Politics

(WASHINGTON) — The last time Democrats gathered in-person for a caucus retreat, in 2019, the House majority crafted an agenda centered on plans for a bipartisan infrastructure bill and lowering prescription drug prices.

Three years later, with full control of Congress and the White House, but facing historic headwinds in the midterm elections, an ongoing pandemic and record-high inflation, Democrats argued that they had a substantive record to sell to voters, even if their agenda remained unfinished.

“If our agenda is incomplete it doesn’t mean we are broken, it means we have to keep working,” Rep. Sean Patrick Maloney, D-N.Y., the chair of House Democrats’ campaign committee, told reporters Thursday. “We know what the stakes are.”

Last year, President Joe Biden signed a $1.2 trillion infrastructure plan into law with bipartisan support, clearing the way for repairs to America’s aging roads, bridges and airports and new investments in broadband.

But the larger social policy plan has been stuck on Capitol Hill, with progressives in the House and several moderate Democrats in the Senate at odds over its scope and scale.

In his State of the Union speech, Biden, who will travel to Philadelphia on Friday to address the caucus, reframed his policy agenda as a plan to fight inflation, and urged lawmakers to revisit lowering prescription drug and child care costs.

“We just have to figure it out and see what’s possible,” Rep. Pramila Jayapal, D-Wash., a leading progressive, said Thursday. “The hard reality of 50 votes in the Senate and 218 votes in the House is the reality we’ll have to focus in on.”

Huddling after a bruising spending bill fight over coronavirus funds that delayed the start of their retreat, Democrats held several sessions with guest speakers and experts on reaching seniors and young voters, national security and immigration.

Maloney, who gave members a presentation on the midterm outlook for the party, acknowledged to reporters that although the president’s party traditionally loses seats in the midterm elections, Democrats are campaigning on more favorable terrain thanks to unexpected redistricting results that created more districts that were won by Biden in the previous election.

“We came out of redistricting with a better map than the one through which we currently hold the majority,” Maloney said, while also acknowledging that Republicans are supported by outside political groups that have outraised their Democratic counterparts.

Rep. Teresa Leger Fernandez, D-N.M., argued that Democrats also have a positive story to tell voters about the state of the pandemic, and can sell the benefits of the American Rescue Plan, the massive Democratic stimulus effort pumped into the economy after the election.

“In November of 2020 it was dark, we could not be with our families, and COVID was raging,” she told ABC News. “Now, a year and three months later, we are able to be with family and gather.”

Leaders of the Congressional Black Caucus laid out new plans to unveil proposed executive actions that the Biden administration could take to address unfinished agenda items on policing and voting rights, which have also stalled in Congress given GOP opposition and the 50-50 split Senate.

Democratic Whip Jim Clyburn, D-S.C., held out hope that some voting measures Democrats have pushed for could also be included in any potential reforms to the Electoral Count Act put forward by a bipartisan group of senators.

For their part, Republicans have continued to hammer Biden and Democrats over rising gas prices and inflation, unveiling new ads targeting swing-district Democrats and predicting that prices will only increase given the ongoing war between Russia and Ukraine.

Democrats repeatedly acknowledged the problem of inflation and rising prices but have attempted in recent days to reframe soaring gas prices as a result of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine — and a sacrifice that Americans should be prepared to make as the West sanctions Russia and supports Ukraine’s democratic government under attack.

“What is the price that we as individuals will want to contribute in solidarity with the Ukrainian people?” Rep. Raul Ruiz, D-Calif., the chair of the Congressional Hispanic Caucus, said Thursday. “If it means paying a few extra cents at the gas tank, then we’re willing to pay that.”

Maloney also told Democrats they need to think more carefully about how they communicate with voters.

“We need to talk like real people, and pass what I call the Maloney brothers test: If you go home for Thanksgiving and your brothers think you sound like a jerk — you know, what your grade point average was — it doesn’t matter to them. You have to show up and be a human being,” he said.

The president’s role in the midterms, Maloney said, is to be the “strong, decent man” who “crushed” his State of the Union address and is “leading the world to stand up to Russian aggression.”

Copyright © 2022, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(WASHINGTON) — President Donald Trump’s former national security adviser, retired Lt. Gen. Michael Flynn, appeared Thursday before the House committee investigating the Jan. 6 attack on the U.S. Capitol and exercised his Fifth Amendment right in response to the panel’s questions, his attorney said.

The committee subpoenaed Flynn in November, requesting documents and testimony in reference to a Dec. 18, 2020, meeting he reportedly attended with then-President Trump in the Oval Office, where seizing voting machines used in the 2020 election was allegedly discussed.

Flynn was also allegedly involved in efforts to draft several memos ordering multiple federal agencies to seize voting machines, which Trump ultimately did not sign.

Flynn’s lead counsel, David Warrington, said Flynn “exercised his 5th amendment right to decline to answer the Committee’s questions” at his appearance Thursday.

A committee spokesperson declined to comment on Flynn’s appearance.

Trump had allegedly contemplated ordering the U.S. Department of Homeland Security to seize states’ voting machines as part of his efforts to challenge the 2020 election results, and Flynn publicly prodded Trump to declare martial law and order the military to oversee new elections in the battleground states that Trump had lost.

One day before Trump met with Flynn, the former national security adviser told the conservative news outlet Newsmax that Trump “could take military capabilities and he could place them in those states and basically rerun an election in each of those states.”

Flynn filed a lawsuit against House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and members of the committee in December seeking “declaratory and injunctive relief” from a subpoena from the committee seeking his records and testimony.

A federal judge quickly rejected Flynn’s effort to get a temporary restraining order that would have barred the committee from enforcing its subpoena against him and obtaining any of his cellphone data from a third-party telecommunications company.

Flynn and former Trump attorney Sidney Powell tried to enlist a Pentagon official to help overturn the election, ABC News Chief Washington Correspondent Jonathan Karl wrote in his book Betrayal: The Final Act of the Trump Show.

According to the book, Flynn — who had just received an unconditional presidential pardon from Trump after pleading guilty in 2017 to lying to the FBI during the Russia probe — made a frantic phone call to a senior Trump intelligence official named Ezra Cohen (sometimes referred to as Ezra Cohen-Watnick), who previously worked under Flynn at both the Defense Intelligence Agency and the National Security Council.

Flynn urged Cohen that “he needed to get orders signed, that ballots needed to be seized, and that extraordinary measures needed to be taken to stop Democrats from stealing the election,” Karl reported.

“Sir, the election is over,” Cohen told Flynn, according to the book. “It’s time to move on.”

Copyright © 2022, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(WASHINGTON) — Republican Sen. Ted Cruz rolled up to the Capitol rotunda on Thursday in a honking semi-truck, the lead vehicle of a convoy that for the past five days has encircled the D.C. Beltway in protest of COVID-19 restrictions.

The Texas senator, fully vaccinated, rode in “People’s Convoy” co-organizer Mike Landis’s truck from Hagerstown, Maryland, before stepping out for a press conference in support of the truckers — many of whom traveled from California in late February.

Cruz thanked the truckers while standing alongside Landis and another co-organizer, Brian Brase.

The “People’s Convoy” met with Cruz and Republican Sen. Ron Johnson, R-Wis., on Tuesday for a roundtable discussion at the Capitol and later with Republican members of the House Transportation Committee.

The truckers said they would continue their protest until they had sat down with more members of Congress and had their demands met. Those demands include rolling back the national state of emergency designation as well as any existing vaccine mandates. The truckers are also calling for congressional hearings on the origins of the pandemic along with an investigation into state and federal COVID responses.

Across the country, however, most COVID restrictions have already been lifted. Some states, like Florida, have maintained lax COVID mandates throughout the pandemic.

If Republicans gain control of Congress next year, Cruz, who has flirted with the idea of a 2024 run as the GOP presidential nominee, said he’d work for legislation to support the truckers’ demands.

The senator took a swipe at Democrats and some Republican colleagues in the Senate over failed votes to end COVID restrictions like mandates for active-duty military, federal civilian employees, federal contractors and private-sector mandates through OSHA.

“I’m fighting to vote on it again… This shouldn’t be a partisan issue,” Cruz said. “This should be ‘leave me the hell alone.'”

Cruz used the press conference to touch on a number of hot-button conservative issues, including mandating voter ID.

“It is insane that you have the left and corporate media that tell you it’s wrong to ask for an ID to vote. That voter ID is a horrible, racist idea, which is nonsense. But at the same time, they demand, ‘show me your papers to lunch.’ That’s idiotic. That’s none of their damn business.”

A crowd member yelled at Cruz during the event, “You should run for president,” to which the senator responded: “Thank you.”

Copyright © 2022, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(WASHINGTON) — CIA Director William Burns told lawmakers Thursday that Russian President Vladimir Putin continues to agree to settlement talks with Ukraine for tactical reasons because he “does not have a sustainable end game” for his invasion.

“Given Putin’s track record, given the fact that he’s someone who hates to act out of what he believes to be weakness, that he needs to concede or admit mistakes, that’s probably a long shot,” Burns said of any chance talks might succeed after a session Thursday in Turkey between the countries’ top two diplomats failed to produce a cease-fire.

Burns also told the Senate Intelligence Committee that Putin, at the same time, is turning Russia into a “propaganda bubble.”

“He’s intensified his domination of the state run media and in his strangulation of independent media, especially in recent years, and particularly since the invasion of Ukraine began.”

“I don’t believe he can wall off [Russians] indefinitely from the truth, especially as realities began to puncture that bubble. The realities of killed and wounded coming home in an increasing number. The realities of the economic consequences for ordinary Russians as I was discussing before, the realities of you know, the horrific scenes of hospitals and schools being bombed next door and Ukraine, enough civilian casualties there as well. I don’t think he can bottle up the truth indefinitely,” he said.

Intelligence agency leaders from around the government testified in the second of two hearings detailing their annual report on “worldwide threats,” after speaking to the House Intelligence Committee on Tuesday.

Burns told Sen. Susan Collins, R-Maine, that the U.S. needs to “focus” on Russia’s potential use of chemical weapons both in terms of a “false flag” operation and in reality.

“This is something as all of you know very well is very much a part of Russia’s playbook,” Burns said. “They’ve used those weapons against their own citizens. They’ve at least encouraged the use in Syria and elsewhere. So, it’s something we take very seriously.”

He said believes the U.S. is adequately pushing back on the Russian narrative.

“In all the years I spent as a career diplomat, I saw too many instances in which we lost information wars with the Russians. In this case, I think we have had a great deal of effect in disrupting their tactics and their calculations and demonstrating to the entire world that this is a premeditated and unprovoked aggression, built on a body of lies and false narratives,” he said.

The head of U.S. Cyber Command, Gen. Paul Nakasone, defended U.S. information-sharing with Ukraine amid Republican suggestions the U.S. was holding back.

“The intelligence that we’re sharing is accurate. It’s relevant, and it’s actionable. I think when we look back at this, that’s the key piece of, of what we’ve been able to do as an intelligence community,” he said.

Defense Intelligence Agency Director Gen. Scott Berrier admitted he could have done a better job assessing problems Putin’s military would have overcoming the Ukrainians’ will to fight.

“So, we assessed prior to the invasion that he was overestimate or underestimating, rather, the Ukrainians … resistance,” he said. “We did not do as well in terms of predicting the military challenges that he has encountered with his own military.”

“We made some assumptions about his assumptions, which proved to be very, very flawed,” Berrier said.

“Among the many profoundly flawed assumptions that President Putin made in launching this invasion, was his assumption that he had built a sanctions-proof economy,” Burns said.

Putin, Burns said, thought he built a “very large war chest to foreign currency reserves and gold reserves, and by not anticipating that the sanctions against the Russian Central Bank, by not anticipating that the German leadership would show such resolve in particular, I think he deeply underestimated the economic consequences, and I think they’re just now being felt in Russia, and that’s going to intensify.”

Copyright © 2022, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(WASHINGTON) — When National Republican Senatorial Committee Chair Rick Scott announced his “11 Point Plan to Rescue America” in late February, it was met with resistance from established Washington lawmakers. Weeks later, it appears to be gaining traction among a handful of deeply conservative GOP Senate candidates,while continuing to fall flat among most Republicans in the running across midterm battlegrounds.

Scott’s 11-point outline mapped out conservative approaches to a range of topics including the economy, the nation’s education system, racial equality, crime, immigration and several other social issues. The public proposal specifically highlighted priorities like finishing the border wall and naming it after former President Donald Trump, promoting two-parent households, opposing abortions and requiring all Americans to pay “some income tax to have skin in the game.”

Upon its publication, the plan was met with criticism from both sides of the aisle. While advocates in various fields blasted points in the plan that targeted social issues — such as prohibiting “critical race theory” in public schools, insisting there are only “two genders” and banning tax dollars from being spent on diversity training — lawmakers and political heavyweights critiqued Scott’s income tax proposal.

ABC News contacted more than a dozen candidates in eight battleground states to weigh in on Scott’s plan. Of those contacted, six responded and three expressed support for the plan as a whole. Three candidates expressed support for the NRSC chair’s decision to present ideas to the public while expressing reluctance to support certain elements of the overall agenda, specifically raising taxes. Alternatively, five candidates did not respond to ABC News’ request for comment, and none voiced full-throated opposition to the plan in its entirety.

Scott released the plan in his capacity as a senator, rather than his position as a committee leader for the upper chamber’s campaign arm, according to the NRSC.

Among the most high-profile responses offering support for Scott’s proposal came from incumbent Wisconsin Sen. Ron Johnson, a strong Trump supporter.

“Senator Rick Scott put forward his proposal that opposes reckless federal spending and intrusive government overreach and supports conservative goals like local control of education, election integrity, religious liberty, and an improved health care system. I think it’s important for elected officials to tell their constituents what they are for, and I support Senator Scott for doing so,” Johnson said in a statement.

In Pennsylvania, Scott received praise from two Republican Senate primary candidates — veteran and conservative political commentator Kathy Barnette and former Trump administration ambassador to Denmark, Carla Sands.

“I’m reading through [the plan], and so far, I agree, and I am grateful that someone with that platform is now saying the quiet parts out loud,” said Barnette, the only Black candidate in her state’s GOP primary, in a phone interview as she reviewed it. She added that the plan “crosses political affiliation — most Americans believe these things.”

She voiced support for classroom policies laid out in the plan, including requiring students to salute the American flag and “learn that America is a great country.”

While she didn’t directly comment on the component of Scott’s plan that says “no government policy will be based on race,” she did say that “racism is real.”

“I have never said that it wasn’t […] what I have tried to instill in my own children is that in today’s America if you don’t like me because of the color of my skin, that’s more your problem than it is mine.”

In an email statement to ABC News, Sands voiced strong support for Scott’s proposal, while placing blame on the Biden administration for inflation and harkening back to policies implemented under Trump.

“I stand with Senator Rick Scott and his 11 point plan to rescue America,” the former ambassador said, adding a parallel to Newt Gingrich’s 1994 “Contract with America.”

Philadelphia-area attorney George Bochetto said he agrees with many of Scott’s “bold positions” but stopped short of backing the plan as a whole over economic concerns.

“I will not be voting for tax increases, and I will protect Medicare and Social Security,” Bochetto said in a statement.

Other high-profile Republican candidates including Dr. Mehmet Oz, Dave McCormick and Jeff Bartos did not return ABC News’ requests for comment.

Scott’s proposal was met with a more lukewarm reception from his Florida colleague, Sen. Marco Rubio, who told reporters last week he had not seen the whole plan and is unsure whether he agrees with all points but that “it’s good that people offer ideas.”

His main point of contention is that Scott’s plan would cause Americans to pay more in taxes — a dealbreaker for many Republicans.

During the North Carolina GOP primary debate, former House Rep. Mark Walker said even though he supports Scott, he does not believe everyone should pay taxes and that people should pay taxes if they have an income.

Former North Carolina governor and GOP Senate candidate Pat McCrory shared the same sentiment — that he supports Scott but not tax hikes.

“The problem is not needing more money, the problem is spending,” McCrory said on the debate stage.

In Nevada, GOP Senate candidate Adam Laxalt said in a statement to ABC News he does not support Scott’s plan.

“I don’t support tax increases on anyone,” he said. “That’s why I signed the Americans for Tax Reform pledge.”

Chuck Morse, one of several Republicans looking to flip Democrat Sen. Maggie Hassan’s seat in New Hampshire, also expressed hesitancy over taxes while avoiding a clear condemnation of the proposal.

“I have not seen the full report. I am a proud tax cutter and have signed the Americans for Tax Reform pledge to NH voters to oppose any new taxes or tax increases. I am building my own campaign based on the #603 way, not any Washington D.C. way,” Morse said in an emailed statement to ABC News.

Fellow New Hampshire Republicans Don Buldoc declined to comment and Kevin Smith did not comment for this article.

The candidate responses come on the heels of Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell offering a strong rebuke of Scott’s proposal. Although McConnell has not released a public Republican agenda, one senator with knowledge of the matter told ABC News that McConnell warned his Republican colleagues in a recent leadership meeting that Scott’s plan could damage the party ahead of the midterms.

“If we are fortunate enough to have the majority next year, I’ll be the majority leader, I’ll decide in consultation with my members what to put on the floor,” McConnell said during a recent press conference.

“Let me tell you what will not be a part of our agenda — we will not have as part of our agenda a bill that raises taxes on half the American people, sunsets Social Security and Medicare within five years. That will not be a part of the Republican Senate Majority agenda,” he added.

ABC News’ Allison Pecorin contributed to this report.

Copyright © 2022, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(WASHINGTON) — The House on Wednesday approved measures to ban Russian energy products, provide billions in assistance to Ukraine and fund the government through the fall — but only after Democratic infighting forced party leaders to remove more than $15 billion in COVID aid from the package.

With the federal government set to run out of funding as soon as Friday, the $1.5 trillion package will avert a shutdown through September, while also adding billions in humanitarian and military aid to Ukraine after Russia’s invasion. The House also passed a four-day stopgap measure to give the Senate time to approve the larger package.

The bill, which includes $13.6 billion in humanitarian and defense aid to Ukraine, received bipartisan support and passed 361-69. The House approved the non-defense portion of the package 260-171, with one member voting present. Later, the House approved a proposal to ban Russian oil and energy imports in a 414-17 vote.

The new aid to Ukraine, billions more than initially requested by the Biden administration, is evenly split between humanitarian and military aid, includes millions to help feed and resettle displaced Ukrainians and nearly $2 billion in potential economic relief for Ukraine and neighboring countries.

Of the $6.5 billion in emergency defense assistance, the package directs $3.5 billion to help arm Ukrainians and allied forces in the region with U.S. military stocks, and another $3 billion to support the deployment of additional U.S. troops and materials to Europe.

In a setback for the Biden administration’s COVID strategy, House Democrats were forced to scrap $15 billion in COVID-19 funding for therapeutics and research in the spending package after an internal revolt from members who objected to repurposing unspent relief Congress had previously approved for states to use at their discretion.

Pelosi, who called the removal of COVID-19 funds “heartbreaking,” told reporters the change was necessary in order for the package to clear the Senate, where a 50-50 split forces Democrats to rely on the votes of at least 10 Republicans.

“We’re in a legislative process. We have a deadline. We’re keeping government open,” she said. “We had a lively negotiation.”

“Some of the members are disappointed,” Pelosi continued. “‘I didn’t get what I wanted in the bill’ — you’re telling Noah about the flood.”

Pelosi, however, said the House would take up a standalone COVID funding bill Wednesday with a plan for the bill to be debated and voted on next week.

Separately, the chamber also approved a measure to ban the import of Russian oil and energy products one day after President Joe Biden signed an executive order to the same effect.

The bill would also direct the administration to consider taking steps to suspend Russia from the World Trade Organization and expand on language in the Magnitsky Act — a sanctions law approved by Congress in 2012 — to allow the Biden administration to impose additional sanctions on Russian officials and individuals linked to the war in Ukraine.

Democratic leaders made changes to that legislation — initially crafted with Republicans in both chambers — after the White House raised concerns that it would make it harder for Biden to ease sanctions on Russia if the Kremlin deescalated in Ukraine.

Another provision to suspend trade relations with Russia and Belarus was adjusted at the White House’s request, House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer, D-Md., told reporters Wednesday.

“It was taken out because the president rightfully wants to talk to our allies about that action, which I think was appropriate,” he said.

Democrats were expected to pass the measures earlier than expected Wednesday night, allowing them to salvage their caucus retreat in Philadelphia that was initially slated to begin Wednesday afternoon.

Biden will address the caucus in Philadelphia on Friday.

Copyright © 2022, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(WASHINGTON) — The Pentagon has been providing daily updates on the Russian invasion and Ukraine’s efforts to resist.

Here are highlights of what defense officials told reporters on Wednesday:

Pentagon against rejects sending fighter jets to Ukraine

On Tuesday evening, Pentagon press secretary John Kirby dismissed a surprise offer from Poland to send all of its MiG-29 fighter jets to a U.S. air base in Germany “and place them at the disposal” of the U.S. government.

“The prospect of fighter jets ‘at the disposal of the Government of the United States of America’ departing from a U.S./NATO base in Germany to fly into airspace that is contested with Russia over Ukraine raises serious concerns for the entire NATO alliance,” Kirby said in a statement, adding that “we do not believe Poland’s proposal is a tenable one.”

On Wednesday, Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin spoke to his Polish counterpart about the MiG-29 offer, thanking him for Poland’s willingness to help Ukraine, but rejecting the notion of using the U.S. as an intermediary for any aircraft transfer.

“He stressed that we do not support the transfer of additional fighter aircraft to the Ukrainian air force at this time, and therefore have no desire to see them in our custody either,” Kirby said during a press conference at the Pentagon.

Kirby characterized the idea as high risk, low reward — the risk being possible escalation by Russian President Vladimir Putin.

“The intelligence community has assessed the transfer of MiG-29s to Ukraine may be mistaken as escalatory and could result in significant Russian reaction that might increase the prospects of military escalation with NATO,” he said.

In addition to that risk, the U.S. believes other forms of military support are more effective.

“We believe the best way to support Ukrainian defense is by providing them the weapons and the systems that they need most to defeat Russian aggression,” Kirby said. “In particular, anti-armor and air defense.”

The U.S. has sent hundreds of millions of dollars worth of military aid into Ukraine, including anti-tank and anti-aircraft weapons such as the Javelin and Stinger systems.

Earlier on Wednesday, a senior U.S. defense official told reporters Russian anti-air capability now spans much of Ukrainian airspace, which also makes aircraft less viable in the fight against the invaders.

Kirby added that the Ukrainian air force still has several squadrons of “fully mission-capable” aircraft of its own.

“We assess that adding aircraft to the Ukrainian inventory is not likely to significantly change the effectiveness of Ukrainian Air Force relative to Russian capabilities.

While the U.S. has rejected the idea for now, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy has continued to call for more aircraft.

“This is about people’s lives. We ask again: make the decision faster. Don’t throw the responsibility — send us the jets,” Zelenskyy said in a Wednesday speech.

And the skies above Ukraine are not yet dominated by Russia.

On Wednesday morning, the U.K. Ministry of Defense tweeted an intelligence update saying “Ukrainian air defenses appear to have enjoyed considerable success against Russia’s modern combat aircraft, probably preventing them from achieving any degree of control of the air.”

“Although Russian air capabilities are significant, their effectiveness has been limited due to Ukrainian … air-defense systems, surface-to-air missiles, and MANPADS,” Kirby said.

Patriot batteries arrive in Poland

Late on Tuesday evening, U.S. European Command confirmed that two Patriot anti-missile systems already in Europe would be moved to Poland. By Wednesday they had arrived, according to the senior U.S. defense official.

“We’re not going to talk about where they are, I’m not going to talk about their operational status, but they are in Poland and they are manned,” the official said.

The Patriot systems are capable of detecting and intercepting incoming ballistic missiles.

Russian missiles and ‘dumb’ munitions

Russia has now fired more than 710 missiles against Ukraine, with about half launched from within Ukraine using mobile platforms, according to the official.

The U.S. has also seen indications Russia is using “dumb” munitions. meaning ordinance that is not precision-guided. The official said it is not clear if these imprecise weapons are being used as part of the original Russian plan or due to problems with their guided missile targeting process.

“What we see manifested is increasing damage to civilian infrastructure and civilian casualties,” the official said.

Russian combat power

Russia has about 90% of its invading combat power still intact, the official said. On Tuesday, the estimate was 95%, but the official emphasized that these numbers are rough estimates, so it doesn’t necessarily mean 5% of Russian forces were taken out of the fight overnight.

No sign Putin preparing reserve forces

The U.S. still sees no indications Putin is trying to gather any more troops in addition to the more than 150,000 originally designated for the invasion, the official said.

Russia’s ground effort

Since Tuesday, Russians have further closed in on Kharkiv, gaining about 12 miles ground.

“It’s still heavy, heavy fighting there,” the official said. “We don’t assess that they’ve taken the city by any means.”

The U.S. has not seen any significant Russian movement toward Kyiv or Chernihiv in the last 24 hours, and there is still no sign of an an immanent amphibious assault on Odessa. Ukrainians have mounted a strong resistance in Mariupol, but Russians continue to surround and bombard the city.

Copyright © 2022, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(WASHINGTON) – The Pentagon on Wednesday, for the second day in a row, rejected a plan by Poland to provide Ukraine with its Soviet-era warplanes through U.S. hands, saying the proposal would risk wider war between Russia and NATO.

Poland’s announcement Tuesday, which shocked U.S. officials, peaked hope in Ukraine that President Volodymyr Zelenskyy’s calls for more fighter jets would be answered.

But Poland’s proposal essentially punted the responsibility to the U.S. by calling for America to take control of the MiG-29 fighter jets at a U.S. air base in Germany and then provide them to Ukraine — an idea the Pentagon roundly rejected as “not tenable.”

Hours after the White House left the door open to a deal Wednesday, saying “logistical and operational” details were being discussed among the U.S., its NATO allies, and Ukraine, there was another surprise: The Pentagon roundly rejected the idea altogether.

“We do not support the transfer of additional fighter aircraft to the Ukrainian Air Force at this time and, therefore, have no desire to see them in our custody either,” Pentagon spokesperson John Kirby said Wednesday.

The back-and-forth by both NATO allies has sparked confusion and exasperation. Poland originally opposed a transfer while the U.S. backed it — until Poland suddenly proposed doing so through the U.S., which now opposes it.

“This is not pingpong. This is about people’s lives. We ask again — make the decision faster. Don’t throw the responsibility. Send us the jets,” Zelenskyy said in a speech Wednesday.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, recounting what she said was a 45-minute call with Zelenskyy about the U.S. providing lethal aid, said, “He wants the planes, the planes, the planes.”

Russia has warned any country from allowing Ukraine to use its airfields to support military aircraft, with Kremlin spokesperson Dmitry Peskov saying Wednesday, “This is an extremely undesirable and potentially dangerous scenario.”

U.S. intelligence has concluded the same thing, according to Kirby, who added that sending Ukraine additional fighter jets is not what Kyiv needs now in its fight against invading Russian forces and their overwhelming bombardment.

“There are alternative options that are much better suited to support the Ukrainian military in their fight against Russia. We will continue to pursue those options,” Kirby told reporters Wednesday.

Ukraine’s air force already has “several squadrons of fully mission capable aircraft,” he added, and the U.S. instead plans to continue providing “the systems that they need most to defeat Russian aggression — in particular, anti-armor and air defense.”

The U.S. has provided Ukraine with Stinger missiles — shoulder-fired anti-aircraft missiles that previous administrations had viewed as too escalatory to provide. The United Kingdom announced Wednesday it would provide its similar system known as Starstreak.

But for now, the U.S. is drawing the line against fighter jets, which U.S. officials say would be logistically difficult to deliver to Ukraine without risking Russian retaliation.

“The intelligence community has assessed the transfer of MiG-29s to Ukraine may be mistaken as escalatory and could result in significant Russian reaction that might increase the prospects of the military escalation with NATO,” Kirby said.

Just days ago, however, Secretary of State Antony Blinken said the U.S. had given “a green light” to Poland to provide the planes directly to Ukraine, although he said it was Poland’s choice.

Polish officials opposed the idea, fearing exactly the scenario Kirby laid out — with Russian strikes on Polish airfields. The Polish prime minister’s office even called reports the country would provide warplanes “FAKE NEWS‼️” in a tweet Sunday.

But two days later, Poland stunned the U.S. by saying it would provide over two dozen MiG-29 fighter jets to the U.S. “immediately and free of charge,” sending them to Ramstein Air Base and “at the disposal of the Government of the United States of America.”

“That actually was a surprise move by the Poles,” Victoria Nuland, Under Secretary of State for Political Affairs, told the Senate hours later, adding, “It wasn’t pre-consulted with us.”

Surprise turned to opposition, with the Pentagon calling the plan “not tenable” for the risk it would pose to U.S. service members.

U.S. Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin called Polish Minister of National Defense Mariusz Błaszczak Wednesday, thanking him, but expressing outright opposition, per Kirby.

Western countries have significantly escalated their military aid to Ukraine, providing thousands of anti-tank missiles in recent weeks alone, according to a U.S. official.

But warplanes now seem to be a step too far, along with a no-fly zone. U.S. and NATO officials have repeatedly warned their forces will not get involved in the conflict in any way, fearing a Russian attack that could quickly spiral into war between nuclear-armed states.

Calls for a “limited” no-fly zone — over western Ukraine to allow for refugees to exit and aid to enter, or over humanitarian corridors — have fallen flat, too.

“Introducing, in our case, American service members in Ukraine, on Ukrainian territory or soil, or American pilots into Ukrainian airspace, whether on a full or on a limited basis, would almost certainly lead to direct conflict between the United States, between NATO and Russia, and that would expand the conflict. It would prolong it. It would make it much more deadlier than it already is,” Blinken said Wednesday.

To some analysts, a no-fly zone would not be a silver bullet here either, with the Kremlin using long-range artillery, even indiscriminate shelling, to grind Ukrainian forces and civilian targets down. Russia has now launched more than 710 missiles against Ukraine — about half of which have been launched from within Russian territory, according to a senior U.S. defense official.

“The best way to help protect the skies is through anti-air weaponry, which the U.K. is now going to be supplying to Ukraine,” British Foreign Secretary Liz Truss said alongside Blinken at the State Department.

While the Biden administration has said repeatedly it’s consulting with allies and partners on what other military aid to provide, it’s unclear what else it could be. Some 75 percent of a $350 million package approved by Biden late last month has already made it into Ukrainian hands, according to officials.

But beyond individual missiles, the U.S. may be considering anti-missile batteries like the Patriot system. Nuland declined to speak publicly about that option, but told a Senate panel Tuesday there are “other things” on Ukraine’s “list that we think we can do, and I’ll leave it at that.”

ABC News’s Luis Martinez and Matt Seyler contributed to this report from the Pentagon, Sarah Kolinovsky, Molly Nagle, and Justin Gomez from the White House and Benjamin Siegel from Capitol Hill.

Copyright © 2022, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(WASHINGTON) — When Ketanji Brown Jackson last month to the U.S. Supreme Court, some of the loudest cheers came from a trio of women who have been by Jackson’s side for the last 30 years.

“It was a lot of screaming and jumping and so excited,” Nina Simmons told ABC News of the reaction she and her friends had to the nomination of Jackson, their college roommate.

Lisa Fairfax, another roommate of Simmons and Jackson, said of the exact moment Biden introduced Jackson as the nominee, “That moment was emotional, watching her actually stand behind the president when she was introduced and then watching her step forward.”

If the Senate approves her nomination, Jackson, currently an appellate court judge, will make history as the first Black woman to sit on the nation’s high court.

By her side through her history-making judicial career have been Fairfax, Simmons and Antoinette Coakley, all of whom roomed with Jackson as undergraduate students at Harvard University, and then as law students, also at Harvard.

The three women are accomplished in their own right — Simmons is senior counsel at Washton & Gitto LLC; Fairfax is the Presidential Professor of Law at the University of Pennsylvania Law School; and Coakley is a professor of law at Northeastern School of Law — but they said they saw early on that Jackson would reach the top of her profession.

“I remember years ago when we were in our college room, our college dorm, saying to Ketanji, ‘You are going to be the first Black woman on the US Supreme Court. You are going to be it,'” said Coakley. “It was that clear back then.”

Jackson, now a 51-year-old mother of two, stood out for her ability to bring people together, according to her friends.

“Ketanji can organize something, bring people together and she recognizes the strength of everyone and makes sure that you recognize your strengths as well,” said Simmons, who recalled Jackson’s support when she was diagnosed with breast cancer in 2014.

“One day I woke up and Ketanji and Lisa are at my door,” said Simmons. “That was a time where I wasn’t telling people. I wasn’t really sharing it, and she showed up, didn’t ask any questions, she just showed up.”

The friends, who nicknamed themselves “the ladies,” also recall a lighter side of Jackson, whom Biden described as “an exceptionally qualified and historic nominee.”

“I think people don’t know that she’s funny, and that she’s an amazing storyteller,” Coakley said.

Added Simmons, “She loves to dance. [When] we were in college and law school, we’d be the first ones out there. She’d be dancing, having a good time.”

And even as their careers took them to different places following law school, Coakley, Simmons and Fairfax said Jackson rooted them onto success.

“I’m now a law professor and Ketanji was actually instrumental in helping me make that transition,” Fairfax said. “She really made me feel like I could do it, supported me through the process.”

“For Ketanji, it was not sufficient just for her to be successful,” added Coakley. “She wanted for all of us to be successful as well, and so we all benefited, I think, from that relationship and that has sustained us all these years.”

Copyright © 2022, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(WASHINGTON) — The House is set to vote as soon as Wednesday on a bill that would codify the Biden administration’s ban on the import of Russian oil and energy products into the U.S., review Russia’s access to the World Trade organization and strengthen the Global Magnitsky Human Rights Accountability Act so that the U.S. can further sanction Russia.

The vote would be remarkably fast-paced for legislation — bypassing the usual legislative process in a clear indication that lawmakers want to punish Russia for its invasion of Ukraine. And while it has support from both Democrats and Republicans, some Republicans have been lashing out at the Biden administration for its decision to ban Russian oil imports amid a chorus of bipartisan calls to do so.

Republicans, while they commended the administration for its decision to ban Russian oil, quickly turned critical of gas price hikes, as some members of the House accused Biden of allegedly turning his back on U.S. oil and gas production as the administration potentially weighs making oil deals with Venezuela and Saudi Arabia.

“First of all: President Biden, stop begging dictators to produce the energy that we need here in America. Don’t go to Russia. Don’t go to Iran. Don’t go to Venezuela when the answer is right beneath our feet. It’s time for President Biden to say yes to American energy,” House Republican Whip Steve Scalise told reporters during a press conference.

One after another, House Republicans took turns to criticize the administration.

“Never should we think that foreign oil is better than American independence when it comes to energy,” Rep. Yvette Herrell of New Mexico said.

“We’re sleeping in the bed that we made,” Rep. Bruce Westerman of Arkansas said. “That’s what happens when you allow energy policy to be dictated by children in Europe, by woke investors on Wall Street, and by politicians who actually think that electric passenger vehicles are going to solve an energy crisis and the climate crisis.”

“We don’t need to be buying Russian energy, but we don’t need to be buying Iranian energy or Venezuelan energy. We need to produce energy of all forms and all types here in the US and do it better than anybody else in the world,” Westerman added.

Rep. August Pfluger of Texas said Biden should meet with oil and gas executives and companies while he is down in Texas today.

“In addition to his pre-planned meetings, what he should be doing is meeting with oil and gas executives and companies,” Pfluger said. “Instead of calling on terrorist regimes to fulfill our needs, what he should be doing is calling on the domestic producers who know better than anybody else in the world, how to produce the supply of energy that not only we need, but that our partners and allies around the world need.”

“The president’s first phone call should have been to the mayor of Midland, Texas, not to Maduro,” he added.

On the House floor Tuesday, Republican Leader Kevin McCarthy hit Biden for shuttering the Keystone XL pipeline last year.

“Democrats want to blame surging prices on Russia. But the truth is, they’re out of touch policies are why we are here in the first place. On Day 1, the President canceled the Keystone Pipeline and stopped new oil and gas leases on federal lands and waters. Then, he gave the green light to Putin’s pipeline,” McCarthy said.

“If we want to lower prices and protect the environment, we must prioritize American energy independence. We have the natural resources under our feet. We have the best workers in the world: drilling the wells, building the pipelines, running the rigs, and extracting the gas in the cleanest way possible,” he said.

“We just need politicians who will get out of the way,” he added.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi announced the energy legislation in a letter sent to democrats Tuesday. Her announcement to codify a ban comes on the heels of President Joe Biden’s announcement earlier Tuesday to ban Russian oil and energy imports.

Pelosi last week forcefully threw her weight behind a potential oil ban and at the time, signaled legislation would be imminent.

“Because this legislation is an urgent imperative – both morally and for our security interests – the House will consider this legislation on the floor today. It is our hope that we have a strong, bipartisan vote,” Pelosi said in a letter sent to Democrats.

The bill would ban the import of Russian oil and energy products into the United States, take steps to review Russia’s access to the World Trade Organization, and reauthorize and strengthen the Global Magnitsky Human Rights Accountability Act so that the United States can impose further sanctions on Russia.

It’s unclear if the House bill would forward in the Senate.

“We first have to see what the House passes, and then we’ll discuss things with the administration and find the best way to make sure that the oil import ban is tight and tough,” Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer said Tuesday.

House Democrats commended Biden’s announcement and rebuffed criticisms that the administration only acted after lawmakers introduced bipartisan legislation to force its hand.

“I don’t think that anything has created any pressure,” House Democratic Caucus Chair Hakeem Jeffries told reporters Tuesday morning.

“He’s been very clear-eyed and transparent with the American people all along the way,” Jeffries said of Biden. “I’m very confident in President Biden’s continued leadership and I don’t think anyone has pressured him into doing anything.”

The decision to ban Russian oil and energy imports is likely to cause more pain at the pump for Americans, which lawmakers are keenly aware of.

Jeffries acknowledged the high gas prices Americans are currently facing and vowed that the Democratic Party would do what it can to relieve the pressure on wallets.

“It’s certainly my hope that my Republican colleagues won’t continue to play politics with an existential crisis for Ukraine, for Europe, for the West and for democracy because that is what is at stake right now. And we have to apply maximum pressure on Vladimir Putin and Russia until it ceases and desists with respect to its aggression and the slaughtering of innocent individuals in Ukraine. It may be some sacrifice that is required across the world,” Jeffries said.

“Certainly, we are seeing incredible sacrifice by the Ukrainian people,” he added.

Jeffries also hinted that the administration could potentially ask Americans to work from home for the time being to help ease the gas crisis and avoid the daily commute.

Asked if he thinks the federal government and businesses should consider changing their policies, even as the COVID crisis has eased up, Jeffries said: “I don’t want to comment on any specific steps that the administration may be contemplating, but I think everything should be on the table in terms of an all-hands-on-deck approach. It’s not just an all of government moment. It’s an all of America moment.”

But White House press secretary Jen Psaki made clear Tuesday that the White House isn’t about to ask Americans to cut down on their gas consumption.

“Well, we’re neither going to make a prediction…nor are we going to tell Americans to stay home,” Psaki said.

ABC News’ Sarah Kolinovsky contributed to this report.

Copyright © 2022, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.