The House of Representatives is taking a vote to formalize its impeachment inquiry of President Biden on Wednesday evening, a move Republicans argue will force the White House into complying with its investigation.

The GOP-led committees on Oversight, Ways & Means and the Judiciary have been investigating Biden over accusations he had leveraged his office of vice president in the Obama administration to enrich his family through foreign businesses. 

It’s been heavily centered on the president’s brother James Biden and his son, Hunter Biden, who is under federal investigation for tax and firearm-related charges. Hunter Biden is also scheduled to appear before the House Oversight Committee for a closed-door deposition on Wednesday, though it’s unclear if he will show up.

The impeachment inquiry vote is scheduled to occur sometime in the 5 p.m. hour.

‘The impeachment inquiry is necessary now…because we’ve come to this impasse, we’re following the facts. Where they lead is hitting a stone wall because the White House is impeding that investigation,’ Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., said at a press conference on Tuesday. 

‘We’re not going to prejudge the outcome of this. We can’t because, again, it’s not a political calculation. We’re following the law and we are the rule of law team. And I’m going to hold to that as my commitment.’

But Democrats have accused the House GOP majority of playing politics with impeachment. Rep. Jamie Raskin, D-Md., the top Democrat on the House Oversight Committee, accused Republicans of moving forward with no proof of wrongdoing on Wednesday morning before the vote.

‘A mountain of evidence and deluge of independent reporting, including from numerous conservative outlets, have discredited every single allegation leveled by Republicans against President Biden in their painstaking and fruitless inquiry—from bogus smears about Ukraine to comical distortions about intrafamily auto payments to desperate and self-debunking cries of obstruction, all proven to be distortions, concoctions, and outright lies,’ Raskin said.

President Biden’s son could be held in contempt of Congress if he doesn’t show up for a closed-door interview today.

Hunter Biden is in Washington, but it is unclear if he will appear for the closed-door deposition the Republican committee leaders have been pushing for. 

Last week, House Oversight and Judiciary Committees chairmen James Comer, R-Ky., and Jim Jordan, R-Ohio, threatened to hold the younger Biden in contempt if he did not show up for the deposition.

Hunter Biden’s attorney Abbe Lowell and the committee leaders traded paper blows with each other as Hunter’s legal defense pushed for a public hearing.

Last month, Lowell said Hunter wanted to testify publicly as opposed to the closed-door interview, but the GOP chairmen that same week said Hunter Biden must appear for a deposition first.

A week later, Lowell sent a letter to Comer, saying the president’s son would only appear before the committee in public testimony.

‘Mr. Biden has offered to appear at a hearing on the December 13, 2023, date you have reserved, or another date this month, to answer any question pertinent and relevant to the subject matter,’ Lowell wrote.

‘He is making this choice because the Committee has demonstrated time and time again it uses closed-door sessions to manipulate, even distort, the facts and misinform the American public — a hearing would ensure transparency and truth in these proceedings,’ Lowell said. ‘We look forward to working out the schedule.’

Comer and Jordan also pledged to release the full transcript after the closed-door deposition if it occurs.

Comer and Jordan also pledged to release the full transcript after the closed-door deposition.

‘On November 8, 2023, we issued subpoenas to your client, Robert Hunter Biden, for a deposition on December 13, 2023,’ they wrote.

‘Contrary to the assertions in your letter, there is no ‘choice’ for Mr. Biden to make; the subpoenas compel him to appear for a deposition on December 13,’ Comer and Jordan wrote.

‘If Mr. Biden does not appear for his deposition on December 13, 2023, the Committees will initiate contempt of Congress proceedings,’ they wrote.

Fox News Digital’s Brooke Singman contributed reporting.

The Supreme Court decided on Wednesday to hear a case on access to the abortion pill and its approval process, which has been defended by the Biden administration. 

The nation’s highest court agreed to consider appeals from the Biden administration and drug manufacturer Danco defending several moves by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration intended to make it easier to access and use the mifepristone pill in the wake of the overturning of Roe v. Wade last year.

In overturning Roe v. Wade in June 2022, the Supreme Court ruled in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization that the U.S. Constitution does not guarantee the right to an abortion and that the matter should be decided by the states. In the aftermath, 14 states have banned abortion at all stages of pregnancy, with some exceptions, and two others have banned abortion once a fetal heartbeat is detected, which is around six weeks of gestation. 

The Biden administration and the maker of the drug mifepristone are asking the high court to reverse an appellate ruling that would cut off access to the drug through the mail and impose other restrictions, even in states where abortion remains legal. The restrictions include shortening from the current 10 weeks to seven weeks the time during which mifepristone can be used in pregnancy. The nine justices rejected a separate appeal from abortion opponents who challenged the FDA’s initial approval of mifepristone as safe and effective in 2000.

The case will be argued in the spring, with a decision likely by late June, in the middle of the 2024 presidential and congressional campaigns.

In reacting to the decision Wednesday, Katie Daniel, state policy director for Susan B. Anthony Pro-Life America, championed in a statement to Fox News Digital how the Supreme Court ‘and the entire country will hear the facts about Democrats’ dangerous mail-order abortion scheme.’ 

‘Working hand-in-glove with the abortion lobby, the FDA has misled the American people with its repeated claims that the abortion pill regimen is ‘safe and effective,’ all while they removed basic safeguards like in-person doctor supervision,’ Daniel said. ‘This not only flies in the face of science and common sense, but the 5th Circuit agreed it most likely broke the law. The people aren’t buying it, either – especially when they learn the FDA doesn’t track serious complications other than death.’ 

‘Under multiple Democrat administrations, the FDA has put politics before its duty to protect health and safety, with tragic results. Without oversight, abortion pills easily get into the hands of abusers and jealous exes. Not only have countless babies died, mothers have also died. The FDA is not above the law, and there must be justice for the harm they cause,’ she added. 

Mifepristone, made by New York-based Danco Laboratories, is one of two drugs used in medication abortions, which account for more than half of all abortions in the United States. More than 5 million people have used it since 2000, according to The Associated Press. The second is misoprostol, which some health care providers say is less effective alone in ending pregnancies. 

Pro-life advocates filed their challenge to mifepristone in November 2022 and initially won a sweeping ruling six months later revoking the drug’s approval entirely. The appeals court left intact the FDA’s initial approval of mifepristone. But it would reverse changes regulators made in 2016 and 2021 that eased some conditions for administering the drug.

The justices blocked that ruling from taking effect while the case played out, though Justices Samuel Alito, the author of last year’s decision overturning Roe, and Clarence Thomas said they would have allowed some restrictions to take effect while the case proceeded.

The FDA has eased the terms of mifepristone’s use over the years, including allowing it to be sent through the mail in states that allow access. In its appeal, the Democratic administration said the appeals court ignored the FDA’s scientific judgment about mifepristone’s safety and effectiveness since its approval in 2000.

Lawyers for the pro-life medical groups and individual physicians who have challenged the use of mifepristone had urged the Supreme Court to turn away the appeals.

‘The modest decision below merely restores the common-sense safeguards under which millions of women have taken chemical abortion drugs,’ wrote lawyers for the Alliance Defending Freedom, which describes itself as a Christian law firm. The lead attorney on the Supreme Court filing is Erin Hawley, wife of Sen. Josh Hawley, R-MO.

U.S. District Judge Matthew Kacsmaryk, an appointee of former President Trump in Texas, initially revoked FDA approval of mifepristone.

Responding to a quick appeal, two more Trump appointees on the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals said the FDA’s original approval would stand for now. But Judges Andrew Oldham and Kurt Engelhardt said most of the rest of Kacsmaryk’s ruling could take effect while the case winds through federal courts.

Dr. Ingrid Skop, a board-certified OB-GYN who serves as vice president and director of medical affairs at Charlotte Lozier Institute, also shared her reaction with Fox News Digital. 

‘I have seen first-hand what the abortion pill regimen has done to my patients, both mother and child. As many as one in five women will suffer a complication such as hemorrhage or infection, and I have cared for many of these women in the ER,’ Skop said in a statement. ‘The Biden administration’s decision to weaken commonsense safeguards and remove doctors from the process shows they prioritize abortion on demand over the mother’s safety. I hope the Supreme Court realizes that the lives of many babies and women are at risk. The FDA must be held accountable for its callous actions.’

The Associated Press contributed to this report.

A recently released Hamas hostage’s revelation of sexual violence against her fellow captives appears to refute anti-Israel progressives who tend to downplay or dismiss terrorists’ atrocities.

Chen Goldstein-Almog, 48, was held hostage by Hamas with three of her children for 51 days following the Palestinian terrorist group’s Oct. 7 attack on Israelis.

Her husband and eldest daughter were murdered by Palestinian terrorists during the attack.

Goldstein-Almog and her children were released by the terror group, and the wife and mother gave an interview with the Israeli press on Dec. 11 about her time as a hostage.

During her interview, Goldstein-Almog revealed she heard firsthand accounts of sexual violence from other female hostages by their Hamas captors.

‘I heard the testimony directly from girls and heard things second hand,’ Goldstein-Almog said. ‘Some of the sexual violence happened well into our time in Gaza, not in the first week.’

‘But the way their bodies were desecrated, they don’t know how they will deal with that. It happened weeks into their time in Gaza,’ she said.

‘If they were released earlier, they would’ve been saved from experiencing sexual violence,’ Goldstein-Almog added.

Goldstein-Almog said they ‘heard three stories firsthand of women saying they were sexually abused and we heard an additional story.’ She added that ‘presumably, there are more instances’ of sexual violence by Hamas.

The former hostage also said she ‘was threatened once when they thought I was wandering around and looking free’ in the first apartment they were taken to and that ‘there was a threat that’ she would ‘be handcuffed, but it didn’t happen.’

‘I said I have kids and nothing happened to me,’ Goldstein-Almog said. ‘It was the only time I felt under threat [of sexual violence].’

A spokesperson for the Biden administration State Department noted earlier this month that one of the reasons Hamas does not want to release women hostages is because ‘they don’t want those women to be able to talk about what happened to them.’

Many American progressives have been largely silent on Hamas’ sexual violence against Israelis, while some have downplayed or dismissed the reports of sexual assault.

Briahna Joy Gray, a former national press secretary for Bernie Sanders’ presidential campaign, tweeted earlier this month, ”Believe all women’ was always an absurd overreach: woman should be heard, claims should be investigated, but evidence is required.’

‘The same is true of the allegations out of Israel,’ Gray wrote in a Dec. 4 tweet. ‘But also, this isn’t a ‘believe women’ scenario bc no female victims have offered testimony.’

‘Zionists are asking that we believe the uncorroborated eyewitness account of *men* who describe alleged rape victims in odd, fetishistic terms,’ Gray continued in a subsequent tweet.

‘Shame on Israel for not seriously investigating claims of rape and collecting rape kits,’ she added.

Progressive Rep. Pramila Jayapal, D-Wash., was torched after she clashed with CNN’s Dana Bash over the lack of widespread condemnation of Hamas’ use of sexual violence against Israeli women during the Oct. 7 attacks.

The Washington state Democrat suggested that wasn’t true, and claimed she had already condemned Hamas’ treatment of women, before quickly turning the conversation back to Israel.

‘But I think we have to remember Israel is a democracy. That is why they’re a strong ally of ours. And if they do not comply with international humanitarian law, they are bringing themselves to a place that makes it much more difficult strategically for them to be able to build allies, to keep public opinion with them, and frankly, morally, we cannot say that one war crime deserves another. That is not what international humanitarian law says,’ Jayapal said.

‘With respect, I was just asking about the women, and you turned it back to Israel. I’m asking you about Hamas,’ Bash said.

The lawmaker said she had already answered the question and added, ‘We have to be balanced about bringing in the outrages against Palestinians. Fifteen thousand Palestinians have been killed in Israeli airstrikes, three-quarters of whom are women and children.’ 

‘And it’s horrible,’ Bash said. ‘But you don’t see Israeli soldiers raping Palestinian women.’

‘I don’t want this to be the hierarchies of oppressions,’ Jayapal said.

Jayapal has since issued a statement ‘unequivocally’ condemning ‘Hamas’ use of rape and sexual violence as an act of war.’

‘This is horrific and across the world, we must stand with our sisters, families, and survivors of rape and sexual assault everywhere to condemn this violence and hold perpetrators accountable,’ Jayapal said.

Neither Jayapal nor Gray immediately responded to Fox News Digital’s request for comment.

Fox News Digital’s Hanna Panreck contributed reporting.

House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jim Jordan said Hunter Biden made a ‘huge change’ by saying his father, President Biden, was ‘not financially involved’ in his business dealings.

Jordan’s comments came shortly after Hunter Biden defied his subpoena by not appearing for a deposition before the House Oversight Committee, and instead, delivering a public statement defending himself and his family amid the House impeachment inquiry against his father. 

‘My father was not financially involved in my business,’ Hunter Biden said Wednesday morning from Capitol Hill, adding the president was not involved in his dealings with Ukrainian natural gas firm Burisma Holdings, or his Chinese investments and others in the U.S.

‘No evidence to support that my father was financially involved in my business because it did not happen,’ Hunter Biden said. 

The White House and President Biden have maintained that the president was ‘never in business’ with his son. Biden has also said he never spoke to his son about his business dealings, but Republicans say evidence — including email records and testimony from Hunter Biden’s former business partners — seem to contradict those statements.  

Jordan, shortly after Hunter Biden’s public appearance, pointed out his changing narrative. 

‘I would just point out that I’ve had a chance to review what Hunter Biden said in his press conference. I think he made an interesting statement,’ Jordan said. ‘He said his father was not financially involved in the business. And I think that qualifier, the word ‘financially’ is important because once again, it shows another change in this story.’ 

Jordan continued, ‘First, it was no involvement. Then no one ever, never talked to anyone, and then we find out about the dinners, the meetings, the phone calls, everything else.’ 

‘Now, it’s okay, he wasn’t involved in the business financially,’ Jordan continued. ‘I think that is important. It’s one of the reasons we want to talk to Hunter Biden.’ 

Jordan said the ‘biggest takeaway’ from Hunter Biden’s appearance was that statement about President Biden not being financially involved — which to Jordan indicates the elder Biden may have been involved in his son’s business dealings in other ways.

‘That is a huge change, which means — sort of means he’s involved,’ Jordan said. ‘I think that’s how anyone with common sense would read it.’ 

Jordan described the change as indicating President Biden has ‘been involved, just not financially.’ 

Jordan said that ‘is a huge departure from everything they’ve said now for the last three and a half years.’ 

President Biden, dating back to August 2019 on the 2020 campaign trail, said he ‘never discussed with my son or my brother or anyone else anything having to do with their business, period.’ 

A month later, Biden said he had ‘never spoken to my son about his overseas business dealings.’ 

The next month, Biden said, ‘I don’t discuss business with my son.’ 

This summer, however, the White House made a change, and began saying Biden was not ‘in business’ with his son during his vice presidency.

‘As we have said many times before, the president was not in business with his son,’ White House counsel’s office spokesperson Ian Sams said in a June 29 statement.

‘The answer remains the same,’ White House press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre said during a July 24 briefing. ‘The president was never in business with his son. I just don’t have anything else to add.’

House Republican Conference Chair Elise Stefanik, Jordan, Oversight Committee Chair James Comer and Ways and Means Committee Chair Jason Smith wrote a letter to White House Counsel Stuart Delery in July to seek clarity on the shifting message, but their July 27 deadline was ignored.

Hunter Biden’s attorney Abbe Lowell in September said he can ‘categorically’ declare that the elder Biden was not involved in his son’s previous business dealings and did not profit from any of them.

‘I can tell you that Hunter did not share his business with his dad,’ Lowell told CNN in September. ‘I can tell you that he did not share money from his businesses with his dad. And as the evidence out there, his dad, like all good parents, tried to help Hunter when Hunter needed that help.’

Meanwhile, Comer and Jordan last week threatened to hold Hunter Biden in contempt of Congress if he defied the subpoena and failed to appear for his deposition. 

Comer and Jordan had vowed to release the full transcript of Hunter Biden’s deposition if he did participate. They also vowed to then schedule a public hearing for the president’s son to testify in a setting for the American people to hear from him directly. 

Meanwhile, Comer and Jordan spoke to reporters, defending their ‘lawful subpoena of the president’s son.’ 

‘This is a normal process in an investigation,’ Comer said. ‘This has been a serious investigation since day one — an investigation about public corruption at the highest level.’ 

Comer said he still expects to depose the president’s son. 

‘And then we will be more than happy to have a public hearing,’ Comer said. 

Jordan said if a public hearing took place first, as suggested by the first son, members would filibuster and delay lines of questioning. 

‘The way you get the facts is you bring people in for an interview behind closed doors,’ Jordan said. 

Lowell and the White House have argued that the subpoena was not valid because the House impeachment inquiry was never formalized by the full House of Representatives. 

However, a vote to do so is expected later Wednesday. 

‘We think it is going to pass,’ Jordan said. ‘We’ll see what their excuse is then.’ 

However, Jordan did say that once that vote takes place, he and Comer will, as promised, ‘move forward with contempt proceedings’ against the first son.

Comer said that the committee has tens of thousands of documents prepared in the room where Hunter Biden was expected to testify. 

Comer said the committee has ‘specific questions for the president’s son,’ and said the American people want this investigation. 

ZIKIM BASE, Israel-Gaza border: It was one of the deadliest clashes of Israel’s ground war in Gaza against Hamas. Nine soldiers killed, some top officers, along with several injured. It happened when Hamas terrorists ambushed troops Tuesday on a mission in the Shejaiya section of Gaza City. On the same day, another soldier was killed farther north.

Fox News spent time that day, just a few miles away, at the Zikim base on the northern Gaza border, a dusty place with sand dunes around and the Mediterranean Sea nearby.  

We watched for several hours as troops steadily streamed toward and away from the battle. They rode in pumped-up, open-top Humvees that sometimes made them look more like extras in a ‘Mad Max’ movie.  

The ones going in also rode side-by-side in troop carrier trucks. They seemed more tentative. The ones on the way out looked relieved that they were getting a break from some of the worst urban combat in decades. Some gave us the thumbs up.  Many looked pretty young. Enlisted and reserve soldiers in the mix.

We asked Major ‘Isaac’ (the IDF asked that we use just his first name), a veteran on and off for much of the eight-week ground war, how the fight was.

‘I need to pick a word,’ he replied.  And then said, ‘Tough.’ Responding further,  ‘…yeh, definitely.’

Major ‘Isaac’ noted Hamas was ‘hiding… some of the time.’ And added about the heavily-armed terrorists, ‘They are prepared.’

He and other soldiers didn’t have to look far for reasons why they were in the fight. 

Starting on Oct. 7, the Zikim base was attacked by dozens of Hamas fighters, arriving there by land and by sea. More veteran soldiers had to take over for the young recruits and fend them off. Bullet holes and rocket impacts could still be seen on the walls of the base’s shelters, the pavement and watch tower.

In the end, they won out, killing all 50 terrorists who targeted this prime location in wave after wave. But seven soldiers would be killed as well. These kinds of attacks were repeated at other bases, kibbutzes and towns. Which would lead to the massive Israeli air war, and now the ground action.

We asked Major ‘Isaac’ about the concerns regarding the huge destruction and loss of life for the residents of Gaza caused by Israel’s air and ground offensive. He noted tersely, ‘No one wants to hurt civilians.’

We also spoke with another soldier, Major ‘Omri.’ He seemed a bit more bullish about his side’s contact with the Hamas foe. ‘They’re tired,’ he told us. ‘We’ll shoot them,’ he added, ‘we’ll find them, even in the tunnels.’

Asked to sum up the future prospects for the IDF in this fight, he came back with a reply that sounded a bit ‘boilerplate,’ but still calmly confident:

‘The IDF is more than willing to continue to do whatever it takes to fulfill operational goals,’ he said.

One of the biggest takeaways from our couple-hour visit to Zikim: What a huge operation this war is, with so many moving parts. That base is just one of many entry points for thousands and thousands of soldiers pouring into the battle.    

Also, the impression that this war is taking its toll on all involved. The death and destruction for the residents of Gaza caught in the crossfire. The hostages who remain stranded just a few miles from the base. As well as the strain from the combat in which these soldiers are participating. Still, their determination remains.

Fox News’s Emily Robertson contributed to this article.