Tag

Slider

Browsing

Senate Republican Ukraine advocates swept away a last-minute cavalcade of attacks on Monday evening, defeating a conservative filibuster of the $95 billion aid package and putting it on a glide path to clearing the chamber.

The 66-33 vote advanced the bill toward final passage, which is expected to take place by midweek, if not earlier. Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) has objected to moving forward more quickly, and conservative opponents have used the delay to throw the proverbial kitchen sink at the proposal.

Those attacks are taking their toll, to an extent: 39 Senate Republicans supported a standalone $40 billion Ukraine bill two years ago, a number that’s now roughly sliced in half. That reflects the sustained attacks on Ukraine by GOP opponents, including former President Donald Trump, whose verbal assaults carry more weight by the day as he marches toward the Republican nomination.

Still, those fusillades have almost certainly failed to stop passage in the Democratic-controlled Senate. There’s no such guarantee over in the House, where Speaker Mike Johnson criticized the bill Monday, casting doubt on its future.

“These are chaotic times. And as a support of Ukraine, Israel and our industrial base, it’s adequate. It’s good enough,” said Sen. John Cornyn (R-Texas) of the Republican support in the Senate.

It’s been roughly 14 months since Congress approved new funding for Ukraine’s defense against Russia’s attacks and the latest tranche is expected to pass the Senate just ahead of the Munich Security Conference, which focuses on threats to international security.

Once a hawkish party that attacked Democrats for being weak on funding national security, now the GOP is split between Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell’s more interventionist views and those of Trump, who said any more money to Ukraine needs to take the form of a loan. And the run-up to the vote reflected the intense tension in the Republican Party over continuing to fund Ukraine, which receives roughly $60 billion under the legislation. The rest is destined for Taiwan, Israel and humanitarian assistance for Gaza.

Ukraine opponents met late Monday evening and came out resolving to delay the bill as long as they can, even if it requires holding the Senate floor overnight. Sen. Ron Johnson (R-Wis.) said they will use as “much time as we can” on the Senate floor.

“We’re not helping Ukraine at this point in time. We’re fueling a bloody stalemate. It makes no sense,” Johnson said after the meeting.

Trump spent the weekend railing against the bill and said he would not defend NATO allies who did not fulfill spending commitments under the international agreement, comments which split Republicans. A group of conservative senators took to the Senate floor Monday afternoon to denounce the bill; later in the day, some joined Elon Musk on a social media channel to continue the attacks.

On the social media channel, Sen. Mike Lee (R-Utah) questioned the spending pointedly: “This thing still has about $8 billion going directly to the Government of Ukraine. They are not choirboys.”Sen. J.D. Vance (R-OH)

And in a sign of conservatives’ fervent pressure campaign to kill the package, Sen. J.D. Vance (R-Ohio) argued in a Monday morning memo to his colleagues that Trump could be impeached again if he withholds Ukraine funding provided by the bill. Ukraine supporters rebuffed Vance’s argument, but it was picked up across the right-leaning media ecosystem.

“First of all, Trump has to get elected president. Second, Democrats have to get the House. And then they have to think this is the only thing they could use to impeach Donald Trump,” said retiring Sen. Mitt Romney (R-Utah), who voted to convict the former president in both impeachment trials. “I can assure you that if Donald Trump becomes president and the Democrats get the House, they’ll be able to find many opportunities to impeach Donald Trump if they wish.”

Amid the crosscurrents, some Republicans were deliberating over their final vote, with some still pushing for certain amendment votes in exchange for their approval. That’s been severely complicated by Paul’s unwillingness to speed up the process, since Democrats are reluctant to allow amendments without expediting passage.

That led to some GOP senators voting against moving the bill forward. On Monday, some of them were still assessing their vote on final passage of a massive national security spending bill with no border components — sending it to an uncertain fate in the House — after the bipartisan border deal fell apart last week.

“My goal is to be a yes. But also remembering there’s another stage to this, and that’s the House of Representatives. And so we need to help them,” said Sen. Kevin Cramer (R-N.D.). “Otherwise, there’s no point in just making a point.”

Speaker Johnson made clear he cares little for the Senate bill in a statement on Monday evening. Though he rejected the Senate’s bipartisan border negotiations last week, he criticized the Senate’s bill for lacking a border component.

It’s just the latest sign of uncertainty for Ukraine aid. Johnson said “the House will have to continue to work its own will on these important matters. America deserves better than the Senate’s status quo.”

Anthony Adragna contributed to this report.

House Republican investigators leading the impeachment inquiry into President Joe Biden are pressing for more details on his interview with Robert Hur as part of the special counsel’s classified documents investigation.

Judiciary Committee Chair Jim Jordan (R-Ohio), Oversight Committee Chair James Comer (R-Ky.) and Ways & Means Committee Chair Jason Smith (R-Mo.) sent a letter to Attorney General Merrick Garland on Monday, asking for any records, including recordings, related to Biden’s interview with Hur’s team. They also want classified documents identified in the report related to Ukraine.

In addition to the documents request, House Republicans are in talks with Hur to have him testify about his report, according to a person familiar with the discussions.

House Republicans are giving the Justice Department until 5 p.m. on Feb. 19 to hand over the requested materials. Otherwise, they warned, GOP lawmakers are “prepared to compel the production of this material if necessary” via a subpoena. They are also requesting any communication between the Justice Department, Biden’s personal counsel and the White House about the special counsel report.

“For our investigatory purposes, the Committees require certain records relating to Mr. Hur’s investigation and report,” the three GOP lawmakers wrote to Garland.

They added that they “require this transcript and any other records of this interview, including, but not limited to, any recordings, notes, or summaries of the interview.”

The Justice Department released Hur’s report last week, which found that criminal charges against Biden wouldn’t be warranted even if DOJ lacked an internal policy against prosecuting sitting presidents. Hur’s investigation found evidence that Biden “willfully retained and disclosed classified materials after his vice presidency,” the report states, but it didn’t “establish Mr. Biden’s guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.”

Congressional Republicans have also emphasized the report’s descriptions of Biden, including that he would be perceived in any court proceedings as a “sympathetic, well-meaning elderly man with a poor memory.” Comer called last week for the Justice Department to provide access to classified documents referenced in the report, as well as release the transcript with Biden. But Monday’s letter is the first formal request for information since the report’s release.

Biden has denied that he improperly shared classified information. Hur’s report alleges that he shared it with a ghostwriter. The president and other Democrats have also publicly criticized Hur’s descriptions of Biden’s memory.

Richard Sauber, a special counsel to the president, and Bob Bauer, Biden’s personal counsel, sent a joint letter to Hur last week asking that he revise his descriptions of Biden’s memory “so that they are stated in a manner that is within the bounds of your expertise and remit.”

In addition to the impeachment inquiry into President Joe Biden — which has largely focused on the business deals of his family members, but also delved into his handling of classified documents and the years-long federal investigation into Hunter Biden — Republicans said in their letter on Monday that they also needed the information for a separate investigation into the federal investigation of former President Donald Trump’s handling of classified documents.

Republicans have tried to draw an apples-to-apples comparison of Biden’s and Trump’s mishandling of classified documents, arguing that the Justice Department’s decision not to charge Biden but to pursue charges against Trump is an example of a politicized justice system.

But Hur’s report draws a contrast between the two cases, noting that Trump allegedly refused to return classified documents for months while Biden turned in the classified documents and cooperated with the investigation.

The Senate is set to approve its $95 billion national security funding package as soon as Tuesday, delivering long-stalled aid to Ukraine, Israel and Taiwan. Then the House will take its turn — and there will be a multi-directional battle to decide the fate of the bill.

That’s because the GOP’s thin margin of control leaves Speaker Mike Johnson with few politically palatable choices as he considers a Senate aid bill that many in his party want to scrap. But if Johnson tries to ignore the bill, a potential rebellion could begin to brew among rank-and-file members in the ideological middle who still want to see Ukraine aid pass.

Several players or blocs are positioned to grab power over the aid measure once it reaches the House — starting with Johnson himself.

The speaker may shrug off the foreign aid package after the Senate clears it, focusing instead on a second attempt to pass the standalone Israel aid plan that he tried and failed to push through on a bipartisan basis last week.

But it’s hard to see that type of response quieting the eagerness among establishment and centrist Republicans to vote on the legislation anyway.

“There’s a general belief that we need to get it done” shared by House Republicans, Sen. Thom Tillis (R-N.C.) said over the weekend. “Hopefully this is something that Speaker Johnson will just take up, because I believe you’d have significant support for it in the Republican conference. Whether or not it’s the majority, I don’t know.”

Johnson has expressed support for Ukraine generally but has not said whether he’d slate a House vote on the Senate’s aid bill, which many conservatives oppose. His spokesperson Raj Shah told Playbook in a statement that Johnson wants to consider the bill “on its own merits.”

“The speaker merely conveyed that each component of the supplemental must be evaluated on its own merits and can potentially be considered separately,” he said in a statement.

Johnson’s office did not immediately respond to a request for comment on whether that means an attempt to design a House rule that might separate out the different component parts of the Senate-passed bill. Even if he goes that route, he’ll face trouble in the Rules Committee, where conservatives hold enough seats to wield an effective veto power over any bill that the House tries to consider under a rule for debate.

Notably, House Democrats can also assert their own power over the aid bill once it passes the Senate. Most, if not all, of them want to approve more Ukraine aid ASAP. Caucus leaders have already signaled they’re open to using any legislative tools that could get that done.

The most likely such tool is the long-shot option of a discharge petition, which requires a majority of House members to sign on in order to force a floor vote despite opposition from GOP leaders. That means at least a few Republicans would have to sign the petition.

There’s already a shell petition with every single Democratic lawmaker attached that can be used to force a vote on the Senate aid bill – although some progressives could peel off out of opposition to its unconditional aid for Israel.

Some House Democrats have already held quiet conversations with Republicans about a pathway forward for the Senate aid package. But if Republicans are feeling any pressure to act on a bill that their presumptive presidential nominee Donald Trump wants to kill, they’re not showing it yet.

And it’s tough to underscore just how rarely a discharge petition is successfully used in the House, where even slim majorities still tend to rule the day. Recall that Democrats floated a discharge petition as a Hail Mary option to circumvent Republican leadership on the debt limit last year, to no avail.

Then there’s the potential for more moderate Republicans to work their will on the foreign aid debate. A handful of them, led by Rep. Brian Fitzpatrick, have indicated they’re open to writing a new national security package with Democrats that would include funding for Ukraine and the southern border, among other priorities.

That makes centrist pro-Ukraine Republicans the most important lawmakers to watch this week when the House returns on Tuesday night. The louder they push for new aid to Ukraine after the Senate passes the supplemental funding package, the more likely it is that Johnson takes up the bill in some way, shape or form.

Another influential centrist in the mix, Rep. Don Bacon (R-Neb.), said last week that he was pushing for a Ukraine aid package that’s more narrowly focused on helping defeat Russia: “There’s a handful of us pushing for military aid. We might not be able to do all the other stuff, but let’s do military aid,” he said.

It’s ultimately arguable that a split vote on the Senate aid bill — taking it up in separate buckets for Ukraine, Israel, and more — means no one has claimed power over the matter. By making that move, Johnson will have essentially avoided forcing conservatives in his conference to accept Ukraine aid that would likely win a Democratic-dominated majority of the House.

House Speaker Mike Johnson is facing another challenge as he tries to navigate an already tricky spy powers fight: an effort within his own ranks to link upcoming legislation to gun rights.

Rep. Warren Davidson is circulating a letter to Johnson and Majority Leader Steve Scalise urging them to use a revived debate over controversial surveillance power to also prevent data brokers from selling consumer information to law enforcement.

And the Ohio Republican is weaving in another hot button issue, arguing that without changes, gun owners are at risk of being negatively impacted.

“It is vital that any forthcoming legislation Section 702 … close the data broker loophole. Congress now has a once-in-a-generation opportunity to update our laws to protect Americans’ liberty, Americans’ right to privacy and the Second Amendment,” Davidson wrote in the letter.

Davidson is collecting signatures from his colleagues for the letter, a copy of which was obtained by POLITICO. The House Judiciary Committee already passed legislation on a bipartisan basis to prevent data brokers from selling consumer information to law enforcement.

It’s the latest potential hurdle for Johnson. House Republicans are hoping to bring a revived bill to change and reauthorize Section 702 to the floor this week. The surveillance power is meant to target foreigners abroad but has come under fire because of its ability to sweep in Americans data.

But a coalition of privacy hawks, including both progressives and conservatives in the House, view the data broker issue as a top priority for the 702 debate. They are expected to get a vote on an amendment related to it as part of this week’s debate.

And they are already getting support from some traditional GOP allies closely watching the debate.

Aidan Johnston, Gun Owners of America’s director of federal affairs, told POLITICO the group “is closely tracking the FISA loophole allowing federal law enforcement to buy lists of gun owners and concealed carry permit holders without a warrant or regard for the Second and Fourth Amendments.”

“We have serious concerns about the potential for the federal government to weaponize this data against Americans, especially given the Biden administration’s lengthy record of harassing and prosecuting political opponents, including gun owners,” he added.

House Republicans are preparing a second attempt at passing legislation reauthorizing a controversial surveillance power.

The Rules Committee will take up legislation Wednesday that would make changes to and extend Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act. The authority is meant to target foreigners abroad but has come under scrutiny for its ability to sweep in Americans.

A spokesperson for Majority Leader Steve Scalise didn’t immediately respond to a question about timing for a vote. But individuals involved in the closed-door discussion told POLITICO they expect the bill to be on the floor Thursday or Friday.

First it will need to get through the Rules Committee, where Speaker Mike Johnson’s plan last year to bring competing bills to the floor ultimately unraveled.

Reps. Chip Roy (R-Texas) and Thomas Massie (R-Ky.), who are both members of the Judiciary Committee, along with Rep. Ralph Norman (R-S.C.), have the combined ability to block a bill in Rules absent Democratic help. They could also be a barometer for the bill’s reception among privacy hawks, members of the Freedom Caucus and their allies.

POLITICO first reported last Wednesday that Johnson was leaning toward bringing a bill to the floor this week after leadership revived a GOP working group aimed at bridging the party’s surveillance divisions.

Two individuals briefed on the discussion told POLITICO late last week and over the weekend that there are expected to be approximately six votes on amendments to the bill, including on a warrant requirement before searching 702-collected data for Americans information and on preventing data brokers from selling consumer information to law enforcement.

The revised bill comes after intense closed-door negotiations about the path forward after the Judiciary and Intelligence committees offered competing proposals late last year.

Technically Congress has until mid-April to work out a deal, but Republicans have hinted that Johnson wants quicker action. The House is currently scheduled to leave after Friday until Feb. 28. When they return, Congress is expected to be consumed by twin government funding deadlines and averting a shutdown threat.

Another Donald Trump impeachment over Ukraine funding? Ohio Republican Sen. J.D. Vance says it’s a possibility, if the $95 billion emergency foreign aid spending bill becomes law and Trump wins the election.

Vance distributed a memo to Senate GOP offices on Monday arguing that the foreign aid measure could tie Trump’s hands if he comes into office next year wanting to pause Ukraine funds as part of negotiations on ending Russia’s war on the U.S. ally. That’s because some of the legislation’s funding expires nine months into the next presidency, effectively — according to Vance — handcuffing a future President Trump from making his own decisions on Ukraine spending.

Vance is one of the most outspoken opponents of Ukraine assistance, and he’s making a last-ditch effort to block the legislation before a critical vote later on Monday to end debate on the foreign aid plan, which needs 60 votes.

“The supplemental represents an attempt by the foreign policy blob/deep state to stop President Trump from pursuing his desired policy, and if he does so anyways, to provide grounds to impeach him and undermine his administration. All Republicans should oppose its passage,” reads the memo by Vance’s office.

The then-Democratic House majority impeached Trump in 2019 over the then-president’s move to withhold funding slated for Ukraine and pressure Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky to launch investigations into Joe Biden, who defeated Trump in November 2020. The Senate acquitted Trump in early 2020.

Though the 2024 election is nine months away, Trump is trying to kill the foreign aid bill and urging the Senate to stop it. Despite that, the bill is clearly on track for passage — with just one more opportunity for the GOP to block it later on Monday. It would still need to pass the House, which is an uncertain prospect at the moment.

If the overseas aid bill does become law and Trump wins the election, Vance’s new memo argues that the incoming president could be impeached again if he “were to withdraw from or pause financial support for the war in Ukraine in order to bring the conflict to a peaceful conclusion.”

PLAINVIEW, New York — On the last day of early voting in the contest for former Rep. George Santos’ vacated House seat, both candidates played it safe in a final sprint ahead of Tuesday’s special election, when a snowstorm is set to batter Western Long Island.

GOP candidate Mazi Pilip and Democratic candidate and former Rep. Tom Suozzi fanned out across New York’s 3rd Congressional District Sunday, campaigning from churches to pickleball courts in the last stretch of the race for the closely-watched swing district.

Victory for Suozzi would be a boon for Democrats who hope to flip the House in 2024, while a win for Pilip would increase the Republicans’ razor-thin majority in the chamber.

Pilip, the Nassau County legislator, continued to avoid the scrutiny of national and local media while campaigning. Meanwhile, Souzzi — a political fixture in the district he represented for six years — invited reporters to his Plainview headquarters to castigate his opponent for her reticence to speak publicly.

But the candidates had one common strategy: urging their supporters to vote early to avoid the poor weather they fear could decrease turnout on election day.

“If you don’t vote today, vote on Tuesday, but it’s gonna be hard to do because of the weather,” Suozzi told dozens of reporters and supporters gathered in the cramped campaign headquarters. Both candidates also pushed early voting on their social media accounts.

Leaving a polling center next to the Mid-Island Y Jewish Community Center, Lorraine Corrente told POLITICO she voted Sunday in anticipation of Tuesday’s storm. She said she had been reminded by two Suozzi representatives who rang her doorbell about 30 minutes prior.

Polls suggest the race is in a dead heat between the two candidates — one, a seasoned politician with strong name ID and another, a relative newcomer with a compelling and unique background as an Ethiopian immigrant and Orthodox Jew who fought in the Israel Defense Forces. Suozzi led Pilip 48 to 44 percent, according to a Newsday/Siena College poll released Thursday. Suozzi said he was “very happy” with the results of the poll, despite his lead lying within the poll’s 4.2 percent margin of error.

“I actually thought it would be closer than it is right now,” Suozzi said when asked about the poll — an acknowledgment of built-in advantages for the GOP in the district.

Pilip has accused Suozzi of going soft on immigration as migrants overwhelm parts of the state.

Pilip did not announce her campaign events to the media or answer POLITICO’s inquiries about her schedule Sunday, but her campaign later told POLITICO by phone that she was at an event at LifeTime fitness and then greeting parishioners at Our Lady of Lourdes Roman Catholic Church in Massapequa Park.

Suozzi, on the other hand, invited reporters and supporters to a news conference, where he blasted Pilip as “George Santos 2.0,” laying out a “six-count indictment” against her that included her voting record and performance at a debate against him that aired Thursday — the only debate of the race Pilip would agree to.

Santos was ousted from the seat in December after the House Ethics Committee released a report finding “substantial evidence” supporting federal prosecutors’ charges of a laundry list of crimes like identity theft and submitting falsified campaign reports.

“What Ms. Pilip and the Republican Party and the extremists have done in this race, the way they’ve conducted the race, has been just like George Santos with the unavailability, the non-transparency,” Suozzi said.

Pilip, who for months had refused to reveal who she had voted for in 2020, told the New York Post on Saturday that she voted for former President Donald Trump, despite being a registered Democrat, as POLITICO first reported. But Suozzi called that claim into question, quipping during his speech: “I honestly don’t believe she voted for Trump.”

“I think she voted for Joe Biden,” Suozzi said. “She voted for Hillary Clinton, too. I’m serious.”

Suozzi has pounced on Pilip’s inexperience and unwillingness to speak to the media throughout the race. On Sunday, Suozzi said he was “flabbergasted by her performance at the debate.”

“I can explain why she didn’t want to debate and I can explain why the Republican party who’s been handling her didn’t want her to debate, because she doesn’t have any detailed positions on any issues,” he added.

While Suozzi also has touted the support of powerful unions like the Hotel and Gaming Trades Council — which spent at least $10,000 on canvassing in the final days of early voting — Pilip has won the backing of most area law enforcement groups.

Twelve police unions have joined forces to endorse Pilip over Suozzi, though the New York City Police Benevolent Association is not endorsing anyone in the race.

Pilip’s spokesperson did not respond to POLITICO’s request for comment for this article. In an interview with Fox News on Sunday, Pilip called Suozzi an “extremist” who “is trying to run away from his record.”

“He wants to create these feelings of me and Santos in the same place,” Pilip said. “Come on, let’s focus on the real issues.”

Beyond affecting the majority in the House, the fate of the race will be an important bellwether for New York politics, where suburbs have bucked a national trend and turned increasingly red.

Republicans have a three-year winning streak in the Long Island suburbs east of New York City, and issues like public safety and property taxes are top of mind for the district’s voters. Accordingly, the two candidates have been battling to own themselves as the centrist in the race while casting their opponent as an extremist.

While Pilip claims Suozzi is effectively part of the far-left “squad” in congress, she carefully, and sometimes confusingly, toes the line on issues like abortion and gun control.

Meanwhile, pro-Suozzi groups are eager to paint Pilip as “MAGA Mazi” and link her with the party’s right-wing leadership, all while boasting the former congressman’s centrist views, like his support for the House GOP’s standalone bill for Israel aid.

If Suozzi wins, “it’d be a big morale boost for the Democrats in New York State,” state Democratic chair Jay Jacobs told POLITICO.

“I think (winning) sets the tone and gives us momentum moving into November,” he said. “It also demonstrates, I think, what a winning argument looks like in the suburbs and upstate.”

Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas said Sunday he is unfazed by continued attempts by House Republicans to impeach him.

Speaking to host Kristen Welker on NBC’s “Meet the Press,” Mayorkas said, “They’re baseless allegations, Kristen, and that’s why I’m really not distracted by them. I’m focused on the work of the Department of Homeland Security.”

The impeachment articles drawn up by House Republicans allege that Mayorkas “has willfully and systematically refused to comply with Federal immigration laws,” a notion that Mayorkas vehemently denies.

House Republicans are expected to vote on them again Tuesday after their initial efforts failed last Tuesday.

Speaking at the end of a week where a bipartisan Senate deal designed to reform the immigration system fell apart, Mayorkas said it remains up to Congress to fix things.

“We don’t bear responsibility for a broken system,” he told Welker. “And we’re doing a tremendous amount within that broken system. But fundamentally, fundamentally, Congress is the only one who can fix it.”

Under the leadership of Speaker Mike Johnson, House Republicans suffered a stunning defeat last week when a vote to impeach Mayorkas failed.

The count was initially tied at 215, with Reps. Ken Buck (R-Colo.), Mike Gallagher (R-Wis.) and Tom McClintock (R-Calif.) voting with Democrats against impeaching Mayorkas. At the last minute, Rep. Blake Moore (R-Utah) flipped his vote to “no,” to allow Republicans to revive the impeachment articles at their discretion.

Republicans are counting on Majority Leader Steve Scalise to return and provide the 216th vote in favor of impeachment; the Louisiana Republican has been undergoing treatment for cancer. But they can’t wait too long in case former Rep. Tom Suozzi wins a special election in New York on Tuesday, which would provide Democrats with another vote.

For his part, Mayorkas said he wasn’t waiting around to see how the vote came out.

“I’m inspired every single day by the remarkable work that 216,000 men and women in our department perform on behalf of the American public,” he said. “I’ve got a busy day today. After the show, a busy day of work. I’ve got a busy day, Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday, and so on.”

If House Republicans vote to impeach Mayorkas, the Senate would have to decide whether to remove Mayorkas from office, though there seems to be no realistic possibility that would happen. The only Cabinet member ever to be impeached was Secretary of War William W. Belknap, who submitted his resignation to President Ulysses S. Grant in 1876 before a Senate trial.

Democrats in Congress are trying to go on offense on border security. They see the collapse of a bipartisan border deal as a rare opening to flip the script on immigration, even if they can’t fully overcome years of attacks claiming they’re weak on the issue.

In both chambers, Democrats are vowing to bring the charge to TV ads this fall. And party strategists are already shopping around polling, testing different messages on the issue. Democrats are also aggressively pitching local news outlets on Republicans’ about-face. Even the Biden administration has already started needling Republicans on it.

The working message: Republicans are flip-flopping on an issue of national security, opposing their own painstakingly drafted solution because former President Donald Trump wants chaos at the border.

“If they think that we aren’t going to talk about their unbelievable hypocrisy, they’re wrong,” said Sen. Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) in an interview. “The minute Donald Trump came out and said that he wanted to preserve chaos at the border, they ran for the hills. That is a story that’s very easy for this country to understand.”

And it’s an attack Democrats plan to deploy across the entire GOP: Everyone from Speaker Mike Johnson and House Republicans to GOP candidates for House and Senate opposed the legislation.

House Majority PAC, Democrats’ top House super PAC, plans to “use the bill extensively in our ads against them this fall,” said spokesperson CJ Warnke. So will Senate Democrats’ campaign arm, spokesperson David Bergstein vowed: “It will be a major line of attack against their candidates. The ads write themselves.”

It’s a remarkable political reversal for Republicans, who have long clamored for border legislation and succeeded in getting Democrats to make big concessions in the current package. To unlock more Ukraine money, Democrats dropped their demands for a path to citizenship or legalization for some undocumented immigrants, instead embracing a border-security-first ethos that they long rejected. It’s a dynamic that Democrats hope will help them defend vulnerable seats they’re holding in red states, take back the House and — just maybe — keep President Joe Biden in the White House.

But it remains to be seen how effectively Democrats’ attacks will land, especially since the legislative implosion occurred months before the November elections. And Republicans say they welcome the fight: “We hope Democrats are sincere in their assertion that they plan to show footage of Biden’s border crisis in every single campaign ad they run,” said Mike Berg, a spokesperson for the Senate GOP campaign arm.

An early messaging test may come as early as next week in New York.

Immigration is taking center stage in the 3rd Congressional District special election on Long Island, where Republicans are pummeling Democratic nominee Tom Suozzi on the migrant crisis that has sent some 160,000 migrants to the New York City area. His GOP opponent, Mazi Pilip, came out against the proposal. Suozzi has said he would support it.

“They are only playing politics. So we should drill that home for sure,” said Rep. Greg Meeks (D-N.Y.), the Democratic Party chair in Queens, part of which lies in the district hosting the special election. “The independent voters, etc. They are watching, they’re paying attention.”

On Long Island, Republicans have gone all-in on the migrant crisis, spending $5.5 million on broadcast TV ads to hammer Suozzi on the issue, according to the media tracking firm AdImpact. They will be even more emboldened if he loses on Tuesday.

Democratic strategists privately conceded that they will not suddenly have the upper hand on immigration politics nationwide. But the disintegration of the deal gives them an easy response to Republican attacks that they otherwise might not have had.

Every two years, the party is pummeled with immigration-focused hits, and the issue has once again risen to the top of GOP campaigns’ agendas. In 2018 the migrant caravan took a star turn in TV ads. In 2022, Republican governors bused and flew migrants from the border to blue states.

Republicans don’t seem eager to change course. Trump’s made it clear he wants to campaign on Biden’s handling of the border — lobbying to kill the deal that would have handed Biden a bipartisan win — and Republicans believe they will be able to recover after a brief surge of criticism.

“The spotlight will be on us for a small period of time, but it will go back on them,” said Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.), who is still pushing for border security measures in a national security supplemental bill despite rejecting the bipartisan deal.

Even Sen. Mitt Romney (R-Utah), who supported the bipartisan bill and is frustrated with his party for not standing up to Trump, called it “laughable” for Democrats to try and take Republicans on over the border given the rate of illegal crossings during Biden’s presidency.

But Democratic strategists still view the bill as the most conservative border policy shakeup in decades and are surprised Republicans walked away after getting so many concessions.

Of course Democrats are attacking Republicans for flip-flopping, said Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska): “And wouldn’t you? We as Republicans need to look at what we’ve said,” she said. “We’ve done a great job of messaging. But people expect us to address it.”

Democrats’ message is about more than just GOP hypocrisy. They’re telling voters Republicans are placing Trump, and politics, above making progress on an issue as serious as the border crisis.

“Their daddy told them no,” mocked Rep. Vicente Gonzalez, a Democrat from a Texas border district.

They began testing those messages even before the deal collapsed.

A poll of battleground House districts conducted by Navigator Research in mid-January, testing Democratic messages on different topics, found 66 percent of voters in those districts would be concerned if “Republicans in Congress are more interested in playing politics and scoring points than fixing the immigration system.”

Democrats have a narrow majority in the Senate and Republicans have a miniscule edge in the House. Both parties are looking for any advantage, however small.

Endangered Senate Democrats all supported the legislation, while Republican Senate candidates, from Kari Lake in Arizona to Bernie Moreno in Ohio, came out against it. Sen. Gary Peters (D-Mich.), who chairs the Senate Democrats’ campaign arm, said “This will hurt them on election night.”

And Sen. Jon Tester (D-Mont.), a red-state Democrat facing perhaps his toughest-ever race, is one of the most vulnerable Democrats in the Senate. Both of his potential opponents, Rep. Matt Rosendale (R-Mont.) and Tim Sheehy, signaled they would oppose the legislation.

“We’re letting people know,” Tester said in an interview on Thursday after supporting the bill.

“I don’t think they can stand up and say they want a secure border then. I think it becomes incredibly hypocritical.”

Wisconsin Republican Rep. Mike Gallagher will not seek reelection this November, he announced on social media Saturday.

Gallagher chairs the Select Committee on the Chinese Communist Party and has been a leading voice in the House on cybersecurity issues. He was first elected in 2016.

Gallagher’s vote against the impeachment of Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas earlier this week prompted reports of a possible primary challenge from a close Trump ally.

Gallagher told the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel that he would enter the private sector at the end of his term, but would continue to focus on national security and defense policy.

In his statement on X, formerly known as Twitter, Gallagher said he had always intended to limit his congressional tenure and thanked his constituents.

“Though my title may change, my mission will always remain the same: deter America’s enemies and defend the Constitution,” he added.

“Mike is a mentor and friend & his chairmanship of @committeeonccp will undoubtedly better position the U.S. to compete with China longterm,” said Iowa GOP Rep. Ashley Hinson on X, calling it a “huge loss for Congress.”

Former Michigan lawmaker and Senate candidate Peter Meijer said Gallagher was the “most thoughtful and intelligent member” he had served with.

“Can’t overstate the loss this is to the House’s ability to smartly counter China and lead from the front on AI/cyber,” Meijer added.