Republicans line up behind Trump after strike on Iran — with few detractors
Republicans on Capitol Hill quickly lined up behind President Trump after he announced that the U.S. conducted a strike on three Iranian nuclear facilities, a strong show of support for the White House with few detractors inside the GOP.
Trump announced on Truth Social just before 8 p.m. EDT on Saturday that the U.S. 'completed our very successful attack on the three Nuclear sites in Iran,' including Fordow, the nuclear site hidden in a mountain south of Tehran. He is scheduled to address the nation from the White House at 10 p.m.
Republican leaders in the House and Senate backed the action, which had become a debate of sorts in Washington — especially among GOP — since Israel struck Iranian nuclear facilities earlier this month in what it called a 'pre-emptive' attack.
Live updates: US bombs Iranian nuclear sites, Trump to address nation
'The military operations in Iran should serve as a clear reminder to our adversaries and allies that President Trump means what he says,' Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) wrote in a statement on X. 'The President gave Iran's leader every opportunity to make a deal, but Iran refused to commit to a nuclear disarmament agreement. President Trump has been consistent and clear that a nuclear-armed Iran will not be tolerated. That posture has now been enforced with strength, precision, and clarity.'
'The President's decisive action prevents the world's largest state sponsor of terrorism, which chants 'Death to America,' from obtaining the most lethal weapon on the planet,' he added. 'This is America First policy in action. God bless our brave men and women in uniform – the most lethal fighting force on the planet – as we pray for their safe return home. May God bless America.'
Johnson was briefed on the strike beforehand, a source familiar with the matter told The Hill.
Senate Majority Leader John Thune (R-S.D.) wrote in a statement with X: 'I stand with President Trump.'
'The regime in Iran, which has committed itself to bringing 'death to America' and wiping Israel off the map, has rejected all diplomatic pathways to peace. The mullahs' misguided pursuit of nuclear weapons must be stopped,' he said. 'As we take action tonight to ensure a nuclear weapon remains out of reach for Iran, I stand with President Trump and pray for the American troops and personnel in harm's way.'
Senate Intelligence Committee Chairman Tom Cotton (R-Ark.) and House Intelligence Committee Chairman Rick Crawford (R-Ark.), similarly, backed Trump after the strike and applauded him for making the 'right call.'
'Iran has waged a war of terror against the United States for 46 years. We could never allow Iran to get nuclear weapons. God bless our brave troops. President Trump made the right call and the ayatollahs should recall his warning not to target Americans,' Cotton wrote on X.
'As I have said multiple times recently, I regret that Iran has brought the world to this point,' Crawford echoed in a statement. 'That said, I am thankful President Trump understood that the red line — articulated by President of both parties for decades — was real. The United States and our allies, including Israel, are making it clear that the world would never accept Iran's development of a nuclear weapon.'
While the majority of Republicans backed Trump in the wake of the strike, there were some GOP detractors on Capitol Hill.
Rep. Thomas Massie (R-Ky.), who has been advocating for the U.S. to avoid intervention in the Israel-Iran conflict, wrote on X minutes after Trump announced the offensive: 'This is not Constitutional.' Massie helped lead a bipartisan war powers resolution to prohibit U.S. involvement in the Middle East dispute.
Rep. Warren Davidson (R-Ohio) suggested that the move was unconstitutional.
'While President Trump's decision may prove just, it's hard to conceive a rationale that's Constitutional. I look forward to his remarks tonight,' he wrote on X.
Trump's decision to strike a trio of Iranian nuclear sites came after a week of debate on Capitol Hill over whether the U.S. should take action in Iran after Israel launched an attack on Iran, prompting a back-and-forth between the two countries.
Trump on Thursday said he would decide whether to take action within the next two weeks.
'Based on the fact that there's a substantial chance of negotiation that may or may not take place with Iran in the near future, I will make my decision whether or not to go in the next two weeks,' Trump said in the statement read by White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt.
The big question had been whether the U.S. would deploy a large bomb known as a 'bunker buster' to strike the Fordow facility, which is underground. While some lawmakers advocated for the move, others — including some of the president's most vocal supporters on the right-flank — pushed against the U.S. directly getting involved in the conflict.
Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-Ga.), for example, said 'Me and my district support President Trump and his MAGA agenda, it's what we voted for in November, and foreign wars weren't a part of it.' On Saturday night, she offered prayers for the safety of U.S. troops and Americans in the Middle East.
'Let us pray that we are not attacked by terrorists on our homeland after our border was open for the past 4 years and over 2 Million gotaways came in.🙏 Let us pray for peace. 🙏,' she added.
But across the GOP conferences on Capitol Hill, Republicans were quick to back the move by the president.
'Our commander-in-chief has made a deliberate —and correct— decision to eliminate the existential threat posed by the Iranian regime,' Senate Armed Services Committee Chairman Roger Wicker (R-Miss.) wrote in a statement on X. 'We now have very serious choices ahead to provide security for our citizens and our allies and stability for the middle-east. Well-done to our military personnel. You're the best!'
House Majority Whip Tom Emmer (R-Minn.), the No. 3 House Republican, said Trump 'was right then, and he is right today: NOW IS THE TIME FOR PEACE.'
'A nuclear Iran posed a threat to the Middle East and to the world. @POTUS has been consistent that this dangerous regime should NEVER possess a nuclear weapon,' he added in a statement on X.
Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
USA Today
21 minutes ago
- USA Today
Do you think the Supreme Court is partisan? Well you're wrong.
Earlier this month, the Supreme Court ruled on a religious liberty case, a firearms case and a DEI case, and most Americans probably didn't hear about any of them. Why? Every decision was unanimous. Recent polling has shown that Americans continue to view the Supreme Court as extremely partisan. Just 20% of those polled view the nation's highest courtas politically neutral, and its favorability is far higher among Republicans than Democrats. These opinions on SCOTUS come from a lack of nuance in conversations around the court, in which Republicans are furious when one of their preferred justices occasionally disagrees with President Donald Trump, and where Democrats ignore the Supreme Court cases that don't get decided along political ideology. The ideological lines on the court shouldn't be chalked up to the party of the president who appointed each justice, and the media narrative suggesting such should be dispelled. Can we finally leave Justice Amy Coney Barrett alone? There is no better example of the lack of nuanced conversation surrounding the Supreme Court than Justice Amy Coney Barrett. She has been villainized by the left for being a Trump sycophant and has been smeared as a liberal in disguise by some of Trump's most ardent supporters. In recent months, Barrett has been under fire from MAGA for not being sufficiently committed to their cause. Glossing over the fact that the job of judges is to determine what the law is, rather than what it ought to be, these individuals have gone from praising Barrett's integrity at her confirmation to demanding she sacrifice it for Trump's causes. Opinion: Liberals owe Justice Barrett an apology. She's clearly not in Trump's pocket. What has Barrett done to deserve any of this? Well, she had the audacity to rule against Trump on a couple of occasions. That's it. Justice Barrett joined the liberal justices in dissent against the majority decision to allow Trump to use the Alien Enemies Act for deportations, as well as voting against the Trump administration's attempts to freeze funds from the U.S. Agency for International Development. Since arriving on the court in 2020, Barrett has joined majorities to overturn Roe v. Wade, restore the right to carry a handgun, eliminate racist affirmative action practices, rein in executive bureaucracy and even expand presidential immunity. No reasonable person could argue that her jurisprudence in these cases is advancing any liberal causes, but the fact that she has ruled against Trump on occasion somehow overrides all of that evidence. Both parties have a warped view of who Justice Barrett is, and that is a symptom of a much larger problem about Americans' information about the court. The news media has played a role in that overall view. News media needs to do a better job of covering SCOTUS Earlier this month, the Supreme Court ruled on a religious liberty case, a firearms case and a discrimination case, and most Americans probably didn't hear about any of them. Opinion: There is no 'reverse discrimination,' people. There is only discrimination. The reason for that is the fact that every one of these decisions was unanimous, each written by one of the three liberal justices, so they didn't fit the narrative of the extremely polarized Supreme Court that Americans have been barraged with in recent years. Naturally, the court tends to split on the highest profile cases, which intuitively makes sense. After all, they are divisive. However, the vast majority of cases undermine the partisan tale often told of the court. For the 2022-23 term, the last for which data has been published, conservative justices only agreed with each other on roughly half of their cases, and in some cases, even they were more likely to agree with a certain liberal justice. Some experts have categorized the justices according to their regard for the consequences of the rulings, instead of political leanings. Justices Barrett, Brett Kavanaugh and Chief Justice John Roberts seem to be more concerned with consequences outside of the specific case they are ruling on. The result is that, in some respects, this group of three is closer to the liberal justices than their conservative colleagues. Furthermore, each justice has individual tendencies that differentiate them from even their ideological allies. Neil Gorsuch has a libertarian streak of generally standing up to the government and has a soft spot for the rights of Native Americans. The popular partisan narrative for the Supreme Court gives a very narrow view of how the justices' ideologies actually play out in practice. Americans should look to the justices' own personal tendencies and judicial philosophy to characterize them, rather than simply grouping them by party. Dace Potas is an opinion columnist for USA TODAY and a graduate of DePaul University with a degree in political science.
New York Post
22 minutes ago
- New York Post
LA Sheriff's department deletes posts calling US airstrikes on Iran's nuclear sites ‘tragic' following backlash
The LA County Sheriff's Department has deleted a social media post calling the US airstrikes on Iran's nuclear facilities 'tragic' after being dragged online. 'Our hearts go out to the victims and families impacted by the recent bombings in Iran,' the department wrote on X Sunday in a now-deleted post. 'While this tragic event happened overseas, the Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department is closely monitoring the situation alongside our local, state and federal partners.' 4 The Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department deleted the X post following backlash. @LASDHQ/X The post sparked immediate outrage and was allegedly updated to exclude the part sending condolences to 'the victims and families' and calling the US military airstrikes 'tragic.' Moments later, it was ultimately deleted from the platform, according to independent journalist Collin Rugg and Libs of TikTok. However, before being yanked for good, the post garnered a massive outcry of responses, bashing the Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department for the insensitive and inaccurate post. 'We sincerely hope your account was hacked. There were no victims in last night's successful targeting of Iran's nuclear sites,' replied the American advocacy group Stop Antisemitism. 'Please verify this post was not posted by an employee of the LA County Sheriff's HQ.' 'It is shocking that the LA Sheriff Department employs someone who would post such messages when our brave men and women are risking their lives to protect our country,' wrote another outraged X user. 4 Satellite image shows a close-up view of destroyed buildings at Isfahan Nuclear Technology Center, after it was hit by US airstrikes, in Isfahan, Iran, on June 22, 2025. via REUTERS 'That individual should be fired immediately and then investigated to find out what drove them to write these messages.' 'This is the CRAZIEST reaction to President Trump delivering MONUMENTAL devastation to Iran's nuclear sites,' another person wrote. While another agreed with the outrage, adding, 'Los Angeles Sheriff Robert Luna should resign in disgrace. Shame on him!' 4 A man who asked not to be identified holds an Iranian and an upside-down American flag while people gather for a 'No War with Iran x Israel and Immigrants' on June 7, 2025, in Los Angeles, California. Getty Images 4 LA County Sheriff's deputies arrest a protester after unlawful assembly was declared following a 'No Kings' national rally against the Trump administration in Los Angeles on June 14, 2025. AFP via Getty Images In response to the backlash over the post, the Los Angeles County Sheriff's office released a statement 'apologizing' for the 'offensive and inappropriate' post late Sunday. 'We are issuing this statement to formally apologize for an offensive and inappropriate social media post recently posted on our Department's social media platforms regarding the ongoing conflict in Iran,' the statement reads. 'This post was unacceptable, made in error, and does not reflect the views of Sheriff Robert G. Luna or the Department. As a law enforcement agency, we do not comment on foreign policy or military matters. Our mission remains solely focused on protecting public safety and serving our diverse communities.' The department acknowledged that it had 'updated' the social media post and has 'launched an internal review to determine how it was created and published.' 'Steps are being taken to strengthen our social media oversight protocols and ensure that any future communications align with our Department's standards of professionalism, respect, and accountability,' the department added. 'We appreciate the continued trust of our community and will work diligently to reaffirm that trust every day.' The Post has reached out to the Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department for comment.
UPI
25 minutes ago
- UPI
Israeli warplanes attack Iran's air defense capabilities
Iranian ballistic missiles over the skies near Jerusalem in two salvos of missiles shot from Iran into Israel following the huge American attacks on Iranian nuclear facilities on Sunday, June 22, 2025. Photo by Jim Hollander/UPI | License Photo June 23 (UPI) -- Israel continued to attack Iran on Monday, targeting its air defense capabilities, as the Islamic regime vows retaliation after the United States bombed three of its nuclear facilities over the weekend. The Israel Defense Forces was posting updates of its assaults on Iran to X on Monday morning, saying warplanes were attacking military infrastructure in Kermanshah. It said more than 15 fighter jets destroyed several launch and storage sites for surface-to-surface missiles targeting Israel. It also said the air force struck six airports in western, eastern and central Iran. Runways, underground hangars, a refueling aircraft and F-14, F-5 and AH-1 aircraft were destroyed, it said. "The destroyed aircraft were intended for use against Israeli Air Force planes and to thwart their operations within Iranian territory," the IDF said. It explained the assaults were "part of efforts to deepen aerial superiority over Iranian airspace." The updates came as the IDF said it had detected several missiles launched from Iran targeting Israel. The launches triggered sirens in several northern Israeli regions, and the IDF said it was working to intercept the projectiles "and attack wherever necessary to eliminate the threat." The strikes come as Iran has vowed to retaliate against Israel and the United States after U.S. warplanes bombed three Iranian nuclear facilities on Saturday night, increasing fears of an expanding war and of Washington becoming involved in another Middle Eastern conflict. According to Iranian state-owned news organization Press TV, the Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps condemned the U.S. attack as illegal under international law while threatening to attack U.S. overseas military institutions. "As we have repeatedly emphasized, the number, dispersion and scale of U.S. military bases in the region are not a source of strength but a major vulnerability," the IRGC said in the statement. The U.S. attack "has granted the Islamic Republic of Iran, within the framework of its legitimate right to self-defense, the option to respond in ways that go beyond the delusional calculations of the aggressor alliance." "Those who violated this land must now await responses that will bring deep regret," it said.
