border security bill ever. then you ve got the head of the republican intel committee in the house saying that republicans in the house are spewing vladimir putin and russian talking points. i mean, their own words are devastating against them. joe, when you were in the house and you and your colleagues in the 90s were fighting, you were fighting for a balanced budget. you had a policy goal. here, we just see chaos. we don t necessarily see what the policy is. are the republicans who are opposing the aid doing it to force the ukrainians to come up with a strategy, to come up to define the instate? it is unclear. it is just swirling around. it s just noise. it is just noise for the same of political noise. there are real questions to be answered right now, richard. we have a finite stock of munitions. we re giving israel a lot. we re giving the ukrainians a lot.
stocks. that s in the aid bill. i m hoping to see that get done this weekend alongside the as critical, certainly, aid bill for ukraine. admiral, it s on track because, last night, house democrats saved those packages of foreign aid bills proposed by speaker mike johnson, which contained aid to israel and ukraine. in a rare move, all four democrats in the house rules committee joined the five republicans in passing a procedural vote that allows the bills to advance to the house floor for a vote. usually, it is the majority party alone that passes these rules in committee and on the floor. the democratic votes were needed because three republicans on the committee voted against the bills in protest that aid for ukraine was not paired with border security measures. in an interview last night, speaker johnson acknowledged the rebellion within his own party from a small faction and admitted he will need those democrats to get his aid packages passed this weekend. we have continued to w
way that she is sort of manhandling the speaker in this matter, giving him very little room to negotiate. making it so much harder to get the piece that they really wanted, which was the connection of border security to ukraine, even though as we noted, we ve been here before and they had the deal. the fact of the matter is, a lot of folks are a little bit tired of that, and i think he saw that opening. the speaker decided to move into it. he went to the leadership on the other side, to hakeem jeffries, talked to the democrats on the committee, and has now finally been able to carve out that space to move this initiative forward. we ll see the votes this weekend. bravo to the speaker. he recognized that his speakership was worth sacrificing for the country. yeah, you know, it s an
especially given the ways this foreign aid package has played out. not just over the course of this week, enjoys, but over the course of the last month and a half or so because of the way we saw speaker johnson leave the senate supplemental version of this languishing, waiting for the house to take into account up, and now we re seeing him take it up in a different fashion but the same substance of what the senate was trying to push in the first instance. we re probably going to see, today, a lot more reaction and hemming and hawing, but we re also going to see under suspicion, requiring a two-third majority to pass it, a border bill go to the floor. the reason they re doing that is because they couldn t get it through the house rules committee last night. it s not something democrats would come along with. three republicans on the rules committee were voting against the speaker s plans. that was probably going to be true on the border. it is definitely what happened on the foreign aid
the chairman of the intel committee in the house. reporter: the president suggesting on twitter that charges should be brought against adam schiff for, in the president s term, fraudulently making up statements that the president made. this is the president s longstanding allegation against schiff, his complaint is that schiff misquoted the president and said something put words in his mouth on the house floor. they ve been going after that. to be clear, adam schiff did portend to paraphrase the president and did not accurately quote him. he was trying to be rhetorical. he was asked about this and didn t really answer what his motivations were for that. he was maybe attempting to be dramatic. this is atmospherics. perhaps the more significant development is the letter from mike pompeo, the secretary of state, writing to the congressional democrats strong indicating he will not have his state department employees comply with those requests to be