Ten Democrats voted with Republicans to rebuke Biden administration officials over their handling of the U.S. withdrawal from Afghanistan on Wednesday.

It passed 219 to 194, and among the Democrats who voted for the measure are Reps. Jared Golden, D-Maine; Mary Peltola, D-Alaska; Marie Gluesenkamp Perez, D-Wash.; Vicente Gonzalez, D-Texas; Greg Landsman, D-Ohio; and Jeff Jackson, D-N.C.

The bill was introduced by House Foreign Affairs Committee Chairman Michael McCaul, R-Texas, who conducted a yearslong investigation into the chaotic military operation.

‘Three years after the deadly and chaotic withdrawal from Afghanistan, the Biden-Harris administration has yet to hold anyone accountable for one of the most devastating foreign policy blunders in American history,’ McCaul told Fox News Digital.

He accused Biden officials of having ‘prioritized optics over security,’ which McCaul said led to the deaths of the 13 U.S. servicemembers who were killed in a terror attack at Hamid Karzai International Airport in Kabul during the withdrawal.

McCaul read their names on the House floor in closing remarks for debate on the bill.

‘Nothing will bring their lives back,’ he said.

The resolution specifically name-checks 15 current or former Biden administration members, including President Biden and Vice President Kamala Harris, Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin, former White House Press Secretary Jen Psaki, former Ambassador to Afghanistan Ross Wilson, and Secretary of State Antony Blinken, among others.

Leading opposition to McCaul’s bill was Rep. Gregory Meeks, D-N.Y., the top Democrat on the House Foreign Affairs Committee.

‘This resolution, as I’ve said all along, is nothing more than political theater designed to score cheap points rather than address the real issues at hand,’ Meeks said. ‘It’s a distortion of the facts and a disservice to the American people, a disservice to our servicemembers, a disservice to our diplomats – all of who put their lives on the line during our 20-year war efforts.’

Them and their sacrifices should not be used as a political football. We should be working on real solutions, supporting our Afghan allies, ensuring that we learn the right lessons, and providing accountability that are based on truth, not partisan narratives.’

McCaul responded, ‘I have tremendous respect [for Meeks]. We work together on many things, bipartisan. And when we don’t agree, we do so civilly. However, I cannot disagree with you more than I do today.’

‘Who could ever forget the harrowing images of Afghans falling off the planes, and babies being flung over barbed wire in a desperate attempt by mothers to save their children and escape Afghanistan under Taliban rule?’ he asked.

McCaul is also poised to lead the House in holding Blinken in contempt of Congress over accusations he is stonewalling his probe. 

His committee advanced that resolution on Tuesday, and Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., suggested to Fox News Digital that he will bring it up for a House-wide vote when lawmakers return from a six-week recess that starts Wednesday.

State Department spokesman Matthew Miller criticized the move in a Tuesday statement, ‘Today’s action by the House Committee on Foreign Affairs was a naked political exercise masquerading as oversight, designed only to further the majority’s partisan interests under the guise of asking questions that have long ago been answered.’

Congress took a significant step toward averting an end-of-month partial government shutdown just weeks before Election Day.

In a victory for Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., a majority of Republicans voted for the measure – it passed 341 to 82, with 132 House GOP lawmakers in favor. All the 82 ‘no’ votes were Republicans.

Faced with an Oct. 1 deadline and little bipartisan progress on fiscal year 2025 spending priorities, the House of Representatives on Wednesday passed a short-term extension of the current fiscal year’s federal funding levels to keep the government open through Dec. 20.

The measure, known as a continuing resolution (CR), gained wide bipartisan support – though more Democrats voted for it than Republicans, as expected.

A large contingent of Republicans, still angry with House GOP leaders for passing last year’s federal funding bills in two large segments rather than forcing the Democrat-held Senate to consider 12 appropriations bills individually, were always likely to vote against extending those measures.

The federal funding debate has been a lightening rod for political drama, particularly during the 118th Congress. Last year’s government funding stand-off precipitated the ouster of Johnson’s predecessor by a group of House Republicans.

Fiscal conservatives are frustrated about punting that fight into December, arguing it puts the House GOP majority in the position of being forced to reckon with a massive ‘omnibus’ spending bill right before the end-of-year holidays rather than work through their 12 individual appropriations bills.

‘I’ve said this in public forum – we are condemned to a Christmas lame-duck omnibus,’ Rep. Keith Self, R-Texas, told Fox News Digital on Tuesday.

House Freedom Caucus member Rep. Ralph Norman, R-S.C., said, ‘I think that’s the preview of coming attractions, unfortunately.’

But Johnson swore both in public and private that the House would not take up an omnibus in December.

‘There won’t be a Christmas omnibus. Somebody asked me in the hallway a little while ago, ‘Will there be mini-buses?’ We don’t want any buses. We’re not going to do any buses.’

Allies of former President Trump, meanwhile, have called for a CR into the new year in the hopes he will win the White House and carry Congress along with him.

House GOP leadership staff suggested to Fox News Digital over the weekend that it’s more likely Johnson will aim for a CR to do just that in December rather than consider an omnibus.

That would line up with his original plan for a more conservative CR – one that offered a six-month funding extension into March and was coupled with a measure to prevent noncitizens from registering to vote in U.S. elections.

The initial plan failed after a rebellion by 14 Republicans. Some defense hawks worried about the effect of a six-month CR on military readiness, while a group of fiscal conservatives balked at the principle of the CR itself.

The new plan is a more straightforward funding extension, though it adds $231 million for the U.S. Secret Service after two foiled assassination attempts against Trump.

And while the Democrat-led White House and Senate were both poised to reject Johnson’s initial CR, President Biden and Majority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., have signaled they’re supportive of the recent deal.

The bill is expected to be considered in the Senate on Thursday, after which it heads to the White House for Biden’s signature. 

Vice President Kamala Harris has announced that she will not be attending this year’s Al Smith Dinner, making her the first presidential candidate since Walter Mondale in 1984 to snub New York City’s famous Catholic event.

The tradition began in 1960, with John F. Kennedy and Richard Nixon donning their high hats, white spats and Arrow collars, and ever since, it has been an evening of national and political unity.

Gotham’s Cardinal Timothy Dolan called Harris’ decision ‘disappointing,’ reminding the veep that Walter Mondale lost all but his home state when he RSVP’d in the negative way back in 1984, and even some liberal pundits are scratching their heads at the decision.

After all, the Al Smith dinner is a venerated institution because it is a rare moment in today’s politics when candidates poke gentle fun at each other and enjoy dinner together, showing the country that there is more that unites us than divides us.

In fact, Harris has at least five very good reasons for ducking this showcase of togetherness, and each is deeply cynical. But taken together, they explain exactly why she is turning her back on tradition and potentially alienating Catholic voters.

1. Harris Does Not Want To Humanize Trump

The vice president is running a bizarre and unprecedented campaign in which she insists she no longer holds the positions she did three years ago and doesn’t feel much need to let us all know what the new positions are. This leaves one strategy for her, and that is to paint Donald Trump as a fascist would-be dictator who would destroy democracy a day after being sworn in using a copy of Project 2025. 

Having a wonderful dinner under the auspices of His Eminence, the smiling and congenial Cardinal Dolan, really doesn’t send that message. In fact, it sends exactly the opposite message. And if Trump isn’t actually evil incarnate, then people might suddenly start comparing economic policies, and the Democrats can’t have that.

2. The Al Smith Dinner Is Too Unscripted For Harris

It’s no secret that the Harris campaign has been closeting their candidate away from unscripted events whenever possible. Medieval monks weren’t this cloistered. In order to participate in the dinner, Harris would have to appear on the dais, without a teleprompter, in front of a crowd that wasn’t hand-chosen and deliver 5-10 minutes of comic material. Nothing we have ever seen Harris do even remotely suggests she is capable of this, and her handlers may know all too well that she isn’t.

3. Protesting The Church Is A Wink At The Far Left

The Harris campaign has settled into an approach in which it vaguely moves to the center by disavowing her past as the most liberal member of the Senate, while also winking at progressives to let them know she really doesn’t mean it. Snubbing the most important Catholic event on the political calendar sends exactly that message to her far-left supporters. Sure, she has to say certain things to get elected, but she is really all about sticking it to the oppressors, and what represents that better than insulting the Catholic Church?

4. Harris Does Not Want A Level Playing Field

As we have seen with the Harris campaign hand selecting only left-leaning networks for proposed debates against Trump, and declining the one on Fox News that had been scheduled with President Joe Biden, Kamala is not willing to face Trump on equal terms. Without an edge, without wildly biased debate moderators, there is no reason to believe Harris can go toe to toe with anyone, much less Donald Trump. She was not battle tested in a primary, and wants no part of a fair fight.

5. Kamala Harris Isn’t Funny

The main goal of anyone delivering remarks at the Al Smith dinner is to score some laughs, and with decent enough joke writers most politicians can manage it, but can Kamala Harris? While it’s true that many of her incomprehensible word salads are unintentionally funny, when she actually tries to be amusing she generally starts cackling at her own joke while saying, ‘right? right?’ to a confused and distinctly not laughing audience. This is just one more aspect of the vice president that the Hidin’ Harris campaign wants to keep under wraps.

Traditions matter to societiesc. So does the ability, even in the midst of the most heated political times, to put all that aside and remember that we are all human beings first. But sadly, those kinds of old-timey ideals do not fit with Harris’ agenda.

Harris not only wants us to dislike each other based on our politics, she needs us to, because if Trump is a human being, if he is a decent, fun person who simply has different political opinions, then Harris has no case to make. So tradition, the church, and basic comity be damned. 

China hawks are calling out Vice President Kamala Harris’ running mate, Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz, for failing to impose a TikTok ban on government-issued devices in his state, particularly considering more than 75% of other states did so amid national security concerns. 

When asked in 2022 whether Walz planned to ban the Chinese-owned social media app on Minnesota-issued devices, the Democrat governor said his team was looking at the issue ‘holistically’ and that he was deferring to tech experts in his administration for ‘recommendations.’ Walz also drew an equivalency between TikTok and X, formerly Twitter, arguing the Elon Musk-owned platform ‘can be somewhat dangerous.’

‘That equivalence goes to, I think, a broader confusion on the left that privacy is a protection from ourselves, from these big businesses. Not a protection from the government,’ said Trent England, executive director of Save Our States, a conservative nonprofit dedicated to defending the constitutional power of states. ‘They’re more trusting toward state actors in general… Elon Musk, however powerful people think he is, he’s not the Chinese Communist Party.’

Walz’s decision not to implement a TikTok ban on Minnesota’s government-issued devices stands in contrast with the actions of numerous other states, and is also out of step with the Biden administration. 

In December 2022, President Biden signed a bill banning TikTok from all federally issued devices. This year, Biden went even further when he signed an additional bill in April to ban TikTok nationwide, unless its Chinese-owned parent company, ByteDance, divests its entire stake in the social media company by next year.

Meanwhile, at least 39 separate states implemented a TikTok ban on government-issued devices. Many of those bans were initiated by governors, while others were introduced by the state legislature and later approved by the governor.

The federal and state bans have also coincided with warnings from the nation’s top law enforcement agency, the Federal Bureau of Investigation, which has said it has ‘a number’ of ‘national security concerns’ related to the U.S. operations of TikTok. ‘They include the possibility that the Chinese government could use it to control data collection on millions of users or control the recommendation algorithm, which could be used for influence operations if they so chose, or to control software on millions of devices, which gives it an opportunity to potentially technically compromise personal devices,’ FBI Director Christopher Wray told Congress in 2022.

Kansas Gov. Laura Kelly, a Republican, called the decision to ban TikTok from government devices ‘common sense.’

‘In the digital age, defending our state’s technology and cybersecurity infrastructure and protecting digital privacy have to be a top priority for us as a state,’ said Wisconsin Gov. Tony Evers, a Democrat, after signing an executive order banning TikTok on government devices.

Evers also pointed out how he, similar to Walz, consulted with cybersecurity and law enforcement experts.

‘I trust the professionals who work in this field, and it was important for me to consult with and get advice from experts in law enforcement, cybersecurity and counterintelligence, including the information technology experts working within DOA-DET, to make the best decision to protect state technologies, and ultimately, the people of Wisconsin.’

England told Fox News Digital on Wednesday that he thinks Walz’s actions are a ‘throwback’ to an earlier era of U.S.-China relations when the prevailing attitude was not to view China as an adversary.

‘Walz is still in this ’90s mindset that we’re going to fix China by engaging with them, which effectively means looking the other way when they’re stealing intellectual property, or engaging in what looks like espionage, or what obviously is espionage,’ England said. ‘I think Walz is really a throwback to an earlier era of China relations that most people have determined was a failure.’

Earlier this month, TikTok argued in federal court that Biden’s proposed nationwide ban on TikTok if ByteDance does not divest itself is unconstitutional. ‘The law before this court is unprecedented and its effect would be staggering,’ attorneys for TikTok said in court earlier this month, according to the Associated Press. 

Additionally, several pro-TikTok activists also rallied outside the courthouse in support of the social media platform. One content creator, Paul Tran, told The Associated Press that being able to make TikTok videos gave his company the lift it needed to stay competitive. ‘TikTok truly invigorated our company and saved it from collapse,’ Tran told reporters.

Fox News Digital reached out to both Walz’s office and the Harris campaign for comment but did not hear back prior to publication time.   

: House Speaker Mike Johnson is calling on Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy to fire Ukraine’s ambassador to the United States after she allegedly organized a U.S. taxpayer-funded visit to a battleground state ahead of the 2024 presidential election, Fox News Digital has learned. 

Ukraine’s ambassador to the U.S., Oksana Markarova, organized a tour of an American manufacturing site for Zelenskyy over the weekend in Pennsylvania, a key battleground state ahead of November’s election. 

Johnson, R-La., said that tour was led by a ‘top political surrogate’ for the Democratic presidential nominee, Vice President Kamala Harris, and ‘purposely excluded’ Republicans. Johnson called it clear ‘election interference.’ 

‘I demand that you immediately fire Ukraine’s Ambassador to the United States, Oksana Markarova,’ Johnson wrote in a letter to Zelenskyy exclusively obtained by Fox News Digital Wednesday. 

‘As you have said, Ukrainians have tried to avoid being ‘captured by American domestic politics,’ and ‘influencing the choices of the American people’ ahead of the November election,’ Johnson wrote. ‘Clearly, that objective was abandoned this week when Ambassador Markarova organized an event in which you toured an American manufacturing site.

‘The facility was in a politically contested battleground state, was led by a top political surrogate for Kamala Harris, and failed to include a single Republican because – on purpose – no Republicans were invited,’ Johnson continued, adding the tour was ‘clearly a partisan campaign event designed to help Democrats and is clearly election interference.’ 

Johnson said the ‘shortsighted and intentionally political move has caused Republicans to lose trust in Ambassador Markarova’s ability to fairly and effectively serve as a diplomat in this country.’ 

‘She should be removed from her post immediately,’ he wrote.  

Johnson stressed that ‘all foreign nations should avoid opining on or interfering in American domestic politics.’ 

‘Support for ending Russia’s war against Ukraine continues to be bipartisan, but our relationship is unnecessarily tested and needlessly tarnished when the candidates at the top of the Republican presidential ticket are targeted in the media by officials in your government,’ Johnson wrote. 

‘These incidents cannot be repeated.’ 

Johnson thanked Zelenskyy for his ‘prompt attention to this matter.’ 

‘I trust you will take immediate action,’ Johnson said. 

Zelenskyy over the weekend visited a Pennsylvania ammunition factory alongside two Pentagon leaders — the assistant secretary of the Army for acquisition, logistics and technology and the Pentagon’s top weapons buyer. 

Zelenskyy also met with Pennsylvania Democratic Gov. Josh Shapiro, who was said to be on the short list to be considered as Harris’ running mate before she chose Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz.

Zelenskyy recently participated in interviews and was critical of former President Trump and his running mate JD Vance, calling the Ohio senator ‘too radical.’

The House Oversight Committee is now investigating the Biden-Harris administration’s alleged use of taxpayer-funded resources to fly Zelenskyy to Pennsylvania ahead of the November presidential election. 

Committee Chairman James Comer, R-Ky., announced the investigation Wednesday and is seeking records regarding the administration’s alleged ‘misuse of government resources’ to allow Zelenskyy to ‘interfere in the 2024 presidential election.’ 

‘The Committee seeks to determine whether the Biden-Harris Administration attempted to use a foreign leader to benefit Vice President Harris’ presidential campaign and, if so, necessarily committed an abuse of power,’ Comer wrote Wednesday in a letter to the White House, Justice Department and the Pentagon. 

Comer said his committee is investigating the circumstances that led to ‘justify’ the administration’s transport of Zelenskyy on a Department of the Air Force aircraft to Pennsylvania. 

Fox News Digital reached out to the White House, Pentagon, Justice Department and Harris campaign for comment.