Category: Headlines

Declaring a state eligible for an early primary slot and making it so are two different things, however. Complying with the new calendar is an easy hurdle for South Carolina and Nevada, as state party leadership sets the primary date in South Carolina and Nevada’s primary date complies with current state law. Michigan, too, must change its date, but Democrats are expected to move forward easily with a bill given that they now control the state legislature. All three states submitted letters to that effect to the DNC in recent days.

But it’s more complicated for New Hampshire and Georgia, where there are Republican-controlled state legislatures.

In a letter submitted Thursday morning, New Hampshire Democrats asked the DNC to “reconsider the requirements,” which they argue should reflect the reality of their situation: A state law requires them to hold their primary a week before any other state in the nation, and the Republican-controlled legislature and governor’s mansion will not budge on changing their date or their current voter access laws.

Right now, the DNC wants New Hampshire to hold its primary on the same day as Nevada, four days after the South Carolina primary. That would “run up against New Hampshire law,” state Democratic Party Chairman Ray Buckley said in an interview with POLITICO.

“To punish us for something we have nothing that we can do about only hurts ourselves.” Buckley said. “It’s my hope that after further consideration and discussion that they would look at creating a plan that not only lifts up Black voices … but also recognize New Hampshire’s state law.”

Meanwhile, New Hampshire Republicans rolled out new legislation Wednesday to fortify the state’s first-in-the-nation status, including a state constitutional amendment, because “our historic tradition has been under attack by those looking to maybe repurpose it for their own political gain,” said state Sen. Regina Birdsell, a New Hampshire Republican.

“We will respond aggressively to anyone that attempts, like the DNC, or anyone, who attempts to take that away from us,” Birdsell said.

New Hampshire Gov. Chris Sununu, a Republican, echoed that commitment, calling any effort to change it “dead on arrival.”

Should New Hampshire Democrats ultimately hold their primary on a date that’s not backed by the DNC, they could face an array of potential sanctions, including automatically losing half their delegates. Candidates who campaign in a state going outside the prescribed order could also face punishment. The DNC broadly empowered the national party chair last year to take any other “appropriate steps” to enforce the new early window.

“If they choose to create any level of sanctions, obviously, we will deal with any that relate to us specifically,” Buckley said.

Democrats face serious hurdles changing the primary date in Georgia, too. The Georgia Secretary of State’s office already ruled out the possibility of splitting the Democratic and Republican primaries into two dates, said Deputy Secretary of State Jordan Fuchs, citing the cost to taxpayers.

Any changes would also need “to be equitable to both political parties,” Fuchs added.

The Republican National Committee, for its part, voted to retain its current early-state lineup: Iowa, New Hampshire, South Carolina and then Nevada. Any state going outside of that order, according to the RNC’s rules, would also face sanctions.

“You have to talk to Republicans if you want to make this work,” said one Georgia operative involved in the calendar process. “Not a single Republican is saying, ‘I want to pick up this gauntlet.’”

Of the move to add Georgia, the operative noted, Democrats “laid no groundwork, no bipartisanship buy-in on it.” Instead, “they surprised everyone.”

The calendar approved in February may not necessarily hold beyond 2024. A number of DNC members privately noted that the review process is already in place to reconsider the 2028 lineup by 2026, meaning that “this is a calendar for 2024, but not necessarily for 2028,” said one Rules and Bylaws committee member.

“There will be a new RBC committee, new DNC leadership, and we hope that we can appeal to them,” Buckley said, when asked about 2024 setting a precedent for future cycles. “I certainly think that the multiple candidates that would be running, or consider running, in 2028 would make their voices clear, too.”

The move to send modern infantry fighting vehicles to Ukraine could pave the way to supplying the more powerful Western tanks, something U.S. and European allies have so far been reluctant to do, say experts and two U.S. officials.

Those could include Germany’s Leopard tanks or even the U.S. Army’s M1 Abrams, said experts and the officials, who spoke on condition of anonymity to talk about ongoing discussions.

Western tanks — as opposed to less powerful wheeled vehicles with smaller main guns — would be a game-changer for Kyiv, which already operates Soviet-era tanks from its own inventories and others provided after the invasion by European nations. A Leopard or Abrams is more mobile, accurate and has longer range compared with the old Soviet tanks. They are also more effective at protecting troops than the older tanks or even the Western infantry fighting vehicles as Ukraine continues to suffer large losses on the battlefield.

Indeed, while President Volodymyr Zelenskyy on Wednesday thanked France for the AMX-10, he urged other allies to provide tanks and other heavy weapons.

“There is no rational reason why Ukraine has not yet been supplied with Western tanks,” he said.

The 50 Bradleys are part of an overall aid package to be announced Friday worth $3.8 billion, according to a person familiar with the matter, who requested anonymity to speak ahead of an announcement. The package sets aside $2.25 billion for Ukraine, which will also include 155mm artillery shells. Another $682 million in military financing will go to Eastern European countries to allow them to buy American weaponry and military equipment. Ukraine will also receive $225 million in military financing.

The package will for the first time include radar-guided Sea Sparrow anti-air missiles, which can be launched from the sea or on land to intercept aircraft or cruise missiles. In a bit of battlefield innovation, the Ukrainian military has managed to tweak its existing Soviet-era BUK launchers to fire the Sea Sparrow, two people familiar with the matter said. Up to this point, Taiwan has been the only country to operate the ground-launched version of the missiles, while the U.S. and multiple allied navies use the ship-mounted version.

Bloomberg first reported that the administration was considering sending Bradleys. The vehicles are designed to work in tandem with the Abrams, providing a “complementary” capability, said retired Lt. Gen. Ben Hodges, a former commander of U.S. Army Europe.

“This is the next step by the administration to provide something that they have been reluctant to do in the past, so this hopefully signals recognition by the administration that the Russians really cannot escalate each time we provide a new capability,” Hodges said.

A Defense Department spokesperson declined to comment on the tank issue.

The Bradley alone would be a significant capability boost for Ukraine. The U.S. has already sent more than 2,000 combat vehicles, including hundreds of mine-resistant vehicles and Humvees that Kyiv has used to push through Russia’s defenses. But the U.S. Army’s gold standard infantry fighting vehicle, the Bradley, is a faster, better-protected update to the M113 armored personnel carrier.

In addition to the 25mm Bushmaster chain gun, it is also armed with two TOW antitank missiles and a 7.62 coaxial machine gun.

“The Brad (or [Infantry Fighting Vehicle]/[Cavalry Fighting Vehicle]) is NOT a tank, but it can be a tank killer,” tweeted retired Lt. Gen. Mark Hertling, also a former commanding general of U.S. Army Europe.

The Bradley is also considered to be a less escalatory choice than the Abrams for an administration still concerned about provoking Moscow. But it will be lethal on the battlefield, particularly when paired with Kyiv’s Soviet-era tanks, Hodges said.

“A big part of combined arms warfare is that you have protected infantry that can move alongside tanks, keep up with them, and that’s part of what combined arms is all about: infantry armor artillery,” Hodges said. “By having your infantry moving along with them, that makes it that much more lethal.”

The U.S. Bradley and the French AMX-10, if deployed by the spring in time for renewed Ukrainian offensives in the east, will provide a potent new capability for Ukrainian forces. The AMX-10 has been used as a reconnaissance vehicle and tank killer by French forces in the past, and its high maneuverability and speed would allow Ukraine to hit hard and fast in small engagements. Its relatively light armor is a drawback against heavy Russian guns, however, making speed the key.

“The French vehicle has a lot of firepower, it just doesn’t have a lot of protection,” said Nick Reynolds, a research analyst at the U.K.-based Royal United Services Institute think tank. “It is ultimately a wheeled vehicle which makes it vulnerable, even if it does have fairly good off-road mobility.” The vehicle’s gun can likely take out Russian T-72 tanks and armored infantry carriers, however.

One adviser to the Ukraine government told POLITICO that Washington and Kyiv have been talking for months about sending heavier armor. One of the main sticking points has been identifying which units or storage facilities have the right vehicles available for export, along with some concerns over advanced optical and communications equipment included in newer models.

The Pentagon last month announced an expansion of its training program for Ukrainian forces at a U.S. base in Germany, both in size and scope. The new program will expand training to a battalion’s worth of roughly 500 soldiers a month, and will also include instruction on how to coordinate infantry maneuvering with artillery support, called “combined arms operations.”

Now that the administration has approved sending the Bradleys, the trainees will likely be instructed on how to more effectively maneuver the vehicles alongside existing tanks and infantry. Lighter and more agile than a tank, the Bradley can hold up to 10 soldiers, who will be able to come off the back carrying Javelin antitank missiles, Hodges noted.

For Ukraine, Bradleys and Western tanks can’t come soon enough. Zelenskyy said Tuesday that Russia is planning a second mobilization for a major new offensive early this year. And last month, Gen. Valeriy Zaluzhnyi, Ukraine’s top military leader, told The Economist that he believes Russia could make a push to take Kyiv as soon as January.

Ukrainian officials have been begging for hundreds more tanks, infantry fighting vehicles and howitzers to help repel Russian attacks, particularly strikes on cities and civilian infrastructure.

“We are balancing on a fine line. And if [the power grid] is destroyed … that is when soldiers’ wives and children start freezing,” Zaluzhnyi told The Economist. “What kind of mood the fighters will be in, can you imagine? Without water, light and heat, can we talk about preparing reserves to keep fighting?”

The administration may still be reluctant to send Abrams tanks, however, due to the significant training and logistics involved. Maintenance in the field will be a challenge, especially without a supply of parts. A tank division can also guzzle up to 600,000 gallons of fuel a day, potentially slowing Ukraine’s movement.

The Bradley’s logistical requirements are “terrifically less burdensome than, say, those associated with an M1,” one of the U.S. officials said. “Our M1s would be a logistics burden that we would not want to put on [Ukraine] until they and we were confident they were ready.”

However, Hodges said the training and logistics challenge is “a solvable problem” if the U.S. begins instructing Ukrainian forces on the systems now.

“Let Ukraine pick 100 tankers that are experienced tank mechanics and send them to wherever the U.S. has Abrams tanks in Poland or send them back to Fort Benning, Ga., where the armor school is, and let them start learning now,” he said.

The drama surrounding Republican leader Kevin McCarthy’s stalled bid to become the next speaker of the House has garnered nationwide attention, and now, those who oppose McCarthy’s nomination, including one prominent Democrat, are asking their supporters for financial support.

The House of Representatives headed into its eleventh vote to determine the House speaker on Thursday night as 21 Republicans continue to withhold their support for GOP Leader Kevin McCarthy of California.

Of the 21 Republicans, at least two – Florida GOP Rep. Matt Gaetz and Arizona GOP Rep. Andy Biggs – have issued emails to supporters calling for donations amid their fight to prevent McCarthy from obtaining the speaker’s gavel.

In a Thursday evening email from Gaetz, who has seemingly led the GOP movement against McCarthy in the House, the congressman wrote: “Maybe the right person for the job of Speaker of the House isn’t someone who has sold shares of himself for more than a decade to get it…”

HOUSE SPEAKER VOTE: HERE ARE THE 21 REPUBLICANS WHO AREN’T VOTING FOR MCCARTHY

Rep. Matt Gaetz R-Fla., delivers remarks in the House Chamber during the third day of elections for Speaker of the House at the U.S. Capitol Building on January 05, 2023 in Washington, DC.
(Anna Moneymaker/Getty Images)

“If you want to Drain the Swamp, you CANNOT put the biggest alligator in charge of the exercise,” Gaetz told his supporters in the email. “But that’s exactly what we would get with a McCarthy Speakership…”

“I need to know if you’ll stand with me on this. Consider this your opportunity to show how the MAGA Base feels about a Cavin’ McCarthy Speakership. If you’re a “NO” Vote like I am… Please make that LOUD AND CLEAR by clicking the button below,” he said, including a link to his campaign donation page.

Like Gaetz, Biggs, who has strongly opposed McCarthy’s bid for speaker, also sent out a campaign email requesting financial assistance from his supporters, according to New York Times reporter Nick Confessore.

“We BLOCKED Kevin McCarthy from becoming Speaker of the House,” Biggs reportedly wrote in the email. “…but now, we conservatives must lead the fight to get the leadership we deserve. Saving this country from Joe Biden and the Left is going to be tough. That’s why we need a leader who has the record, skill, and ferocity to lead the House GOP.”

From left to right: Reps. Democrat Hakeem Jeffries of New York, Republican Matt Gaetz of Florida, Kevin McCarthy of California, and Republican Andy Biggs of Arizona.
(Nathan Howard, Joe Raedle, Alex Wong, Tom Williams/CQ-Roll Call, Inc via Getty Images )

THE VOTE FOR HOUSE SPEAKER

“But I am running out of time to win over my colleagues. Can I count on your support as I fight for a conservative Speaker…and finally put the Establishment on notice,” Biggs added, including a link where donations could be made.

Democrats are also using the holdup in the House by Republicans to fundraise.

In an email titled “embarrassing chaos” – which was sent Thursday evening by incoming Democratic leader Hakeem Jeffries – the newly elected Democratic leader told his supporters that he lacks the total number of donations to “show that Democrats are united and ready to lead our country.”

“Republicans have now failed 6 times to elect a Speaker of the House. This hasn’t happened in over 100 years,” Jeffries said in the campaign email. “I’ll be blunt: Republicans are incapable of governing. And they’re putting politics over the American people. But if Democrats stick together in this historic moment, we have an opportunity to show how powerful we are.”

Jeffries’ email also contained a list of links where his supporters could make donations.

Rep. Hakeem Jeffries, D-N.Y., conducts a news conference after a meeting of the House Democratic Caucus in the Capitol Visitor Center on July 13, 2022.
(Tom Williams/CQ-Roll Call, Inc via Getty Images)

CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP

Twenty of the GOP members-elect have voted for other candidates while one has voted present – or not voting for any candidate – amid the tumultuous votes.

The 21 House Republicans who haven’t voted for McCarthy are Reps.-elect Andy Biggs of Arizona, Dan Bishop of North Carolina, Lauren Boebert of Colorado, Josh Bechreen of Oklahoma, Michael Cloud of Texas, Andrew Clyde of Georgia, Eli Crane of Arizona, Matt Gaetz of Florida, Bob Good of Virginia, Paul Gosar of Arizona, Andy Harris of Maryland, Ana Paulina Luna of Florida, Mary Miller of Illinois, Ralph Norman of South Carolina, Andy Ogles of Tennessee, Scott Perry of Pennsylvania, Matt Rosendale of Montana, Chip Roy of Texas, Keith Self of Texas, Byron Donalds of Florida and Victoria Spartz of Indiana.

Spartz – who has voted present in recent rounds after initially backing McCarthy – is the one Republican of the 21 who has yet to vote for a McCarthy opponent.

Fox News’ Houston Keene contributed to this report.