Trump holds rally in Pennsylvania city with Latino-majority population

(WASHINGTON) — As President-elect Donald Trump’s comments tanking House Speaker Mike Johnson’s short-term government funding bill sent House Republicans into a tailspin Wednesday night, Senate Republicans were left to try to make sense of the remaining pieces.

Congress must act to fund the government by midnight on Friday or risk a shutdown. With the House back at the drawing board, the clock is ticking.

The nature of government funding bills means that the Senate is usually in a wait-and-see posture until the House acts. That’s particularly true this time around, where Johnson has to wrangle his slim House majority into passing legislation that Trump will find palatable before the Senate decides whether they can accept it.

The looming funding deadline means that the Senate will in all likelihood be forced to stomach whatever Johnson manages to pass through the House unless it is so unacceptable that Senators are willing to shut the government down over it. Democrats still run the Senate for a few more days, and the 60-vote threshold in the Senate makes compromise essential.

During late votes Wednesday night, Senate Republicans weighed in on the current government funding situation with a little more than 48 hours until a shutdown.

Many say they weren’t happy with Johnson’s original proposal

Despite the challenges now facing Congress to finish up work on government funding, there are a number of Senate Republicans who concede they weren’t happy with the House proposal that Johnson put forward on Tuesday. Some are pleased that Trump got involved to encourage changes.

“This is supposed to be a CR that extends the status quo. And it’s supposed to be lean and mean,” Sen. John Kennedy, R-LA said. “Well, I mean, it may have been mean, but it wasn’t lean. And what I think we’re going to have to do to get it passed is go back to a real CR, which is just an extension of the status quo.”

Sen. Mike Rounds, R-SD, said all of the “crap” that was attached to the House CR was “very very disappointing to me.”

He signaled a willingness to support a clean CR with disaster relief.

There appears to be some eagerness to re-open discussion about a path forward, but the time is running out, and there are now a number of very thorny issues that will require a lot of negotiation with very little time.

Southern State Republicans draw the line at disaster relief

As House Republicans go back to the drawing board to try to satiate Trump’s demands, it’s clear they’ll have to balance them against all-out insistence from many Senate Republicans that billions in disaster relief remain tacked to this bill.

Republican Sen. Lindsey Graham, whose home state of South Carolina was deeply impacted by Hurricane Helene, said he will vote against a funding bill that doesn’t include relief for his and other affected states.

He called it a “moral imperative to get money into the system.”

“We’ve got to have the disaster relief. I can’t go home and play like it didn’t happen,” Graham said. “To anybody who thinks that disaster relief is pork, come to where I live and see what happened in my state in North Carolina and Georgia.”

Sen. Thom Tillis, R-NC, whose home state was affected by both Hurricane Helene and Hurricane Milton, said he’d do everything in his power to slow down the passage of any government funding bill that doesn’t include funding for relief.

“I feel very strongly. [If] we don’t get disaster in the bill I’ll do everything to keep us there until we do,” Tillis said.

Tillis said he spoke with VP-Elect Vance Wednesday and said Vance “gets” the importance of disaster aid.

“JD gets it. I spoke with him this afternoon. He understands the need to get disaster follow-up in there,” Tillis said. “Most people, at least JD and others, believe that we have to do the disaster supplement.”

Republicans open to debt limit hike, but skeptical about accomplishing it on this timeline

Trump complicated government funding matters significantly with an eleventh-hour push to include a hike to the federal debt limit in this package. It has left some Republicans unclear on a path forward.

“I don’t think he’s wrong,” Sen. John Kennedy, R-LA, said when asked if Trump’s debt limit proposal was helpful. “But it complicates the matter.”

That’s an understatement.

Debt limit negotiations have in prior years taken months upon months to carefully weave together. A number of Senate Republicans conceded tonight that while they’d support raising the debt limit in this bill, getting to yes on it in the tiny window of time left will be a real challenge.

“I don’t know how we do that,” Sen. Mike Rounds, R-SD, said. “I mean, I’m open to ideas on it but I don’t know how we do that.”

Graham said he’d leave decisions about the debt limit to Trump but conceded that Democratic buy-in would be necessary to do it.

“I don’t know how this plays into things. I do know this, we don’t want to default. There are a lot of Republicans who will never vote to raise the debt ceiling for ideological reasons,” Graham said.

Sen. John Cornyn, R-TX, acknowledged that getting all Republicans on board a debt limit hike would be a challenge.

“I don’t know if Republicans are going to vote for that, particularly the Freedom Caucus, so I guess we’ll take it one step at a time,” Cornyn said.

Tillis also acknowledged that Democrats would have to buy into a plan to hike the debt limit. And with the deadline to do so still months off, he said he was unsure what would inspire Democrats to participate in eleventh-hour negotiations on the issue.

“I just think there’s got to be something more to it than a demand that it get in, because again there’s no burning platform,” Tillis said.

Calls with Trump

Sen. Josh Hawley, R-MO, said he spoke to Trump just before he issued his original statement today that discouraged Republicans from supporting the short-term government bill put forward by Johnson.

Hawley said that Trump thought Speaker Johnson’s CR was a “total disaster.”

Hawley criticized Johnson for what he said was “clearly” not reading Trump into the negotiation process of the bill.

“I made this point to him, to the president that is, about the House Leadership. I mean, is this going to be the norm? Is this how we’re going to operate? They’re going — is this going to be the standard that we are setting?”

ABC News asked Hawley if Trump expressed frustration with Johnson specifically, and Hawley said “yes.”

But that was refuted by Sen. Markwayne Mullin, R-OK.

“I have spoken to the president several times today. I would not classify, I would not classify it as being frustrated with the Speaker,” Mullin said.

Mullin said that it was articulated to Johnson for “awhile” that Trump wanted a debt limit hike.

“He does want the debt limit included in whatever package they put forth, but he’s as far as being upset, I absolutely do not agree with that.

The Musk factor

Senators seemed to downplay the significance of Elon Musk’s influence on the current situation. Musk took to his social media platform X to repeatedly slam the Johnson-backed bill on Wednesday.

“I think there are people putting too much weight on Musk or anybody else opining. I think there were structural challenges to begin with,” Tillis said. “These outside influences have an impact, but I think that that came from within not from without. I’ve seen some of the reports about how Elon basically vetoed it. I’m sure his voice weighed in, but it had, it clearly had a structural problem before anybody opined on it.”

Hawley, when asked about Musk’s weighing in, seemed to push concerns aside.

“As somebody who doesn’t like the CR, I welcome the criticism,” Hawley said.

Copyright © 2024, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

Since Nov. 1, an FBI command post has been operating 24/7 and will continue to for at least nine days to to ensure the election is safe and secure.

“This command post is an opportunity for us to bring people together, all the different subject matter experts here in the FBI at headquarters and in the field, and we bring in our partners so the intelligence and threats that come in, and we can disseminate that information to the key partners, which is state and local officials around the United States,” said Jim Barnacle, deputy assistant director of the FBI’s Criminal Investigative Division.

The command post is staffed with 80 people from more than a dozen agencies from the U.S. Capitol Police to the U.S. Postal Inspection Service.

The FBI is focused on criminal threats, such as threats to election workers, foreign malign influence, cyberthreats and acts of violence.

Barnacle said there have been some foreign operations that they have seen as well as “some attempted cyber attacks.”

“Russia, China and Iran are seeking to influence us, government, policy and politics for their benefit, they are also looking to undermine democracy, sow discord and undermine Washington’s standing in the world,” he said.

Last week, the intelligence community found that Russian actors were behind a video purporting to show Haitian migrants voting in Georgia.
MORE: Law enforcement on alert for Election Day threats, new report says

Also in Georgia, there was a denial of service attack on the secretary of state’s office. Officials are ready for those incidents to occur and stress there is no material impacting on voting, Barnacle said.

“The FBI is looking at all those threats that come in here in the command post,” he said. “We’re triaging that information.”

Barnacle said the FBI learned from its 2016 and 2020 operations and have improved its communications. When it comes to physical threats, he said it’s important for state and locals to have the information they need to act.

“We’ve learned our lessons in the past,” he said. “We are trying to share information.”

The FBI isn’t monitoring social media and wants to ensure the First Amendment is followed, but when threats are made that is when they step in.

People are more aware about how to report things that happen than in years past, but that has resulted in only a smaller uptick in reporting incidents, he said.

“That’s what we’re asking people to do when they see a threat of violence or they see a foreign malign influence operation, we’re asking people, if they see threats of violence or they see criminal activity, to report that to state and local election officials and law enforcement,” he said.

Copyright © 2024, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(PHILADELPHIA) — The Philadelphia district attorney sued Elon Musk and his super PAC on Monday over the billionaire’s controversial $1 million registered voter giveaway.

The lawsuit from Philadelphia District Attorney Larry Krasner claims Musk and his America PAC are “running an illegal lottery in Philadelphia (as well as throughout Pennsylvania).”

Musk announced the eighth winner of his super PAC’s $1 million prize in Lancaster, Pennsylvania, on Saturday and doubled down on his promise to continue offering the money to a registered swing state voter who has signed his petition. He said participants are not required to vote, but the online petition form says one has to be a registered voter to be eligible.

“We’re trying to get attention for this very important petition to support the Constitution. And, it’s like, if we, you know — we need the right to free speech; we need the right to bear arms,” Musk said at the rally.

“So we’re going to be giving out a million dollars every day through Nov. 5,” he continued. “And also, all you have to do is sign the petition in support of the First and Second Amendment. That’s it. You don’t even have to vote. It’d be nice if you voted, but you don’t have to. And then just basically sign something you already believe in, and you get a test to win a million dollars every day from now through the election.”

Federal law singles out anyone who “pays or offers to pay or accepts payment either for registration to vote or for voting.” The penalty is a fine of no more than $10,000 or a prison sentence as long as 5 years.

When asked for comment, a representative for America PAC pointed ABC News to a post on X announcing Monday’s $1 million giveaway winner, which was published after news of the lawsuit broke. The winner on Monday was from Michigan, according to the post.

The person added it is fair to “infer” the PAC plans to continue handing out the $1 million checks.

The Department of Justice sent a letter to Musk last week warning him the giveaway may violate federal law, a source familiar with the matter confirmed to ABC News. The letter from the Election Crimes Branch of the DOJ’s Public Integrity Section was sent to Musk’s PAC, the source said.

Several experts ABC News spoke to in the wake of Musk announcing the giveaway said it occupies a blurry area of law.

“I’ve gone back and forth on it,” Richard Briffault, a professor of legislation at Columbia University Law School, told ABC News. “It clearly violates the spirit of the statute, but it’s not 100% clear to me that it violates the letter of the law.”

Other experts, like Doug Spencer, a professor of election law at the University of Colorado, said “it seems like it really crosses the line.”

ABC News’ Max Zahn contributed to this report.

Copyright © 2024, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.