networks and radio plus compelling podcasts. it's available at the apple store and google play. download it free today. c-span now, your front-row seat to washington, anytime, anywhere. >> there are a lot of places to get political information, but only at c-span do you get it straight from the source. no matter where you're from or where you stand on the issues, c-span is america's network. unfiltered, unbiased, word-for-word. if it happens here or here or here or anywhere that matters, america is watching on c-span. powered by cable. host: we continue the conversation on the speakership elections with jason derek who is the editor-in-chief of cq roll call editor in chief.

this is a historic moment. people pointed back 100 years the last time a multiple ballot speakership election was held. what is your sense of how historic this could get as we go into round two or around for today at noon? guest: i feel like we are in very uncharted waters here. you said this hasn't gone to a second ballot in 100 years. think of the changes in the country in the last 100 years since 1923. we don't know who will back down. mccarthy, the speakership was in his grasp in 2015 when john boehner stepped down. he did not have the votes. he did not take it to the floor and that led to paul ryan being speaker. he has been preparing for this for years now trying to develop the kind of relationship he needs. it's unclear that he will say it didn't work out again. i think he is a net for the long haul.

at the same time, the people who are opposed to him, it is not clear what would warm them to kevin mccarthy. they also know what is at stake. they know this is an historic moment. they pride themselves on the history and the institution. it is unclear who backs down and what leads to that. host: yesterday was one of those days that history has to be broken again. records will be broken again. back in the 1800s they had multiple days and weeks. guest: 100 33 ballots in 1855, 1856. we are a long way from that. it's hard to see it going that long because congress is a different institution. it seems as intractable as that. host: what is the core, the five members who initially opposed his leadership and now 19-20.

what is that group want instead of kevin mccarthy or what do they want from kevin mccarthy? guest: you mentioned the five who said they will not be peeled away. they will be voting as a block. that grew up to 20 yesterday as we saw on the third ballot. host: did that surprise you? guest: it did a little bit, yes. a lot of people thought it could grow from 10, 13, the fact i got to 30, it's heading to the wrong direction if you are watching stocks. you want the stocks to be slightly plump. host: what do you think this group wants? guest: there are a couple of different reasons in the blog. it is not a unified block even though they all voted against mccarthy. either for jim jordan or other folks. one of the things they feel very

strongly about is the institution of the house needs to be more responsive to individual members and of leadership. that manifest mostly through what is called the motion to vacate the chair. this chased out john boehner and paul ryan back in 2015 and it was sort of held over paul ryan's head for a long time. any member can call for a motion to vacate the chair. a vote of no-confidence, snap election. to basically replace the speaker, to get rid of the speaker. any one member could call that snap election at any point and they had to vote on it, it's a privileged resolution so to speak. when the democrats we took house in 2018, they alter that so it had to be with the concurrence of the conference.

it cannot just be any member, it had to be someone in leadership would sign off on that. the hardest core, they want to return to just one member. mccarthy and jordan thought they had a deal that would win then some support and said not one but five. it was incorporated in the rules package that the house will eventually vote on. that was incorporated into this rule package. there is talk about some of them want immediate votes on border security. there are some that want plum committee assignments. some pedestrian things that people rule four. the thing that they want is a sense that power will be returned to members opposed to being concentrated in leadership may be the overarching theme. host: jason dick as our guest

and we talk about leadership elections which resume at noon eastern. the lines are (202) 748-8000 for democrats, (202) 748-8001 for republicans, and for independents and others. (202) 748-8002. after the meeting yesterday kevin mccarthy's closing argument is i deserve this, i earn this and it sounded like he has stopped, no more negotiation. i earn this. guest: that is what are reporting poor out to. it did not seem to have a kind of effect. it was not a resounding argument. it may have turned some people away. you go into a meeting that you need five votes and you go out thinking you need up to 10 and then you get on the floor and you get to 20, thus not an argument that is carrying the

day. host: this is a roll call this morning. kevin mccarthy upon is unmoved. they are showing barbara lee, one of the four tellers appointed by the house for each of the rounds. the old-school nature of this vote and members have to stand and announce who they are voting for speaker. guest: it's almost like being in the senate. they famously don't have voting cards, they have both on paper or vocal hand gestures. it's practical to do that with 400 35 members waiting to be sworn in. this is one of those ceremonial times that they usually don't have to go through this much. we don't see this much process. it's like some members are getting a civics lesson and how things have worked in as he said, just seeing people marking

off and checking off names it brings home that they could go really old-school and they need to. host: yesterday, kevin mccarthy was nominated three times first by elise stefanik, then by jim jordan and then by steve scalise. thinking about those three different speeches, what was the tone of each that stuck out to you? guest: the theme that linked all three is that they kept on coming back to how mccarthy is a team player. that is playing too we need to all get on board. they need someone who develops relationships and someone who has fought and suffered setbacks. having those three, stefon aiken's police are members of mccarthy's leadership team and they have been. jordan used to help found the freedom caucus and will head the judiciary committee.

they want to present a unified front in continuing to appeal to the members of their conference to be team players. it almost seemed like jordan was painted that he had to make this argument because he almost knew what was coming. i try not to put myself too much into the thoughts of members when they are speaking because their thoughts of their own. he did seem to say we have to -- this is not a good look guys. we need to get past this and stop operating because we need to get this done. host: kevin mccarthy and i disagreed on a lot of things through the years. guest: jordan was part of the house freedom caucus that helped sink his bid in 2015. instead of trying to alienate him or trying to fight him over the years, he brought him in as an ally. he made sure that he was upfront

and the biggest battles the house republicans have waged with democrats especially on impeachment of former president donald trump. he brought jordan into the tent and jordan also saw that this was a way that he could also further his own agenda and that is not where his mates are, his house freedom caucus mates are. host: is reporting on how the former president is weighing in on this raised? guest: the former president donald trump is endorsed kevin mccarthy to be the speaker. he said that last year. he was not trumpeting it on his social media application, true social. there wasn't a lot about kevin mccarthy. mccarthy called him and said do i still have your support? host: he called them last night? guest: he called him after the three rounds of voting and trump said he still had support.

it doesn't seem like there's a lot of enthusiasm for it. trump does not have the platform so he used to. he doesn't have a white house press pool to record his every movement and what he is saying. he does not have as much as the platform but there is no reporting that he is working the phones to call matt gaetz or andrew biggs or chip roy to try to change their mind. host: let's get your calls for jason dick, let us get to john from north carolina on the independent line. caller: i wanted to get on before, could he possibly become a speaker without the 218 votes? guest: no. he can't become speaker without a vote on the house of members present. the threshold right now of 430

four members is to 18. if there are absences or of some of the members decide to vote present or abstain from voting, that would lower the threshold to get him to 218. in order to get him to 203 there would have to be a lot of people either not voting are not present and it seems like that is an unlikely scenario. host: angela is up next from fairfield, tennessee, on the republican line. caller: my comment to some of your callers, i agree we need some body she will be strong. to the voters who are calling republicans are reese's. the only racist are the democrats because they had people fighting against each other in making minorities think

that they are underprivileged. in this country, you can be whatever you want. there are people of all colors who are rather successful. for your callers to call republicans racist, thus absurd. it is totally absurd. democrats hold people as slaves in their mind by manipulating their lines. they've been doing it for years. host: let me ask you about, if kevin mccarthy does get elected, does this whole process we can him? guest: yes. he would already be taking office. let's say he got elected on the first ballot yesterday in an alternate universe. he is already dealing with such a small margin of error. he could only lose four boats and pass any legislation.

nancy pelosi was dealing with a similar low margin of error in the previous congress. she could only lose a handful of votes but she was able to keep her caucus unified. there are a lot of differences between kevin mccarthy and nancy pelosi exercise their leadership style and they are of different generations, they have different approaches. mccarthy would always have a difficult time in being speaker and being the leader of the house republican in the house. he is the speaker of the house, not just the republicans. this doesn't do anything to help him. it only weakens him. especially if you have vote after vote where people are digging in their heels. that is not something he can take to the bank and say this makes me a much better leader. host: david is in brooklyn on

the democrats a line. caller: good morning, jason, i am sure you heard the callers talking about statesmen, barlow would say statements to died 100 years ago. all of this is built on compromise and it seems that even on the republican side, there is no cohesion to come up with compromises that make sense to benefit anybody. is there some portion that in order to govern their needs to be compromised even if you are not giving away the farm, as they would say? guest: this is the hard part of governance. it does require everybody to give up a little bit. this is what makes leaders is figuring out where people, help bar you could take them with you and when you have to draw the line. it seems like mccarthy thought he had figured out where that line was in particularly with

the rules package and granting more authority, power and transparency to the process. he could be forgiven perhaps for being a little impatient because there are a lot of things that the speaker has to do, republican leader has to do when they are in the minority of their thankless jobs. it is not apparent that the folks within that 20, particularly the hardest core, the five, are going to signal this is absolutely what i want today. who knows, we are a few hours away from the house convening. they come in at noon. perhaps, there was a dark night of the soul with some people. it doesn't seem that there are enough people who are there to say, for the good of the country, for the good of the caucus, for the good of the institution i will put aside my differences and vote for something a don't necessarily

want. host: what support does steve scully have? guest: both scalise and mchenry are institutionalist and they have a lot of goodwill among the members. mchenry was a part of leadership before he settled into a policy driven role on the financial services committee. he was a chief deputy whip for a while there. scalise has been newer to congress but he commands a lot of respect. he had this tragic shooting that he was involved in any came back from that. that showed a lot of people that this is someone who is pretty tough and not got people to think of him in different ways, not just as a partisan warrior.

he had a lot of friends on the democratic side. i don't think they will vote for him. he is not a person that seems to engender, and instinctual reaction to mccarthy among some of the members of the house freedom caucus that may not be there with someone like scalise in particular. host: to california, good morning two to max on the independent line. caller: yes, hello. i've a two-part question. one, mccarthy seems like a rino, in these coming in feel like he is soft on these investigations. the rank-and-file people want them because he is more apt to

not be as harsh as investigation of these processes. two, why do people think that because of mccarthy and his establishment ties, we need people there to be antiestablishment that will vote for him. it's more about compromising this guys a has a lot of issues in his past. he supported this omnibus bill that are affecting the economy and the esteemed members are stringent about these things. why would people want to believe that mccarthy would even have a chance if his beliefs saying that i deserve this. it seems very narcissistic. guest: i think the caller gets to the deepest core issue which is there are people who just

don't trust mccarthy is going to follow through on his promises to them. weathers on the investigation, he had pinned his twitter profile so that we will investigate hunter biden like he has never seen it before. is that really going to happen? they trust are ordered to do that. he seems like a true believer to them. with mccarthy, even though he said it and committed to it and even committed to creating a committee and the judiciary that jordan would help him that would study what they are calling the weaponization of the federal government. regardless of what he seems to promise or say, there is a lack of trust there that he will follow through. the caller said mccarthy allowed the omnibus which was signed into law to go through.

mccarthy didn't have any power to stop that. senators have a lot more leeway, lower leverage to stop legislation like the omnibus. mccarthy doesn't. it really is, martial law in the house. the majority gets what they want. it is probably a little more fun for members of the minority because they get to rabble-rousers like we saw with the democrats yesterday. they were having the time of their lives it seems. one of the other stories that are reporters jim sachsen road, ted lieu texted with a bag of popcorn saying i can't wait. they were gleeful in saying that they were unified and hakeem jeffries had got more votes. they can't really change anything. they can change the result here in the way the house operates. mccarthy, even though he opposed the omnibus, he did not have a

lot of power to stop it. host: do you think the democratic congress has a preferred candidate? a republican candidate for speaker? guest: i don't want to speak for them, but mccarthy has shown that he can work with people. so has steve scalise, i think the democrats would prefer not to have any republican to have to deal with. nancy pelosi didn't really deal with mccarthy as much as chuck schumer has to deal with mitch mcconnell. they are going to get somebody eventually, whether it is mccarthy risk police. it seems like jeffrey's is someone who can make it work on his and. host: it wasn't a typical opening day in congress, roll call covered it all. let's go to the headlines, a couple of significant notes, patty murray becoming the first female president pro tempore and

mitch mcconnell marking his milestone as longest senior leader. guest: dianne feinstein was the single most democratic. he was typically online. this position was created in the line of succession to clarify who becomes president or vice president in the event of vacancy. it is typically gods the most senior member. feinstein had come under withering criticism for a few years there in her capacity and leadership on the judiciary during the nomination for supreme court justices under donald trump and chuck schumer was able to allow her to step aside or to lobby that she would not get it and open the way for murray who has universal respect.

not just in the democratic congress but among republicans two. she is arguably more powerful as the chair of the appropriation committee, she will be sworn in and that chair position later on this month when the senate reconvenes. this is a big deal. this is historic. to see a woman vice president swear in a president pro tempore , it's kind of big deal. host: in terms of the senate itself, how different will the 100 18, controlled by democrats, how will they operate with the republicans, regardless of who is speaker, with republicans controlling the house? guest: we weren't thinking there would be a lot of big-ticket legislative items simply because democrats and republicans will take very different approaches to legislative priorities. the house will focus on

investigations and oversight in the senate was probably going to see if they could get the house in order on appropriations to be ready for the inevitable trauma that we see at the end of every year. also confirm the nominees. in a 50-50 senate, democrats had to work with republicans if there was a tie vote in committee because we had an equal number in power-sharing agreements. the vice president could only break ties on the floor. if somebody was a controversial nominee, he had to go through quite a bit of hoops to get the person on the floor and eventually get to a 51-50 vote.

as soon as the senate flew the men they sent them home. they are not back until the 23rd of january. host: we have 20 more minutes with jason dick from cq roll call editor in chief, this is derek. caller: good morning guys, mccarthy wants to be speaker because he thinks he is due. he wants to be speaker because it is his turn. he just wants to be speaker. he never got over the fact the paul ryan gave him the boot before so now he is mad and he wants to be speaker. thus number one. number two, you have to remember, this is supposed to be a formality for all intents and purposes.

he gets up there and they have their pomp and circumstance, they do the vote. and yea, he become speaker. well, it did not happen. he is going to be weak, he has to promise everyone everything under the sun and it will be really sad for him, historically, people will look back and think what was he thinking? the thing is, he is not going to be able to legislate because it is like herding cats. they will focus on investigations. as a democrat i say thank you, bring it on. i would love to see it. everyone knows they run investigations like legislation. they can't. everyone remember harold gaudi? i think he is running a podcast in his mother's basement or something.

good book, we are in for a rough ride. host: some of the things you brought up earlier. he reiterated thereto. guest: looking past this week or however long it takes to get a speaker, there will be a speaker of the house and that person will be republican and they will get to some of their priorities. they want to be voting on what steve scalise was saying, ready to go legislation which its on their issues prominently among them cutting funding for 87,000 irs agents which would be funded through this ominous bill and be in charge of collecting revenue and modernizing the irs. force the mechanisms, thus the first thing that they wanted to get you out of the gate. they were not there. these are not the headlines that the republicans wanted. they want to talk about that. they wanted to talk about energy policy, the border, the issues

they feel that is important to them and their constituents. eventually, we will get there. the investigations will start. where they go is kind of unpredictable. i don't know what the effect is going to be on the public and how many people will priorities that. host: to donna calling from fulsome, louisiana, on the republican line. caller: hi, good morning. i wanted to assess question for a long time. when c-span finishes and they go to the house, nancy pelosi is never there. she always has somebody sitting in. so does the speaker not have to be there every day? another question, if jordan does not want the speakership, is he going to the 20 and telling them to vote for mccarthy? to me, is a disgrace that the republicans can't stick together

. being from louisiana, i would love to see steve scully's but that probably won't happen. guest: the speaker of the house usually, they will appoint someone on an interim basis to manage the day-to-day business of the house. the speaker will be there for the big both. the first one swearing people and after the election. nancy pelosi was there for the the optimist being passed. getting back to her earlier years of the speaker as the affordable care act. the practical nature of the house dictates that there are a series of lieutenants will take over the speakership for boy do that -- for more day-to-day.

host: let's hear from melissa, iowa, the independent line. caller: hi, thanks for taking my call. you talked about how nancy pelosi was so great about raining people in and the affordable care act that she passed that was so great. she is the only speaker of the house that has put across the bill that says you have to vote on it before you can read it. when nancy pelosi went and for her last speakership of the house, she actually stopped the vote because aoc in the squad were not going to vote for her. she stopped the vote, went back and promise them a whole bunch of committees and everything and then she went back to voting and she was allowed to be speaker of the house. otherwise, she would not have been the speaker of the house. the reason mccarthy is having issues because these people don't want him because he is the same old, same old.

he has gone along to get along with mitch mcconnell. we are sick and tired of the go along, get along. we want people who will actually work for the country and do what we want them to do. the federal government is not supposed to tell us what we are supposed to do, we are supposed to tell them what to do. host: jason dick, good or bad, speaker pelosi's legacy? guest: for her like a sea is opposed to using good or bad it will be consequential. just by the nature of who she is, she is the first woman to be speaker. that alone would be the first line in a historical evaluation of her speakership. it was one of the more consequential ones. she held onto the post of democratic leader for almost 28 years. it was one of those things that

as kevin mccarthy is finding out, is not that easy as the caucus changes in society changes. weathering different politics, different precedents. the fact that she was able to become speaker a second time. she had to work with people who were 50 years old younger than them. she found a way to work with them and consolidate her influence in a very close margin. she did not have a lot of us to work with. that is consequential as opposed to good or bad. i don't want people to think that i have my thumb on the scale one way or another. certainly, history will view her as one of the most significant speakers. host: and to be clear, speaker pelosi former majority leader, are they hands off with new

democratic leadership? guest: one of the moments that stuck out to me yesterday in the first ballot was within pelosi road and enthusiastically forwarded jeffrey's name for his nomination. we were already settling in for a long day. that was pelosi understanding the value of symbolism and she understands the value of gestures. she said, i will not be like the mother-in-law coming into the kitchen saying i want my son to 's eggs to be cooked that way. steny hoyer and her know that there is a time for a new generation. the new house members already have a spark that just come from

being the new kids. in terms of when to start that, this is a pretty good time for them. for the democratic caucus. they can't really afford to lose their seats. former leaders usually leave congress as we have seen pretty quickly. democrats can afford to lose any seeds. they will be here, hoyer is going back to the appropriations committee. he will be there for council but i don't get the feeling that pelosi is going to be knocking on the door of hakeem jeffries office and asking when we are meeting today? host: let's hear from karen from chester and consul pennsylvania, on the democrats line. caller: i'm a democrat but i'm not an extremist. i am more moderate than most democrats.

i wanted to make a plea for a reasonable speaker. we need someone who will work for the people and i think that is the problem here. everybody promises what they will do, we will get them and investigate and the he say/she say. i want to make a plea, do you know who could be reasonable? i have given up on the house because once i found out that the republican orientation for new members and democrats orientate for new people severally. i was done. who could be reasonable, who can work for the people and not for the party? host: was that the case here, they did separate orientation for members? guest: not all people. they broke out at certain points.

you look for some of the bigger orientation during the office selection. the colors right that there has been a debulking of positive interactions. there are few opportunities for people to get together. they have more opportunities during that freshman orientation than they do in a typical week, which is sort of sad. they have this crazy schedule coming in on monday and tuesday, leaving on a thursday or friday to go back home. they are at a breakneck pace sometimes. sometimes, they have several committee meetings happening concurrently. there's not a lot of time that they get to interact together. in the speaker's lobbies, that sometimes happen because it is a fun, chaotic place where people can interact. then you have the republican side, the democratic side, even though they are not barriers

separating them. host: we had a feel yesterday watching on the floor of the house, here is the behind closed doors other than the fact that we can see everything but can't hear they're talking about. any negotiation over what was happening was happening there on the floor. guest: it was an mixed turning thing. the reason we saw more even if you were in the chamber, one of the reasons we see more than we normally do is because the rules package. not to keep coming back to that, i know it's very like house nerd. host: we like house nurse here on c-span. guest: it usually forbids cell phone recordings and pictures on the floor and while in the house because there is no rules package, it is a free-for-all. this only last until members are sworn in a vote on rules package and everyone put their phones

back in their pockets. everyone stops talking their kids and grandkids. we are getting a peek at what is happening that we normally get. and you are right, there is horsetrading going on. a couple of colors ago said -- caller ago, is jim jordan talking to members? he says no, this is not my time. this is about mccarthy. host: on the television side of things too, the cameras are usually controlled by the house and they still are. in this case, c-span cameras and other cameras were throughout the house showing a much broader picture of what was happening. host: let's go to don and

fallon, montana, on the republican line. don, you are on the air, on the republican line. next, we will go to darrell in new jersey on the independent line. caller: hello, good morning. host: morning. caller: when i look at what is happening here, it's almost as if the republican party ignored the results of the selection. they went into the selection season talking about inflation and now it seems that the speakership hinges on how many investigations of hunter biden and joe biden are going to go on in this congress. i don't think the american people actually voted for that. i also don't think the american people -- i think the american people repudiated trumpism,

and yet the republican party is proceeding as if joplin is payback for the investigations of someone that we now know was a criminal president. that is not the american people's business. sometimes i wonder if maybe the problem in this country is the voters. not the politicians. host: jason dick? guest: one of the things i've been fascinated by, there's this repudiation of washington. we have to drain the swamp. the issue as the caller -- i tend to agree with the caller. the congress doesn't come from washington it comes from the rest of the country. one of the first things they can

start looking to drain as their own backyard. the people they are freshening with are not coming from capitol hill, they are not coming from georgetown, peoria arizona. they are coming from bakersfield california and laramie wyoming. the problems we have as a country are reflected in the congress and the congress is only as good as a people who send them there. host: let me ask you about a member elect that we saw on the floor, george santos he was admitted to lying on his resume about his employment, his education. the wall street and the wall street journal, once he is sworn in, what kind of actions could

take place when it comes to george santos? guest: the house ethics the primary police of behavior. at this point, it may be difficult for the house ethics committee to take it up or justified taking it up. at the minimum is just an argument because the actions under question are not while he was a member of congress. that doesn't mean people care refer him to the office of professional ethics and the ethics committee cannot open up an investigation themselves. those offices tend to focus on member behavior in the member in question, all of this stuff happened, the falsifying of his resume, the $700 fraud in brazil years ago, it's tough to keep up with the different things of george santos. he may be more in trouble with

law enforcement because of the multiple investigations that have been opened up into him, his behavior, particularly in new york for the ethics committee goes through him. they don't move with a lot of alacrity in pursuing members, particularly of the justice department or local law enforcement is involved in an investigation. they don't want to get in front of the sort of probes. host: let's get one more call here, let us go to mary in las vegas. caller: good morning. the swamp is in the house. there is a swamp full of election deniers who sided with the president. no crime too big or too small, with regards to the irs, the objection is they don't want billionaires to get out of this.

people like me have always been audited. trumpet and the commissioners so that he would not get audited. you are worried about the few $1 million from hunter biden, what about the billions jared kushner scott in the middle east from the saudi's? he got a one million from qatar. host: the amount of oversight that the new republican congress will reportedly undertake. what do we expect to see first in this serious investigation? guest: given the high profile nature of hunter biden and his laptop, i would guess that thing start with that. they can start with the splash.

perhaps far-reaching consequences, the origins of the coronavirus. it's been on that panel, the subcommittee. also, it's a select committee that would look in the competition with china. those trade relationships. those investigations would get underway but i would guess they would want to start off with some sort of a splash and it does not seem to get more splashy than hunter biden and this may be a heck of a laptop. host: we know your days going to get busy. we appreciate you spending some >> c-span is your unfiltered view of government. we're funded by these television companies and more, including cox. >> homework can be hard, but squatting in a diner for

internet work is even harder. that's why we're providing lower income students access to affordable internet so homework can just be homework. cox connect to compete. >> cox supports c-span as a public service along with these other television providers giving you a front-row seat to democracy. >> all democrats voted for

hakeem jeffries giving him more votes than kevin mccarthy. the other g.o.p. members split their votes between andy biggs of arizona, with 10 votes, jim jordan of ohio with six, jim banks of indiana, byron donalds of florida and former new york congressman lee zeldin each received one vote in the first round. 218 votes is required to become speaker with all 434 members voting. now, in the second ballot, hakeem jeffries, again, got all 212 democratic votes. kevin mccarthy, 203. but the 19 republican defectors would go on to unite to nominate jim jordan. in the third ballot, can heem jeffries, 212. kevin mccarthy went down by one vote to 202 after representative byron donalds changed his vote from the previous ballots to

support jim jordan who ended up with 20 votes total. again, all short of the 218 needed. so long as all 434 members are voting for someone by name, the number to become speaker remains 218. now, that threshold would change if members are absent or vote present. without a declared winner in the speaker election, the house cannot proceed with the swearing in of members, committee work, or any legislative business. so kevin mccarthy spent last night meeting with allies behind closed doors to discuss a path forward. and he continues to tell reporters that he is confident in reaching the votes that are necessary to become speaker. this morning, former president donald trump weighed in on his truth social media account reiterating his support for kevin mccarthy. the former president wrote --

some really good conversations took place last night and now it's time for all of our great republican house members to vote for kevin. close a deal. take the victory. and watch crazy nancy pelosi fly back home to a very broken california. the only speaker in u.s. history to have lost the house twice. republicans do not turn a great triumph into a giant and embarrassing defeat. it's time to celebrate. you deserve it. kevin mccarthy will do a good job and maybe even a great job. just watch. now, in just a few minutes, the house gavel will go down. it's possible they might not even have a fourth vote. heather of punch bowl news is reporting that democrats are hearing that republicans will vote to adjourn when they come in at noon. either until this afternoon or tomorrow. we mention this possibility in punch bowl news. and now democrat leaders recommending a no vote if

republicans move to adjourn. that's what was announced in the democratic caucus. now, we haven't heard much from house republicans this morning. but the house democrats held a press conference to talk about the path forward and what happened yesterday. here's a little bit from democratic caucus chair peete aguilar -- pete aguilar. mr. aguilar: right now, our focus and we're working with our staffs to make sure that we're following the letter and spirit of everything that we're allowed to do, but we don't have statuseses as -- statuses as members until we organize and that's because of this republican chaos. there will come points where other things are impacted. committees can't hire their staff members as well because there are no committee chairs and ranking members. this is -- this is a crisis of the congress. and it's a crisis at the hands of the republican dysfunction.

and so that's -- that's where we are until we have the main organizing principle, which is electing someone to lead this congress and taking our oates which is so -- our oaths which is so important. >> in three minutes the gavel will come down in the house. the lights are on. some of the members are starting to gather. we'll go to the house floor in just a second. just showing you a late-breaking tweet from olivia from "politico." we heard from five house republicans who are likely to oppose a motion to adjourn if g.o.p. leadership decides to do so at noon. four said they are strongly against and one is a lean no. five plus the 212 democrats if they all vote no on the motion to adjourn is 217. and with 434 members, that would be 217-217. so we'll see how this plays