The Dictatorship
House to vote on constraining Trump’s Iran war — with GOP support undecided
When the House votes Thursday to rein in President Donald Trump’s war with Iran, Democrats expect nearly unanimous support among their caucus.
What remains unclear is whether even a small number of Republicans will join them — and whether it will be enough to send a message to the president about Congress’ willingness to check his military authority.
On the GOP side, Democrats aren’t sure what to expect.
A similar war powers resolution failed last month, 212 to 219 — with four Democrats joining with Republicans in opposition. (Only two Republicans voted in support.)
Rep. Gregory Meeks of New York — the top Democrat on the House Foreign Affairs Committee — told MS NOW they have every Democrat but one in support, “and we’re working on that one.”
“I have two Republicans, and I’m working on a few others who are on the fence,” he said. ”I don’t think they’re going to get off the fence until such time there’s a vote. I don’t know which way they’re going to go.”
If the House approves the resolution, it would amount to a dramatic rebuke of the president and his decision to launch the war, which is now past the six week mark. Thirteen U.S. military personnel are dead. Gas prices have skyrocketed. And the U.S. doesn’t look any closer to a resolution, despite Trump’s promises otherwise.
But even if the war powers resolution is adopted, there’s little indication it will have much practical effect beyond sending a message. The Senate failed to advance its own Iran war powers resolution Wednesday. And, of course, the president would have veto power should a resolution ever land on his desk — a two-thirds, veto proof majority is a long shot, requiring a notable chunk of Republicans to cross the president.
Of the four Democrats who voted against the war powers resolution last month, two have already indicated they will vote in support this time: Reps. Greg Landsman of Ohio and Henry Cuellar of Texas.
Cuellar, in a statement, expressed frustration with a lack of clarity from the administration as to “our objectives, our long-term goals and, most importantly, a clear exit strategy.”
Landsman told MS NOW he will vote for the resolution because of how long the conflict is dragging on, saying Trump has been “cavalier and unserious.”
The other two Democrats who voted ‘no’ last time — Reps. Jared Golden of Maine and Juan Vargas of California — have not said what they intend to do this go around. Neither office responded to a request for comment.
Meeks wouldn’t say which Republicans he is targeting or who the Democratic hold-out is. But when asked if he was confident heading into Thursday that the resolution would advance, he said, “If I had Golden, I would be.”
The two Republicans who voted for the resolution in March were Reps. Thomas Massie of Kentucky, the GOP co-sponsor of the measure, and Warren Davidson of Ohio.
The House vote Thursday will mark the second time this week congressional lawmakers have weighed in on curbing Trump’s authority in Iran. Already, a similar effort failed in the Senate.
On Wednesday, the Senate took its fourth procedural vote on an Iran war powers resolution, with the tally breaking largely the same way it did the three previous attempts: An unsuccessful 47-52 vote. Sens. Rand Paul, R-Ky., and John Fetterman, D-Pa. were the only members to cross the aisle.
Some more moderate Republicans who recently raised concerns about the president’s threats to wipe out a “whole civilization” — such as Sens. Susan Collins of Maine and Lisa Murkowski of Alaska — still voted against advancing the resolution.
Walking to the Senate floor, Murkowski pointed to negotiations between the U.S. and Iran. “We’re still engaged in an operation, although theoretically we are at a pause,” she said.
Days earlier, she wrote on X that Trump’s rhetoric “cannot be excused away as an attempt to gain leverage in negotiations with Iran.”
“The oppressive, terror-spreading regime of the Islamic Republic must be distinguished from the people and the civilization of Iran. Everyone involved—especially the President and Iran’s leaders—must de-escalate their unprecedented saber-rattling before it is too late,” she added at the time.
Senate Democrats say they intend to continue to force votes on war powers resolutions in the weeks to come. However, while they may try to increase the political pressure on Republicans, they may not find immediate success in prying additional GOP lawmakers to their side.
That story may change in a few weeks, though.
The War Powers Resolution of 1973 states that 60 days after the president first informs Congress of hostilities, the use of armed forces must end unless Congress has officially voted to authorize military force — setting the potential for April 29 to be a key day in the Capitol.
One House Republican, who requested anonymity to discuss the internal dynamics, told MS NOW that after April 29, there could be enough GOP support to constrain the president
“I want to be able to say that no matter who’s the president, no matter which party’s in charge, no matter what region of the world, what country we’re talking about, that we’re applying the same law to the same standard consistently,” this Republican said. “So it is so much easier to just say we are going to follow the War Powers Act of ‘73. If we want to change that law, then let’s change it. But right now, that’s the law, so why don’t we just stick with that?”
Rep. Ro Khanna, the Democratic co-sponsor of the House’s war powers resolution, told MS NOW in an interview Monday night that he also has been hearing that April 29 will be a key GOP defection day.
“When Thomas Massie and I introduced the war powers resolution, we only had two Republicans,” he said. “Now I’m hearing almost 15 Republicans.”
Murkowski, for her part, is reportedly working on a resolution to formally authorize the use of military force (an AUMF, in congressional parlance). Such a measure would allow Congress to set guardrails on the U.S. operation. It’s unclear how much support this could garner.
Sen. Thom Tillis, R-N.C., on Tuesday argued an AUMF “could be an advantage” for the president as part of negotiations with Iran — saying it would remove “the political calculation that maybe the president doesn’t have Congress.”
Sen. Josh Hawley, R-Mo., told MS NOW that while he hopes the conflict will be over by the 60-day mark — or that the president will announce his plans to wind the operation down — “if neither of those things happen,” Hawley said, “then I think, yeah, we have to look at debating a declaration of war.”
Still, however, those stances could change in an instant. In January, two Republican senators — Hawley and Todd Young of Indiana — voted to advance a war powers resolution for Venezuela, a move that was perceived as a massive rebuke of Trump and his strategy of targeting drug boats in the Caribbean.
But the next week, when it came time to weigh in on the actual legislation, the pair voted noa decision that came after an intense lobbying campaign from the White House, underscoring the tight grip Trump still has on congressional Republicans.
Separately on Wednesday, the Senate rejected a resolution from Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., to block the sale of bombs and bulldozers to Israel — who, with the U.S., launched the attack on Iran.
While the result was not surprising — similar resolutions have failed previously — Sanders did succeed in getting more support from the Democratic caucus than ever before.
The change, Sanders argued, was a reflection of the deteriorating levels of support for Israel among U.S. voters, particularly Democrats.
“This is where the American people are, the polls are very clear,” Sanders said.
Sanders left open the possibility of another vote in the future.
Jack Fitzpatrick contributed to this report.
Kevin Frey is a congressional reporter for MS NOW.
Mychael Schnell is a reporter for MS NOW.
The Dictatorship
Trump says US will blockade Iran in the Strait of Hormuz and charge ships for safe passage
DUBAI, United Arab Emirates (AP) — The U.S. launched strikes on Iran early Tuesday morning, hours after President Donald Trump said Washington is “reinstating” a blockade on Iran in the Strait of Hormuz. Trump separately suggested the United States will charge other ships for safe passage, upending hundreds of years of American policy supporting freedom of navigation across the globe.
Iran responded with attacks targeting Bahrain, Jordan and two tankers associated with the United Arab Emirates traveling through the strait, killing one mariner and wounding eight others. The Emirates threatened to retaliate against Iran, potentially drawing the nation home to Abu Dhabi and Dubai back into fighting with Tehran.
The attacks come as Iran and the U.S. both vie for control of the strait through which a fifth of all traded crude oil and natural gas once passed in peacetime. The price of benchmark Brent crude oil rose to a one-month high of over $84 in trading early Tuesday, still well below the nearly $120 reached at the height of the war but threatening to make costs everywhere higher.
Trump insists strait will be open
The U.S. military’s Central Command said it struck areas around Abu Musa, Bandar Abbas, Bushehr, Chahbahar, Jask and Konarak, targeting Iranian “coastal defense systems, missile and drone sites and maritime capabilities.” Iran acknowledged strikes around those areas, but provided no immediate casualty or damage assessments.
“These strikes will continue imposing a heavy cost on Iranian forces and degrade their ability to attack innocent civilians and commercial shipping in the Strait of Hormuz,” the U.S. military said.
Moments after the military announced the new strikes, Trump called it “another major attack.”
“We’re hitting them very hard. And it’ll continue, and we’ll see what happens,” he told reporters in the Oval Office. “We’re knocking out all of their offensive capability and we’re controlling the straits. We’re putting the blockade back.”
Trump also provided new details on his administration doing an about-face and suggesting it will charge tolls for ships going through the strait, after previously suggesting that it wouldn’t.
“We’re protecting a very rich portion of the world,” he said. “We’re spending money. And so, what we’ve done is, we are going to be reimbursed for protection.”
Sign up for Morning Wire: Our flagship newsletter breaks down the biggest headlines of the day.
It’s a change in U.S. policy that, until now, said the strait should remain open to all without tolls — as it was before the U.S. and Israel attacked Iran on Feb. 28. Any attempt by the U.S. or Iran to charge fees would violate global norms on freedom of navigation and raise tensions, likely causing further economic disruption far beyond the region.
The U.S. Navy has fought for freedom of navigation on the seas since the Barbary Wars and the War of 1812.
Attacks resume across the Mideast
The United Arab Emirates’ Defense Ministry said early Tuesday that Iran attacked two tankers in the Strait of Hormuz, killing one mariner and wounding eight others.
The Emirati Defense Ministry said Iran launched two cruise missiles at the tankers Mombasa and Al Bahiyah.
The attacks set both tankers ablaze, though the fires were extinguished.
Iran’s paramilitary Revolutionary Guard claimed the attack on the tankers, saying the vessels “ignored repeated warnings.”
“They chose to pass through a minefield and were subsequently targeted and disabled,” the Guard said.
Bahrain also came under renewed attack early Tuesday morning as Iran retaliated over the latest round of U.S. airstrikes. Bahrain sounded its missile alert sirens twice, urging the public to seek shelter. There was no word on any damage or casualties from the attack.
The Emirati Defense Ministry said the attack on the tankers killed one Indian national and wounded six Indians and two Ukrainians.
“The UAE reserves its full right to respond to this escalation and to take all necessary measures to protect its territory, its citizens and residents,” the Defense Ministry added.
The Emirates used similar language before launching attacks against Iran during the war. Fighter jets could be heard overheard Tuesday morning in Dubai.
The U.S. Embassy in Abu Dhabi and the U.S. Consulate in Dubai alerted Americans early Tuesday that consular appointments had been canceled through Wednesday “due to the regional security situation.”
Jordan’s military said it intercepted four missiles from Iran, according to a statement carried by the kingdom’s state-run Petra news agency. Jordan hosts U.S. forces and has come under attack by Tehran in recent days.
Trump says Iran failed a test
Earlier Monday, Trump told conservative radio host Hugh Hewitt that the agreement reached last month was “built to test” Iran, adding that “when you’re dealing with sleazebags (agreements) don’t mean much.”
“They didn’t honor the test,” the president said.
Iran asserts it has the right to manage traffic through the strait and potentially charge fees in accordance with the interim peace deal. The U.S. has disputed that.
The American military and the United Nations’ International Maritime Organization have tried to establish a route through the strait along the coast of Oman that would be outside of Iranian control. Iran has attacked ships using that route, saying the U.S. is violating the interim peace deal. The U.S. has attacked Iran in response, drawing Iranian attacks on U.S.-allied Arab states.
Exchanges of fire in recent days had already cast further doubt on the interim peace deal. Washington had lifted a blockade it imposed in mid-April as part of that deal, which also called for the strait to be fully reopened.
“We are reinstating the THE IRANIAN BLOCKADE,” Trump said on social media. “All other countries will have fair and open use of the Strait.”
The president said the U.S. would be “reimbursed” by 20% of the value of cargo to help cover “any and all costs necessary to do the job of providing safety and security.”
The U.S. military said it will resume its blockade of Iranian ports at midnight local Wednesday in Dubai.
___
Boak, Weissert and Toropin reported from Washington. Associated Press writers Mae Anderson in New York, Christopher Weber in Los Angeles, Kareem Chehayeb in Beirut, Munir Ahmed in Islamabad and Stella Martany in Irbil, Iraq, contributed to this report.
Writer E. Jean Carroll finally has the $5 million — plus interest — that a jury ordered President Donald Trump to pay her in damages in one of her two cases against him, after Trump fought the payout for years.
Court records posted Tuesday show a transfer of $5,625,005.48 to Carroll’s legal team took place the day before.
Carroll received the money more than three years after a jury found that the president was liable for sexually abusing her in a Manhattan department store in 1996, and then for defaming her on social media. Trump has repeatedly appealed the judgment to no avail — including petitioning the Supreme Court multiple times — and last week launched a last-ditch attempt to block her from getting the money.
Last Tuesday, his legal team filed a briefrequesting that the disbursement of the damages be halted, pointing to his pending request for the Supreme Court to reconsider its refusal to hear his appeal.
A federal judge nevertheless ordered Wednesday that Carroll be paid, prompting a swift appeal from Trump and a motion for an emergency administrative stay on the disbursement of the funds.
That request was denied.
“Three years ago, a unanimous nine-person jury found President Trump liable for sexually assaulting and defaming E. Jean Carroll. Today, we are pleased to report that she has received the damages payment the jury awarded her as a result of that verdict,” said Carroll’s lead attorney, Roberta Kaplan.
Clarissa-Jan Lim is a breaking news reporter for MS NOW. She was previously a senior reporter and editor at BuzzFeed News.
Lisa Rubin is MS NOW’s senior legal reporter and a former litigator.
To the extent that the United States and Iran had a ceasefire deal in place to end the deadly, destabilizing war, that agreement has unraveled. Donald Trump has declared the ceasefire “over”; both countries have renewed their military strikes; and the American president is positioning the U.S. as a mercenary forcewith plans to charge tolls to pay for guarding the Strait of Hormuz.
As for the deal the Trump administration negotiated with Iran, formally known as a memorandum of understanding, or MOU, conservative host Hugh Hewitt asked the president whether the framework was “built to fall apart.” The Republican responded with an answer he hadn’t shared previously.
“It was built to test. It was a test,” Trump replied. “We didn’t know. It didn’t, look, memorandum of understanding, when you’re dealing with sleazebags, don’t mean much. And they don’t mean much when you’re dealing with honorable people, too, because it’s memorandum of understanding. It doesn’t mean much.”
The president went on to say that Iran “didn’t honor the test,” before suggesting that he had predicted from the outset that officials in Tehran would cause the agreement to collapse through noncompliance. “I said, ‘Watch, I guarantee. Watch.’ And they never, they never followed it.”
The apparent point of the on-air comments wasn’t merely to blame Iran for the unravelling deal, it was also to convey the suggestion that Trump knew all along Iran would cause the framework to collapse.
The trouble is, very recent history proves otherwise.
It was exactly one month ago when the president published a statement to his social media platform, announcing, “The Deal with the Islamic Republic of Iran is now complete. Congratulations to all!” About an hour later, seemingly eager to pat himself on the back, he added“This Great Deal will bring Peace and Security to the whole Region. Many presidents have tried to make Peace with Iran, and all have failed before me. The Leaders of the Region have, for the first time, found a President who can help them achieve real Peace.”
In the days that followed, not only did Trump continue to celebrate his alleged triumph, but the White House invested an enormous amount of time and effort in touting the deal, all while Vice President JD Vance went on a media tour, doing his best to defend the policy on the merits.
There was nothing about this being a “test.” Not a word was uttered about the idea that the deal “doesn’t mean much.”
If the president expects his post hoc rationalization of this failure to persuade anyone, he’s probably going to be disappointed.
Steve Benen is a producer for “The Rachel Maddow Show,” the editor of MaddowBlog and an MS NOW political contributor. He’s also the bestselling author of “Ministry of Truth: Democracy, Reality, and the Republicans’ War on the Recent Past.”
- What’s in store for Todd Blanche’s confirmation hearing
- GOP governors, utilities join Trump data center pledge
- Vance to meet with House Republicans Wednesday
- Trump says US will blockade Iran in the Strait of Hormuz and charge ships for safe passage
- ‘Too cute by half’: Senators brush off Trump’s suggestions for honoring Graham
- Democrats divided on whether to make daylight saving time permanent
- Luna signals she will end revolt, vote to allow the House to debate legislation
- Ron Johnson is full speed ahead on Reconciliation 3.0
- The foods most likely to carry diarrhea-causing parasite cyclospora (and which are safe)
- How to hold Trump accountable: Sue, baby, sue
-
Politics1 year agoFormer ‘Squad’ members launching ‘Bowman and Bush’ YouTube show
-
The Dictatorship1 year agoLuigi Mangione acknowledges public support in first official statement since arrest
-
The Josh Fourrier Show2 years agoDOOMSDAY: Trump won, now what?
-
Politics1 year agoFormer Kentucky AG Daniel Cameron launches Senate bid
-
Uncategorized2 years ago
Bob Good to step down as Freedom Caucus chair this week
-
The Dictatorship1 year agoPete Hegseth’s tenure at the Pentagon goes from bad to worse
-
Politics1 year agoBlue Light News’s Editorial Director Ryan Hutchins speaks at Blue Light News’s 2025 Governors Summit
-
The Dictatorship10 months agoMike Johnson sums up the GOP’s arrogant position on military occupation with two words