Republicans have gained another 12 days in which to beat up on Chuck Hagel. And even though they may not ultimately stop him from taking over the Pentagon, they relished the opportunity to keep trying. 
 
 “The fight goes on,” said conservative editor Bill Kristol, who marshaled opposition research, media buys and op-eds against Hagel. Kristol vowed that he would “continue to work to convince a majority of senators of the undeniable truth that we can do much, much better than Mr. Hagel.” 
 
 Text Size - 
 
 + 
 
 reset Reid: Hagel filibuster 'tragic' PHOTOS: Hagel's confirmation hearing Play Slideshow POLITICO LIVE: Hagel, Brennan fight Obama's battles 
 
 (Also on POLITICO: Reid sets stage for Hagel showdown) 
 
 And one Republican aide promised the long Presidents’ Day recess would represent for Hagel “one more week of additional questions on top of the questions they refuse to answer.” 
 
 Just the same, Democrats said they remained confident they would finally make Hagel secretary of Defense when they try again on Feb. 26. In that sense, Thursday’s 58-40 vote to cut off Senate debate was as much an attempt to advance him as Potomac jiu-jitsu by Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.), who moved it up from Friday knowing it would fail in a bid to get Republicans on the record blocking him. Sixty votes were needed to move the nomination forward. 
 
 Reid and the White House seized the opportunity to slam the GOP for what they called needless obstructionism that might prove dangerous given the appearance that the Defense Department would be headless. Its incumbent boss, Leon Panetta, was set to stay on until Hagel is finally confirmed, the Pentagon confirmed, but Panetta flew home to California on Thursday to help sell the narrative that Republicans were leaving his office in the E-Ring vacant. 
 
 (PHOTOS: What they’re saying about Hagel) 
 
 White House Press Secretary Jay Carney charged Republicans with putting “political posturing ahead of our nation’s security.” 
 
 “A clear majority in the United States Senate supports Senator Hagel’s confirmation, so today’s action runs against both the majority will of the Senate and our nation’s interest,” Carney said. “Allow this war hero an up or down vote, and let our troops have the Secretary of Defense they deserve.” 
 
 (Also on POLITICO: McCain 'largely satisfied' on Hagel) 
 
 Republicans weren’t buying it – Senate Minority Whip John Cornyn said Reid had moved up the Hagel vote just “to get a story in the newspaper,” and he defended the validity of the sticking points over which Republicans had chosen to make their stand: Hagel’s financial disclosures and the Sept. 11 attack on the U.S. Consulate in Benghazi. 
 
 Republicans said they needed to be confident Hagel hadn’t taken payments from “foreign sources,” and they said the White House owed them more detail about its actions in the immediate aftermath of the Benghazi attack. Democrats fumed, arguing the issues were unconnected and that Hagel had satisfied the Senate Armed Services Committee’s disclosure requirements, but they could also not muster the 60 votes to break Republicans’ barricade. 
 
 The White House attempted to mollify at least two key Republican opponents, John McCain of Arizona and Lindsey Graham of South Carolina, with a letter that explained that President Barack Obama had called his Libyan counterpart on the day after the attack, but it wasn’t enough. ||||| A bitterly divided Senate panel on Tuesday voted to approve President Barack Obama's nomination of Chuck Hagel to be the nation's defense secretary at a time of turmoil for the military with looming budget cuts, a fresh sign of North Korea's nuclear ambitions and drawdown of U.S. forces in Afghanistan. 
 
 FILE - In this Jan. 31, 2103 file photo, former Nebraska Republican Sen. Chuck Hagel, President Obama's choice for defense secretary, testifies before the Senate Armed Services Committee during his confirmation... (Associated Press) 
 
 The Armed Services Committee voted 14-11 to send the nomination to the full Senate, with all the panel's Democrats backing the president's choice to succeed Defense Secretary Leon Panetta. The committee's Republicans were unified in their opposition to their onetime colleague, a former two-term Republican senator from Nebraska and twice-wounded Vietnam combat veteran. 
 
 Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., said he would move ahead with a full Senate vote despite Republican complaints that he was "jamming it through." A vote is expected on Thursday, and barring any surprises, the Senate is likely to confirm Hagel for the president's second-term national security team. 
 
 Hagel, 66, would take charge of a military facing deep cuts in projected spending; challenges from North Korea, Iran and Syria; and the reduction of U.S. combat forces in Afghanistan. 
 
 Democrats, who hold a 55-45 edge in the Senate, have the numbers to confirm Hagel on a majority vote, but would need the support of five Republicans before an up-or-down vote on the president's Cabinet choice would be allowed. 
 
 More than a dozen Republicans oppose the nomination, and the committee's ranking Republican, Sen. Jim Inhofe of Oklahoma, is insisting that any confirmation be based on 60 votes rather than a majority of the Senate. But several Republicans reject what would be an unprecedented effort to delay a vote on a Cabinet nominee for defense secretary. 
 
 Hagel faces fierce opposition from Republicans who have challenged his past statements and votes on Israel, Iran, Iraq and nuclear weapons. Just hours before Tuesday's vote, foes circulated a memo arguing for more information about Hagel's personal finances and highlighting past statements by Democratic senators demanding further disclosures when the Senate considered nominees by Republican presidents. 
 
 The panel's chairman, Sen. Carl Levin, D-Mich., said the GOP demands were beyond the scope of those traditionally asked of previous nominees, Republican and Democrat _ a point echoed by his Republican colleague, Sen. John McCain of Arizona. 
 
 But Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, continued to demand that Hagel provide personal financial information for the past five years instead of the standard two years of committee and Senate rules, and suggested that the panel doesn't know whether Hagel received compensation from "extreme and radical groups." He also suggested that Hagel was hiding information. 
 
 That angered Levin, who rejected the notion of a different standard for Hagel than for other nominees and said he was "not going to accept your suggestion and innuendo." 
 
 Sen. Bill Nelson, D-Fla., accused Cruz over going over the line. 
 
 "You basically have impugned the patriotism of the nominee" with suggestions that he is cozy with Iran, Nelson said. "You also stated your opinion that you don't think he's truthful. Those are two fairly strong statements." 
 
 Inhofe said reported comments about Iranian leaders praising Hagel backs up Cruz's claim. "You can't get cozier," the panel's top Republican said. 
 
 The testy exchanges about Hagel prompted McCain to interject, "Sen. Hagel is an honorable man. No one on this committee should impugn his character and integrity." 
 
 Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., insisted that the former GOP senator was out of the mainstream. "He's in a league of his own," Graham said. 
 
 McCain, who was a close friend of Hagel's but split over the Iraq war and politics, said Tuesday he would vote against confirmation. However, late Monday McCain met privately with several committee Republicans and urged them not to filibuster the nomination, pointing out that the roles could be reversed someday with a Republican president and GOP-controlled Senate. 
 
 "I'm encouraging my colleagues if they want to vote against Sen. Hagel that's one thing, and that's a principled stand," McCain told a group of reporters. "We do not want to filibuster. We have not filibustered a Cabinet appointee in the past and I believe that we should move forward with his nomination, bring it to the floor and vote up or down." 
 
 All 55 Democrats are expected to back Hagel, and two Republicans _ Sens. Thad Cochran of Mississippi and Mike Johanns of Nebraska _ have said they will vote for the nominee. At least five Republicans have said they oppose a filibuster despite their reservations or opposition toward the nominee. 
 
 More than a dozen Republicans have said they will oppose their former colleague, and several others have indicated they are likely to vote no. Sen. Kelly Ayotte, R-N.H., a member of the Armed Services Committee, said Tuesday she would vote against the nominee, citing his performance at his confirmation hearing. 
 
 Hagel seemed ill-prepared under withering cross-examination from committee Republicans in nearly eight hours of testimony on Jan. 31. He was repeatedly pressed about past statements and votes on Israel, Iran and nuclear weapons, with GOP lawmakers suggesting he wasn't sufficiently supportive of Israel or anti-Iran. 
 
 In the memo circulated Tuesday, Republicans focused on the 2005 fight over President George W. Bush's nomination of John Bolton to be ambassador to the United Nations, and Democrats who tried to stop the nomination. The position is not Cabinet-level, however. 
 
 Faced with a Democratic filibuster, Bush circumvented the Senate and made Bolton a recess appointment. 
 
 Graham has signaled that he would block the nominations of Hagel and CIA Director-designate John Brennan if he doesn't get more answers about the deadly raid on the U.S. diplomatic mission in Benghazi, Libya, in September. 
 
 "I'm insisting that the president answer ... what he did that night. That's all. It would take five minutes to answer my question," Graham told reporters. "It's the only leverage I have." 
 
 The White House pushed back Monday, with spokesman Jay Carney insisting the administration had answered lingering questions about Libya and the president's actions on that fateful day. 
 
 "What is unfortunate here is the continuing attempt to politicize an issue, in this case through nominees that themselves had nothing to do with Benghazi, and to do so in a way that only does harm to our national security interests," Carney said. "Sen. Hagel, Mr. Brennan, they need to be confirmed." ||||| Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) on Sunday called former Republican Nebraska Sen. Chuck Hagel, who is President Barack Obama’s likely pick for defense secretary, an “in-your-face” nomination” and someone who is “out of the mainstream” of thinking on foreign policy issues. 
 
 
 
 (Also on POLITICO: Obama to pick Chuck Hagel for Pentagon) 
 
 “I’m going to vote for Senator [John] Kerry [for secretary of state]. I don’t agree with him a lot, but I very much think he’s in the mainstream of thought,” Graham said on CNN’s “State of the Union." 
 
 “Chuck Hagel, if confirmed to be the secretary of defense, would be the most antagonistic secretary of defense toward the state of Israel in our nation’s history," Graham said. “Not only has he said you should directly negotiate with Iran, sanctions won’t work, that Israel should directly negotiate with the Hamas organization, a terrorist group that lobs thousands of rockets into Israel. He also was one of 12 senators who refused to sign a letter to the European Union that Hezbollah should be designated as a terrorist organization." 
 
 “He has long severed his ties with the Republican Party. This is an in-your-face nomination by the president," Graham said. "And it looks like the second term of Barack Obama is going to be an in-your-face term." 
 
 
 
 (Also on POLITICO: The shortlist for Obama’s top jobs) 
 
 Read more about: Lindsey Graham, Chuck Hagel, Pentagon, Defense ||||| Former Nebraska senator Chuck Hagel will testify before the Senate Armed Services Committee today as he seeks to make the case for why he should be the next Secretary of Defense. 
 
 While Hagel’s nomination has been quite controversial — on both the left and the right — he appears to have weathered the initial storm and, having won the backing of influential New York Sen. Chuck Schumer, seems likely headed for confirmation. 
 
 Still, much rides on Hagel’s performance before the committee today. The committee is packed with opponents (ranking Republican Jim Inhofe has already said he would oppose Hagel’s nomination), former friends (John McCain) and likely supporters who still need to hear a few correct answers to reassure them (Kirstin Gillibrand). 
 
 Below are five senators on the Armed Services Committee worth keeping an eye on — for a variety of reasons — during Thursday’s hearing. Whom did we miss? The comments section awaits. 
 
 1. Ted Cruz: The Texas Republican senator may have only been elected in 2012, but he’s already making waves for his outspokenness in the Senate. (He was a forceful advocate for gun rights in a hearing on gun violence in the Senate Wednesday, for example.) Cruz, who was elected thanks to the power of the tea party movement, has already come out in opposition to Hagel’s nomination; Cruz has said Hagel has “consistently advocated weakness” in matters of foreign affairs. And Cruz was one of only three senators to vote against John Kerry’s confirmation as Secretary of State on Tuesday. 
 
 2. Kirstin Gillibrand: The New York Democrat has given every indication since meeting with Hagel that she will be a ‘yes’ vote but has said she will resist coming out publicly one way or the other until after the hearing. Expect Gillibrand’s questioning to focus heavily on Hagel’s past statements about Israel and the threat posed by Iran — areas of considerable concern not only to her constituents in the Empire State but also of major importance if she wants to pursue national office at some point. Gillibrand, an early sponsor of repealing the “don’t ask, don’t tell” policy for gays in the military, is also expected to get Hagel to state publicly that he’ll do whatever is necessary to ensure that the policy is fully repealed. 
 
 3. Lindsey Graham: The South Carolina senator has every reason to give Hagel a hard time. Graham has already called Hagel’s pick an “in-your-face nomination” by President Obama and insisted that the former GOP senator has “long severed his ties with the Republican party.” Graham faces the very real possibility of a primary challenge from his ideological right next year, and the Hagel hearings are a good place to allay some concerns conservatives have with him. 
 
 4. Jim Inhofe: You might think that Inhofe, of Oklahoma, might go easy on his fellow Plains-state senator. You’d be wrong. Very wrong. Not only has Inhofe already gone on record in opposition to Hagel’s nomination, but he has also suggested that voting for Hagel would amount to “giving (Obama) that added impetus to do the things that I think are destroying America.” So there’s that. Now, while Inhofe is expected to hammer Hagel on things like Iran, the two are friendly on a personal level, and so that may limit Inhofe’s aggressiveness. Or it may not. 
 
 5. John McCain: The history of faded friendship between Hagel and McCain makes this perhaps the most intriguing coupling of the hearing. McCain has withheld his endorsement from Hagel to date and said Sunday he won’t decide how he will vote until after the hearing. He and Hagel parted ways during the early part of the last decade over the way forward in Iraq, and in the immediate aftermath of Hagel’s nomination, McCain said he had “serious concerns about positions Sen. Hagel has taken on a range of critical national security issues in recent years.” Will McCain allow a once-close friendship to trump those policy concerns? Or will it be the other way around? 
 
 DCCC raises $1.9 million: The Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee will announce today that it raised $1.9 million since late November, ending the 2012 cycle with nearly $184 million raised, a DCCC aide tells The Fix. 
 
 That figure is actually $20 million more than the committee raised during the 2010 election cycle, when the party was in the majority. 
 
 It also has less debt ($13.5 million) than it did after the 2010 cycle ($19 million), along with more cash ($1.5 million versus $800,000), leaving it in better financial shape to start the 2014 election cycle. 
 
 Cuccinelli sounds like Romney in book: Virginia governor hopeful Ken Cuccinelli (R) is set to come out with a book in which he echoes — in part — Mitt Romney’s “47 percent” comment. 
 
 “Sometimes bad politicians set out to grow government in order to increase their own power and influence,” the attorney general writes. “This phenomenon doesn’t just happen in Washington; it happens at all levels of government. The amazing thing is that they often grow government without protest from citizens, and sometimes they even get buy-in from citizens — at least from the ones getting the goodies.” 
 
 He adds: “Citizens will vote for those politicians who promise more benefits each year, rather than the fiscally responsible politicians who try to point out that such programs are unsustainable and will eventually bankrupt the states or the nation.” 
 
 Cuccinelli is very conservative — there is no doubt about that — and Democrats will undoubtedly try to use stuff like this to marginalize him. 
 
 Fixbits: 
 
 Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.) responds to Erick Erickson’s criticism of his immigration reform push. Meanwhile, Ann Coulter and Sen. David Vitter (R-La.) go after Rubio. 
 
 Rubio is moving his family to Washington, and selling his house back in Florida. He will still keep a home in his home state, though. 
 
 Sen. David Vitter (R-La.) says Rubio is “amazingly naive” on the immigration issue. 
 
 Sen. Lamar Alexander (R-Tenn.) says video games are a bigger problem than guns. 
 
 Rep. Paul Broun (R-Ga.) is very close to announcing his Senate campaign. 
 
 Sen. Bob Menendez (D-N.J.) says allegations that he used prostitutes in the Dominican Republican are “false.” The office of a Menendez ally whose plane that senator has used was raided this week. 
 
 Potential Kentucky Senate hopeful Ashley Judd (D) and her race-car driver husband Dario Franchitti are getting divorced. 
 
 Must-reads: 
 
 “Obama’s Flip-Flops on Money in Politics: A Brief History” — Justin Elliott, ProPublica 
 
 “GOP electoral vote changes going nowhere” — Emily Schultheis, Politico 
 
 “Who would benefit if Electoral College is changed?” — Anthony Salvanto and Mark Gersh, CBS News 
 
 “Mass. governor taps friend to fill Kerry seat” — Nia-Malika Henderson and Sean Sullivan, Washington Post 
 
 “Why Republicans Should Ignore Obama” — Ramesh Ponnuru, Bloomberg 
 
 “Lynch, Markey Ready for Senate Primary Brawl in Massachusetts” — Joshua Miller, Roll Call ||||| Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell says former Sen. Chuck Hagel should be given a “fair” confirmation hearing if he’s picked as defense secretary, but wouldn’t stand by his previous praise of the Nebraska Republican. 
 
 
 
 (Also on POLITICO: Obama to pick Hagel for Pentagon) 
 
 “He ought to be given a fair hearing like any other nominee, and he will be,” McConnell (R-Ky.) said during a pre-taped interview Sunday on ABC’s “This Week.” “I’m going to wait and see how the hearings go and whether Chuck’s views square with the job he would be nominated to do.” 
 
 When Hagel left the Senate in early 2009, McConnell praised his “clear voice and stature on national security and foreign policy.” But McConnell appeared to back off those comments as Hagel has come under fire from fellow Republicans for not being sufficiently supportive of Israel, especially as it relates to the nuclear threat from Iran. 
 
 “I’m going to take a look at all of the things Chuck has said over the years and review that, and in term of his qualifications to lead our nation’s military,” McConnell said. “He certainly has been outspoken on foreign policy and defense over the years. The question we will be answering,if he is the nominee, is do his views make sense for that part job.” 
 
 Earlier McConnell stated: “Whoever is nominated for secretary of defense is going to have to have a full understanding of our close relationship with our Israeli allies, the Iranian threat and the importance of having a robust military.” 
 
 
 
 (Also on POLITICO: The shortlist for Obama’s top jobs) 
 
 Read more about: Mitch McConnell, Chuck Hagel, Pentagon, Defense ||||| Chuck Hagel is disavowing a comment he reportedly made six years ago tying the State Department to Israel, according to South Carolina Sen. Lindsey Graham. 
 
 Graham announced on "Fox News Sunday" that Hagel sent him a letter saying that he did not recall making the remark in a 2007 speech at Rutgers University. In that speech, the former Republican senator from Nebraska reportedly said the State Department was an adjunct of the Israeli foreign minister's office. Graham, also a Republican, called that alleged remark "disturbing" as critics said it was part of a pattern where President Barack Obama's nominee to be the next secretary of defense has taken stances seen as hostile to Israel. 
 
 But Hagel has furiously sought to rebut criticism over Israel and appears to have done so in his letter to Graham, who had sought clarification. 
 
 
 
 (Also on POLITICO: Rubio: Reported W.H. immigration plan DOA) 
 
 "He did not recall saying that," Graham said of Hagel's letter. "He disavows saying that. ... If that's true, that would end that matter." 
 
 "I will take him at his word," Graham said, "until something else comes along." 
 
 The comments come after Republicans blocked Hagel's confirmation last week in the Senate, claiming they needed more time to review his nomination. The letter indicates that Hagel is continuing to provide information to Senate Republicans, who appear likely to let the nomination be approved when the Senate returns from recess next week. 
 
 On NBC's "Meet the Press," the new White House chief of staff, Denis McDonough, said there is nothing left in documents set to be turned over to Senate Republicans that would hurt Hagel's confirmation prospects. 
 
 Indeed, Graham said he believes presidents deserve "great deference" in their Cabinet picks, but he continued his criticism of his former Republican colleague, who served as Nebraska senator from 1997 to 2009. 
 
 Hagel is "one of the most unqualified, radical choices for secretary of defense in a very long time," Graham said. 
 
 Read more about: Lindsey Graham, Chuck Hagel
– No sooner had rumors of Chuck Hagel's pending nomination to head up the Pentagon leaked than lips were flapping about what a bad idea it was. Hagel "is an in-your-face nomination by the president," charged Lindsey Graham, who "would be the most antagonistic secretary of defense toward the state of Israel in our nation’s history." Texas Sen. Ted Cruz blasted President Obama as "a president who has drunk the tea. He's high on re-election right now." Mitch McConnell, in an interview taped yesterday, was slightly warmer, saying, "he ought to be given a fair hearing, like any other nominee, and he will be. I’m going to wait and see how the hearings go and whether Chuck’s views square with the job he would be nominated to do.” Elsewhere on your Sunday dial, as per Politico: Dick Durbin on Hagel: “Chuck Hagel was a decorated veteran of the Vietnam war, a person that includes service on the Foreign Relations Committee as well as the Intelligence Committee. Yes, he is a serious candidate if the president chooses to name him.” Freshman Rep. Tom Cotton, R-Ark., on Hagel: "I would vote against him. Mr. Hagel came out against the surge the week that I returned from Iraq in 2006, said the war couldn't be won. No one had told us that when we were fighting it in 2006." McConnell on a potential challenge from Ashley Judd: "Look, the election is going to occur in 2014. In the meantime, I'm going to focus on the issues we have going on here."