Americans rehabilitate ex-presidents all the time.
It was fascinating to see the rebranding of George W. Bush — the man who took us into the disastrous Iraq war and horribly bungled the response to Hurricane Katrina — into a charming amateur artist who played buddies with and passed candy to Michelle Obama.
And it didn’t just happen for him. The Monica Lewinsky scandal faded in our consideration of Bill Clinton. Barack Obama’s reliance on drone strikes and his moniker “deporter in chief” rarely receive mention now.
This is because our political memories aren’t fixed, but are constantly being adjusted. Politicians’ negatives are often diminished and their positives inflated. As Gallup noted in 2013, “Americans tend to be more charitable in their evaluations of past presidents than they are when the presidents are in office.”
Without a doubt, Donald Trump benefits from this phenomenon. The difference is that other presidents’ shortcomings pale in comparison with his and his benefit isn’t passive: He’s seeking the office again and, as part of that, working to rewrite the history of his presidency. His desperate attempts, first to cling to power, then to regain it, include denying the 2020 election result and embracing the Jan. 6, 2021, insurrection that his denials helped fuel.
His revisionism has worked remarkably well, particularly among Republicans. A Washington Post/University of Maryland poll conducted in December found that Republicans “are now less likely to believe that Jan. 6 participants were ‘mostly violent,’ less likely to believe Trump bears responsibility for the attack and are slightlyless likely to view Joe Biden’s election as legitimate” than they were in 2021.
This is one of the truly remarkable aspects of the current presidential cycle: the degree to which our collective memory of Trump’s litany of transgressions has become less of a political problem for him than might otherwise be expected. Even the multiple legal charges he now faces are almost all about things that happened years ago and, to many citizens, involve things that the country should put in the rearview mirror.
Indeed, in the same poll, 43 percent of Americans and 80 percent of 2020 Trump voters said they believed that the Jan. 6 storming of the Capitol was an event that the country needed to move on from.
Many Americans experienced the Trump years as traumatic, and one of the most bewildering aspects of this year’s presidential race is the way that so many other Americans are disregarding or downgrading that trauma.
In 2021 a study was published about how we remember political events, specifically examining recollections about two watershed moments, one being Trump’s election in 2016. The study’s lead author, Linda J. Levine, a psychologist at the University of California, Irvine, wrote, “People exaggerated when remembering how angry they had felt about the political events but underestimated their feelings of happiness and fear.”
This is part of what she describes as “memory reconstruction,” the updating of our memories of the past to reflect our current feelings and beliefs. And what it says to me is that many of us have a clearer recollection of our indignation from 2016 but have developed a hazier recollection of the sense of foreboding that hung in the air during the years that followed.
I’m not sure that people — not just Republicans — are fully remembering what it felt like, just a few years ago, to wake up every morning having to brace themselves before checking the news because they didn’t know what fresh outrage awaited them.
I’m not sure that people are fully remembering the constant chaos or the disorienting feeling of the stream of lies flowing from the Trump White House.
I’m not sure that people are remembering the family separation policy, the “very fine people” refrain or the tossing of rolls of paper towels in Puerto Rico after a hurricane ravaged the island.
Too many people have settled into a hagiographic view of Trump’s presidency, even though you can make a solid case that today’s economy is stronger than the one Trump left behind and that Trump did — and still does — gush over the world’s dictators and agitate America’s allies.
D. Stephen Voss, a political scientist at the University of Kentucky, told me this week that “voters are usually only responding to fairly recent memories and fairly recent messaging.” As he put it, “Candidates can fairly easily put their past behind them.”
This electoral quirk is an outgrowth of human nature. Staying in moments of apprehension is so emotionally expensive and consumes so much energy that we often allow ourselves to grow numb to them or diminish them.
But the threat that Trump poses to our country hasn’t diminished. It has increased. He keeps saying things — he won’t be a dictator “except for Day 1” — that demonstrate he is not only a danger to the country but also to the world order.
And in the end, that is the most important issue in this election, not Biden’s memory or disagreements over his foreign policy or migrants at the border or economic anxiety. You can’t make the country better without saving it first.
Those fighting to save our democracy can never lose sight of that, particularly since many of those supporting Trump now see his multifarious sins through rose-tinted glasses.
Charles M. Blow is an Opinion columnist for The New York Times, writing about national politics, public opinion and social justice, with a focus on racial equality and L.G.B.T.Q. rights.
Ex-F.B.I. Informant Is Charged With Lying Over Bidens’ Role in Ukraine Business
The informant’s story was part of a series of explosive and unsubstantiated claims by Republicans that the Bidens engaged in potentially criminal activity.
By Glenn Thrush– February 15, 2024
Hunter Biden outside the U.S. Capitol building in December. An FBI informant has been charged with lying to his handler about ties between Joe Biden and son Hunter and a Ukrainian energy company. Credit…Kenny Holston/The New York Times
The special counsel investigating Hunter Biden has charged a former F.B.I. informant with fabricating claims that President Biden and his son sought two $5 million bribes from a Ukrainian energy company, according to an indictment in a California federal court.
The former informant, Alexander Smirnov, 43, was accused of falsely telling the F.B.I. that Hunter Biden, then serving as a paid member on the board of Burisma, demanded the money to protect the company from an investigation by the country’s prosecutor general at the time.
The story Mr. Smirnov told investigators was part of a series of explosive and unsubstantiated claims by Republicans that the Bidens engaged in potentially criminal activity — allegations central to the party’s efforts to impeach the president.
In July, Senator Charles E. Grassley, Republican of Iowa, released a copy of an F.B.I. record that included the false allegation without naming Mr. Smirnov, or questioning its veracity.
“I’ve been pushing the Justice Department and F.B.I. to provide details on its handling of very significant allegations from a trusted F.B.I. informant implicating then-Vice President Biden in a criminal bribery scheme,” Mr. Grassley said in a statement at the time, praising “heroic whistle-blowers” who brought the document to light.
The claims in the report turned out to be a lie, said the special counsel, David C. Weiss, the Trump-appointed U.S. attorney in Delaware.
Mr. Smirnov now faces a two-charge indictment for making false statements and obstructing the government’s long-running investigation of the president’s troubled son. If convicted, he faces a maximum penalty of 25 years in prison.
Mr. Smirnov is a permanent resident of the United States, according to a senior law enforcement official. He was arrested in Las Vegas on Wednesday after disembarking from an international flight and was expected to appear before a federal judge later Thursday.
Hunter Biden promised to protect the company “through his dad, from all kinds of problems,” Mr. Smirnov falsely claimed to the bureau in 2020, according to Mr. Weiss, the special counsel who has charged the president’s son twice over the past year on tax and gun charges.
Mr. Smirnov, prosecutors working for Mr. Weiss said, was only in contact with Burisma executives in 2017, after Mr. Biden left office — when he “had no ability to influence U.S. policy.”
He is accused of exaggerating his “routine and unextraordinary business contacts with Burisma” into “bribery allegations” against the president, who is identified in the filing as “Public Official 1.”
Glenn Thrush covers the Department of Justice. He joined The Times in 2017 after working for Politico, Newsday, Bloomberg News, The New York Daily News, The Birmingham Post-Herald and City Limits. More about Glenn Thrush
US has new intelligence on Russian nuclear capabilities in space
Katie Bo Lillis, Alex Marquardt, Jim Sciutto, Oren Liebermann, Natasha Bertrand, Melanie Zanona and Kevin Liptak – February 14, 2024
US has new intelligence on Russian nuclear capabilities in space
The US has new intelligence on Russian military capabilities related to its efforts to deploy a nuclear anti-satellite system in space, according to multiple sources familiar with the intelligence.
The intelligence was briefed to Congress and key US allies, and some lawmakers say it is serious enough that it should be declassified and made public. While the intelligence is concerning, multiple senior members of Congress briefed on the information on Wednesday emphasized that it does not pose an immediate threat to the US or its interests.
The system remains under development and is not yet in orbit, according to three US officials familiar with the intelligence. It’s not clear how far the technology has progressed, one of the officials said. A separate US official told CNN the threat does not involve a weapon that would be used to attack humans.
It was not immediately clear whether the intelligence referred to a nuclear-powered, anti-satellite capability or a nuclear-armed capability.
While members of Congress downplayed the immediacy of the threat, an anti-satellite weapon placed in orbit around Earth would pose a significant danger to US nuclear command and control satellites, said Hans Kristensen, director of the Nuclear Information Project at the Federation of American Scientists. The US relies on such satellites – which he called “essential” – to ensure constant, seamless control over its nuclear arsenal.
Other countries have tested anti-satellite weapons in the past, but this would be an escalation, Kristensen said, and the US has made clear that it would react “very forcefully” to an attack on its nuclear command and control satellites.
“If it’s orbital, it’s a new level of threat [to the system], whether it’s nuclear or not,” said Kristensen, who added that even conventional weapons on an orbital anti-satellite system could pose a significant threat to the US.
ABC News first reported that the intelligence related to a Russian space-based nuclear capability.
Earlier Wednesday, the chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, Republican Rep. Mike Turner of Ohio, ignited a firestorm on Capitol Hill when he issued a cryptic statement announcing that the panel had “information concerning a serious national security threat.”
In a letter to lawmakers inviting them to view the intelligence in the committee’s classified spaces, he said that it related to a “destabilizing foreign military capability that should be known by all congressional policymakers.”
Immediately, lawmakers began tramping down to the House basement to learn what the intelligence was.
Some left underwhelmed. One Democratic member with deep national security experience said that they had never before received that kind of urgent summons over a national security matter during their time in Congress — and that the intelligence they saw when they arrived was not urgent enough to justify Turner’s alarm-pulling.
Within hours, the Republican speaker of the House, Rep. Mike Johnson, attempted to tamp down the imbroglio, telling reporters that “there is no cause for alarm” and indicating that he had known about the intelligence since at least January.
“We just want to assure everyone steady hands are at the wheel. We’re working on it and there’s no need for alarm,” Johnson said.
Rep. Jim Himes, the committee’s top Democrat, said in a statement that “the classified intelligence product that the House Intelligence Committee called to the attention of Members last night is a significant one, but it is not a cause for panic.”
National security adviser Jake Sullivan on Wednesday said he was “surprised” that Turner had made the existence of the intelligence public, noting that he was already scheduled to brief the top Republican and Democratic leaders of the House as well as Turner and Himes on Thursday.
“We scheduled a briefing for the House members of the Gang of Eight tomorrow,” Sullivan said. “That’s been on the books. So I am a bit surprised that Congressman Turner came out publicly today in advance of a meeting on the books for me to go sit with him alongside our intelligence and defense professionals tomorrow.”
Turner in his statement has urged the Biden administration to declassify “all information relating to this threat so that Congress, the Administration, and our allies can openly discuss the actions necessary to respond to this threat.”
Meanwhile, in a joint statement, the Republican and Democratic leaders of the Senate Intelligence Committee suggested that they had been tracking the intelligence but that it would be difficult to declassify it without exposing sensitive sources and methods.
The uproar over the new intelligence comes as a $60 billion aid package to support Ukraine in its fight against Russia has stalled in the House and former President Donald Trump has been publicly supporting GOP members who have opposed the package. Trump has also in recent days said that he would encourage Russia to “do whatever the hell they want” to NATO allies that do not meet alliance-set spending goals on their own defense.
Johnson has said that he will not bring the Senate-passed aid measure to the floor.
But Turner has publicly supported continuing to fund the Ukraine war effort. Some lawmakers and US officials privately speculated that his effort to brief lawmakers on the intelligence — something the House Intelligence Committee voted on Tuesday night to do — might be an attempt to shore up flagging support for Ukraine.
Sources declined to provide further detail on the intelligence or the Russian capabilities it describes.
But for years, Russia has pursued counterspace systems designed to neutralize US military and commercial space systems, according to a 2022 Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA) report on space security. Russian doctrine called for being able to target an enemy’s satellites from the ground, air, cyber and space, using attacks that range from temporary jamming to outright destruction.
In 2020, Russia tested a space-based anti-satellite weapon with sophisticated orbital capabilities that could have a dual purpose: it could service and inspect friendly satellites while having the capability to attack enemy satellites.
An attempt to launch a nuclear-armed anti-satellite system into space would violate The Outer Space Treaty of 1967, which explicitly prohibits “any objects carrying nuclear weapons or any other kinds of weapons of mass destruction” in orbit.
This story and headline have been updated with additional developments.
CNN’s Michael Williams, Annie Grayer and Morgan Rimmer contributed to this report.
Top Republican warns of ‘serious’ national security threat
Bernd Debusmann Jr – BBC News, Washington – February 14, 2024
House Intelligence Committee chairman Mike Turner provided no details about the ‘serious’ national security threat.
The chairman of the powerful House Intelligence Committee has issued a vague warning of a “serious national security threat” facing the US.
The cryptic statement from Republican Mike Turner called on President Joe Biden to declassify the threat, although no further details were given.
The White House has said the threat is not imminent, but that congressional leaders would be briefed this week.
Lawmakers have until Friday to review intelligence about the threat.
In a statement posted by the House Intelligence Committee on X, the platform formerly known as Twitter, Mr Turner said only that the committee has “made available to all members of Congress information concerning a serious national security threat”.
“I am requesting that President Biden declassify all information relating to this threat so that Congress, the administration and our allies can openly discuss the actions necessary to respond to this threat,” the statement added.
A memo sent to members of the House of Representatives on Tuesday night that was obtained by Punchbowl News provided few additional details, noting only that the “urgent matter” is in “regard to a destabilising foreign military capability”.
The intelligence is available for lawmakers to view in a secure facility within the US Capitol complex until Friday, 16 February.
Some reports in US media suggest the warning is related to Russian attempts to develop a space-based anti-satellite nuclear weapon. The New York Times, citing current and former US officials, said the weapon was not yet in orbit.
The top Democrat on the committee, Connecticut’s Jim Himes, said in a statement that while the classified threat is “significant”, it “is not a cause for panic”.
“As to whether more can be declassified about the issues, that is a worthwhile discussion but it is not a discussion to be had in public,” he added.
Similarly, House Speaker Mike Johnson said that there is “no need for public alarm”.
Senate Intelligence Chairman Mark Warner and Vice-Chairman Marco Rubio said in a statement that their committee has been “rigorously tracking this issue from the start” and “are discussing an appropriate response with the administration.”
“We must be cautious about potentially disclosing sources and methods that may be key to preserving a range of options for US action,” the statement added.
Asked about the threat at the White House, National Security Advisor Jake Sullivan told reporters that he had offered to personally brief the so-called “Gang of Eight” comprised of House and Senate leaders from both parties and the top lawmakers on the House and Senate Intelligence Committees.
A briefing for the House members of the wider group – which includes Mr Turner, Mr Johnson and Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries – had been scheduled for Thursday, 15 February.
“I’m a bit surprised that Congressman Turner came out publicly today in advance of a meeting on the books for me to go sit with him alongside our intelligence and defence professionals tomorrow,” Mr Sullivan said. “I’m not in a position to say anything further today.”
Mr Sullivan later added that the Biden administration is “protecting the national security of the United States and the American people”.
“Americans understand that there are a range of threats and challenges in the world that we’re dealing with every single day, and those threats and challenges range from terrorism to state actors,” he said. “And we have to contend with them.”
GOP warning of ‘national security threat’ is about Russia wanting nuclear weapon in space: Sources
John Parkinson, Luke Barr, Anne Flaherty, Luis Martinez and Adam Carlson – February 14, 2024
The White House’s national security adviser and leading lawmakers on Capitol Hill sought to allay public concerns on Wednesday after the House Intelligence Committee chairman warned of a “national security threat” related to a “destabilizing foreign military capability” so serious that President Joe Biden should declassify “all information” about it.
Two sources familiar with deliberations on Capitol Hill said the intelligence has to do with Russia wanting to put a nuclear weapon into space.
This would not be to drop a nuclear weapon onto Earth but rather to possibly use against satellites.
Still, “it is very concerning and very sensitive,” said one source, calling it “a big deal.”
While not addressing the subject directly, multiple members of Congress quickly described the issue as serious without stoking public alarm.
“We are going to work together to address this matter, as we do all sensitive matters that are classified,” House Speaker Mike Johnson told reporters at the Capitol on Wednesday afternoon.
“But we just want to assure everyone steady hands are at the wheel,” he said.
Rep. Jim Himes, a Connecticut Democrat and the ranking member on the House Intelligence Committee, echoed that in his own statement, calling the warning “significant” but “not a cause for panic.”
“As to whether more can be declassified about this issue, that is a worthwhile discussion but it is not a discussion to be had in public,” Himes said.
Earlier on Wednesday, Ohio Republican Rep. Mike Turner, the chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, said in a statement that his panel had “made available to all Members of Congress information concerning a serious national security threat.”
PHOTO: PACE Satellite. (NASA)
“I am requesting that President Biden declassify all information relating to this threat so that Congress, the Administration, and our allies can openly discuss the actions necessary to respond to this threat,” Turner said.
He said he was making information on the matter available in a secure location to all members of the House in accordance with chamber rules.
Lawmakers arrived to the committee space throughout the afternoon to view the raw intelligence for Turner’s warning, inside a secure facility in the basement at the Capitol.
“it’s concerning,” Rep. Bruce Westerman, R-Ark., said afterward, though he didn’t address any additional details.
A letter sent to members of Congress from Turner and Himes, obtained by ABC News, indicated the threat is linked to “a destabilizing foreign military capability that should be known by all Congressional Policy Makers.”
The White House’s national security adviser, Jake Sullivan said at Wednesday’s press briefing that he had already scheduled a classified meeting with congressional leadership before Turner’s request.
Sullivan was pressed several times by reporters about the intelligence request, but he declined to specifically say if Thursday’s meeting will be to discuss the reported threat.
He also declined to provide further details about it beyond saying that, broadly, “Americans understand that there are a range of threats and challenges in the world that we are dealing with every single day,” such as terrorism.
“I am confident that President Biden, in the decisions that he is taking, is going to ensure the security of the American people,” Sullivan said.
PHOTO: National Security Advisor Jake Sullivan speaks during a press briefing at the White House in Washington, Feb. 14, 2024. (Kevin Lamarque/Reuters)
“I reached out earlier this week to the Gang of Eight” — referring to the leaders of both parties in both chambers of Congress and the ranking intelligence members — “to offer myself up for a personal briefing … and in fact we scheduled a briefing for the four House members of the Gang of Eight tomorrow,” he said.
“So I am a bit surprised that Congressman Turner came out today,” he said. (Turner has not commented further to the press.)
Sullivan said that the White House has “has gone further and in more creative, more strategic ways dealt with the declassification of intelligence in the national interest of the United States than any administration in history. So you definitely are not going to find an unwillingness to do that.”
“But just to be clear, Turner calls it an urgent matter with regard to a destabilizing foreign military capability,” ABC News Chief White House Correspondent Mary Bruce asked. “Are you aware that there is an emerging serious threat here that he’s referring to?”
“‘I’ll just say that I personally reached out to the Gang of Eight. It is highly unusual, in fact, for the national security adviser to do that,” Sullivan responded.
President Biden had been tracking the threat cited by Turner and specifically asked Sullivan to “engage” the Gang of Eight on it, a U.S. official confirmed to ABC News.
“I did that to set up a meeting. … We’ll have that conversation tomorrow,” Sullivan said at the briefing. “I’m not gonna say anything further.”
ABC News’ Fritz Farrow and Lauren Peller contributed to this report.
Why 22 Senate Republicans defied Trump and voted for aid to Ukraine
Ayesha Ali – February 13, 2024
Early Tuesday morning, 22 Senate Republicans defied Donald Trump and voted with Democrats to pass a $95 billion foreign aid package — most if for Ukraine and Israel.
The former president and other Senate Republicans had tried to kill the measure that President Biden has called critical.
He earlier had stopped a version that included border security provisions, wanting to deny Biden a win on immigration and claiming he could get do better if he regains the White House.
Here’s why some of the Republicans who went against Trump said they voted as they did, although few, if any, made much mention of Trump.
PHOTO: Former President Donald Trump speaks at Trump National Golf Club in Bedminster, N.J., June 13, 2023. (Andrew Harnik/AP, FILE)
Several GOP senators noted the supplemental aid package includes $26 billion to help replenish U.S. military stockpiles depleted by ammunition and other equipment and supplies sent to Ukraine, Israel and Taiwan, according to a bill summary.
Sen. Shelley Moore Capito of West Virginia, a member of the Senate Appropriations Committee, said in a statement, “The national security supplemental we passed today equips our country with the resources to restore American deterrence and resolve amid rising threats and President Biden’s weakness.”
PHOTO: Sen. Shelley Moore Capito, R-W.Va.,, left, speaks during a news conference on the Administration’s pause on LNG exports, Feb. 8, 2024, on Capitol Hill in Washington, as Sen. Dan Sullivan, R-Alaska, right, looks on. (Mariam Zuhaib/AP)
Sen. Todd Young, R-Ind., also said the bill would revitalize the U.S. defense industry.
“This bill also will help rebuild our defense industrial base, which has significantly diminished in recent years,” he said. “Restoring our military readiness — from artillery to semiconductors — is critical not to promoting war but to deterring conflict.”
Sen. Roger Wicker, R-Miss., the top Republican on the Senate Armed Services Committee, also emphasized U.S. national security concerns.
“My primary obligation as a U.S. senator is protecting America. This national defense legislation counters the Biden administration’s weak defense policy decisions and will save American lives,” he said.
Sen. Kevin Cramer of North Dakota justified his vote by saying the House would be able to “take an imperfect bill and make it better.”
Sen. John Boozman of Arkansas echoed Cramer.
“It was still important to advance the process so the House of Representatives can influence these policies and help secure even better outcomes,” he said.
Support for allies
Prior to the vote, Sen. Thom Tillis of North Carolina, took to the Senate floor to warn of consequences if Ukraine and Israel were not sent the aid.
“Why am I so focused on this vote? Because I don’t want to be on the pages of history that we will regret,” he said. “If we walk away, you will see the alliance that is supporting Ukraine crumble, you will ultimately see China become emboldened. And I am not going to be on that page of history.”
PHOTO: Sen. Mike Crapo, R-Idaho, left and Sen. Jim Risch, R-Idaho, right, walks through the U.S. Capitol, Feb. 7, 2024, in Washington. (Mariam Zuhaib/AP)
Sen. Mike Crapo, R-Idaho, also underscored the necessity of standing by allies, but said the United States can’t ensure global security alone.
“The United States cannot be the policeman of the world, nor can we engage in every conflict, which is why we must support allies who will stand with us in what is a very dangerous time globally,” he said.
Ahead of the Senate vote on the supplemental aid package, Sen. Lindsey Graham of South Carolina did mention Trump. He released a statement Monday evening suggesting that the aid to Ukraine and Israel in the package be given as a loan instead, an idea Trump had proposed.
PHOTO: Ranking member Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., speaks during the Senate Judiciary Committee’s hearing on online child safety on Capitol Hill, Jan. 31, 2024 in Washington. (Manuel Balce Ceneta/AP)
“A loan on friendly terms allows America, who is deeply in debt, a chance to get our money back and changes the paradigm of how we help others,” Graham said. “President Trump is right to insist that we think outside the box.”
Graham, usually a national security hawk who previously had supported aid to Ukraine, voted against it.
The 22 Senate Republicans who voted to pass the aid are: John Boozman, Shelley Moore Capito, Bill Cassidy, Susan Collins, John Cornyn, Kevin Cramer, Mike Crapo, Joni Ernst, Chuck Grassley, John Hoeven, John Kennedy, Mitch McConnell, Jerry Moran, Lisa Murkowski, Jim Risch, Mitt Romney, Mike Rounds, Dan Sullivan, John Thune, Thom Tillis, Roger Wicker, Todd Young.
ABC News’ Allie Pecorin contributed to this report.
Here Are the Republicans Breaking With Their Party to Back Ukraine Aid
Carl Hulse – February 13, 2024
Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) gives a thumbs up as the Senate votes to pass a long-awaited foreign aid package for Ukraine and Israel early Tuesday morning, Feb. 13, 2024. (Anna Rose Layden/The New York Times)
WASHINGTON — Seventeen Senate Republicans have bucked a majority of their party and former President Donald Trump in joining Democrats to push military assistance for Ukraine toward approval in the Senate, highlighting a widening foreign policy divide in the contemporary Republican Party.
The 17 senators, mainly national security hawks who include several military veterans, have provided the votes necessary to overcome multiple filibusters backed by a majority of their colleagues, clearing the way for approval within days of $95 billion in aid to Ukraine, Israel and allies in the Pacific region.
“The thread that binds that group together is national security,” said Sen. Jerry Moran, R-Kan., who is one of the 17. “America’s national security, the belief that what happens in Ukraine matters to the United States, the belief that what happens in Israel matters and the belief that what happens in the South Pacific matters.”
Backing the funding could draw condemnation from Trump and his allies, a possibility that was most likely a factor in the decision of some to oppose it.
Some Republicans who have balked at the bill have suggested that they could ultimately back the legislation on final passage after trying to use their opposition to win the chance to change it — an effort that has so far not proved successful. But whether more than half of the 49 Republicans will vote for it remains an open question.
Here’s a closer look at the defectors so far, and what is motivating them.
All But Two of the Senate’s Republican Leaders
The group includes the two top Senate Republicans, Mitch McConnell of Kentucky and John Thune of South Dakota, as well as two others on the leadership team: Sens. Joni Ernst of Iowa and Shelley Moore Capito of West Virginia.
Two other leaders, Sens. John Barrasso of Wyoming and Steve Daines of Montana, both of whom have endorsed Trump, are opposed.
The sharp split on the funding inside the top echelons of the Senate Republican Conference mirrors a sharp division inside the party, which for much of the post-World War II era has been a strong proponent of exerting American power overseas and standing by U.S. allies. But there is a growing and strong sentiment among Republicans — encouraged by Trump — toward withdrawing from foreign involvement.
McConnell has been among the most vocal proponents of sending aid to Ukraine. He has called Ukraine’s war against Russian aggression an existential issue and argued with increasing fervor in recent days that the United States must not abandon its democratic ally standing up against President Vladimir Putin of Russia.
Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky., who has been leading an effort to slow-walk the military assistance measure, on Monday called the idea that bolstering Ukraine was essential to America’s national security “ludicrous.”
“I think sending money to Ukraine actually makes our national security more endangered,” Paul said. “The leadership has come together, but it is the wrong kind of compromise. It is a compromise to loot the Treasury. They are shoveling out borrowed cash.”
Others who voted for the funding include Sens. John Cornyn of Texas, a former top Republican who is interested in rejoining leadership, and Chuck Grassley of Iowa, the longest-serving Senate Republican.
National Security Leaders and Veterans
Several members of the Armed Services Committee have backed moving ahead with the bill, including Sen. Roger Wicker of Mississippi, the senior Republican on the panel, Sens. Mike Rounds of South Dakota and Dan Sullivan of Alaska, and Ernst.
Ernst served overseas as an Iowa National Guard officer, and Sullivan is a colonel in the Marine Corps Reserve. A third Republican veteran who has been a strong backer of the aid, Sen. Todd Young of Indiana, is a former Marine officer.
Democrats have praised the Republicans who have joined them in the Ukraine effort.
“I think they understand the necessity of supporting Ukraine, particularly since this is a contest between a rules-based international order and Russian autocracy,” said Sen. Jack Reed, D-R.I., chair of the Armed Services Committee. “They also understand that it could involve our service members soon.”
Mainstream Republicans and Appropriators
Members of the Appropriations Committee, including two more-centrist senators — Susan Collins of Maine, the senior Republican on the spending panel, and Lisa Murkowski of Alaska — have also been instrumental in pushing the aid. Other appropriators behind the bill include Moran, Sen. John Kennedy of Louisiana and Capito.
The measure has the backing of a handful of others who have been known to break with their party and support bipartisan compromises, including Sens. Mitt Romney of Utah, a member of the Foreign Relations Committee; Bill Cassidy of Louisiana; and Thom Tillis of North Carolina.
“I think there is a common understanding that if we fail on this vote, if we don’t support Ukraine — this is not bluster, this is not hyperbole — bad things are going to happen,” Tillis said Monday.
Republican backers of the legislation say they cannot worry about Trump or the potential electoral consequences given the urgency behind the push to restrain Russia and avoid a wider war in Europe or Asia.
“The stakes are high, and we must meet the moment,” Collins said.
As for a potential backlash, Tillis said he was not worried.
“I slept like a baby last night,” he said, referring to his vote Sunday to overcome the filibuster by a majority of his Republican colleagues.
The following is an alphabetical list of the 17 Republicans who voted to advance the bill past its final procedural hurdle on Monday:
Biden accuses Trump of bowing to Putin by encouraging Russia to invade NATO allies that don’t meet their obligations
Kevin Liptak and Michael Williams – February 13, 2024
President Joe Biden on Tuesday slammed Donald Trump after the former president said he would encourage Russia to invade countries that don’t meet their NATO obligations, saying such comments amount to bowing down to Vladimir Putin.
The remarks – Biden’s latest criticism of Trump from the White House – are some of his harshest criticism of his likely rival on foreign policy to date.
Speaking Saturday at a rally in South Carolina, Trump said he would encourage Russia to do “whatever the hell they want” to any NATO member country that doesn’t meet spending guidelines on defense. Biden said those comments sent a “dangerous and shocking” signal.
“Can you imagine a former president of the United States saying that?” Biden asked incredulously from the State Dining Room. “The whole world heard it. The worst thing is he means it.”
Biden began his speech by encouraging the House of Representatives to “immediately” hold a vote on the Senate-passed, $95 billion supplemental aid package that would provide assistance to Ukraine, Israel and US partners in the Indo-Pacific region, as well as humanitarian assistance to Palestinians in the Gaza Strip.
More than $60 billion from the Senate package would have been allocated to Ukraine, as the country prepares to mark the second anniversary of its full-scale invasion by Russia. Previous attempts to pass an aid package – combined with a border security bill – were scuttled after Trump came out in opposition.
Trump’s comment drew immediate consternation, not only from the American foreign policy establishment but from NATO allies, who have watched warily as Russia proceeds with its invasion of Ukraine.
For Biden, who has spent much of his career working on issues related to transatlantic security, the remark was particularly galling. When he heard about the remarks afterward, the president was aghast, according to a person familiar with the matter. He later issued a statement through his campaign decrying the sentiment.
The White House criticized Trump’s comments shortly after they were made.
“Encouraging invasions of our closest allies by murderous regimes is appalling and unhinged – and it endangers American national security, global stability, and our economy at home,” White House spokesperson Andrew Bates said in a statement on Saturday.
Former President Donald Trump arrives on stage during a Get Out The Vote rally at Coastal Carolina University on February 10 in Conway, South Carolina. – Win McNamee/Getty Images
But Biden’s criticism of Trump from the White House went a step further. In a speech that mentioned Trump by name at least a half-dozen times, Biden sought to forcefully rebut questions about American commitment to its allies.
“No other president in our history has bowed down to a Russian dictator,” Biden went on. “Let me say this as clearly as I can: I never will. For God’s sake, it’s dumb. It’s shameful. It’s dangerous. It’s un-American.”
On Tuesday, Biden spent a significant portion of his speech on Ukraine aid going after Trump for the remark, which he said undercut longstanding US values.
“When America gives its word, it means something. When we make a commitment, we keep it and NATO is a sacred commitment,” Biden said.
“Donald Trump looks at this as if it’s a burden,” he added.
He said Trump viewed the defense alliance as a “protection racket” and didn’t understand its role in protecting freedom and security.
“For Trump, principles never matter. Everything is transactional,” Biden said.
He said American adversaries “all cheered” when they heard Trump’s comments. “I will not walk away. I can’t imagine any other president walking away,” Biden said.
“You didn’t pay, you’re delinquent?’ No, I would not protect you. In fact, I would encourage them to do whatever the hell they want. You got to pay. You got to pay your bills.”
Trump continues to show that he is manifestly unfit for the presidency, boasting again over the weekend that he is going to unleash his own Nazi-like Gestapo force on “day one” of his presidency (what some have described as “Trump’s Kristallnacht”) in 2025 to invade “blue” parts of the country to forcibly detain and deport hundreds of thousands of black and brown undocumented residents. To accomplish such a goal will require gross violations of the law, the Constitution, and civil and human rights. The Trump regime’s reign of terror will also be an act of massive violence and civil disorder – which Dictator Trump and his agents likely desire as a pretext to invoke martial law.
By the conventional wisdom any of these (and the many other) examples of such perfidy and betrayals of American democracy, and the country’s interests and well-being more generally should disqualify Trump from public office. In total, all of them should have resulted in Trump being exiled from American public life.
Meanwhile, the American economy is extremely robust because of the Biden administration’s stewardship and leadership. The stock market is at historic highs. The labor market is strong. By political measures, such as the Democratic Party’s wins in midterm elections as well as on the state and local level, Biden should be trouncing Trump. Instead, high-quality public opinion polls consistently find Trump and Biden in a virtual tie.
The Trumpocene has broken these old norms and expectations. Of course, so-called conventional wisdom ceased to apply more than seven years ago with Trump’s victory in 2016. The American mainstream news media and political class have mostly refused to adapt to this new world and the end of normal politics.
In an attempt to gain some clarity about this increasingly bewildering “longest election ever,” what the early public opinion polls mean and how many political observers are deeply concerned that the 2024 election is increasingly feeling like a repeat of the disastrous 2016 election, I recently asked a range of experts for their thoughts and suggestions.
Cheri Jacobus is a political strategist, writer, ex-Republican, and host of the podcast “Politics With Cheri Jacobus.”
We are in for a roller coaster ride between now and November. That we are still in this uncharted territory regarding Trump is frightening, and an indication that our institutions are weaker than we suspected in even our darkest moments. The Pollyannas among us should be summarily silenced at this late stage in the game.
Attorney General Merrick Garland has let us down, allowing Trump and the worst of his crew to skate, placing us in this untenable position where Trump is to be the GOP nominee for president. Our “trust” in a Trump-corrupted Supreme Court indicates we still don’t want to accept that our highest court has been co-opted and corrupted, as Clarence Thomas is still there while his wife escapes justice as Garland looks the other way. Our media still enables Trump for clicks and ratings, and those getting rich and/or TV famous in that cottage industry that “fighting” Trump has built, are very much OK with it all; Trump is still good for business.
The good news is that Joe Biden’s team, while in an uphill struggle against these forces they should never have to face, are inching ahead. He defies conventional wisdom fairly regularly, most recently in South Carolina where he outpaced polling by 30+ points, winning 98% instead of coming in with 60-something percent the polling predicted.
I still believe there are more persuadable voters out there than conventional wisdom suggests. We saw some anecdotal evidence of this in New Hampshire where some GOP primary voters indicated if Nikki Haley were not the GOP nominee, they would vote for President Biden, or simply not vote for president at all in November. But Donald Trump is not an option — they are done with him.
Every traditional method and manner of building a Biden win, predicting a Biden win is heavily in his favor, including and especially his stellar record of results, but the persistent knocking down of the guardrails of any and all protections of our democracy continues. I fear we are becoming numb and even accustomed to this, rather than properly alarmed. I fear Vladimir Putin long ago identified the cracks, fissures, and weakness in our various institutions that comprise those guardrails, and is consistently several steps ahead of us while we are repeatedly whiplashed. Media. Supreme Court, Federal bench. Post office. Twitter. Ukraine (that 2016 RNC platform language forced by Trump/Putin team). Putin-friendly Mike Johnson as Speaker. So many things that in retrospect truly seem like connected dots, and should make us concerned that we are not willing or able to connect the dots in advance and get ahead of this.
Are we, as a country, still in denial? We are the frog being boiled slowly.
David Pepper is a lawyer, writer, political activist, and former elected official. His new book is “Saving Democracy: A User’s Manual for Every American”.
I’ve always believed it would be Trump versus Biden. And that’s what it will clearly be.
It won’t only be the longest election of all time, but viewed differently—it’s the longest attempted insurrection of all time. At the outset, the clear motivation for Trump to run again was to avoid the accountability he would otherwise face for his actions around January 6, and other alleged cases and crimes. Running has helped him pay the legal bills to defend it all. Winning, he thinks, gets him immunity and the pardon power. He doesn’t even hide lately that that’s what he craves. And now an entire party is all-in on that cause, including potential vice presidential choices, making clear they would have done the opposite of Mike Pence on January 6.
The most consistent data point has been the overperformance of Democrats since the middle of 2022, largely due to a more energized turnout and the far-right careening into extremism. From Kansas in August ’22 (the special election over abortion access), to November 2022 (not just federal races, but Democrats flipping several statehouses and election deniers losing Secretary of State and Governor races in numerous states), to the big victories in Ohio in August and November 2023, to the Virginia Statehouse in 2023, Democrats have built up a winning streak all across the country, and at multiple levels. Heck, even Moms of Liberty candidates losing 70% of their races in 2023 was a part of this trend. Remember, these are the years where Democrats are supposed to be losing—because they are in the White House. Those statehouse slips defied a half-century of precedent. These aren’t just polls; they are actual outcomes. And the consistency of these results tells us something is happening beneath the surface that is largely being lost as we ogle a faux-GOP primary and polls that are all over the map.
I don’t think anyone knows what will happen. This is indeed an unprecedented time—a battle royale for democracy at all levels. No one who cares about democracy should take it—or anything—for granted. They should count on Trump and anti-democracy forces in states to have studied where they fell short in 2020 and 2022, learning from it, and yes, doing anything to win beyond even what they’ve done before.
But they should also take note of the winning streak I described above. It is real, and it defies history. And it’s a result of tireless work by grassroots activists and candidates at all levels, and a realization by a broad swath of voters that the current far right is too extreme for America and their community. Similar, tireless work and effective messaging will be needed to protect democracy in 2024.
Mark Jacob, former Chicago Tribune metro editor and current author of the Stop the Presses newsletter at stopthepresses.news.
Most people who will vote in November are not paying that much attention to politics right now. It’s time for people who care – and who know that the risk of us losing democracy are real – to get active, support candidates, get on volunteer lists, and hone their arguments for when they will matter most this fall.
I’d advise everyone to protect their mental health by ignoring the polls. I think it’s going to be a close election, probably closer than in 2020. My best guess now is that Trump will go down again, but there’s no cause for overconfidence.
We should be worried about what will happen and if this could be a repeat of 2016 — and we should use that worry as motivation.
Hundreds of things that could affect the presidential race will happen before Election Day. There’s no predicting those. The overriding message that Americans of good will need to keep focusing on is that one candidate believes in democratic principles and the other one threatens to tear down our system to feed his cult of personality. Our children’s and grandchildren’s lives will be greatly affected by the actions we take this year.
Rick Wilson is a co-founder of The Lincoln Project, a former leading Republican strategist, and author of two books, “Everything Trump Touches Dies” and “Running Against the Devil: A Plot to Save America from Trump – and Democrats from Themselves”.
I’d rather be in President Biden’s position than Trump’s. President Biden is climbing in the polls, the economy is doing well, Biden has passed some of the most consequential legislation in history, and Trump is – of course – facing prison over 91 criminal counts. Democrats need to celebrate the successes of Biden’s term and stop the bed-wetting.
This will be a long election simply because we know who the candidates are in February. Trump’s congressional cult members are going to screw with the budget process and the border in order to help Trump’s chances.
We have months and months of attacks and recriminations to come from a desperate Trump and his MAGA hordes who know the only way they can win is to make this election about something – anything – other than Biden’s success as president. Democrats need to buckle up and stay engaged and not get frustrated. President Biden will win this election if everyone comes out to vote and gets their friends and family to do the same.
The economic indicators show the excellent job President Biden has done to turn the nation around after Trump absolutely destroyed the economy with his mishandling of COVID. We consistently see solid job numbers month over month, oil production is at the highest it’s ever been by any nation in history, and manufacturing is opening up across the country due to the CHIPS Act. These are the numbers that matter to voters when it comes time to vote.
Trump’s trials are all signal – from now through the election they will remain a constant reminder of his culpability in the January 6 attack on the Capitol.
The age issue is nothing but noise by prognosticators who are trying to obtain cable news contracts. The reality is that Trump is showing signs of impairment with his erratic behavior and inability to remember details. The ultimate decision point is how they each handled the job. Every single indicator shows that President Biden has been one of the most successful presidents in history.
Let’s make no mistake, this will be a close election and will come down to several key swing states. But again, I’d rather be Biden than Trump. The economy is going in the right direction and people are starting to be appropriately terrified of what a second Trump term could look like. No matter the outcome, Trump is an unpopular figure who will not win the majority of the vote nationwide.
It’s up to Biden and the Democrats to show the distinction between the two: Another Biden term that continues building on its economic and foreign success, or a rage-filled Trump administration that will rip away individual rights, punish people who disagree and empower our enemies by wrecking America’s standing in the world.
Credit…Patrick T. Fallon/Agence France-Presse — Getty Images
It is unclear whether Donald Trump has forgotten the precise nature of NATO or whether he ever fully grasped it in the first place.
What is clear, however, is that Trump — who ostensibly spent four years as president of the United States — has little clue about what NATO is or what NATO does. And when he spoke on the subject at a rally in South Carolina over the weekend, what he said was less a cogent discussion of foreign policy than it was gibberish — the kind of outrageous nonsense that flows without interruption from an empty and unreflective mind.
“One of the presidents of a big country stood up and said, ‘Well, sir, if we don’t pay, and we’re attacked by Russia, will you protect us?’” Trump said, recalling an implausible conversation with an unnamed, presumably European head of state. “‘You didn’t pay? You’re delinquent?’” Trump recounted responding. “‘No, I would not protect you. In fact, I would encourage them to do whatever the hell they want. You gotta pay. You gotta pay your bills.’”
The former president’s message was clear: If NATO members do not pay up, then he will leave them to the mercy of a continental aggressor who has already plunged one European country into death, destruction and devastation.
Except NATO isn’t a mafia protection racket. NATO, in case anyone needs to be reminded, is a mutual defense organization, formed by treaty in 1949 as tensions between the United States and the Soviet Union hardened into conflict. “The parties agree that an armed attack against one or more of them in Europe or North America shall be considered an attack against them all,” states Article 5 of the North Atlantic Treaty.
According to the terms of an agreement reached last year, member states will work to spend at least 2 percent of national G.D.P. on military investment.
But let’s set this bit of fact-checking aside for a moment and look at the big picture.
It is not just that Trump is ignorant on this and other vital questions; it is that he is incoherent.
Consider his remarks at a recent gathering of the National Rifle Association in Harrisburg, Pa. “We have to win in November, or we’re not going to have Pennsylvania. They’ll change the name. They’re going to change the name of Pennsylvania,” Trump said.
Who, exactly, is going to change the name of Pennsylvania? And to what? I don’t know. I doubt Trump does either.
Or consider the time, last November, when Trump confused China and North Korea, telling an audience of supporters in Florida that “Kim Jong Un leads 1.4 billion people, and there is no doubt about who the boss is. And they want me to say he’s not an intelligent man.”
There was also the time that Trump mistook Nikki Haley, his former ambassador to the United Nations, for Nancy Pelosi, the former speaker of the House.
“Nikki Haley, you know they, do you know they destroyed all of the information, all of the evidence, everything, deleted and destroyed all of it. All of it, because of lots of things like Nikki Haley is in charge of security. We offered her 10,000 people, soldiers, National Guard, whatever they want. They turned it down. They don’t want to talk about that. These are very dishonest people,” Trump said, repeating his false claim that Pelosi was responsible for the failure of Capitol security on Jan. 6.
If you would like, you can also try to make sense of the former president’s recent attempt to describe a missile defense system:
“I will build an Iron Dome over our country, a state-of-the-art missile defense shield made in the U.S.A.,” Trump said, before taking an unusual detour. “These are not muscle guys here, they’re muscle guys up here, right,” he continued, gesturing to his arms and his head to emphasize, I guess, that the people responsible for building such systems are capable and intelligent.
“And they calmly walk to us, and ding, ding, ding, ding, ding, ding. They’ve only got 17 seconds to figure this whole thing out. Boom. OK. Missile launch. Whoosh. Boom,” he added.
I assume Trump is describing the pressure of actually manning a missile defense system. Even so, one would think that a former president — currently vying to be the next president — would at least try to be a little more articulate.
But this gets to one of the oddest things about this election cycle so far. There is no shortage of coverage of President Biden’s age, even if there’s no evidence that his age has been an obstacle to his ability to perform his duties. Indeed, it is plainly true that Biden has been an unusually successful president in areas, like legislative negotiations, that require skill and mental acuity.
Coverage of Biden’s age, in other words, has more to do with the vibes of an “elderly” president — he isn’t as outwardly vigorous and robust as we would like — than it does with any particular issue with his performance.
In contrast to the obsessive coverage of Biden’s age, there is comparatively little coverage of Trump’s obvious deficiencies in that department. If we are going to use public comments as the measure of mental fitness, then the former president is clearly at a disadvantage.
Unfortunately for Biden, Trump benefits from something akin to the soft bigotry of low expectations. Because no one expected Trump, in the 2016 election, to speak and behave like a normal candidate, he was held to a lower effective standard than his rivals in both parties. Because no one expected him, during his presidency, to be orderly and responsible, his endless scandals were framed as business as usual. And because no one now expects him to be a responsible political figure with a coherent vision for the country, it’s as if no one blinks an eye when he rants and raves on the campaign trail.
It’s not that there aren’t legitimate reasons to be concerned about Biden’s age. He is already the oldest person to serve in the Oval Office. The issue here is one of proportion and consequence. Biden may be unable to do the job at some point in the future; Trump, it seems to me, already is.
One of those is a lot more concerning than the other.
Jamelle Bouie became a New York Times Opinion columnist in 2019. Before that he was the chief political correspondent for Slate magazine. He is based in Charlottesville, Va., and Washington.
