The Dictatorship
Senate Republicans fall in line with Trump and pass reconciliation bill
After a marathon session of votes Thursday and Friday, senators passed a roughly $70 billion reconciliation bill funding immigration enforcement, as more moderate Republicans abandoned efforts to constrain President Donald Trump’s $1.8 billion settlement fund — and a host of other controversies — and advanced the legislation without imposing any new restrictions on the president.
After more than 18 hours of voting, party loyalty ultimately prevailed. Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D., successfully navigated a series of politically fraught amendments that could have forced Republicans into direct confrontations with Trump.
At 4:52 a.m., senators voted 52-47 to pass the bill, with Sen. Lisa Murkowski, R-Alaska, as the lone Republican to oppose the final measure.
The legislation now goes to the House, where it faces further drama. GOP leaders initially planned to vote Friday in order to send the measure to Trump’s desk before the weekend. But facing potential attendance problems, House Republicans canceled Friday votes and are instead eying passage next week.
While some Republican critics of Trump broke with their party on individual amendments — and, in Murkowski’s case, on final passage — there were never enough defections to push Democratic proposals over the finish line. Depending on parliamentary rulings, amendments needed either a simple majority or 60 votes to pass. And amendments that required 60 votes received up to 54 votes in favor, while measures that only required a majority stalled out at 49.
It was either a fortuitous stroke of luck for GOP leaders or an intentional display of bipartisan theater, depending on who you asked.
At one point, Sen. Bill Cassidy, R-La., asked to change a mistaken “nay” vote to a “yea” after it was already clear the outcome wouldn’t change. The switch allowed him to register support for a Democratic proposal barring federal or private funds for Trump’s planned East Wing ballroom. The Senate agreed unanimously, nudging support from 52 senators to 53 — still well short of the 60 votes required.
Cassidy was the most persistent Republican holdout. About 17 hours into the amendment marathon, he offered a measure to redirect the $1.8 billion settlement fund to law enforcement officers who defended the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021. That measure garnered 52 votes in support, short of the 60 required.
“I was hoping that we could both have money to protect the border, but still do that which I hope to achieve,” Cassidy told reporters midway through the votes, referring to his efforts to block Trump’s $1.8 billion settlement fund.
The bill’s passage highlights a persistent clarity of purpose among Republican lawmakers, despite several weeks of drama.
“We’ve sort of lost sight of our ultimate objective here,” Sen. John Kennedy, R-La., told reporters ahead of the votes on Thursday. “The objective is to get DHS funded, and we’ve had some — some unrelated issues that have been thrust into the process, and they’ve got to be dealt with.”
The biggest point of contention throughout the votes was Trump’s proposed settlement fund, stemming from his lawsuit against the Internal Revenue Service. Democrats and a small group of Republican holdouts argued that Congress should prohibit the fund outright, regardless of acting Attorney General Todd Blanche’s promise to abandon it. But the GOP-controlled Senate repeatedly refused to take action.
Senators first rejected a proposal by Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., to send the bill back to the Judiciary Committee with instructions to block Trump’s “anti-weaponization” fund. That measure failed 49-50, short of the majority needed.
After expressing serious concerns about Trump’s settlement fund, Cassidy voted against that amendment and allowed the bill to move forward.
Next, members voted on an amendment from Sen. Thom Tillis, R-N.C., to redirect the funds to anti-fraud enforcement, a proposal that drew complaints from Democrats who viewed it as simply shuffling money around. That measure failed 15-84, well short of the 60 votes necessary.
Cassidy spent hours trying to draft an amendment to address the Trump settlement fund so that it would only need a simple majority. He was ultimately unsuccessful. And when he failed, there were no repercussions for GOP leaders when his amendment suffered the same fate as all the other proposals.
Democrats were able to force votes on a number of hot-button issues.
A proposal by Sen. Jeff Merkley, D-Ore., to bar federal funds for Trump’s East Wing ballroom — and to ban private donations unless authorized by Congress — drew 53 senators in support and 46 opposed, still well short of the 60 votes needed.
The close votes gave vulnerable Republicans and occasional Trump critics an opportunity to distance themselves from the administration without jeopardizing either the immigration funding package or Trump’s support.
The three most vulnerable incumbent Republicans in 2026 — Sens. Susan Collins, R-Maine, Jon Husted, R-Ohio, and Dan Sullivan, R-Alaska — all supported Tillis’ unsuccessful amendment to redirect Trump’s settlement money.
Husted, a Trump ally who rarely bucks his party, trailed Democratic former Sen. Sherrod Brown by eight percentage points in a Fox News poll released Wednesday. Husted voted for all three key measures to block Trump’s settlement fund Thursday and Friday.
Mostly, however, the amendment votes gave Democrats an opportunity to force Republicans onto the record. Democrats sought votes to block Bill Pulte from serving as acting director of national intelligence, increase home construction, require unannounced inspections of the Delaney Hall detention facility and prevent settlement-fund payments to Tina Peters, the former Colorado county clerk convicted of leaking voter data.
Republicans also took the opportunity to vote again on the SAVE America Act, which would require voters to show proof of citizenship to register to vote. The measure failed 48-50, short of the 60 votes required. Collins, Tillis, Murkowski and Sen. Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., joined Democrats in opposition.
For Democrats, the votes offered fresh material for an argument they have been making for months: that the private reservations Republicans express about Trump rarely translate to action when it counts.
Democrats have repeatedly pointed out that the Republican case against legislatively blocking the $1.8 billion fund — that it’s unnecessary because the Trump administration has already killed it, and that doing so could incur Trump’s veto — is self-violating. (Either the fund is dead and Trump shouldn’t care that Congress statutorily blocks it, or he’s trying to preserve his options as some lawmakers fear.)
But for Republicans, the immigration enforcement money was simply too important. And the amendment votes may have even worked to their advantage, as vulnerable Republicans could display their independence — even if that independence was largely symbolic.
With immigration enforcement funding hanging in the balance, most GOP lawmakers concluded that preserving party unity — and avoiding a direct confrontation with Trump — was more pressing than erecting new guardrails around the president.
The result was a familiar outcome. Republicans aired their concerns, Democrats forced uncomfortable votes, and Trump emerged with the legislative outcome he wanted.
Mychael Schnell and Lillie Boudreaux contributed to this report.
Jack Fitzpatrick covers Congress for MS NOW. He previously reported for Bloomberg Government, Morning Consult and National Journal. He has bachelor’s and master’s degrees from Arizona State University.
The Senate Judiciary Committee postponed a vote on acting Attorney General Todd Blanche’s nomination, a spokesperson said late Wednesday, as two retiring Republicans on the panel dug in over President Donald Trump’s personal “anti-weaponization” deal with the government he runs.
Sen. Chuck Grassley’s decision to delay the committee vote that had been set for Thursday marks a setback for one of Trump’s highest-profile Cabinet nominees, at the hands of Texas Sen. John Cornyn and Sen. Thom Tillis of North Carolina, a pair of Republicans set to leave the chamber next year.
“Chairman Grassley works to set President Trump’s nominees up for success in committee, not failure. Senators Cornyn and Tillis want written assurances from the Department of Justice regarding the Trump-IRS settlement,” the committee spokesperson said.
Blanche’s nomination to permanently head the Department of Justice needs the support of either Cornyn or Tillis to make it out of the committee to a vote by the full Senate, assuming all Democrats remain opposed.
“Why don’t you call over the Department of Justice and tell them they have one hour and 50 minutes to get me what I asked for,” Cornyn told reporters Wednesday afternoon amid the hardening standoff over his demand that Blanche and the DOJ put in writing a commitment never to pursue the president’s prized “anti-weaponization” fund, and to clarify the terms of Trump’s personal deal with the Internal Revenue Service.
Tillis told MS NOW that the conversations were complicated by the need for the Justice Department to get “several parties” to agree on the language of the statement Cornyn and Tillis are seeking.
“What I’ve advised the chair, and I would assume Senator Cornyn said something similar, is that we’re not prepared to vote yes yet,” he added.
“The Department has been in regular communication with Committee members for weeks, and we look forward to continuing to work productively with Senators to address any concerns,” a Justice Department spokesperson said in response to the decision to postpone the committee vote.
Cornyn was set to meet with Blanche on Wednesday morning, but the meeting was called off after Blanche failed to meet the senator’s demand for written proposals to modify the controversial settlement agreement he brokered between Trump and the IRS. The Republican senator is set to leave Congress when his term ends in January after a bruising May primary loss to Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton, Trump’s chosen candidate.
“Maybe John Cornyn’s upset with me because I didn’t endorse him,” Trump told reporters Wednesday afternoon in the Oval Office. “I don’t know what it is, but I haven’t heard that there’s a problem. I heard (Blanche) is going through quite nicely.”
Cornyn made clear to Blanche during his confirmation hearing that he will not get his support until he agrees to reopen and modify the settlement. Due to the committee’s narrow Republican majority, one GOP “no” vote is enough to sink Blanche’s nomination.
The senator has asked Blanche to provide proof that the proposed nearly $1.8 billion “anti-weaponization” fund established as part of the deal between Trump and the IRS is formally dead, and he has also demanded Blanche narrow the tax audit immunity provisions the settlement afforded to Trump and his family.
Blanche has publicly stated that his department has dropped the fund, but he and the DOJ have dodged requests from Cornyn and a federal judge to put that in writing.
After announcing his meeting with Blanche would not take place Wednesday morning, Cornyn told reporters that changes from Blanche “in a modified release form” would be acceptable, but that “for some reason … they simply refuse to do it,” referring to the DOJ.
Shortly after the meeting was called off, a Justice Department official told MS NOW that the department “provided a written proposal to Senator Cornyn’s staff yesterday following ongoing discussion with both the Committee and the Senator’s office.”
Cornyn said that proposal was “not responsive” to his demands because it did not address the tax audit immunity provisions in the settlement, one of his key demands.
In May, Blanche signed an addendum as part of the deal that granted Trump, his family and his businesses immunity from pending IRS tax audits. That agreement, which has been decried by former IRS officials and legal experts as unlawful self-dealing, is being contested in federal court.
Cornyn noted that Blanche testified under oath that he could meet the request during his confirmation hearing.
“Maybe they think I’m just going to give up or you know, go along, but they’re mistaken,” Cornyn said when asked why he thinks the DOJ could be slow-walking his request.
Kevin Frey contributed to this report.
Sydney Carruth is a breaking news reporter covering national politics and policy for MS NOW. You can send her tips from a non-work device on Signal at SydneyCarruth.46 or follow her work on X and Bluesky.
Mychael Schnell is a reporter for MS NOW.
Ebony Davis is a breaking news reporter for MS NOW based in Washington, D.C. She previously worked at BLN as a campaign reporter covering elections and politics.
When Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu arrived this week for his tour of Washington, he may have had a mission in mind.
Netanyahu needed to overcome his newly diminished stature and waning influence over his once close friend President Donald Trump as both leaders grapple with the unpopularity of a war they started together and is escaping their control.
His meeting at the White House with Trump on Tuesday, which was closed to the press, was the first face-to-face encounter between the two allies since the U.S. and Israel launched a joint attack against Iran on Feb. 28.
Trump gave him a muted welcome and afterwards simply described the meeting as “very good.” “Obviously, many important subjects were discussed,” the president wrote on Truth Social.
Rather than an intimate one-on-one setting, the Oval Office was full of top U.S. officials — Vice President JD Vance, Secretary of State Marco Rubio, Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent, Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Gen. Dan Caine, and special envoy Steve Witkoff.
But Netanyahu continued the full court press on the Trump administration.
Over the course of two days, in addition to seeing Trump and attending Sen. Lindsey Graham’s funeral at the Capitol, Netanyahu also met separately with Vance, Hegseth, and Rubio, White House and Israeli officials confirmed to MS NOW.
The Israeli prime minister’s slate of meetings with key U.S. national security officials comes at a pivotal moment in the Iran conflict as tensions escalate in the region and Americans increasingly sour on the war. A recent Quinnipiac poll shows 60% of American voters opposing U.S. military action against Iran and 74% against sending U.S. ground troops into Iran.
Not only does Trump face pressure as Republicans face an uphill battle to retain congressional control in this fall’s midterms, Netanyahu’s fate as prime minister is at stake in Israel’s upcoming September elections – and he can’t afford to lose Trump’s favor.
The talks largely focused on what to do next as Iran continues to menace shipping in the Strait of Hormuz and retaliate against American bases in the region and launch attacks on Gulf allies.
According to a senior Israeli official who was granted anonymity to describe the closed-door meeting, President Trump and Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu did not come to a final decision after discussing three paths forward: get a “good deal” focused on Iran’s nuclear program and enriched material, have no deal and instead continue the blockade and economic pressure, or take escalated military action.
But Netanyahu did not tell Trump what he should do – nor did he express a preference.
The senior Israeli official noted Netanyahu has not ruled out diplomacy – as long as it is coupled with “very strong pressures,” calling the push to dismantle Iran’s nuclear program “a contest of will and a contest of force.”
“There are ways of squeezing them and squeezing them and squeezing them and negotiating at the same time,” the official said.
Netanyahu did not present President Trump with new intelligence regarding the underground Iranian nuclear facility Pickaxe Mountain, per the senior Israeli official, noting the U.S. and Israel already are constantly sharing intelligence – and know where Iran’s highly enriched material is. “We don’t think it’s moved, and I think we have a pretty good grasp on that,” the official said.
During their meeting on Tuesday, Trump and Netanyahu discussed ways Israel and the U.S. can work together to stop Iran’s nuclear program and get the Strait of Hormuz open to maritime trade, the senior Israeli official said.
The two leaders also discussed a third goal: to continue to undermine the Iranian regime and “possibly create future conditions for a change in that area.” U.S. officials have backed away from pursuing paths that would overthrow the current leadership, but Netanyahu still believes that could happen.
“The chasm that has been created between the people and the regime is not about to be closed,” the senior Israeli official said of Netanyahu’s thinking.
Netanyahu advised Trump in February that Israeli intelligence indicated launching strikes against Iran would lead to the toppling of the Islamic Republic’s regime – and five months later, the slain ayatollah’s son retains power with a close circle of hardliners, calling into question the accuracy of Israel’s intelligence apparatus.
But the senior Israeli official said at the time, Netanyahu did not promise the Iranian people would take fate into their own hands following a coordinated attack. Rather, he chose his words carefully and said that an attack could create conditions to “advance the probability or the possibility that that would happen.”
The conditions needed for the Iranian regime to fall, “did not materialize,” the official told MS NOW, adding, “not for lack of insight, but for either operational failure or decisions that were made.”
Despite Netanyahu insisting Israel and the U.S. are on the same page, differences still remain: the sale of F-35 fighter jets to Turkey and the Saudi nuclear arrangement did not come up during Wednesday’s White House meeting, according to a second Israeli official granted anonymity to describe sensitive discussions.
Meanwhile, the conflict continues to spread, with an Iranian drone attacking a U.S. gas storage tanker off the coast of Egypt on Wednesday.
Trump indicated he would not let Iran’s latest action slide, telling reporters on Wednesday that the U.S. would retaliate against Iran even as he leaves room for diplomatic talks to resume.
“It’s our turn, and we’ll see if we get there with an agreement at some point,” Trump said. “But we’re going to hit them very hard.”
As for what it would take for Israel to join the U.S. strikes, the senior Israeli official said that if Israel is attacked by Iran, “We will respond very, very forcefully and very quickly. And I think Iran would make a great mistake.”
Julia Jester covers politics for MS NOW and is based in Washington, D.C.
International rage over FIFA’s close ties to President Donald Trump has reached a fever pitch after soccer’s governing body announced a plan to sell a significant stake to an investor group led by Joshua Kushner, the brother of Trump’s son-in-law.
The president and his family have all but turned the White House into their personal piggy bank. And FIFA — which has its own sordid history of corruption — seems to have made itself a party to Trump’s self-enrichment under Gianni Infantino’s leadership, such as by paying for space inside Trump Tower in New York. (The organization has defended the office rental as a World Cup outpost.)
Soccer is seen by many as a unifying game. But Trump’s incorporation of FIFA into his political dynasty is threatening that idea.
FIFA has announced plans to sell a large minority stake in a new company that will run its main events, including the World Cup and Club World Cup, as part of a plan to triple the amount of development money it dishes out to its 211 member associations.
Under the proposals — which are subject to approval by a majority of those national associations and FIFA’s 37-member council — a new entity called FIFA Forward Enterprises (FFE) will take over all commercial operations, while FIFA remains the game’s global governing body and retains a majority stake in FFE.
A press release from FIFA confirmed the plans and said Thrive Eternal, which was launched by Joshua Kushner, is expected to lead the investment group that would control FIFA Forward Enterprise. FIFA did not clarify why Thrive Eternal was selected, and Kushner was already dabbling in sports.
But Trump basically has already given son-in-law Jared Kushner carte blanche to dictate U.S. foreign policy in the Middle East while simultaneously hatching business plans in the region. (Jared Kushner has denied any conflicts of interest.)
Joshua Kushner reportedly has been a major donor to Democrats. But, predictably, the idea of another Kushner becoming financially entwined with the World Cup — the world’s most popular sporting event — and basically being dropped into a position of global significance isn’t going over well. Several other soccer governing bodies have expressed concerns, including Europe’s UEFA.
“This crosses a line that football’s governing institutions should never cross,” UEFA said in a statement about The Athletic’s report, adding: “The soul and governance of football are not assets to trade — especially with zero transparency as to who gains financially. None of us are the owners of football. It is not FIFA’s to sell.”
Democrats on the House Judiciary Committee also rebuked the plan, writing on X: “Apparently the fake Peace Prize and giant lease with Trump Tower weren’t enough — now Infantino performs a kickback hat trick by pursuing a multibillion-dollar deal with Jared Kushner’s brother to sell ownership stakes in the World Cup to private investors.”
FIFA, Donald Trump’s favorite corrupt racketeering enterprise in world sports, is now going directly into business with the Trump family!
Apparently the fake Peace Prize and giant lease with Trump Tower weren’t enough—now Infantino performs a kickback hat trick by pursuing a… https://t.co/knSZibuMea
— House Judiciary Dems (@HouseJudiciary) July 28, 2026
Rep. Jamie Raskin, D-Md., has already launched an investigation into the FIFA leader’s relationship with the Trump administration, while dozens of European lawmakers — citing concerns about “potential breaches of political neutrality” — have called for the FIFA Ethics Committee to investigate Infantino. This new proposal seems unlikely to assuage those concerns.
But what it does seem likely to do is fuel global anger toward the U.S. — the kind that has been growing since Trump retook office.
And when you consider that, it’s truly remarkable how the same MAGA movement whose members whined for years about politics mixing with sports is now in lockstep with a president who seems dead-set on casting his shadow over every sports event he can.
This post on X basically sums up the foul stench around FIFA’s latest proposal.
Sepp Blatter was Infantino’s predecessor as FIFA president and oversaw the organization amid some of its many scandals. When heof all people, is warning about how Trump and Infantino’s relationship is “deeply damaging” soccer, it’s a sign of how far FIFA has descended into the gutter.
Ja’han Jones is an MS NOW opinion blogger. He previously wrote The ReidOut Blog.
-
The Josh Fourrier Show2 years agoDOOMSDAY: Trump won, now what?
-
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
-
Uncategorized2 years ago
Bob Good to step down as Freedom Caucus chair this week
-
Politics1 year agoFormer Kentucky AG Daniel Cameron launches Senate bid
-
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 Dictatorship11 months agoMike Johnson sums up the GOP’s arrogant position on military occupation with two words