Categories Uncategorized

Senate strikes deal on how to advance spending agreement, breaking Title 42 logjam

The Senate on Thursday struck a deal to advance to final passage the $1.7 trillion omnibus spending package that will fund the government through the end of fiscal year 2023.

Senate Majority Leader Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.) announced the deal Thursday morning.

Senators will vote on 15 amendments, including a vote on one to end Title 42 that had stood in the way of members reaching an accord that would get them out of town for Christmas, before voting on final passage.

The Title 42 amendment, which would end the Trump-era policy that allows migrants to be expelled from the U.S., will be held require 51 votes to pass. 

“It’s taken a while but it’s worth it,” Schumer said, pleading with senators to be at their desks for the duration of votes that could take hours. 

Lawmakers have been itching to get out of Washington due to the winter storm hitting much of the country ahead of Christmas.

DEVELOPING.

Source: TEST FEED1

Schumer breaks Title 42 spending bill logjam with Sinema's help

Senate Majority Leader Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.) announced Thursday morning that he’s reached an agreement with colleagues on amendments to the 4,155-page omnibus so the Senate can pass the bill later in the day and give the House a chance to act Friday.   

And it looks like his savior may be independent Sen. Kyrsten Sinema (Ariz.), who on Thursday introduced an amendment to increase border funding and resources for border communities and extend the Title 42 health policy that expedites the deportation of migrants seeking asylum in the United States.  

Sinema’s amendment could give political cover to centrist Democrats to vote against a proposal sponsored by Sen. Mike Lee (R-Utah) to cut funding for Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas’s office unless the Biden administration reinstates the Trump-era Title 42 policy. 

Democrats say Lee’s amendment would sink the omnibus in the House if it passes the Senate. 

Schumer said on the floor that senators and staff had worked until 2 a.m. to work out a deal on amendments but failed to reach one.  

Then just before 10 a.m. Schumer announced a deal with Republicans to vote on a block of 17 amendments, giving the Senate a chance to pass the $1.7 trillion omnibus later in the day.  

That would give the House a chance to vote Friday to send the legislation to President Biden’s desk.  

“We have an agreement now. We will vote on all of the amendments in order and then vote on final passage. It’s taken a while,  but it is worth it and I appreciate the cooperation of everyone here,” Schumer announced on the floor.  

The block of amendments he announced includes Lee’s proposal and Sinema’s side-by-side amendment, which is cosponsored by Sen. Jon Tester (D-Mont.).  

He voiced optimism, however, that the stalemate could be resolved before lunchtime.  

“We are getting ever closer to reaching an agreement but we are still not there,” he informed colleagues shortly after the Senate opened for business at 8 a.m. Thursday. “I hope that we will lock in an agreement sometime later this morning.” 

The massive spending bill stalled Wednesday evening when Lee insisted on getting a vote on his amendment. Republicans argue Title 42 is holding back a deluge of migrants from Venezuela and other countries at the U.S.-Mexico border.   

The Supreme Court has temporarily blocked the Biden administration attempt to end Title 42.  

Democrats suffered a setback Thursday when the parliamentarian ruled that Lee’s amendment is germane to the year-end spending bill, which means it could be attached with only 51 votes or a simple majority.  

Republicans think that Sinema and centrist Democrats up for re-election, such as Tester and Joe Manchin (D-W.Va.) will be under heavy pressure to vote for Lee’s amendment, which could give it the simple majority it needs to pass.    

But with Sinema’s side-by-side amendment, she, Tester, Manchin and other centrist Democrats, such as Sen. Mark Kelly (D-Ariz.) can vote for it instead of the Lee proposal and fend off Republican attacks that they don’t take the situation at the border seriously. 

Her amendment would need to be allowed a simple-majority vote threshold to have a chance of passing. If the parliamentarian rules it needs 60 votes to be attached to the omnibus, it will likely fall away.  

Sinema’s proposal would boost border security funding, increase resources for border communities and extend Title 41 until what she calls “a proper plan” to address the flood of migrants is in place.  

“This year’s historic levels of border crossings at our Southern border makes clear the status quo is not working. Our amendment boosts funding for border security, increases resources for border communities and extends Title 42 until a proper plan to manage the crisis at our border is in place,” Sinema said in statement.  

Updated at 10:15 a.m.

Source: TEST FEED1

How Trump paid $0 in income tax in 2020

Donald Trump paid no income tax during his last year as president, according to his tax returns, which were released to a congressional committee and are set to be made public within a few days.

Despite pulling in nearly $11 million in interest from investments in addition to his nearly $400,000 salary, Trump did not pay income taxes because he also reported a $16 million loss from his real estate businesses. That loss put the former president almost $5 million in the red for 2020.

That means he didn’t have any taxable income and he didn’t pay anything in income tax.

This pattern of high investment returns offset by high business losses continues throughout the tax returns that the House Ways and Means Committee obtained and released as part of larger reports on the IRS’s presidential audit system this week.

In 2019, Trump reported about $20 million in income from investments, offset by $16 million in real estate losses.

His investment gains were offset by $11 million in business losses in 2018, by $16 million in losses in 2017 and by more than $76 million in losses in 2015.

All these losses originate in one large loss of more than $105 million reported by the Joint Committee on Taxation in 2015, which was itself part of a $700 million loss going back to 2009.

By spacing out this mega-loss, tax experts say that Trump was able to reduce his tax liability year by year, making sure he never got an outsize bill from the IRS.

“Trump paid nothing in taxes for years and years. How does he do that? Through losses. By using losses as a sheltering device,” Steve Rosenthal, a tax analyst with the Urban-Brookings Tax Policy Center who has testified to Congress about Trump’s taxes, said in an interview.

Other tax experts said it was incorrect to describe Trump as having used tax shelters, arguing that he had suffered real losses.

“His old losses are not ‘tax shelters.’ They were losses that he incurred that are being rolled over year to year. If he never incurred the losses, he would not be able to take them,” Steve Goldburd, a tax attorney and partner at the Goldburd McCone law firm in New York, said in an interview.

Goldburd pointed out that while Trump didn’t pay income tax in 2020, the former president has been making payments of his estimated taxes while rolling over portions of his refunds from previous years.

“He is continually paying in estimated taxes,” Goldburd said. “Three million [dollars] in 2020 plus a $10.6 million rollover for 2019. In 2019, it was $700,000 plus a $9.8 million rollover from the previous year.”

Goldburd said that losses in the real estate world faced by building owners such as Trump might not even be due to the fact that the buildings are losing money but rather due to maintenance costs that can be written off as depreciation.

“As a real estate professional, [Trump] is entitled to take these losses,” he said. “These losses can be from actual losses, but more likely from real estate depreciation expenses. These entities may not actually be losing money, but in fact have the depreciation that’s wiping out the partnership’s income.”

Trump is not being accused of breaking laws by using his business losses to protect his income from tax liability.

But Trump’s approach to paying taxes, which he has likened to playing a sport, along with the accounting practices that exempt him from the tax burdens faced by most Americans, are raising broader questions about the tax code.

“These are issues much bigger than Donald Trump. Trump’s returns likely look similar to those of many other wealthy tax cheats—hundreds of partnership interests, highly-questionable deductions, and debts that can be shifted around to wipe out tax liabilities,” Senate Finance Committee Chairman Ron Wyden (D-Ore.) said in a statement Wednesday.

“We need legislation to simplify the tax code, particularly in the area of partnerships,” he said. “Putting an end to the games wealthy tax cheats play with their partnerships is going to be a priority going forward.”

Wyden has legislation that he says will close loopholes related to partnerships to help simplify the tax code, but insiders warn about the institutional forces in Washington that could mobilize to block initiatives like this one.

“Every loophole has a constituency,” said Rosenthal. “So often, there’s nobody standing for the public’s interest. There’s just a whole bunch of constituent interests, and those can be bought off pretty easily.”

Source: TEST FEED1

Zelensky helps Pelosi exit House in historic fashion

Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) is ending her long leadership tenure with an historic flourish, wrapping up two decades at the top of the party with a string of major victories — political, legislative and diplomatic — that are putting a remarkable cap on a landmark era.

This week alone, House Democrats have released the tax records of former President Trump following a years-long legal battle.

They wrapped up their marathon investigation into last year’s Capitol attack, complete with criminal referrals for Trump.

And they’re poised to pass a massive, $1.7 trillion federal spending bill packed full of Democratic priorities, including legislation designed to ensure the peaceful transfer of power between presidents — a push that came in direct response to the rampage of Jan. 6, 2021.

Those were just the expected developments. 

Congress on Wednesday also played host to a history-making address by Ukraine’s president, Volodymyr Zelensky, after his surprise visit to Washington — a stunning demonstration designed to shore up U.S. support for Kyiv amid Russia’s long-running invasion.

Any one of those items, on its own, would have been a significant triumph in a brief lame-duck session following midterm elections that will put Republicans in charge of the lower chamber next year.

The combination is something else entirely, constituting an extraordinary — and highly consequential — string of wins for Pelosi and the Democrats just weeks before she steps out of power after 20 years and passes the torch to a younger generation of party leaders.

“The 117th Congress has been one of the most consequential in recent history,” she wrote to fellow Democrats this week, taking a victory lap. She added that the lame-duck agenda has them leaving on “a strong note.”

Zelensky’s visit, in particular, carried outsize significance. 

The Ukrainian president has, since the Russian invasion began in February, emerged as the global symbol of democratic defiance in the face of the violent authoritarianism of Russian President Vladimir Putin.

And having him on hand in the Capitol —  itself the target of an anti-democratic mob last year — gave a big boost to the warnings from Democrats that America’s election systems and other democratic institutions are under attack, not least from Trump’s false claims that the 2020 election was “stolen.”

Pelosi, who had staged a surprise trip to Ukraine earlier in the year, found a special importance in Zelensky’s visit, noting that her father, Thomas D’Alesandro, Jr., was a House member in 1941 when Winston Churchill addressed Congress to urge America’s support in the fight against the tyrannical forces of Nazi Germany. 

“Eighty-one years later this week, it is particularly poignant for me to be present when another heroic leader addresses the Congress in a time of war – and with Democracy itself on the line,” Pelosi said in announcing Zelensky’s visit this week. 

Zelensky’s presence also gave a boost to the Biden administration’s efforts to provide Ukraine with assistance — military, economic and humanitarian — in the face of opposition from conservatives on Capitol Hill who want to cut off the spigot of U.S. aid when Republicans take over the House next year. 

Hours before Zelensky’s speech, Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-Ga.), a conservative firebrand, said U.S. taxpayers are being “raped” by lawmakers who provide billions of dollars in foreign aid.

“Of course the shadow president has to come to Congress and explain why he needs billions of American’s taxpayer dollars for the 51st state, Ukraine,” she tweeted, referring to Zelensky. “This is absurd. Put America First!!!”

Democrats, joined by many Republicans, have countered with promises to continue providing Kyiv with the support it needs to win the conflict. House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (D-Md.) said Wednesday that it’s meaningless to praise the Ukrainian’s courage without backing those words with funding. 

“Some of you asked me, ‘Well, how much would we do?’ And my response has been, ‘As much as we need to do.’ That’s my limit,” Hoyer told reporters. “This is a fight for freedom — [a] fight for a world order of law and justice.” 

The issue of Ukraine aid could prove to be a headache for Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.), who’s vying to become Speaker next year and needs the support of conservatives — including those opposed to more Kyiv funding — to achieve that goal. 

Despite the hurdles, Pelosi said she’s confident that Congress will come together to support Kyiv next year, even with a GOP-controlled House. 

“I think there’s very strong bipartisan support respecting the courage of the people of Ukraine to fight for their democracy,” she told reporters earlier in the month. 

Pelosi, of course, had solidified her place in the country’s history books long before this Congress — when Democrats adopted massive bills to fund infrastructure, battle COVID-19 and tackle climate change — and the lame-duck session, when that list of policy wins is growing longer still. 

As a back-bencher in 1991, Pelosi had visited Tiananmen Square, launching her image as a pro-democracy activist, both in Congress and on the world stage. And her profile rose again in 2002, with her firm opposition to the Iraq War. 

Years later, in 2007, she became the first Speaker in U.S. history, a feat she repeated again in 2019. She was Speaker during the Great Recession; ushered in the Dodd-Frank law designed to curb the worst abuses of Wall Street; and battled Trump head-on, launching two impeachments of the 45th president and creating the special committee to investigate the Jan. 6 attack on the Capitol.

That panel reached the end of its investigation this week, issuing a summary of its findings on Monday that included recommendations that the Justice Department further investigate Trump for four separate federal crimes, including inciting an insurrection. The final report is expected to be released on Thursday. 

“Our Founders made clear that, in the United States of America, no one is above the law,” Pelosi said in response. “This bedrock principle remains unequivocally true, and justice must be done.”

Perhaps recognizing that her leadership days were numbered, Pelosi also went out of her way this year to boost her legacy by visiting some particularly volatile spots around the globe. That list included Ukraine, amid the war with Russia; Taiwan, in the face of retaliatory threats from China; and most recently Armenia, where she took clear sides in a long-standing conflict with Azerbaijan.

Yet in Pelosi’s own view, her legacy will be defined by a law she helped to enact long before Russia invaded Ukraine or Trump entered the political stage: The Affordable Care Act, or ObamaCare, is how she wants to be remembered.

“Nothing in any of the years that I was there compares to the Affordable Care Act, expanding health care to tens of millions more Americans,” she told reporters last week. “That for me was the highlight.”

Source: TEST FEED1

Mike Lee, Title 42 drama holds up omnibus passage

An effort led by Sen. Mike Lee (R-Utah) to maintain Title 42 is threatening efforts to pass a sweeping government funding bill before a shutdown deadline later this week.

Congressional negotiators on both sides say the biggest holdup is ongoing negotiations to decide what the voting threshold would be to pass the amendment.

Lee’s amendment to the bipartisan deal would cut funding for Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas’s office unless the Biden administration reinstates the border control policy known as Title 42, a Trump-era policy that allows for migrants to be quickly expelled at the border without asylum processing.

The administration may not be able to fully reinstate the policy, as its permanence is currently under review by the Supreme Court, after having been found illegal by a federal judge.

Sen. Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), chair of the Senate Appropriations Homeland Security Subcommittee, took aim at the push, while raising concerns about its chances of passing a Democratic-led House.  

“We have a difference of opinion on immigration policy. We’re not going to solve that in this budget,” he told reporters late Wednesday. “And to let that disagreement take down aid to Ukraine to keep people alive during a cold winter, especially tonight, is pretty unthinkable.”

The hold-up scuttled tentative hopes the Senate would be able to vote on the government funding bill overnight, though late Wednesday Senate Minority Whip John Thune (R-S.D.) said he thought the chamber may be able to move forward on the bill Thursday morning.

“There’s been some progress made. … I wouldn’t say breakthrough yet,” he said.

Title 42 was due to end Wednesday, but a group of GOP-led states successfully got Chief Justice John Roberts to delay that sunset on Monday.

On Tuesday, the Biden administration, which had appealed the federal judge’s order to end Title 42, asked Roberts to go ahead with ending the policy, which was based on an expired public health order issued by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC).

Title 42 was originally put in place in 2020 by the Trump administration under the guise of pandemic public health protections, but subsequent reports have revealed that the CDC was pressured politically to issue the public health order by then-White House advisor Stephen Miller.

Under the policy, many migrants who arrive at the border can be summarily expelled without being screened for asylum claims.

U.S. officials have carried out around 2.5 million expulsions under the policy, nearly two million of which have been carried out by the Biden administration.

While Title 42 allowed for speedy expulsions, the regular border protocol known as Title 8 allows for expedited removals of certain migrants, and also allows for border officials to refer migrants for criminal prosecution for repeat illegal entries.

The Biden administration had staunchly implemented and defended Title 42 until Tuesday, when it asked Roberts to lift his stay, but Republicans have nonetheless consistently used the policy to attack the administration.

A Senate Democratic aide said conversations are still ongoing with Republicans, while claiming Lee’s “goal is to kill” the omnibus amid speculation such an amendment couldn’t pass the House.

Lee’s latest push comes as Republicans have once again pulled attention to the border, and as Lee and a group of Senate Republicans look to sidetrack the long term budget deal.

GOP backers behind the push say the delay is necessary to allow the incoming GOP-led House more sway in government funding talks. However, there are many Republicans in the Senate who are pushing instead for Congress to pass an omnibus before year’s end, citing concerns about funding for areas like defense. 

Updated at 10:58 p.m.

Source: TEST FEED1

Zelensky address meets divided House GOP preparing to grab purse strings

House Republicans offered mixed reactions to Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky’s address to a joint meeting of Congress, foreshadowing a bumpier road that his country will face in securing future U.S. aid once the GOP takes control of the House in a few weeks.

Republican supporters of aiding Ukraine’s efforts against Russia praised Zelensky’s speech. Rep. Brian Fitzpatrick (R-Pa.) said that Zelensky had “overwhelming support” in the chamber and will “continue to have that.” 

Rep. Michael McCaul (R-Texas), who is set to chair the House Foreign Relations Committee next year, expressed hope that the speech would help push a more aggressive focus from the U.S. on military assistance to Ukraine.

“Every time we get them what they need, they win. But this administration is so concerned about being provocative,” said McCaul. “We are not doing what we need to do to have them win this thing more quickly. The longer this thing drags out, the more difficult it’s going to be, and we’re not giving them what they need.”

But critics of Ukraine aid showed little openness to being open to changing their minds because of the speech.

Walking into the address, Rep. Warren Davidson (R-Ohio) said that he did not think Zelensky should be speaking from the House floor.

“We should be focused on trying to contain the war, not expand the war. And this kind of sends the message we’re kind of OK with expanding the war. And I think we should be sending a different message,” Davidson said.

He followed up with a quip about Zelensky’s more casual-looking olive green military garb: “He’s dressed more for the auditorium, so he should be talking to us down there.”

Reps. Lauren Boebert (R-Colo.), Matt Gaetz (R-Fla.), and Jim Jordan (R-Ohio) sat out most standing ovations during the speech (though Boebert stood while Zelensky entered the chamber). Boebert said in a video after the speech that she would not support any more money to Ukraine until there is a “full audit” of where already approved funds have gone.

House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.), who has said that House Republicans will not send a “blank check” to Ukraine in the next Congress, carefully navigated the optics of Zelensky’s visit. Many of the right-wing House GOP critics of aid to Ukraine are also withholding support for his Speakership.

McCarthy attended a meeting with Zelensky and other top congressional leaders — Senate Majority Leader Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.), Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) — ahead of the speech and was part of the Escort Committee bringing the president into the chamber. He joined in standing ovations. But he was not present for another media-centric moment with the other three congressional leaders walking into the Capitol rotunda.

Standing in front of some of his fiercest supporters as well as his admirers, Zelensky made a direct argument in favor of aid to his country.

“Your money is not charity. It’s an investment in the global security and democracy that we handle in the most responsible way,” Zelensky said.

But he likely had little chance of swaying the fiercest GOP opponents to aid.

Rep. Thomas Massie (R-Ky.) tweeted that he was not in Washington, D.C., and would not attend the speech of a “Ukrainian lobbyist.” Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-Ga.), who did not attend the address, tweeted earlier in the day that global foreign aid is like Americans being “raped everyday at the hands of their own elected leaders.”

According to the Hill pool, only 86 of 213 House Republicans attended the speech Wednesday evening. More than a third of House members had active letters to vote by proxy on Wednesday, with many worrying about weather disrupting travel just before Christmas.

GOP frustration about congressional negotiators rushing to pass an omnibus funding bill before a Friday government shutdown deadline also fueled sour reactions to Zelensky appearing before Congress. The package includes $45 billion in aid to Ukraine.

Rep. Chip Roy (R-Texas) said Zelensky’s speech was “more of the theater that has been orchestrated by the current outgoing Democrat leadership of the current Senate leadership in order to try to prop up a belief that $47 billion — again, with no debate at all — is just going to be magically created out of thin air and sent over to Ukraine.”

Republican skepticism of and resistance to Ukraine funding is layered. Some members oppose aid altogether based on an “America First” or anti-war philosophy. Others support more military aid but less economic and humanitarian aid, and still others believe the U.S.-Mexico border should be prioritized more.

But the House GOP is largely in agreement on probing where existing funds have gone. When the House Foreign Affairs Committee voted on a resolution from Greene to audit Ukraine funding earlier this month, every Republican voting on the panel supported it — though unified Democrats blocked the measure from advancing.

“The majority in both parties in both House and Senate support this effort, but they’re not going to if we don’t have accountability [and] transparency,” McCaul said. 

The outside group Heritage Action, the advocacy arm of the conservative think tank, was particularly influential in getting Republicans to vote against a $40 billion Ukraine aid package in May. It is also lobbying against the omnibus as well as the Ukraine measures outlined in it.

“While the situation in Ukraine is serious, the United States still lacks a coherent vision and strategy in the region. Spending an additional $47 billion in assistance – with only 62% of that assistance going to Ukraine military assistance – without adequate oversight and accountability for the aid is a misuse of taxpayer money,” Jessica Anderson, executive director of Heritage Action, said in a statement. “The next Congress must have an honest and transparent debate about the size and scope of U.S. assistance, and demand equal cooperation from all of Ukraine’s European neighbors.”

Supporters of Ukraine are confident that there will still be overwhelming support for aiding the country in the next Congress, despite the minority of vocal critics. But any future assistance packages could have to look different to get that support.

“I think the right path, moving forward, is to demand a hell of a lot more share of the humanitarian aid burden be burdened by European countries, while the United States continues to focus on the fight itself, the right rep weaponry, backfilling that weaponry,” said Rep. Dan Crenshaw (R-Texas). 

Al Weaver and Mychael Schnell contributed.

Source: TEST FEED1

Five biggest moments from Zelensky’s address to Congress

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky delivered a historic speech before a joint meeting of Congress on Wednesday night, pleading with the U.S. to continue its support of Ukraine in the face of Moscow’s attacks.

The address, which spanned roughly 23 minutes, marked the first time a foreign leader addressed Congress during wartime since Winston Churchill did so in 1941 during World War II. The trip to Washington was also the first known time Zelensky has left Ukraine since Russia invaded in late February.

Here are the five biggest moments from Zelensky’s speech:

A packed entrance

Zelensky entered a packed House chamber Wednesday night, with lawmakers from both parties and chambers, Cabinet officials, and the U.S. ambassador to Ukraine coming together to view the president’s historic speech.

The chamber erupted in a standing ovation, and Zelensky shook hands with a number of lawmakers while walking down the aisle toward the dais.

The applause continued well after Zelensky arrived at the microphone, stretching for roughly three minutes. At one point, when attendees were still clapping, Rep. Lauren Boebert (R-Colo.) — who has been critical of U.S. aid to Ukraine in the past — sat down.

Vice President Harris and Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.), both of whom wore blue suits while presiding over the chamber during the joint meeting, greeted Zelensky when he arrived at the dais and shook his hand.  It could be the last time two women preside over a joint meeting of Congress for a while — Pelosi set to step down from her post as Democratic leader at the end of the year.

Zelensky likens Ukraine’s war to U.S. fight for independence

Throughout his speech Zelensky pointed to moments in U.S. history as a way to call for united American support in fending off Russia’s assault, comparing the battles fought for U.S. independence to Ukraine’s fight for freedom.

“To ensure Bakhmut is not just a stronghold that holds back the Russian army but for the Russian army to completely pull out, more cannons and shells are needed,” Zelensky said. “Just like the Battle of Saratoga, the fight for Bakhmut will change the trajectory of our war for independence and for freedom.”

“If your patriots stop the rise in terror against our cities, it will let Ukrainian patriots work to the full to defend our freedom,” he added.

At another point in his speech, Zelensky cited the Battle of the Bulge when underscoring Russia’s aggression.

“The Russian tactic is primitive. They burn down and destroy everything they see. They sent thugs to the front lines. They sent convicts to the war. They threw everything against us, similar to the other tyranny, which is in the Battle of the Bulge,” he said.

“Just like the brave American soldiers which held their lines and fought back Hitler’s forces during the Christmas of 1944, brave Ukrainian soldiers are doing the same to Putin’s forces this Christmas,” he added.

It is not the first time Zelensky has cited historical events in American history to round up support for his country. During a virtual address to Congress in March, he pointed to the attack on Pearl Harbor and the 9/11 terrorist attacks.

Zelensky the comedian shines through

Zelensky, who before entering politics was a comedian and actor, showed moments of humor during Wednesday’s address, eliciting chuckles in the chamber.

“Your support is crucial. Not just to stand in such fight but to get to the turning point to win on the battlefield. We have artillery, yes. Thank you. We have it. Is it enough? Honestly, not really,” he said, evoking laughs.

At another point in his speech, Zelensky spoke to the abilities of Ukrainian soldiers when it comes to operating American weaponry.

“Ukraine never asked the American soldiers to fight on our land instead of us. I assure you that Ukrainian soldiers can perfectly operate American tanks and planes themselves,” he said, leading to laughs and claps in the chamber.

The speech comes as Congress is on the brink of sending Ukraine an additional $45 billion in assistance amid its ongoing conflict with Russia. The funding is included in the end-of-the-year spending measure that both chambers are considering this week.

Unity — but not completely

Signs of unity were seen and heard during Zelensky’s speech, with lawmakers of both parties and chambers coming together for a number of standing ovations throughout the address.

Some of the largest cheers of the night came when Zelensky said that “Ukraine holds its lines and will never surrender” and that his country “is alive and kicking.”

The chamber also erupted in a rush of applause when the president capped off his speech, wishing the crowd “merry Christmas and happy victorious new year.”

As Zelensky wrapped up his speech, shouts of “Slava Ukraini,” which means “Glory to Ukraine,” could he heard in the chamber.

And in a sign of bipartisanship, Rep. Liz Cheney (R-Wyo.) sat on the Democratic side of the chamber for Zelensky’s speech. She was seated next to Rep. Elaine Luria (D-Va.), who along with Cheney serves on the Jan. 6 select committee. Both lost reelection this year.

Lawmakers were not, however, unified for the entire evening. Boebert and Republican Reps. Matt Gaetz (Fla.), Jim Jordan (Ohio) and Tim Burchett (Tenn.) sat out a number of standing ovations, and House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) was not seen with Zelensky and other congressional leaders — Pelosi, Senate Majority Leader Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.) and Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) — when the group walked through the Capitol’s Statuary Hall.

Zelensky, Pelosi exchange flags

In one of the most powerful moments of the night, Zelensky and Pelosi exchanged flags of their respective countries.

Zelensky said he received the Ukrainian flag during a visit to Bakhmut on Tuesday, when he visited with troops. They asked that he deliver the flag to Congress.

“When I was in Bakhmut yesterday, our heroes gave me the flag. The battle flag. The flag of those who defend Ukraine, Europe and the world at the cost of their lives. They ask me to bring this flag to you, to the U.S. Congress, to members of the House of Representatives and senators whose decisions can save millions of people,” Zelensky said.

“So let these decisions be taken. Let this flag stay with you. Ladies and gentlemen, this flag is a symbol of our victory in this war. We stand, we fight and we will win because we are untied — Ukraine, America and the entire free world,” he added.

Zelensky then unfolded the Ukrainian flag — which had black handwriting on the yellow portion — and handed it to Pelosi, who was sitting on the dais. The two kissed on the cheek. Zelensky then handed the other side to Harris, and the two women held it up for the chamber to see.

Pelosi returned the favor shortly after, presenting Zelensky with a framed American flag that flew above the Capitol on Wednesday. Zelensky held it up over his head, and the chamber erupted in applause. He walked out of the chamber while displaying the flag.

Source: TEST FEED1

Five takeaways from Zelensky’s trip to Washington

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky delivered high political drama with his trip to Washington on Wednesday.

The visit, shrouded in secrecy until the last moment, was the first time Zelensky is known to have left his country since Russian President Vladimir Putin launched an invasion in February.

Zelensky arrived as the contours of the conflict are shifting. 

Russia has been using drones to barrage Ukraine’s infrastructure, leaving much of the population without power or heat as the savage winter looms.

Almost 5,000 miles from Kyiv, Republicans are poised to take narrow control of the House in January — with one wing of the party deeply skeptical of the current level of U.S. aid.

A $1.7 trillion government spending package currently before Congress includes $45 billion in new aid to Ukraine.

Here are some of the big takeaways from Zelensky’s trip.

Symbolism matters

Zelensky’s physical presence in Washington had a power of its own.

The Ukrainian leader and his allies in the Biden administration made the most of the moment, both creating and reveling in the spectacle. 

Biden greeted Zelensky on the White House’s South Lawn, walked him along the edges of the Rose Garden to the Oval Office and held a press conference alongside him.

Later, before his speech to Congress, Zelensky was shown the splendor of the Capitol by Senate Majority Leader Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.) and Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.).

His speech itself was punctuated by applause from members of both parties and reached its emotional crescendo as he presented a Ukrainian flag, apparently from the front lines in Donbas and signed by the troops, to the chamber.

Zelensky was dressed in his customary military-style clothing throughout.

Symbolism may not get bills passed or aid delivered on its own.

But the imagery of the day underscored U.S.-Ukraine solidarity in an immediate, emotive way.

Biden’s bottom line: “As long as it takes”

Some Republicans have become louder in making the case that U.S. assistance to Ukraine should not be a “blank check.”

Biden’s position is a far different. Washington is there, he insists, for “as long as it takes.” 

In the closing moments of Wednesday’s news conference, Biden sought to reassure Zelensky, telling him, “You don’t have to worry. We are staying with Ukraine as long as Ukraine is there.”

The White House sees the war in Ukraine as a struggle that simply cannot be lost, for fear that such an outcome would embolden Putin and expose American weakness to rivals and adversaries such as China and Iran.

The skeptics contend that the U.S. has no vital interests at stake in Ukraine, that the gush of money toward Kyiv is excessive and likely polluted by corruption, and that the war is a distraction from the plethora of problems at home that demand attention.

Those issues are going to play out in starker contest once the GOP takes over in the House.

But there’s no question over where Biden stands — even though he still refuses to entertain the notion of American boots on the ground inside Ukraine, directly engaging the Russians.

The visit put skeptics of more aid in a tough political spot

For all the noble rhetoric, there were elements of naked politics to the visit and its timing.

The White House obliquely acknowledged as much.

The night before Zelensky arrived, a senior administration official told reporters that the visit would be “an important injection of momentum.”

The momentum has the capacity to roll over critics, at least in the short term.

Those arguing against the $45 billion in aid as part of the spending deal, for example, are in an unenviable position. They are setting their faces against a wartime leader, internationally admired, who has shown unquestionable personal bravery. 

For one day at least, he became the center of the American political world and pleaded for help.

The doubters may gain political traction in the months ahead.

But Zelensky’s visit puts them on the defensive for now.

Zelensky made significant overtures to Republicans

The Ukrainian president walked a fine line, expressing gratitude to Biden but also not tying himself so closely to the president as to make U.S. support for the war look like a Democratic-only effort.

It isn’t. 

Many senior Republicans, including Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (Ky.) and the lead Republican on the House Foreign Affairs Committee, Michael McCaul (Texas), are strong advocates for continued American support for Ukraine.

Addressing lawmakers at the Capitol, Zelensky thanked those from both parties who had visited Kyiv and emphasized the need for “bipartisan” and “bicameral” support.

The overtures clearly weren’t going to win everyone over. 

GOP firebrand Rep. Lauren Boebert (Colo.) sat down as Zelensky received a standing ovation upon entering the House chamber for his speech. Some GOP lawmakers didn’t show up at all.

Rep. Thomas Massie (R-Ky.) tweeted that he was in Washington but would not be attending the address, deriding Zelensky as “the Ukrainian lobbyist.”

Still, Zelensky kept the door very wide open for other Republicans to remain supportive.

A vague outline of a peace plan

The question of how the war ends is self-evidently huge, given that Putin seems determined not to back down and the chances of an outright Ukrainian victory seem slim.

Zelensky’s speech to lawmakers offered a hint — but a rather vague one.

He said that Ukraine had “already offered proposals.” He did not say what they were, but he said he had discussed them with Biden, the president was supportive of them and they included 10 points for “our joint security.” There was also mention of a summit.

But if that was intriguing, it also seemed clear that peace was some distance away.

Asked at the earlier news conference with Biden about the idea of a “just peace,” the Ukrainian president expressed some perplexity, musing on what that phrase might mean for his compatriots who had lost family members to Russian aggression.

Source: TEST FEED1

Zelensky makes direct appeal to Americans in historic address

U.S. support can help hasten the end of Russia’s war in Ukraine, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky said in a historic speech to a joint meeting of Congress that served as a direct appeal to Americans providing billions in tax dollars to Kyiv. 

Zelensky spoke from behind the podium of the House chamber following a meeting with President Biden. He made the visit to Washington as Ukrainian forces remain engaged in battle against the Russian military and civilians are under assault of devastating missile strikes and drone attacks.

“I hope my words of respect and gratitude resonate in each American heart,” Zelensky said.

“Our two nations are allies in this battle, and next year will be a turning point. I know it — the point when Ukrainian courage and American resolve must guarantee the future of our common freedom,” he said.

The Ukrainian president’s visit came as Congress prepares to pass $45 billion in further military, economic and humanitarian assistance related to Ukraine so it may continue to defend itself against Russian President Vladimir Putin’s offensive. 

“Russia could stop its aggression, really, if it wanted to, but you can speed up our victory. I know it,” Zelensky said.

The Ukrainian president traveled to Washington within a day of visiting one of the Ukrainian Armed Forces frontline positions against Russia, in the eastern city of Bakhmut, which he said if kept if liberated from Russian forces “can change the trajectory of our war.”

“We have artillery, yes, thank you. We have it. Is it enough? Honestly, not really,” Zelensky said, and called for more cannons and shells to win the battle for the eastern city.

The Ukrainian president’s earlier meeting with Biden at the White House included an announcement on more than $2 billion in military and humanitarian support for Ukraine and that included advanced Patriot Missile Batteries.

Biden pledged at that meeting that the U.S. would support Ukraine for “as long as it takes” and to ensure that Ukraine “wins on the battlefield.” 

And the massive, $45 billion aid package reflects strong support from both parties and chambers of Congress. But it has faced criticisms from some Republicans who argue against big-dollar foreign assistance packages, and some polls reflect slipping American support for financing a nearly 10-month war that shows little sign of resolving.

Zelensky, speaking to such war fatigue, warned against the U.S. turning away from providing robust support for Kyiv and argued that investing in Ukraine’s military is protecting America’s security. 

“This battle cannot be frozen or postponed. It cannot be ignored, hoping that the ocean or something else will provide a protection,” the Ukrainian president said.

“From the United States to China, from Europe to Latin America, Africa to Australia, the world is too interconnected and interdependent to allow someone to stay aside and at the same time to feel safe when such a battle continues.” 

His speech drew resounding applause and standing ovations from both Democratic and Republican lawmakers present in the House chamber.

Zelensky acknowledged that many of them had traveled to Kyiv in the midst of Russia’s war on the country, including House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) who traveled there in May. 

Zelensky’s address comes shortly before Republicans take control of the lower chamber, where House Republican Leader Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.), who is campaigning for Speaker, has spoken to pushing for more oversight of Ukrainian aid, saying that he won’t sign a “blank check” for Kyiv.

Zelensky offered gratitude for the American military, economic and humanitarian support – which is set to amount to $110 billion for 2022 if Congress passes the additional, emergency aid package. 

And the Ukrainian president sought to speak to criticisms from Republicans that not enough oversight is being exercised on U.S. assistance to Ukraine.

“Your money is not charity, it’s an investment in the global security and democracy that we handle in the most responsible way,” the Ukrainian president said. 

Even as Zelensky spoke of ongoing military support to beat back Russia on the battlefield, he said he is pursuing peace, and appealed to Congress to be supportive across both sides of the aisle. 

“I’m glad to share that President Biden supported our peace initiative today,” Zelensky said, referring to a 10-point plan that, in part, calls for Russia’s retreat from Ukraine’s territory and that was presented at the G-20 summit last month.

“Each of you, ladies and gentlemen, can assist in the implementation that American leadership remains solid, bicameral, and bipartisan.” 

Source: TEST FEED1