WASHINGTON — Federal prosecutors urged a judge on Tuesday to reject Hunter Biden’s efforts to dismiss the gun charges against him, revealing that investigators last year found cocaine residue on the pouch the president’s son used to hold his gun.

In pressing for the case against President Joe Biden’s son to proceed, prosecutors said “the strength of the evidence against him is overwhelming” and pushed back against Hunter Biden’s claims that he is being singled out for political purposes.

In addition to “incriminating statements” Hunter Biden made about his drug use in his 2021 memoir, investigators found a white powdery substance on the brown leather pouch he used to store the gun after pulling it from the state police vault last year, prosecutors wrote. An FBI chemist determined it was cocaine, they said.

“To be clear, investigators literally found drugs on the pouch where the defendant had kept his gun,” prosecutors said.

Hunter Biden has pleaded not guilty to charges accusing him of lying about his drug use in October 2018 on a form to buy a gun that he kept for about 11 days. He has acknowledged struggling with an addiction to crack cocaine during that period in 2018, but his lawyers have said he didn’t break the law. Hunter Biden has since said that he’s stopped using drugs and has worked to turn his life around.

His attorneys didn’t immediately respond to requests for comment on the prosecutors’ filing Tuesday.

These criminal proceedings could have been avoided with a plea deal last year, but an agreement with federal prosecutors fell apart and now the president’s son is facing the spectacle of a trial this year while his father is campaigning. He was indicted after the plea deal broke down when a judge who was supposed to sign off on the agreement instead raised a series of questions about the deal.

He had initially agreed to plead guilty to misdemeanor tax charges and would have also avoided prosecution on the gun charges had he stayed out of trouble for two years. It was the culmination of a years-long investigation by federal prosecutors into the business dealings of the president’s son.

His lawyers have urged the judge to dismiss the gun case, alleging he was “selectively charged” for improper political purposes. They have argued that special counsel David Weiss — who also serves as U.S. attorney for Delaware and was originally appointed by former President Donald Trump — “buckled under political pressure” to bring more severe charges amid criticism of the deal from Trump and other Republicans.

Prosecutors, however, said there is no evidence “to support his allegation that the Executive Branch, led by his father, President Biden, and its Justice Department, led by the Attorney General appointed by his father, authorized prosecution by the U.S. Attorney and Special Counsel of their choosing for an ‘improper political purpose.’”

“The charges in this case are not trumped up or because of former President Trump — they are instead a result of the defendant’s own choices and were brought in spite of, not because of, any outside noise made by politicians,” prosecutors wrote.

Hunter Biden’s criminal proceedings are also happening in parallel to so far unsuccessful efforts by congressional Republicans to link his business dealings to his father. Republicans are pursuing an impeachment inquiry into President Biden, claiming he was engaged in an influence-peddling scheme with his son. But House Republicans on Tuesday halted plans to hold Hunter Biden in contempt of Congress for defying a congressional subpoena in their ongoing investigation, citing negotiations with his attorneys that could end the standoff.

No evidence has emerged so far to prove that the president, in his current or previous office, abused his role or accepted bribes, though questions have arisen about the ethics surrounding the Biden family’s international business dealings.

The Senate overcame its first procedural hurdle Tuesday night to ward off a partial shutdown on Saturday, advancing another two-tiered stopgap spending bill that would kick government funding deadlines into March.

In a 68-13 vote, the upper chamber advanced the measure, which would fund parts of the government through March 1 and March 8. With federal cash expiring in a matter of days for the departments of Agriculture, Transportation, Veterans Affairs, Energy and more, much will hinge on whether the Senate can come to an agreement to quickly pass the stopgap, which requires consent from all 100 senators.

Any one senator could hold things up and cause a delay, risking a brief weekend shutdown.

“Time is of the essence,” Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer said on the floor before the vote Tuesday afternoon. “If both sides continue to work in good faith, I’m hopeful that we can wrap up work on the CR no later than Thursday. The key to finishing our work this week will be bipartisan cooperation in both chambers.”

Key context: The short-term patch, known as a continuing resolution or CR, was unveiled Sunday and would extend government funding to two different dates, similar to the current stopgap. Funding for military construction, Veterans’ Affairs, the USDA, FDA, Department of Transportation, Department of Housing and Urban Development, Department of Energy and other programs would expire on March 1.

Funding for the remaining spending bills — including Financial Services, Legislative Branch, Commerce-Justice-Science, Homeland Security, Defense, Interior-Environment, State-Foreign Operations and Labor-HHS-Education — would expire on March 8.

Top appropriators simply need more time to work on the bills after Speaker Mike Johnson and Schumer struck a long-delayed deal on a government funding framework earlier this month.

What’s next: Johnson, facing heat from his right flank for cutting a deal with Democrats, will almost certainly need substantial help from across the aisle to pass the measure in the House.

The lower chamber is expected to take up the measure as soon as it passes the Senate. Johnson will likely need to bring it up under suspension, which means the bill would require a two-thirds vote threshold to send the stopgap to President Joe Biden’s desk.

Speaker Mike Johnson’s new short-term spending plan is sparking quick pushback from his right flank, who wanted to use the funding deadlines to crackdown along the U.S.-Mexico border.

Johnson, during a conference call Sunday night, defended the two-tier plan that would set another pair of short-term funding deadlines for March 1 and March 8. He also reiterated Republicans’ view that their sweeping immigration bill that passed last year is their starting point for any border talks.

But that did little to quell immediate pushback from hardline conservatives, who have argued for Johnson to shut down the government without border concessions.

“Enough with the continuing resolutions. We’ve had plenty of time to address funding levels. Congress keeps punting this while our southern border remains a mess and our national debt continues to surge. We are doing the American people a disservice,” said Rep. Andy Biggs (R-Ariz.).

Rep. Warren Davidson (R-Ohio) pressed Johnson during the call if there was a plan to counter the Senate’s forthcoming border-foreign aid deal, while Rep. Matt Rosendale (R-Mont.), another Freedom Caucus member, asked Johnson if he was going to tie the House’s border bill to government funding, according to two sources on the call.

Already a handful of House Republicans have said they would oppose a continuing resolution (CR) with that number likely to grow into the dozens this week. Ninety three Republicans voted against his two-tier spending plan last year and amid fierce backlash Johnson promised conservatives at the time that he wouldn’t use another short-term spending patch.

House Republicans are “planning to pass a short-term spending bill continuing Pelosi levels with Biden policies, to buy time to pass longer-term spending bills at Pelosi levels with Biden policies. This is what surrender looks like,” the Freedom Caucus said on Sunday night about the stopgap plan.

But other members pushed back against the idea that the push for border policy at the cost of shutting the government down was not tactically sound.

“That position might make for a good soundbite but it’s strategic incompetence. We have two possible leverage points to get border security: our own budget, or Ukraine aid. You’d rather hold hostage our own troops’ pay? Or hold hostage Ukraine aid?” Rep. Dan Crewshaw (R-Texas) said in a statement to POLITICO.

“Anyone advocating we hold our own military hostage is either strategically incompetent or prefers losing yet another battle on border policy changes. Some might even be afraid of giving up the border as a campaign issue. They don’t want a solution.”

This consternation on his right flank is not new.

Johnson has faced public attacks from his own party over his bipartisan, top-line spending deal with congressional leaders, with a group of conservatives pressing him last week to renege on his previously agreed upon deal and start a new one — a request that heightened the chances of a shutdown. That meeting triggered a flurry of other centrist and rank-and-file Republicans to warn him against breaking the terms of his agreement, particularly as they head deeper into election season.

Already, some are raising the prospect of moving to oust Johnson just like his predecessor, former Speaker Kevin McCarthy. Earlier Sunday, Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-Ga.), who has floated the idea of a motion to vacate, went even further, telling Fox News that she would use the ouster tool if Johnson green-lights Ukraine aid as part of a broader aid package that Republicans argue must include border policy.

On Friday, the Louisiana Republican made a public statement that he would stick with his original plan, which largely mirrors top-line numbers reached by McCarthy and the White House last year. And he argued privately over the past week that this is the reality of a two-seat majority, where they have limited leeway to push for their demands in a divided government without triggering a shutdown. Johnson also faced pushback from other corners of his conference, as well Democrats, over the idea of a year-long CR.

“Because the completion deadlines are upon us, a short continuing resolution is required to complete what House Republicans are working hard to achieve: an end to governance by omnibus, meaningful policy wins, and better stewardship of American tax dollars,” Johnson said in a statement Sunday night about the short-term spending patch.

Johnson weighed in against the Senate’s forthcoming border deal over the weekend, though the top GOP negotiator, Sen. James Lankford (R-Okla.), indicated the negotiations were being misrepresented.

Sen. Jim Risch of Idaho endorsed Donald Trump on Saturday evening ahead of the Iowa caucuses, giving the former president the support of nearly half the GOP conference before a single caucus or primary contest.

“I realize President Trump greatly aggravates the left and the national media. I believe that is a small price to pay for righting this ship of state which is so greatly listing. I hope Republicans will join me in nominating President Trump,” Risch said in a statement on Saturday provided to POLITICO.

Risch is the top Republican on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee and was the chair during half of Trump’s presidency. In the statement, he criticized President Joe Biden for “knowingly, willingly, and intentionally” reversing Trump’s foreign and domestic policies.

Risch’s backing gives Trump 22 Senate endorsements. No other candidate has any endorsements from GOP senators with many in the party — even those who have issues with Trump — seeing his nomination as increasingly inevitable.

Congressional leaders will move next week to pass a two-tiered stopgap into March, with six days left until the first of two government shutdown deadlines.

The new funding patch would keep federal agencies running on two different timeframes, like the current stopgap. Funding for some federal agencies would expire March 1, while funding for others would run through March 8, according to a source familiar with the proposal.

Speaker Mike Johnson is backing the plan, which is necessary to finish a slate of 12 spending bills for the current fiscal year, after he previously rejected the notion of another short-term funding extension. Johnson is expected to brief the GOP conference on Sunday night.

The second “laddered” approach will almost certainly require hefty Democratic support to pass the House, while conservatives fume at the Louisiana Republican for cutting a deal with Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer on a government funding framework for the fiscal year that began Oct. 1.

Johnson said Friday that he is committed to sticking to that framework, despite a push from Republican hardliners to abandon the deal in favor of a more conservative proposal that would be doomed in the Senate.

The fiscal 2024 framework negotiated by Johnson and Schumer largely adheres to the budget totals set by the debt limit deal cut by President Joe Biden and former Speaker Kevin McCarthy last summer, setting defense funding at $886 billion and non-defense funding at nearly $773 billion.

Utah Sen. Mike Lee endorsed former President Donald Trump, calling the presidential race a “binary choice.”

“Look, whether you like Donald Trump or not, whether you agree with everything he says or not, he is our one opportunity to choose order over chaos and putting America first over America last,” Lee said during an appearance on Fox News’ Ingraham Angle on Friday.

Lee is among at least 21 Republican senators who have endorsed Trump so far. Although GOP leaders in the House have lined up behind Trump, Senate Republican leadership has mostly held out.

“Whether you like Trump or not, Americans face a binary choice,” Lee wrote in a post to X, formerly known as Twitter.

“Biden refuses to enforce our border, prosecutes his opponents, & embraces policies that make life unaffordable for hardworking Americans,” he continued. “I choose Trump.”

Lee also endorsed Trump in 2020 and earned an endorsement from the former president during his 2022 reelection campaign, but the two were not always friendly. In 2016, Lee publicly ranted about Trump and attempted to block his nomination during the GOP convention. But during the Trump presidency, Lee strengthened ties with the former president and pushed for shared legislative priorities.