Congress
Trump is interested in new Russia sanctions. But there’s a catch.
President Donald Trump is ready to sign a punishing Russia sanctions bill that GOP hawks have pushed for months. But only if it changes to give him more control.
A senior administration official granted anonymity to discuss the president’s view said that “conceptually there’s an openness” to the bill from Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.), but the person suggested that the legislation needs to preserve what the White House sees as the president’s sole authority to oversee U.S. foreign policy.
The current draft of the bill allows the president to waive a 500 percent tariff on countries that buy Russian oil and uranium for up to 180 days, and Graham said Tuesday he has agreed to revise the bill to allow for a second waiver, subject to congressional oversight.
The administration’s desired changes would solidify the president’s waiver authority, ensuring that Congress has no power to question Trump should he decide to end the sanctions.
“The current version would subject the president’s foreign policy decisions to micromanagement by Congress through a joint resolution of disapproval process. … That’s a nonstarter for us,” said the official. “The administration is not going to be micromanaged by the Congress on the president’s foreign policy. The bill needs a waiver authority that is complete.”
Trump’s new willingness to engage with Congress on a sanctions bill underscores his growing frustration with Russian President Vladimir Putin, who he says has rebuffed efforts to negotiate an end to the bloodshed in Ukraine.
“For the president now, he has invested his own reputation of being able to negotiate anything anywhere, and Putin has made him look foolish,” said one Republican operative close to the White House.
Trump said Tuesday that Putin was throwing “a lot of bullshit” at him and that he was “looking very strongly” at the sanctions bill. On Wednesday, Speaker Mike Johnson threw his support behind the sanctions push.
“Vladimir Putin has shown an unwillingness to be reasonable and to talk seriously about brokering a peace, and I think we have to send him a message,” he said.
Senate Majority Leader John Thune has been more circumspect, citing both “substantial progress” in working with the White House on the bill but also making clear his desire to get Trump fully onboard. He said in a floor speech Wednesday it was possible the measure could come to the Senate floor this month but offered no guarantee.
But the president’s comments, emphasizing that any additional Russia sanctions would be “at my option,” underlined what aides said is a top priority: maintaining maximum flexibility and total control over U.S. policy toward the Kremlin.
Two people granted anonymity to describe private discussions on Capitol Hill acknowledged that while the White House might broadly be supportive of the sanctions bill, they hadn’t yet reached an agreement with lawmakers on the scope of the waiver authority.
Thune acknowledged in a brief interview that the waiver language remains subject to negotiation.
“We’re still working with them,” he said, adding that they were “trying” to get everyone on the same page.
The White House, asked for comment on the state of play, pointed to Trump’s remarks.
So far, the GOP-controlled Congress has been remarkably pliant in the face of Trump’s pressure, delivering the president’s massive tax and spending package last week and backing the White House’s actions on trade, immigration and war powers — all areas where Congress has constitutionally granted authority.
Given that pattern, the administration expects lawmakers will craft the Russia sanctions bill in a way that satisfies Trump, even if that means giving up their role administering its provisions. That’s a shift from Trump’s first term, when a broad sanctions bill targeting Russia included language creating a former congressional review process.
Aside from his desire to curtail Congress’ ability to check him on foreign policy matters, Trump’s insistence on flexibility has just as much to do with keeping the door open for a potential breakthrough with Putin, according to the two White House officials.
Graham reiterated Wednesday that he believes Trump is on board with his legislation, saying that the president “wants a waiver, he’s got a waiver. He’s in control of how you implement the sanctions.”
“He told me he thought it would be helpful,” Graham said about his conversations with Trump about the bill. “We want to be a team. We want to help the president. This is an effort to give the president leverage he doesn’t have today.”
Even with the bill’s broad and bipartisan backing in the Senate — with more than 80 co-sponsors, it could theoretically survive a Trump veto — many Republicans are loath to take it up until there’s a clear and unequivocal statement of support from the president.
“The desire to move up here is real, but the risk is moving a bill that the president ultimately decides he doesn’t want,” said one GOP Hill official granted anonymity to discuss the private deliberations.
While Republicans are tentatively eyeing the week of July 21 to put the bill on the floor, some GOP lawmakers have been privately skeptical of Graham’s claims this week that everyone is on the same page. They want to hear Trump say it himself.
That’s particularly true for a handful of lawmakers in the “America First” faction of the GOP who have typically been at odds with Graham’s more traditional hawkish stances. Sen. Josh Hawley (R-Mo.), for instance, said he would be calling Trump this week to hear his thoughts on the bill directly.
“I know Lindsey has said now he’s in favor of it … [but] I just want to get clued into what his thinking on it,” Hawley said. “I just prefer to hear it from him.”
Said another GOP senator who was granted anonymity to speak candidly, “If the president’s in favor of sanctions, then I’m in favor of sanctions, but I defer to the president.”
“He’s the one in the middle of all the negotiations,” the senator continued. “He’s frustrated with Putin today. He’s been frustrated with [Ukrainian President Volodymyr] Zelenskyy before. And he’s the only leader in the world that can bring both sides together.”
Connor O’Brien contributed to this report.
The chair of the House Agriculture Committee said he’s not willing to “accept bad results” as a tradeoff for the benefits of advancements in artificial intelligence — a direct rebuttal to OpenAI CEO Sam Altman.
“As someone who practiced health care for 28 years, I’m never willing to accept bad results. I think we just need to do our best,” Rep. G.T. Thompson, a Pennsylvania Republican, told reporters Monday.
He was responding to Altman’s comments to Decoded by Blue Light News that people “should accept some bad things happening for the benefits of this technology and people having the agency.”
Pressed further on whether he agreed with Altman’s premise, Thompson replied, “No, I think we have to work harder to prevent any bad things from happening.”
Altman’s comments come in the wake of increased panic over the risks of catastrophic destruction from AI, with many industry leaders and experts arguing that guardrails are needed on the technology to prevent it from spinning out of human control.
Pressure is building on Congress to regulate the rapidly-advancing technology, but lawmakers are divided over whether the AI industry needs federal regulation or if it’s capable of governing itself.
The executives of major AI labs and tech companies gathered at the White House last week to discuss solutions with President Donald Trump, who believes overregulating AI will have national security repercussions. The group ended up signing a “morally binding” AI accord that critics say won’t do enough to prevent a worst-case scenario.
Thompson noted Monday he believes that AI will bring “tremendous solutions,” specifically in regards to finding cures for health issues like cancer and Alzheimer’s disease. But he also said AI has to be led with “principle” — comparing it to how he addressed digital assets in a bill to regulate the cryptocurrency industry, which he worked on as chair of the Agriculture Committee.
“The first principle is ‘do no harm.’ So we need to protect consumers, and that means, I think, building some guardrails — some guidelines — to do that,” Thompson said. He added that the second principle is to “foster innovation.”
“I think AI has a lot to do with that,” he added. “I don’t think AI works without RI: Real Intelligence.”
LE SUEUR, Minnesota — Senate Majority Leader John Thune said Monday there is no “consensus” yet on advancing a bill establishing permanent daylight saving time even as President Donald Trump ramps up pressure on Republicans to pass it.
Thune addressed the matter in a Monday interview after Trump used his Truth Social account multiple times over the weekend to rail against the legislation, known as the Sunshine Protection Act — going so far as to post the personal cell phone number of one of its GOP opponents, Sen. Tom Cotton of Arkansas.
“The president feels strongly on it like he does a lot of issues,” he said. “It’s something we’re having conversations about but there’s no clear path forward or consensus on it yet.”
While Trump singled out Cotton for scrutiny, Thune made clear the opposition to the permanent daylight saving time proposal — which would lead to very late winter sunrises in some parts of the country — ran deeper than one senator.
Cotton has publicly voiced opposition to the proposal for year, citing, among other things, the fact that children in his state would be going to school in the dark for part of the year.
Sen. Roger Wicker (R-Miss.) voiced similar objections Monday to reporters in the Capitol, saying he was mindful of “safety concerns in the more northern and rural states where children get on the school bus in very early hours.”
Thune, who spoke during a campaign swing in Minnesota with GOP Senate nominee Michele Tafoya, has himself opposed previous daylight saving bills. He said Monday that “a lot of it depends on where you are in the country” and that “your geography probably has as much to do with your position on that as anything.”
Sen. Rick Scott (R-Fla.), who has aligned himself closely with Trump, is among the lawmakers who have been pushing to get the bill through the Senate. He recently told POLITICO, “I’m going to make sure it gets passed this year.”
Riley Rogerson contributed to this report.
Democrats have pulled back some of their ads in North Carolina’s Senate race, days after the top Senate Republican super PAC paused its future spending in the state.
WinSenate, a group affiliated with the Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer-aligned Senate Majority PAC, has removed roughly $1.1 million in North Carolina ad buys this week, according to ad tracking firm AdImpact. The group still has roughly $18.8 million in future reservations through Election Day.
“Senate Majority PAC is committed to seeing this race through to victory, and will continue to make spending decisions based on how to best build a strong Senate majority,” Senate Majority PAC spokesperson Lauren French said in a statement.
The move, combined with the GOP-aligned Senate Leadership Fund’s decision to pause future spending, are a signal that both parties are shifting resources amid an ever-expanding Senate map. Democrats are increasingly confident in their North Carolina Senate nominee, Roy Cooper, as he continues to hold a sizable lead in public polling over Republican Michael Whatley — but some privately say states like Michigan and New Hampshire need more resources.
Meanwhile, multiple Republican groups, not just SLF, have retreated from the state in recent weeks, effectively deciding that it’s no longer worth the money to boost Whatley’s campaign.
The Koch-aligned Americans for Prosperity Action left North Carolina off its $22 million list of future spending across key Senate contests, and Old North Action removed $6.5 million in ad reservations last month.
The Cooper campaign, however, is still treating the race as competitive, pointing to North Carolina’s closely divided electorate and the fact that President Donald Trump won the state in each of the past three presidential elections.
“North Carolina is a truly 50/50 state and Democrats haven’t won a US Senate race in 18 years. We can’t take anything for granted or our eye off the ball,” said Morgan Jackson, a senior adviser to the Cooper campaign. “DC is broken and we’re going to continue to run this race like we’re ten points down to ensure North Carolinians get the change they desperately need.”
-
Politics2 years agoFormer ‘Squad’ members launching ‘Bowman and Bush’ YouTube show
-
Uncategorized2 years ago
Bob Good to step down as Freedom Caucus chair this week
-
The Josh Fourrier Show2 years agoDOOMSDAY: Trump won, now what?
-
The Dictatorship2 years agoPete Hegseth’s tenure at the Pentagon goes from bad to worse
-
Politics2 years agoFormer Kentucky AG Daniel Cameron launches Senate bid
-
The Dictatorship2 years agoLuigi Mangione acknowledges public support in first official statement since arrest
-
Politics2 years agoBlue Light News’s Editorial Director Ryan Hutchins speaks at Blue Light News’s 2025 Governors Summit
-
The Dictatorship1 year agoMike Johnson sums up the GOP’s arrogant position on military occupation with two words