Congress

Trump is interested in new Russia sanctions. But there’s a catch.

Published

12 months ago

July 9, 2025

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.

Congress

Cait Conley wins Democratic primary to face Rep. Mike Lawler

Published

25 minutes ago

June 24, 2026

Blue Light Newsroom

NEW YORK — Army veteran Cait Conley has emerged victorious in the bitter Democratic primary for New York’s 17th Congressional District, setting up a general election fight between a past national security staffer for former President Joe Biden and Republican Rep. Mike Lawler.

Conley, who served six tours overseas before becoming the National Security Council’s director for counterterrorism, leaned on her military service during her campaign, casting herself as a tough-as-nails political outsider who could cut through the noise and find pragmatic solutions.

Congress

Democratic socialist Valdez wins open Brooklyn-Queens primary

Published

41 minutes ago

June 24, 2026

Blue Light Newsroom

NEW YORK — State Assemblymember Claire Valdez prevailed in the tumultuous primary to succeed retiring Rep. Nydia Velázquez, notching the Democratic Socialists of America a win in one of the left’s most high-profile proxy wars.

Valdez, who has served in the Assembly representing Queens since last year, was boosted by the city chapter of the DSA and Mayor Zohran Mamdani. Her major competitor was Brooklyn Borough President Antonio Reynoso, who had the backing of the state Working Families Party and Velázquez.

The dynamics of those competing interests loomed over the campaign, exposing tensions among progressive Democrats.

The 7th District, which covers parts of Brooklyn and Queens, has been dubbed the “Commie Corridor.” That’s a nod to the DSA’s electoral power there — which it flexed during last year’s June mayoral primary when Mamdani enjoyed some of his strongest results in that district.

While the candidates agreed on most policy positions, Valdez and Reynoso spent months sparring over who had the most ironclad progressive values. Complicating matters further for them was New York City Council member Julie Won, who had the support of notable Asian American organizations and elected officials but struggled to gain enough traction to emerge as a real threat. Public defender Vichal Kumar was also on the ballot.

Even though the contenders all referred to Israel’s actions in Gaza as a “genocide,” Valdez repeatedly criticized Reynoso for how long it took him to use that label. She also attacked him for accepting campaign donations from people affiliated with the real estate industry.

In the waning days of the campaign, Valdez sought to tie Reynoso to the American Israel Public Affairs Committee — a tactic progressive candidates have long employed to mobilize their base, especially as the public’s view of Israel has grown increasingly negative. AIPAC said it was not involved in this race, and its independent expenditure arm did not appear to spend money on the contest.

Reynoso, meanwhile, tried to use Mamdani’s endorsement against Valdez, accusing her of being “beholden” to the mayor — a strategy that evidently did not land with an electorate that views Mamdani so positively. One significant flashpoint unfolded when the NYPD faced accusations of collaborating with Immigration and Customs Enforcement during a chaotic incident in Brooklyn, a charge Mamdani has denied. Reynoso said that when things “get complicated with the NYPD,” he doesn’t have “any bosses telling me to slow down and wait and work on messaging.”

A super PAC supporting Reynoso also attacked Valdez for not having as much political experience as Reynoso, who served in the City Council and as a community organizer prior to becoming borough president.

Valdez’s win is a boon for Mamdani, who put his political capital on the line in a handful of races this cycle — and angered Democratic power brokers in the process. Velázquez, a 16-term incumbent known as “La Luchadora” who’s served as a mentor for younger progressives in the city, was an early supporter of Mamdani in the mayoral election. But the two ended up on opposite sides in races up and down the ballot this year, stress-testing how the new mayor navigates relations with powerful, well-respected party figures.

Reynoso emphasized his “underdog” status in the race, despite his backing from Velázquez, the Working Families Party and major unions, pointing to Mamdani’s involvement and the district becoming more gentrified. Like Velázquez, Reynoso also endorsed Mamdani in the mayoral primary. But during the campaign, he accused the mayor of being “disloyal” to the veteran lawmaker.

Super PACs emerged as a major point of contention in the race as well. Reynoso and Won both criticized Valdez for putting public messaging on her campaign site — a common tactic viewed as a cue to PACs known as “redboxing” — where she presented talking points contrasting herself with Reynoso. Reynoso posted a redbox on his site too, but said he “had to do it” after Valdez put one up. After super PACs began supporting both candidates, Won touted herself as the only contender keeping their promise not to accept super PAC spending.

Throughout the campaign, Valdez leaned on her background as a union organizer. Originally from Texas, she moved to New York over a decade ago to be an artist. She is all but certain to win in the fall, when she will face Republican Melvin Rivera. Reynoso has not said if he will decline the Working Families Party ballot line for the general election.

Congress

Brad Lander trounces New York Rep. Dan Goldman in election upset

Published

56 minutes ago

June 24, 2026

Blue Light Newsroom

NEW YORK — Former New York City Comptroller Brad Lander defeated Rep. Dan Goldman in Tuesday’s Democratic congressional primary, ousting the two-term lawmaker after a bruising campaign that focused heavily on their differences over Israel.

On the campaign trail, Lander concentrated much of his attention on immigration and his opposition to U.S. military aid for Israel — and he was buoyed by an early endorsement from Mayor Zohran Mamdani.

Goldman became a household name after helping lead the first impeachment of President Donald Trump in 2019. A former federal prosecutor and heir to the Levi Strauss fortune, he was first elected to Congress in 2022 by a razor-thin margin, making his seat a target for progressives seeking to expand their footprint in the city’s congressional delegation.

The result wasn’t unexpected, as a recent poll showed Lander holding a commanding lead. With the primary in the bag, Lander is expected to coast in November’s general election, since there’s no competitive Republican candidate on the ballot.

Goldman’s district is safely Democratic, so Lander’s victory will not impact the party’s broader push to reclaim control of the House in November’s midterm elections.

Lander’s win is, however, a boon for the Democratic Party’s ascendant left wing — and a feather in the cap for Mamdani, who endorsed Lander the same day he launched his campaign in mid-December. In Lander, Mamdani has an ally who is more likely to push his priorities on Capitol Hill, a sharp contrast with Goldman, who never offered support for Mamdani during last year’s New York City mayoral race.

In many ways, Lander and Goldman, who are both Jewish, do not differ that much from each other politically. They are both ardent critics of the Trump administration’s hard-line immigration agenda and agree millionaires should be taxed at higher rates.

Lander found an edge, though, by making the race about Israel.

Fashioning himself a “liberal Zionist,” Lander attacked Goldman relentlessly on the campaign trail over the perception that the incumbent hasn’t been forceful enough in speaking out against Israel’s war in Gaza, which has left more than 75,000 Palestinians dead after being launched in response to Hamas’ Oct. 7, 2023, terror attack. Lander has blasted Goldman for not supporting legislation to block more U.S. military aid for Israel and accused him of kow-towing to pro-Israel lobbying groups by not calling the country’s war a “genocide.”

Supportive super PACs, including one funded by prominent business owners who also backed Mamdani’s mayoral run, piled on, spending hundreds of thousands of dollars on ads knocking Goldman and lauding Lander in the leadup to the election.

The talking points resonated with voters in Goldman’s district, which voted overwhelmingly for Mamdani, a longtime critic of Israel’s government, in last year’s mayoral election.

Lander was also able to capitalize on his deep ties to the district, especially in the Brooklyn portion, which he represented for 11 years while serving as a member of the New York City Council.

Goldman tried to fend off Lander’s challenge by committing to spend as much as $1 million of his own money on the race. Ultimately, the money didn’t move the needle enough for Goldman, who serves on the House Judiciary and Homeland Security Committees.

Lander mounted his challenge after placing third in the city’s Democratic mayoral primary last June. Initially, he angled for a top job in Mamdani’s administration after the mayoral race, but he switched gears to run for Congress after the mayor reportedly informed him there would be no position available for him at City Hall.