Congress

Trump’s Iran endgame grates on Hill Republicans

Published

1 hour ago

June 24, 2026

The White House would prefer Congress handle the Iran war’s endgame something like this: Pony up, and don’t ask too many questions.

That approach is grating on many congressional Republicans, who are chafing at the idea that President Donald Trump’s administration is asking for hundreds of billions of dollars in fresh military funding without briefing most of Congress on the cease-fire agreement Trump signed last week.

As House lawmakers returned to the Capitol this week for the first time since the “memorandum of understanding” was inked, even GOP members who are generally supportive of the president said they had a hard time understanding why administration had not been more forthcoming with details on the agreement and the nuclear talks it sets up.

Rep. Mike Simpson of Idaho, a senior appropriator, told reporters “it wouldn’t hurt” to get a briefing from Trump officials this week “because mostly what I hear is what I hear from the news.”

Even ahead of briefing, a swath of angrier Republicans has grown livid at the text of the Trump-signed memo, which includes an agreement to lift U.S. sanctions on Iranian oil sales and pursue a $300 billion Iranian “reconstruction” plan in order to reopen the Strait of Hormuz and end the hostilities.

Vice President JD Vance told reporters last week that the administration was “quite confident that we can temporarily lift those sanctions without going to Congress and seeking their approval.”

“The Administration acts like they want a deal much more than the Ayatollah regime,” Rep. Don Bacon (R-Neb.) said in a text message, joining multiple hawkish senators in expressing dismay. “Committing $300B in reconstruction, sanctions relief, pulling back forces near Iran and putting pressure on Israel looks like weakness.”

Trump sought to quiet the internal skeptics Tuesday, telling reporters that anyone who has been critical of the deal “has to be educated, even if they’re friends of mine.” He is set to travel to Capitol Hill Wednesday to sign a bipartisan housing bill and meet with restless GOP senators who may press him for a defense of the agreement.

But the vast majority of House members have not heard anything beyond administration talking points nearly a week after details of the memorandum first emerged. The White House sent the full text of the agreement to Congress Thursday — after Trump had signed it and administration officials had briefed reporters on the document.

Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) told reporters Tuesday he expects House members will receive a briefing on Iran this week. Later, Johnson indicated in an interview a planned briefing from Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth to a select group of House Republicans Wednesday was the only briefing lawmakers should expect for now.

“The secretary is the ultimate authority on it, so I’m sure he’ll provide a lot of information,” Johnson said of Hegseth, who was not directly involved in the peace negotiations.

He did not commit in the interview to additional briefings for a wider swath of lawmakers: “We’ll have to see. I mean, we’ll see what the secretary does, and then evaluate after that.”

Some White House officials, including Vance, briefed select groups of GOP lawmakers last week on the agreement, including party leaders and top lawmakers on foreign affairs committees. Sen. Lindsey Graham of South Carolina, a GOP defense hawk who was initially skeptical of the deal, said he spoke on the phone with Steve Witkoff, Trump’s special envoy to the Middle East. The top Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee, Rep. Jim Himes (D-Conn.), said his panel has not been briefed on the agreement.

The grumbling from Hill Republicans is shaping up to be a major pain point as Trump officials ramp up pressure to approve new Pentagon spending. A top Defense official told key lawmakers last week that a $78 billion emergency infusion is needed to pay for the Iran war — on top of the $350 billion in defense funding Trump has demanded Republicans deliver in a new party-line bill.

A formal request for emergency spending could land on Capitol Hill as soon as this week, and House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-N.Y.) hammered the idea Monday, telling reporters that Trump and Hegseth are responsible for “Operation Epic Failure.”

“Their reckless and costly war of choice has been a disaster for the American people,” Jeffries said. “And the notion that they’ll come up to Capitol Hill to try to get an additional $80 billion to continue to waste taxpayer money on an endless war in the Middle East that Donald Trump promised he wouldn’t start, but would stop, is beyond reckless.”

One senior Republican involved in the talks about the party-line bill said Trump’s defense funding request is “tough” for Republicans to deliver, given the pushback from various corners of the House GOP over the size of the ask and the debate over how to pay for it.

GOP Rep. Eric Burlison (R-Mo.) issued a blunt warning in a Tuesday X post: “The Pentagon wants $891 billion this year and still can’t pass a clean audit. … My rule is simple: show me you passed an audit, then we can talk about more money.”

Burlison is among the front-runners to be the next chair of the hard-line House Freedom Caucus and is a member of the Republican Study Committee. Hegseth is set to appear at the invitation of the latter group Wednesday to make the case for the new military spending requests. But he, like Trump, could face sharp questions about the peace deal, which many Republicans believe is all too similar to the 2015 agreement Barack Obama brokered as president.

“I’m always willing to give peace a chance,” Rep. Marlin Stutzman (R-Ind.), an RSC member who is planning to attend the Hegseth briefing, said. But he noted the U.S. needs to make sure that Iran doesn’t drive a “wedge” between America and Israel.

Stutzman also said he was looking forward to the Defense secretary providing a detailed “fiscal update” of how much the Pentagon has spent on the war and how much artillery needs to be backfilled, while adding that will need to have “hard conversations” about finding offsets to any new military spending.

Rep. Tom Barrett, a Republican facing a highly competitive race against another military veteran for his Michigan seat, said in an interview he was concerned that the administration had not been more forthcoming in answering lawmakers’ questions.

He said he anticipated those attending the Hegseth briefing would press the secretary on the Iran agreement in addition to the administration’s funding request.

Republicans are also internally divided over whether Congress needs to vote on any final nuclear agreement the Trump administration might reach with Iran in the coming months, as would seem to be required under a 2015 law passed as the Obama deal was coming together. The memorandum sets out a 60-day period for further talks.

Sen. Eric Schmitt (R-Mo.) argued just hours after Trump announced the initial agreement with Iran that a vote wouldn’t be “necessary.” A few minutes later, Graham declared in response that there would be “no way” Congress would forgo a vote on any final nuclear deal.

Weighing heavily on vulnerable GOP incumbents is that the 60-day window expires in August, just weeks before the midterm elections. Trump has threatened to go back to widespread bombing against Iran if the talks don’t produce a satisfactory result.

Johnson, asked how this was different from Obama’s deal, defended Trump and reiterated that there was no deal yet.

“You’ve got to allow this to play out,” he said, praising Trump for having “handled Iran.”

He added that he was “heartened” that gas prices had dipped and mostly declined to weigh in on the sanctions relief Trump promised, noting “there’s a lot of moving parts right now” and that he has “always been a supporter of strong sanctions against Iran.”

“I’ve got enough to do to manage the House over here,” he said. “I’m not going to tell the administration how to negotiate that.”

Riley Rogerson contributed to this report.

Congress

Cait Conley wins Democratic primary to face Rep. Mike Lawler

Published

21 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

37 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

52 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.