Kyrsten Sinema on Tuesday forcefully defended the border agreement she’s reached with both parties, calling conservative attacks on the bill “misinformation” and explaining in detail how the deal would curb illegal crossings.

The Arizona Independent rebutted the argument by some conservative lawmakers that the Senate deal’s emergency border shutdown power — which is set to kick in automatically at an average of 5,000 border encounters a day — would green-light thousands of illegal crossings. Those new expulsion authorities would end the government’s “catch and release” operations, asylum screenings would accelerate and Congress would limit the use of parole authority for southern border crossings, she said.

“The rumors that are swirling about what this legislation does are wrong. Our bill ends catch and release. It ensures that the government both has the power and must close down the border during times when our system is overwhelmed. And it creates new structures to ensure that folks who do not qualify for asylum cannot enter the country and stay here,” Sinema told reporters.

Her rare public comments come at a critical moment for the legislation, which is under unceasing attack from the right and former President Donald Trump. Speaker Mike Johnson is telling his members that the House will not take the bill up and attacking its border shutdown power; Sinema called attacks on that shutdown trigger “the largest piece of misinformation out there.”

She then explained in great detail why the pact she’s set to release with fellow Sens. James Lankford (R-Okla.) and Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) would reshape the country’s handling of the southern border and push down crossings that can crest over 10,000 a day.

“The idea that people — ‘illegals’ — are coming into the country, 5,000 a day: Factually false,” she said.

Under the terms of the still-unreleased deal, if the border is shut down, asylum seekers could still make claims at ports of entry and would have 90 days in which to make an asylum interview. If those interviews are successful, asylum seekers can still be in the country until their case is decided, which would take 90 days. A failed interview would result in immediate removal, Sinema said.

Those who claim asylum at places other than ports of entry would be detained immediately under the deal, with their asylum claim decided in detention. Those individuals would be removed within 15 days if they fail their interview. Those who qualify for asylum, which would require meeting a higher standard if the legislation is enacted, would receive a work permit and potentially a path to citizenship, Sinema said.

“They are going to two places: Detention or a short term alternative to detention, which includes monitoring by the government, until their claims are adjudicated. And then they’re either removed or set on a path to to become asylees,” Sinema said of the new process.

She also said the bill text would be released “very, very soon” and that she expected to see a vote on the legislation, even as many Republicans are balking. Sinema said Johnson’s team is aware of the particulars of the bill even as he publicly attacks the legislation.

“I would like to see a vote as soon as possible. And that’s what I would urge. I don’t control the floor,” Sinema said. “But I hope that we vote as soon as this package is public — with enough time for senators to read of course.”

Right-wing corners of social media currently contain plenty of unfounded conspiracy theories about the Super Bowl, NFL, Taylor Swift psyops and Joe Biden. But some conservative senators aren’t having any of it.

“There’s no truth whatsoever,” said Sen. Tommy Tuberville (R-Ala.), a former college football coach. “Football is football. Hopefully we stay closer to that than we can all this social media.”

He added: “I don’t think it’s gonna make any difference in this election.”

It was a sentiment shared by Senate supporters of Swift’s boyfriend Travis Kelce and his Kansas City Chiefs, who will head to Las Vegas to face the San Francisco 49ers in Super Bowl LVIII on Feb. 11.

“If they’re both in love, good for them, and I have a 13-year-old that’s a huge Taylor Swift fan,” said Sen. Eric Schmitt (R-Mo.), a staunch Chiefs fan. “She’s a pop star and she’s got a boyfriend who plays for the Chiefs, and I don’t probably [need to] overcomplicate things.”

That’s also the view of Sen. Roger Marshall (R-Kan.), who wore a Chiefs tie to Senate votes Wednesday.

“That’s all nonsense,” he told POLITICO. “Everyone should embrace the Travis and Tay-Tay story. I think it’s a great story, an American love story, something that Walt Disney wrote. So we just wish them the best. I think it’s great for the NFL.”

He added of Swift’s past support for Democratic politicians and causes: “I think I’m able to separate politics from football, from entertainment.”

The Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee announced it raised $12.3 million in December for a total of $28 million in the fourth quarter of 2023, POLITICO has learned.

The campaign arm highlighted that December total for House Democrats is $5 million more than the NRCC raised in the same month.

Notably the DCCC also raised $1.3 million more in member dues in 2023 than 2021, with a 13 percent increase in participation rate among members in dues for 2023 compared to 2021. Democrats have pushed lawmakers to pay their dues to the campaign arm as they try to flip control of the House.

“I am grateful for the leadership of Hakeem Jeffries and the entire House Democratic Caucus who have helped ensure that the DCCC will have the resources it needs to take back the majority to defend reproductive rights, stop extremism in its tracks, and help grow the middle class,” DCCC Chair Suzan DelBene said in a statement.

GOP infighting and indecision is already threatening to disintegrate the border deal, even before Senate negotiators release the long-awaited bill text.

As senators returned for a critical two-week sprint in D.C. before a lengthy recess, Republicans are starting to doubt whether the agreement — which would be tied to billions in foreign aid — can pass their chamber. GOP leaders first set out to find a compromise that could win a majority of Republican senators over, but that’s only grown more challenging as conservatives, Speaker Mike Johnson and former President Donald Trump hammer the deal.

Asked if the agreement appears to be on a path toward passing the Senate, Sen. John Cornyn (R-Texas) replied: “It certainly doesn’t seem like it.”

“There are a number of our members who say, ‘Well, I’ll join a majority of the Republicans but if it doesn’t enjoy that sort of support, then count me out,’” Cornyn said in an interview. “The whole idea of passing something that the House won’t even take up is another challenge.”

There are two main reasons for the growing questions about the bill’s future: Trump’s attacks and Johnson’s vows not to take it up. And the two seem related; Johnson said Tuesday he had talked to Trump about the issue “at length” though he denied they are opposing it for political reasons.

It’s a frustrating nadir for a senators in both parties, who have spent more than three months trying to connect an immigration and border deal with billions in Ukraine funding. Republicans, including Johnson, explicitly demanded that Ukraine funding can’t move before border security policies. Now, it seems they’ve cooled on any bipartisan deal at all, and are instead demanding that Biden use his existing executive powers to secure the border.

Sen. Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) said that Johnson is trying to kill the bill in the Senate so he doesn’t have to deal with his own complicated politics.

“He would probably love for this to die in this Senate so that he doesn’t have to answer to his members who want Ukraine funding,” Murphy said.

And Johnson’s position has a real effect on Senate Republicans, who may need to provide a dozen or more votes just to clear the 60-vote threshold — depending on how many Democrats defect. But it needs more GOP votes than that for any hope of moving the House.

Those dynamics have raised a persistent and frustrating question among some plugged-in Republicans: Will this even come to the Senate floor?

“The very people who demanded that we have something on the border as part of the supplemental, suddenly all these months later say they don’t want something on the border,” said Sen. Kevin Cramer (R-N.D.), who hasn’t committed to voting either way. “The fact, by the way, that the House may not take it up even if we do pass it. That’s not irrelevant. Why would a bunch of us spend political capital on a cause that can’t pass?”

Cramer praised Sen. James Lankford (R-Okla.) for leading negotiations on a deal and keeping the conference informed, lamenting that “now a bunch of Republican senators are throwing him under the bus because it’s more convenient politically than explaining the merits of it.”

Johnson and conservatives have criticized the agreement for not automatically kicking in the border shutdown authorities until migrant encounters crest an average of 5,000 per day. Meanwhile, the text of the bill is still under wraps, allowing the party’s right flank to continuously rile up the base by speculating the legislation will only be a boon to Democrats.

Sens. Rick Scott (R-Fla.) and Ron Johnson (R-Wis.) were among the senators on Tuesday criticizing the agreement and Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell’s leadership. McConnell appointed Lankford to lead the Republican negotiations.

Sen. Mike Rounds (R-S.D.) indicated that Russia could be behind some of the messaging against the bill: “I suspect that a lot of the internet rumors are very well coming from overseas, where they would love to see this shut down because some people would rather not see funding for Ukraine.”

“You’ve got a narrative out there that is taking hold, not really founded in facts. But I think at some point unless you’re able to win the debate based on the merits of the policy, that the hill is getting steeper,” said Sen. Thom Tillis (R-N.C.), a Lankford ally.

Several members of GOP leadership were noncommittal on Tuesday about the legislation amid the fierce political crosscurrents, and Sen. Steve Daines (R-Mont.), who runs the party’s campaign arm, said he’s heard some “real concerns” from constituents. Sen. Shelley Moore Capito (R-W.Va.) said senators are “really anxious” to see the actual text and that she couldn’t divulge her leaning until then.

“People ought to wait and see all the provisions that James [Lankford] has negotiated. And then they’ll realize that it’s an enormous improvement over the current crisis,” said Sen. Susan Collins (R-Maine).

Yet even when text comes out, Sen. Roger Wicker (R-Miss.) said it will have “to be public for quite a long time” before it can advance. The Senate is scheduled to go on a two-week recess at the end of next week.

Majority Leader Chuck Schumer has repeatedly suggested a vote could take place soon. Meanwhile, a House committee is working to advance articles of impeachment against Department of Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas, who consulted closely with Senate negotiators.

“Are they going to impeach him because people are coming across the border? Then pass the goddamn bill,” said a frustrated Sen. Jon Tester (D-Mont.). “Then you might have some talking points if he doesn’t follow through on it.”

Ursula Perano contributed to this report.

The House passed legislation Tuesday that would increase penalties for undocumented immigrants who flee from border security agents using a motor vehicle by a 271-154 vote.

Fifty-six Democrats backed the measure.

The legislation, sponsored by border-state Rep. Juan Ciscomani (R-Ariz.), would expand those penalties if the chase results in death or serious injury — and would make any immigrant convicted of such a crime ineligible for legal status in the U.S.

The bill is named after Border Patrol Agent Raul Gonzalez, Jr., who passed away in 2022 after his vehicle crashed while pursuing several undocumented immigrants fleeing police.

The action comes amid ongoing hostility among some Republicans toward an emerging Senate border security compromise recently endorsed by President Joe Biden.

House Intelligence Committee members got a multi-hour briefing on Tuesday from two senior administration officials on the attack by Iran-backed proxies in Jordan that killed three U.S. service members and wounded dozens more.

CIA Director Bill Burns and Director of National Intelligence Avril Haines briefed panel lawmakers. Prominent attendees for at least part of the session included Speaker Mike Johnson, Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries and Republican Conference Chair Rep. Elise Stefanik (R-N.Y.).

“I’m a big fan of disproportionate responses,” said committee member Dan Crenshaw (R-Texas) following the briefing. “There’s a lot of, soft-handed commentators out there that say, ‘That’s escalatory, you’re gonna get us into World War III.’ And they don’t know anything about foreign affairs, and they certainly don’t know anything about war.”

He added: “Once you’ve killed your service members, you’ve crossed some serious lines.”

Rep. Raja Krishnamoorthi (D-Ill.), another panel member, pronounced himself satisfied that the Biden administration is looking carefully at the full range of possible responses.

“Our adversaries need to know that we’re prepared and capable to strike decisively, and we will,” he said following the briefing. “And we’re going to do everything we can to protect our men and women from harm.”