Rep. Jerry Nadler, D-N.Y., once said it was ‘very clear’ the Trump campaign colluded with the Russians in the 2016 election — a claim later contradicted by the release of Special Counsel John Durham’s report on the Russia investigation.

‘It’s become very clear that the Trump campaign colluded with the Russians in trying to subvert the election,’ Nadler told CNN in November 2018. ‘The president is right to be nervous right now, because it appears that time is running out when he can hold himself above the law.’

The comments now conflict with the Durham report, which concluded in May that federal agencies had no ‘actual evidence of collusion’ to justify its launch of the Trump-Russia investigation. This added to the conclusion of Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s report in 2019 that determined there was no evidence of a criminal plot to influence the 2016 election. 

Nadler, in the 2018 interview, said evidence would soon surface to prove Trump’s personal involvement in collusion with Russia.

‘The walls are tightening about his knowledge of the collusion with the Russians,’ Nadler said. 

This evidence never arose, but Nadler later said in a January 2020 interview with CBS that Trump attempted to rig the 2020 election just ‘as he worked with the Russians to try to rig the 2016 election.’ The comments came amid the impeachment push over Trump’s call with Ukrainian President Volodymr Zelensky to investigate then-candidate Joe Biden.

‘The reason he did that was in order to extort a foreign government to smear his political opponents for his personal benefits and to help try to rig the 2020 election as he worked with the Russians to try to rig the 2016 election,’ Nadler said. ‘Same pattern.’

The Durham report concluded the Trump-Russia investigation was based upon ‘raw, unanalyzed and uncorroborated intelligence.’ The launch of the investigation despite the lack of evidence, the report said, showed the Department of Justice and FBI ‘failed to uphold their mission of strict fidelity to the law.’ The report also concluded the agencies relied heavily upon leads for information ‘provided or funded (directly or indirectly) by Trump’s political opponents.’

EXCLUSIVE: Fox News has learned that more than 100 former Trump administration officials have formed a growing coalition backing Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis to be the Republican Party’s 2024 presidential nominee.

According to multiple sources within the group, officially known as ‘The Eight-Year Alliance,’ DeSantis is ‘a proven winner,’ a contender with a depth of policy proven by what he’s accomplished at the state level, and a leader who ‘does what he says.’

The primary motivation of the group, the sources said, is to promote a candidate they feel would be a viable contender for two presidential terms, something they see in DeSantis. They also want to prevent former President Donald Trump ‘immediately becoming a lame-duck president’ should he win back the White House, considering the polarizing affect his persona has had on American politics.

The group includes former Acting Associate Attorney General Jesse Panuccio, former Special Assistant to the Secretary of Defense Will Bushman, former Counselor to the Secretary and White House Liaison at the Department of Labor Pedro Allende, former Senior Counsel and Senior Advisor to the Secretary of Commerce James Uthmeier and Principal Deputy General Counsel at the Department of Commerce David Dewhirst.

Uthmeier, who currently serves as DeSantis’ chief of staff in Tallahassee, and Dewhirst have also been deeply involved in the process of growing the coalition.

Fox has not yet been provided a full list of names of those that have signed on as part of the coalition.

The sources emphasized that they were not seeking to bash Trump, and that they were ‘proud’ of their service to the Trump administration and its effort to ‘shake things up’ in Washington, D.C., but that they were now ‘wholeheartedly’ behind DeSantis.

DeSantis is expected to officially enter the 2024 presidential race this week after months of buildup and speculation, and will join an increasingly crowded field of Republican candidates that includes Trump, former U.N. Ambassador Nikki Haley, Sen. Tim Scott, R-S.C., businessman Vivek Ramaswamy, former Arkansas Gov. Asa Hutchinson, conservative radio host Larry Elder and businessman Perry Johnson.

Early polls have consistently shown Trump with a commanding lead over his opponents, and DeSantis in a distant second.

Fox News’ Paul Steinhauser contributed to this report.

FIRST ON FOX – Rep. Chris Smith, R-N.J., announced Monday he will be chairing a congressional hearing on the Biden administration’s ‘push to enter an international pandemic treaty that could cede American sovereignty to the World Health Organization (WHO).’ 

Smith, who chairs a subcommittee concerned with global health and human rights organizations, first raised concerns last May when the White House offered amendments to the WHO’s international health regulations, which the congressman said would grant new unilateral authority to the director-general of the WHO to declare a public health crisis in the United States and/or other sovereign nations without any consultation with the U.S. or any other WHO member states.

Specifically, Smith said, the Biden amendment would strike the current regulation that requires the WHO to ‘consult with and attempt to obtain verification from the State Party in whose territory the event is allegedly occurring in,’ an action he says would be ceding the United States’ ability to declare and respond to an infectious disease outbreak within the U.S. and be dependent on the judgment of the United Nations. 

Smith said top officials from the Biden administration will be invited to testify, but it’s not yet clear who those officials will be. 

Smith’s office says they hope to hold the hearing next month. 

‘Under absolutely no circumstances should the Biden administration surrender American sovereignty to the World Health Organization and allow the voice of the American people and consent of the governed to be subjugated to dictates of an agenda-driven global administrative bureaucracy,’ Smith said. 

‘The American people have a right to know exactly what the Biden administration is negotiating at the WHO, especially as the president remains silent and fails to reassure us that he will protect our Constitution from bureaucrats at this troubled United Nations body,’ said Smith.

Smith said the hearing will help bring greater public scrutiny and ‘much-needed transparency’ to the administration’s ‘aggressive efforts to enter this new accord with the WHO, which took disastrous missteps during the COVID-19 pandemic.’ 

The WHO has had a zero-draft treaty in the works for at least a year. Amendments will be considered in an upcoming meeting in July. A vote to adopt a final version of the treaty will likely take place in 2024. 

Smith says the zero-draft WHO pandemic treaty starts off with ‘very harsh criticism of the United States and the international community by calling it a ‘catastrophic failure of the international community in showing solidarity and equity in response to the coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic.”

Article 4 of the treaty, he says, ‘pays lip service to sovereignty and then completely overcomes that lip service by saying, ‘provided that activities within their jurisdiction or control do not cause damage to their peoples and other countries.” 

He says that language ’empowers the WHO to step in and prescribe what each country would do.’

Article 10, Smith claims, says the United States would be obligated to provide 20% of its medical supplies – including tests, vaccines, medications and the like – to the WHO. 

‘They would say, ‘We want it, you have to provide it,’’ he said.

‘My colleagues and I look forward to having the Biden administration address these grave concerns that have rightfully alarmed many American citizens, including me,’ said Smith Monday.

A bill introduced by Wisconsin state Rep. Joy Goeben and state Sen. Jesse James, both Republicans, would make possession of child sex dolls a felony.Under the proposed law, prison sentences for possession could range from 3 ½ years or less for a first-time offender, to 25 years for someone caught multiple times with dolls resembling a specific child.Goeben called the dolls ‘horrifying’ in a phone interview, adding ‘it’s really scary that this is something that exists and it’s being used against our children. We need to stop that. We need to protect our kids.’

Wisconsin Republicans have joined a national push to outlaw child sex dolls, releasing a proposal Monday that would make possessing one a felony.

Some groups say the dolls help protect children by providing those attracted to children another outlet. Others find the dolls abhorrent.

Some dolls can be constructed to resemble specific children. For example, a Florida mother in 2020 discovered photos of a child sex doll being sold online that exactly resembled her 8-year-old daughter, according to the Child Rescue Coalition, a nonprofit organization that works to protect children from sexual exploitation.

A number of states have passed laws outlawing child sex dolls since 2019, including Florida, Tennessee, South Dakota and Hawaii. Arizona Gov. Katie Hobbs signed a bill Friday outlawing the dolls in her state. Republican legislation banning them nationwide — dubbed the Creeper Act — has been floating around the U.S. House of Representatives since at least 2017.

England has banned importation of such dolls, and Canadian law classifies the dolls as child pornography.

Wisconsin state Rep. Joy Goeben and Sen. Jesse James’ bill would define a child sex doll as an anatomically correct doll, mannequin or robot with features that resemble a minor and is intended for sexual uses.

Anyone caught possessing such a doll would be guilty of a felony punishable by up to 3 1/2 years in prison. A first offense involving three or more dolls or a second offense would be punishable by up to 6 years. A third or subsequent offense would be punishable by up to 10 years.

If the doll resembles a specific minor the offender would face up to 15 years in prison for a first offense. Subsequent offenses involving a doll resembling a specific child would be punishable by up to 25 years.

Offenders who have already been convicted of a child sex crime would face one felony level higher than the possession charge. For example, a person convicted of child sexual abuse would face up to 6 years for possessing a doll rather than 3 1/2 years.

Goeben said she believes pedophiles use the dolls in a lead-up to actually assaulting children.

‘(The dolls) are horrifying,’ she said in a telephone interview. ‘It’s really scary that this is something that exists and it’s being used against our children. We need to stop that. We need to protect our kids.’

James, who served as police chief in the city of Altoona before he was elected to the Legislature, said the dolls leave him ‘absolutely disgusted.’ He, too, insisted that the dolls are a gateway to real assaults that can devastate children and families.

‘They’re to serve a purpose that may temporarily, in my opinion, satisfy the sexual urges,’ he said. ‘However, I think that nothing ever replaces the real thing. (The dolls are) a temporary fix.’

Aides to Assembly Speaker Robin Vos and Senate Majority Leader Devin LeMahieu didn’t respond to an email inquiring about whether leadership supports the proposal.

Not everyone opposes the dolls. The Prostasia Foundation, which describes itself on its website as working to protect children from sexual assault with laws based on evidence rather than emotion, maintains that doll bans are an unconstitutional invasion of privacy and remove a harmless outlet for those attracted to minors, perhaps leading to sexual assaults against real children.

‘Don’t let emotional scare tactics win out over sound science,’ the foundation said in an online essay urging voters to reject South Dakota’s ban.

The National Institutes of Health’s National Library of Medicine last year released findings from a survey of 85 child sex doll owners and 120 of what the survey termed ‘minor-attracted people’ who don’t own dolls, The respondents were recruited through online forums for people sexually attracted to children.

The survey found that generally doll ownership was associated with lower levels of sexual preoccupation but more sexually objectifying behaviors and anticipation of sex with children.

Goeben and James have given their fellow lawmakers until May 30 to sign on as co-sponsors.

<!–>

–>

A bulldozer began moving sand along a stretch of badly eroded beach Monday in a Jersey Shore town where the bitter fight over how to protect its rapidly shrinking shoreline has led to $33 million worth of litigation.

Before the summer tourism season kicks off this weekend, North Wildwood hopes to repair dunes in the most heavily eroded section of its beach and restore beach access points to usable condition. The state Department of Environmental Protection granted permission for emergency repairs last week.

The town and the state have been fighting for years over how best to protect North Wildwood’s shoreline as it waits to become the last part of the state to receive a beach replenishment project that is still at least two years away.

The state has fined North Wildwood $12 million for past unauthorized work on its beaches that the state claims could actually worsen erosion.

North Wildwood, in turn, is suing the state for $21 million, which it says is how much it has spent trucking sand to the shoreline over the past decade to try to keep up with erosion.

‘We are happy to get this work completed soon,’ said Mayor Patrick Rosenello. ‘But this certainly doesn’t fix the much larger issue, which is the lack of a beach nourishment project in North Wildwood.’

North Wildwood and its surrounding coastal neighbors have not received the periodic beach replenishment projects that most of the rest of the Jersey Shore has been getting for decades, due in part to the difficulty of getting approval from property owners.

As a result, it has experienced serious erosion over the last decade, and says it needs to take immediate emergency steps including shoring up dunes and building another steel sea wall to complement one it already built.

Numerous violation notices issued by the state remain active, including one that involves work the city did several years ago along a section of beachfront that it said had become badly eroded. The state said the work destroyed 8 acres of vegetated dunes, including 6.7 acres of critical wildlife habitat, and 1.1 acres of freshwater wetlands.

North Wildwood previously built a vinyl and steel bulkhead for about 10 blocks without state approval, saying it needed to act urgently to protect lives and property. That is separate from the latest bulkhead the city wanted to build, but agreed to forego for now.

<!–>

–>

Former President Donald Trump’s accuser E. Jean Carroll has filed a motion to amend her defamation lawsuit to include the former president’s comments made to CNN during a town hall earlier this month.

The defamation lawsuit that she has moved to amend was filed in 2019 and is separate from the suit that was decided nearly two weeks ago.

Monday’s court filing looks to increase the amount of damages Carroll is seeking from Trump.

On May 9, a federal jury ruled Trump was not liable for rape but was liable for sexual abuse and defamation. As a result, the former president was ordered to pay $5 million to Carroll.

Trump chose not to attend the civil trial and was absent when the verdict was read.

Carroll, now 79, alleged that in 1996, Trump raped her at the Bergdorf Goodman department store across the street from Trump Tower in Manhattan. According to Carroll, the two had a chance run-in at the store, where Trump was shopping for a gift for ‘a girl.’ She said he asked for her advice, and the two shopped together before he pushed her into a dressing room and assaulted her.

Trump and his legal team insist the allegations are fabricated, and the former president’s initial reaction included an accusation that Carroll was motivated by wanting to sell copies of her book.

The accusation led to Carroll slapping Trump with a defamation claim, alleging that his response caused harm to her reputation.

Earlier this month, Trump participated in a town hall in New Hampshire that was moderated by CNN.

During the town hall, Trump was asked about the allegations and jury’s verdict.

‘This woman, I don’t know her. I never met her. I have no idea who she is. I had a picture taken years ago with her and her husband, nice guy John Johnson,’ Trump said. ‘He was a newscaster, very nice man. She called him an ape, happens to be African-American. Called him an ape – the judge wouldn’t allow us to put that in. Her dog or cat was named vagina, the judge wouldn’t allow to put that in.’

The former president continued to tell the host he never met the woman, despite her allegations.

READ THE AMENDED LAWSUIT HERE:

When the host told Trump the jury found that he sexually abused Carroll, he said, ‘they didn’t.’

He again said he did not know who the woman was, even swearing on his children, adding that it was a fake story.

In response to the statements made by Trump during the town hall, Carroll motioned to amend her complaint by adding allegations concerning the verdict against Trump, and his response to the verdict.

Carroll and her attorneys claim Trump’s statements involved repeating claims the jury found to be ‘defamatory.’ They argued the statements are directly relevant to the issue of punitive damages on the defamation lawsuit.ges on the defamation claim.

‘Punitive damages in relation to a libel claim – the defamation claim – may be awarded to punish a defendant who has acted maliciously and to discourage others from doing the same… a statement is made with malice or it’s made maliciously… if it’s made with deliberate intent to injure or made out of hatred or ill will or spite or made with willful or wanton or reckless disregard of another’s rights,’ the motion reads. ‘The nature of Carroll’s underlying claim for defamation against Trump based on his 2019 statements, however, remains the same.’

Authorities could temporarily seize firearms and background checks would be expanded for gun buyers, under two bills passed Monday in the Pennsylvania House, where Democrats are using their razor-thin majority to push gun-control measures after a yearslong standstill in the politically divided government.

The party describes the proposals as relatively moderate measures to cut down on gun trafficking, suicide deaths, accidental shootings and day-to-day violence. Republicans oppose the bills, saying they punish law-abiding gun owners.

‘While this is just the first step, by passing these commonsense and responsible gun safety measures we’ve shown our neighbors and communities that we are listening and we are acting, and that we stand with them in combating senseless gun violence,’ said House Speaker Joanna McClinton, a Philadelphia Democrat.

The ‘red flag’ bill, which would allow a judge to order the seizure of firearms if asked by family members or police, passed on a 102-99 vote, with two Republicans voting alongside Democrats, and one Democrat flipping to vote with Republicans. Nineteen states have similar laws, according to Everytown for Gun Safety, a leading gun control advocacy group.

Rep. Mike Schlossberg, a Democrat from Lehigh County, recalled his own struggles with mental health as he spoke in favor of the bill.

‘I find myself wondering frequently what would have happened that morning, Feb. 3, 2002, if I had had a gun,’ he said. ‘Some of you have been in that deep, dark place. But for those of you who haven’t, you have to understand that getting someone through a moment of suicidal crisis — and it is often just a moment — is the most critical thing you can do to save someone’s life.’

But Republicans said the bill unfairly targets legal gun owners.

‘The plan and the strategy has always been and will be to disarm law-abiding citizens,’ said Rep. Stephanie Borowicz, a Republican from Clinton County. ‘And any Republican that thinks they can vote for this today: Know that you are aiding and abetting the socialism and communism that the Democrats are pushing in this nation.’

Another bill, which passed by a 109-92 vote, seeks to expand background checks on firearms buyers in Pennsylvania and end an exception for private sales of shotguns, sporting rifles and semi-automatic rifles, known as the ‘gun show’ loophole.

‘This is not major legislation. This is not a heavy lift,’ said Rep. Matthew Bradford, a Montgomery Democrat. ‘This is a modest bill, with a modest impact, that will have real impact on some of the most lethal weapons in our Commonwealth.’

A third bill, which failed by a 100-101 vote, would have required gun owners to report a lost or stolen firearm to police within three days. Repeat offenders would have faced a misdemeanor charge.

A fourth measure in the package, which would require long-barreled firearms to be sold with trigger locks, did not come up for a vote.

The bills that make it through the House must still go through the Republican-controlled Senate, which has historically been protective of gun rights, while working with Democrats to boost funding for anti-violence and mental health programs.

The measures come as the U.S. is setting a record pace for mass killings in 2023. In Philadelphia, gun violence played a big role in the campaign for mayor, and the city is asking the state’s highest court to allow it to impose its own gun-control policies.

The Pennsylvania Legislature, long controlled by Republicans, has not seriously considered broadening gun-control measures since 2018. With the newfound Democratic majority in the House, the chamber kicked off this session’s debate over gun violence with a hearing in March.

<!–>

–>

It is hard to understate just how close the U.S. is to hitting the debt ceiling.

There are talks – again. But no agreement. No bill. Nothing close as Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen reiterated on NBC that the ‘hard’ deadline was June 1. Yellen added that the government would struggle to pay its bills beyond June 15 if Congress doesn’t take action.

So how do the sides sidestep an epic collision with the debt ceiling?

At least one Republican lawmaker with whom Fox spoke suggested that the government was rushing on cruise control toward the debt limit – and Congress was past the point of no return of a crisis. 

‘There is too much to do and too little time if the date is June 1,’ said the lawmaker who asked they not be identified. ‘No way.’

How President Biden and House Speaker Kevin McCarthy, R-Calif., bridge this chasm is unclear. Observers note that negotiations this intense should have been underway at least in April – with the expectation the sides would hit hiccups like the ones on Friday. That pause cost the sides nearly three days of talks. And anyone who has watched negotiations like these know that those speedbumps are inevitable.

It’s possible there could be more. That’s why they may not have enough time to wrap this up.

To wit:

Let’s just say there is a deal by Tuesday. It likely takes until Thursday to get the legislative text into form. McCarthy insists he will adhere to the House’s ’72 hour rule.’ That allows Members to study and consider the bill. It also means the House may not even debate and vote on the bill until the coming weekend.

Therefore, the Senate may not even get the legislation until Monday, May 29th – Memorial Day. Even if the Senate is really humming, that could take until Wednesday, May 31st to wrap things up. But more likely, June 1 or 2.

And remember, this is the timeline if everything goes swimmingly.

But what we’ve left out of this analysis are the potential contours of a deal – to say nothing of what it takes to get the votes to pass such a package.

Here we go.

It’s about the math.

Mixing the cocktail of Republican and Democratic votes to pass a still theoretical bill through the House (and the Senate – we’ll get to that at some point) involves very precise, yet mysterious political alchemy. House Republicans have long talked about wanting a ‘a majority of the majority’ to be in favor of any prospective package. That concept goes back decades with House Republicans. But this is 2023. Plus, McCarthy endured the longest Speaker’s race since 1859 to get the job. 

How does McCarthy agree to any pact which doesn’t have close to 200 of the 222 Republicans in the House in favor of it?

It’s likely that anywhere from 20 to 40 House Republicans are hard noes on any bill which doesn’t replicate the debt ceiling bill muscled through last month. 

Fox is told McCarthy’s floor is 180 GOP yeas. One knowledgeable source told Fox that anything south of 180 could mean a conservative Republican files a motion to ‘vacate the chair’ and force a vote for Speaker in the middle of the Congress.

This has always been the concern for the Speaker. Can he accept a deal which may put his own political career in jeopardy? Or, is there a way to finesse this so everyone believes they’ve secured a win?

This begs the question about what coalition of House Democrats would support a plan? How many Democrats can House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries, D-N.Y., provide or afford to lose? However, this conversation is not really about Jeffries. It’s about President Biden. The President faces liberal Members demanding he just use the ’14th Amendment’ (which says that federal public debts shall not be in question) and conclude the argument. Progressives are leery of President Biden giving up too much – especially on domestic spending and work requirements for those receiving welfare benefits. 

Who exactly is going to be willing to walk the plank to get this done or hold true to their principles?

Here’s another challenge for McCarthy: the House’s debt ceiling bill could pose a problem in the negotiations.

President Biden withheld from negotiations until the House approved its bill – albeit one which secured zero Democratic votes and has no chance of overcoming a filibuster in the Democratically-controlled Senate. 

However, there is something worth noting about the House GOP’s debt ceiling bill. Passage of that measure was McCarthy’s greatest accomplishment since clasping the Speaker’s gavel. He had little to stand on in these negotiations had the House not approved the Republican package. But passage of that measure could also box in McCarthy. 

Fox is told that more and more House Republicans refuse to budge from that bill. McCarthy pushed so hard to get lawmakers to agree to that package that many are reluctant to accept anything short of that measure.

Moreover, McCarthy isn’t former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif. Pelosi often designed legislation to score the necessary matrix of votes. One senior House Republican told Fox last week that McCarthy is more ‘big picture’ and hands off. He wants the membership to reach consensus first. He defers to them.

That may work internally. But a debt ceiling accord must be something which President Biden and at least some Democrats can accept. Otherwise, it’s just a debate among Republicans. 

This brings us to the quintessence of ‘the math.’ The vote counting surrounding the House GOP’s April debt ceiling bill is the centerpiece. How many Republicans are married to that bill? How many can go for something less than that bill? That will dictate where this debate heads over the next few days. 

Now, let’s go back to timing.

The casual observer may believe that lawmakers are all hunkered down in Washington until they find a solution. That’s not the case. Only few were in DC over the weekend. The House of Representatives is in session this week – but scheduled for a recess next week. So what happens if it gets to the weekend and there is no legislative traffic on the debt ceiling? Do Republicans keep the House in session or do they cut everyone loose until there is something to vote on?

This slices two ways. 

Congressional leaders could apply ‘Stockholm Syndrome’ tactics to convince members to vote yes. In other words, hold everyone ‘captive’ in Washington until they come around and vote yes. But that could mean torching part of the House’s recess – to say nothing of various Memorial Day activities lawmakers love to attend back home.

It is generally thought keeping everyone in DC could help leaders. It makes it easier to count and track where the votes lie. However, Fox is told that holding everyone in Washington could stir dissent if some Republicans don’t like the plan McCarthy ultimately cobbles together with Mr. Biden. 

A surefire way to tick off Members and make them even more grumpy? Keep everyone here over a holiday weekend and blow up part of the recess – with nothing to vote on. 

It’s unclear which path the sides may take.

But what if there’s nothing to vote on? 

That spells trouble as the country hurtles toward the June 1 debt ceiling deadline. 

Chad Pergram currently serves as a senior congressional correspondent for FOX News Channel (FNC). He joined the network in September 2007 and is based out of Washington, D.C.

EXCLUSIVE – First-term Republican Sen. JD Vance of Ohio is weighing in on his state’s burgeoning 2024 Senate primary.

Vance is endorsing business executive Bernie Moreno in the Republican primary to challenge longtime Democrat Sen. Sherrod Brown next year in a race that could determine if the GOP wins back the Senate majority. News of the endorsement was shared first with Fox News Digital on Monday.

Moreno, a successful Cleveland-based business leader and luxury auto dealership giant, is making his second straight bid for the Senate. So is the other prominent GOP candidate in the race to date, state Sen. Matt Dolan, a former top county prosecutor and Ohio assistant attorney general.

‘Bernie is a lifelong businessman, who has created thousands of good-paying middle-class jobs and is a strong America First conservative, who will never stop fighting to protect Ohio workers and families. Bernie is committed to securing our southern border, getting tough on China and taking the fight to the woke corporations waging war against our conservative values,’ Vance said in a statement.

Vance, who called Moreno a ‘friend,’ added that ‘It’s time to turn the tides on the establishment insiders who sell out our country to special interests and elect more political outsiders like Bernie, who will always put America First in Washington, DC. I’m looking forward to having Bernie as a colleague in the U.S. Senate.’

Moreno, who invested millions of his own money to run TV commercials to try and boost his 2022 Senate bid, suspended his first Senate campaign in February last year after requesting and holding a private meeting with former President Donald Trump.

The crowded and combustible 2022 GOP Senate nomination in Ohio was eventually won by Vance, a former venture capitalist and best-selling author who landed Trump’s endorsement just before last May’s primary. Vance went on to defeat longtime Democrat Rep. Tim Ryan in last November’s general election to succeed retiring GOP Sen. Rob Portman.

After dropping out of the race in 2022, Moreno forged a close relationship with Vance. Moreno raised money and campaigned with Vance across the state and played the role of Ryan in Vance’s debate preparations. Moreno, an immigrant who arrived in the U.S. legally from Colombia with his family as a boy, is spotlighting his credentials as an outsider as he runs for the 2024 GOP Senate nomination.

‘I’m honored to have earned the endorsement of Senator Vance. Not only is he a close personal friend, but as a fellow political outsider and entrepreneur, he’s shown that DC desperately needs new ways of thinking,’ Moreno said in a statement. ‘When I win this race, I’ll stand shoulder to shoulder with JD in the Senate to fight for Ohio families, end the invasion at our southern border, protect American culture and traditions, rein in Big Tech and Big Media, stop Biden’s radical Green New Deal policies and defend our America First conservative values against the unholy alliance of woke corporations and Big Government.’

Moreno argued that ‘the career politicians and establishment insiders in both parties have failed us all, and just like JD, I will be a fighter for Ohio’s workers and families against the corrupt special interests in the swamp. As Senator, Ohioans can trust that I will always do everything possible to grow our middle class and will be dedicated to putting what’s best for America and its people at the center of everything I do.’

A source close to Vance told Fox News that ‘beyond being personally close to Bernie and viewing him as an ideological ally, JD is endorsing Bernie so early because he feels strongly about ensuring that we don’t see a replay of the type of bloody primary fight that he had to deal with last cycle, which left him with depleted resources going into the general election. He believes that Bernie is the candidate best positioned to quickly unify both the conservative grassroots and the Ohio donor class around his campaign to give Republicans the strongest shot at defeating Sherrod Brown next year.’

Due to their friendship, it’s no surprise that Vance is backing Moreno in the 2024 Senate primary. And there’s speculation that the senator’s backing of Moreno may be a prelude to a Trump endorsement in the months ahead.

Trump, who’s the clear front-runner in the GOP presidential nomination race as he makes his third straight White House run, was endorsed by Moreno in February.

And Trump called Moreno ‘highly respected’ as he took to social media in April to encourage Moreno to launch a Senate campaign. And earlier this month, Moreno was endorsed by Trump ally Charlie Kirk and his Turning Point Action conservative political organization.

While Moreno has the ability to self-fund his campaign, he’s expected to fundraise aggressively, as he did in his first Senate bid. Moreno’s campaign announced that they hauled in contributions from more than 500,000 donors during the first week after their Senate launch.

Dolan – whose family owns Major League Baseball’s Cleveland Guardians – also shelled out millions of dollars of his own money to run ads for his 2022 Senate bid. He surged near the end of last year’s primary race, coming in third behind Vance and just behind former state Treasurer Josh Mandel, who came in second. Dolan is expected to again invest millions of his own money into his 2024 campaign.

Rep. Warren Davidson and Ohio Secretary of State Frank LaRose are among other Republicans considering Senate bids.

The winner of next year’s GOP primary will challenge Brown, who’s the only Democrat to win statewide in Ohio in the past decade. Brown will be heavily targeted by Republicans in a state that was once a premiere battleground but has shifted red over the past six years.

Democrats currently control the U.S. Senate with a 51-49 majority, but Republicans are looking at a very favorable Senate map in 2024 with Democrats defending 23 of the 34 seats up for grabs. Three of those seats are in red states that Trump carried in 2020: Ohio, Montana and West Virginia. Five others are in key swing states narrowly carried by Biden in 2020: Arizona, Michigan, Nevada, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin.

NORTH CHARLESTON, S.C. – EXCLUSIVE – It’s one the biggest questions facing Republican Sen. Tim Scott as he jumps into the race for the 2024 GOP presidential nomination.

Will Republican voters be receptive to what Scott calls his ‘optimistic, positive message anchored in conservatism.’

Scott, who on Monday will formally declare his candidacy for the White House at a campaign kick off event at Charleston Southern University, his alma mater, said in an exclusive interview with Fox News just ahead of his 2024 launch that GOP presidential primary voters are hungry for a what he’s preaching.

He’ll join a GOP White House field that includes former President Donald Trump, who announced his third straight presidential run in November and remains the clear front-runner in the Republican nomination race. 

Trump has continued to relitigate his 2020 election loss to President Biden as he repeats his unproven claims that his defeat was due to an election ‘stolen’ through ‘massive voter fraud.’ And the former president’s listing of his many legal grievances also became a campaign staple this year.

Asked by Fox News if Republican voters are receptive to his positive message, Scott pointed to his recent stops in the two states that kick off the GOP presidential nominating calendar and emphasized ‘what I’ve seen in Iowa and New Hampshire is that voters are thrilled to have a conversation about optimism, a conversation about how to move this country forward together.’

‘I’m stunned at the hunger for something positive as long as its anchored in conservatism. As long as you have a backbone,’ he added.

Scott, a rising star in the GOP and the only Black Republican in the Senate, is launching his campaign in North Charleston, the town where he grew up.

‘Here’s a kid that grew up in North Charleston, South Carolina, mired in poverty, in a single parent household. To think about one day being the President of the United States just tells me that the evolution of the American soul continues to move toward that more perfect union,’ the senator stressed.

‘There’s not a better place to have a conversation than on a campus with a spirit of academic excellent and a Christian environment and that Charleston Southern University. So I’m glad to be here at the home of the Bucs,’ Scott added.

Scott’s campaign kick off comes three days after he filed with the Federal Election Commission, which officially launched his presidential campaign. Scott’s move came as he launched a $6 million ad blitz into the summer in Iowa and New Hampshire.

Scott kicked off a ‘Faith in America’ listening tour in February. That tour has taken the senator Iowa and New Hampshire, as well as his home state of South Carolina, which holds the third contest in the GOP primary and caucus lineup. Scott will return to Iowa and New Hampshire on Wednesday and Thursday, following his campaign kick off.

He joins a growing field of GOP White House hopefuls who are challenging Trump.

Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis, whose anti-woke crusade has made him popular with conservatives across the country, is expected to officially file paperwork this week with the FEC to launch a presidential campaign, with a formal announcement to follow. DeSantis is second in the Republican primary polls, behind Trump but far ahead of the rest of the field.

That field will also include former Vice President Mike Pence, who’s expected to launch a campaign in the coming weeks. 

Scott will also face serious competition from Nikki Haley, the former ambassador to the United Nations and former two-term South Carolina governor who launched a 2024 presidential campaign in February. Haley, who’s spending plenty of time on the campaign trail in the early voting states, and Scott share many of the same allies and donors. 

Also in the race are former two-term Arkansas Gov. Asa Hutchinson, multi-millionaire entrepreneur, best-selling author and conservative commentator Vivek Ramaswamy, Michigan businessman and 2022 gubernatorial candidate Perry Johnson and conservative radio talk show host and former California gubernatorial candidate Larry Elder.

Govs. Doug Burgum of North Dakota and Chris Sununu of New Hampshire are seriously mulling presidential bids, with announcements likely in the coming weeks, and former New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie expected to announce in the coming days whether he’ll launch a second GOP presidential campaign.

Scott, who cruised to re-election last November to what he has said will be his final six-year term in the Senate, is expected to court evangelical Christian voters, who play an outsized role in GOP politics in Iowa and his home state. 

Another question for Scott, who’s currently polling in the single digits with the rest of the pack, trailing DeSantis and far behind Trump, is how he can broaden his support and rise in the polls.

‘I think after the announcement I think the polls will start to change,’ Scott told Fox News. ‘I think there’s an enthusiasm that will continue to spread throughout the country. And we’ll start doing the things candidates do, which will include going back to Iowa, New Hampshire, South Carolina and beyond. So we’ll spend the time, stay on the campaign trail, and make sure we have the message that works.’

While Scott doesn’t have the same national standing with conservatives that Trump and DeSantis enjoy, he’s known as a ferocious fundraiser who had roughly $22 million in his campaign coffers at the end of March, which can be transferred to his presidential campaign. The fundraising war chest could give Scott a head start over some of his rivals for the Republican nomination.