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

Bill Gates denied association with Epstein’s crimes in closed-door Hill interview

Published

2 hours ago

June 23, 2026

Blue Light Newsroom

Tech mogul Bill Gates told the House Oversight Committee he was aware of Jeffrey Epstein’s prior sex crime conviction but that he did not know Epstein was continuing to engage in misconduct at the time of their acquaintance, according to a transcript of his testimony.

In his transcribed interview with the panel earlier this month as part of its ongoing Epstein investigation, Gates recounted details of his dealings with Epstein over the years — which extended from 2011, when he was first introduced to Epstein, to 2014, when he realized Epstein would not make good on his promise to steer donors towards Gates’ philanthropic work.

“I was aware that he had a criminal conviction,” Gates said, according to the transcript. “I knew that it was of a sexual nature, but, no, I don’t think I … dug into the specifics, although I probably should have.”

Gates’ decision to shrug off the conviction from 2008 underscored the extent to which many of those who chose to associate with the disgraced financier opted to ignore potential warning signs of impropriety. It was not until more than a decade after his first brush with law enforcement that Epstein was arrested on federal sex crimes charges; he died by suicide in jail in 2019 while his case was pending.

Gates’ relationship with Epstein has drawn new scrutiny since materials released by the Justice Department revealed new details about their relationship. In one draft correspondence contained in the so-called Epstein files, Epstein appears to have written and sent to himself a letter to Gates, where he alleged that Gates asked Epstein to “delete the emails regarding [his] std” and give him antibiotics to “surreptitiously give to Melinda [French Gates].”

Gates has denied that allegation and, during his interview with the Oversight Committee, Gates questioned whether Epstein was attempting to blackmail him.

“Now that I see the January release of documents, it appears that in many cases he, at least in emails to himself, was sort of rehearsing how either he or he coaching someone else might choose to blackmail me, but none of those messages were ever sent to me,” Gates said. “You know, I never paid Jeffrey Epstein anything.”

He also said that Epstein “certainly wasn’t a friend,” and insisted he never engaged in sexual conduct or received massages from individuals introduced to him by Epstein. And despite knowledge of his 2008 conviction, Gates said he was unaware at the time of their relationship that Epstein was a registered sex offender. He also said he never visited Epstein’s island.

The Oversight Committee also on Tuesday released a transcript of its June interview with Lesley Groff, one of Epstein’s former assistants who was among those named as a potential co-conspirator as part of Epstein’s non-prosecution agreement in 2007. She was never charged with any wrongdoing and, according to the transcript, recalled that law enforcement’s decision came as a surprise.

“I am not a conspirator, and I never would have agreed to this language,” she said, according to the transcript. “Their unilateral decision to label me as a potential conspirator remains my scarlet letter.”

Like others who have come before the panel, Groff claimed she was unaware of his crimes during the time of her employment and that Epstein, following his 2008 conviction, said that he was “set up.” Groff said she believed him, so she continued to work for him.

“I also saw the same VIPs continue to surround Epstein after his conviction,” she explained as a rationale for maintaining her own ties.

For instance, Groff told the Oversight Committee she “would connect phone calls” between President Donald Trump and Epstein multiple times a year.

Trump has not been charged with any wrongdoing tied to Epstein, but his relationship with the financier has raised eyebrows while fueling speculation that the administration has been working to cover up its connections — including by pushing back against making the Epstein files public last year and then slow-walking their release.

The Justice Department has defended its handling of the files’ release, and Trump has maintained he broke off his relationship with Epstein years before his death.

Congress

Senate votes to halt Iran war despite Trump’s push for peace deal

Published

5 hours ago

June 23, 2026

Blue Light Newsroom

The Senate on Tuesday voted to cut off the U.S. military campaign against Iran, handing a fresh loss to President Donald Trump despite his attempts to convince lawmakers and the public that a deal to end the war is at hand.

Four Republicans broke ranks to help approve a resolution to block further military action unless it is green-lighted by Congress.

The war powers measure is largely symbolic — the resolution cleared Tuesday doesn’t go to the president to sign or veto. But the bipartisan 50-48 vote is a damaging milestone for the Trump administration: Both the Senate and House have now weighed in against the Middle East conflict that’s stretched on for more than 100 days. The same measure passed the House in early June after months of close calls.

Congress

Housing bill threatened in GOP elections-bill spat

Published

5 hours ago

June 23, 2026

Blue Light Newsroom

The long-anticipated bipartisan housing bill is under threat from a Florida Republican who threatened to “shut the floor down” if House GOP leaders move forward with passing it Tuesday.

Rep. Anna Paulina Luna said Republicans instead need to prioritize passage of the SAVE America Act, the GOP elections bill that has been stuck in the Senate for months. Speaker Mike Johnson has scheduled a Tuesday evening vote on the housing bill in hopes of sending it to President Donald Trump for a planned Wednesday signing at the White House.

Luna posted her threat on social media Tuesday afternoon and later specified in an interview that she would oppose procedural measures teeing up GOP-backed legislation going forward if party leaders didn’t abandon their plans to hold the housing bill vote via special fast-track procedures that would effectively sideline Republican hard-liners.

Luna cannot single-handedly block those procedural votes, but she said there is “a group” of lawmakers who would join her. She separately called on Trump to veto the housing bill in a bid to force the SAVE America Act to be added to it.

Johnson plans for now to proceed with the Tuesday evening vote on the housing bill, according to two people granted anonymity to discuss internal conversations. If Luna and her unnamed allies follow through with their threats, they could derail a pair of appropriations bills set for House consideration this week and potentially freeze the floor indefinitely given the GOP’s razor-thin majority.

“I have been telling them,” Luna said of her complaints to GOP leaders.