>> Thanks so much for that
information.
>>> This afternoon kifb Mccarthy
will convene a conference call
as he worked to get enough votes
to be house speaker.
A key concession he's offering
to lower the threshold requires
to force a flow vote that would
oust a sitting speaker.
Here with me now is commentator
Scott Jennings.
Good morning.
Great to see you.
This is very interesting.
So currently just to give people
context, the rule right now on
what is called the motion to
vacate, but essentially it is a
vote to oust the spoke -- the
speaker, the majority of
conference would have to vote on
that.
He's saying it lower it to
potentially five.
That is a number that has been
floated out there.
What do you make of this
potential deal?
Good idea, bad idea?
>> First of all, sorry for the
picture.
The sun is coming through my
window here.
>> You look very angelic.
>> I look like an angel coming
down.
>> You're going to bless us with
some analyst here.
>> Well, this motion to vacate
essentially if you put the power
of this in one person's hand or
in five people's hands, Mccarthy
would be putting his own head in
a guillotine and handing a
string to the people who hate
him the most.
It would make the speakership
unworkable because you have a
couple of people that don't like
it and vacate the chair and make
his life miserable on a daily
basis.
So the people who support
Mccarthy doesn't want him to do
that.
Even though 85% of the
conference wants him to be
speaker, we're going to put all
of the power in the hands of
one, two, three, four or five
people.
So it seems like an unworkable
thing for the people who are out
there saying that their
committed to Mccarthy's
speakership.
So it is a puzzle because he
doesn't have the votes but the
way he has to get the votes may
doom his speakership.
>> And it is quite the quandary.
And the vote is Tuesday and the
members will all be coming in on
Tuesday so it is hard to gauge
where people are.
But we know there are five
hardliners that have said
they're voting in block all
together and they are unswayed.
The fact that we're having this
conversation this close and
talking about potentially
lowering this threshold, what
does that mean?
Let's say he does become house
speaker, does that make him
very, very weak from the outset?
>> Yes, of course it does.
If he were to have to lower this
threshold and put this power in
the hands of a small number of
people, it would put him on
constant thin ice.
I mean, celebrity essentially, it would
give him no maneuvering room.
But if you have a couple of
folks who didn't want to do it,
they could throw his entire
speakership into jeopardy.
The house is kind of a majority
body, the party with the most
seats gets to pick the speaker
and in the conference meeting,
85 plus percent of the
Republicans voted for Mccarthy
to be speaker.
But the people who are holdouts
here are saying, is we think the
entire 435 body chamber should
be put in the hands of five
people which is antithetical to
the way the house runs.
>>> Before we leave, I want to
talk about the president's tax
returns, we've been talking
about them in this hour.
How do you see this impacting
presidential over sight and how
this plays out as we move
forward.
>> I agree with the Republican
criticism of this today.
I think it was inevitable that
it would come out but it feels
like to Republicans that it was
vindictive.
It is a trump hate porn on the
way out as the Republicans are
about to take over.
And so what I suspect you'll see
what Republicans will say is
what is good for the goose, is
good for the gander, there will
be something that a Republican
will publish and say you started
it.
I get the feeling it is going to
set off one of these tit-for-tat
battles between the parties.
I don't love it, it feels
vindictive.
I'm surprised it took this long.
>> And it is true that everyone
has followed that precedent
except for trump in releasing
them.