(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.