logo
The GOP goes to war

The GOP goes to war

Politico07-02-2025

Presented by
With help from Eli Okun, Garrett Ross and Bethany Irvine
A Note to Our Readers from POLITICO's CEO and Editor-in-Chief
POLITICO has been the subject of debate on X this week. Some of it has been misinformed, and some of it has been flat-out false. Let's set the record straight.
POLITICO is a privately owned company. We have never received any government funding — no subsidies, no grants, no handouts. Not one dime, ever, in 18 years.
Millions of people around the world read our journalism on POLITICO.com, POLITICO.EU, and in newsletters like this one. It is supported by advertising and sponsorships.
POLITICO Pro is different. It is a professional subscription service used by companies, organizations, and, yes, some government agencies. They subscribe because it makes them better at their jobs — helping them track policy, legislation, and regulations in real-time with news, intelligence, and a suite of data products. At its core, POLITICO Pro is about transparency and accountability: Shining a light on the work of the agencies, regulators, and policymakers throughout our vast federal government. Businesses and entities within the government find it useful as they navigate the chaotic regulatory and legislative landscape. It's that simple.
Most POLITICO Pro subscribers are in the private sector. They come from across the ideological spectrum and subscribe for one reason: value. And 90% renew every year because they rely on our reporting, data, and insights.
Government agencies that subscribe do so through standard public procurement processes — just like any other tool they buy to work smarter and be more efficient. This is not funding. It is a transaction — just as the government buys research, equipment, software, and industry reports.
Some online voices are deliberately spreading falsehoods. Let's be clear: POLITICO has no financial dependence on the government and no hidden agenda. We cover politics and policy — that's our job.
We are so proud of our journalists and so proud of the connection we have with you, our readers.
We stand by our work, our values, and our commitment to transparency, accountability, and efficiency — the same principles that drive great journalism and great business.
Now, back to work.
Goli Sheikholeslami and John Harris
DRIVING THE DAY
Happy Friday. This is Eugene Daniels, up early to help you make sense of a frenzied end to the week here in Washington.
TODAY: It might be Friday, but the internal Republican battle for the upper hand on reconciliation is still in full swing. Speaker Mike Johnson had promised House Republicans he and fellow GOP leaders would unveil their reconciliation framework this morning — but it now seems they'll still be working on it all through the weekend. (Majority Leader Steve Scalise said late last night they still hadn't agreed on a topline.) As that work continues, Senate Republicans will descend on Mar-a-Lago for dinner tonight with President Donald Trump, where they'll try to woo him toward their own competing vision for reconciliation. In the balance is nothing less than Trump's entire legislative agenda … No pressure.
And smack dab in the middle of it all … Trump will meet with Japanese PM Shigeru Ishiba at 11:30 a.m. — followed by an inevitably news-packed press conference at 1:10 p.m. (More on that in a moment.)
RECONCILABLE DIFFERENCES: Top House Republicans huddled in the White House for a roughly five-hour meeting yesterday that kicked off with a visit from Trump but continued mostly as a conversation amongst themselves.
How it began: 'Trump laid out a list of tax policies and other priorities for the legislation,' Benjamin Guggenheim and Meredith Lee Hill report. 'He then told lawmakers he had other meetings, told them to work out a plan among themselves, and let him know when they had settled on something that could pass.'
Then what? 'We don't exactly know what went down, which is how we know it might have actually been a productive meeting,' senior Congress editor Mike DeBonis told us for today's Playbook Daily Briefing. 'The aphoristic rule of Washington meetings is: The more you know about what happened in it, probably the less fruitful it was.'
Here's what we do know: House Republicans are looking for a deal that includes not only border, energy and defense, but also a permanent extension of the 2017 Trump tax cuts, as Benjamin and Meredith report.
That's different from the Senate approach: The Senate Budget panel looks to mark up its own package next week, tackling the border, energy and defense in one bill while punting taxes until later.
The view from the House: Trump 'is very clear about what he wants,' Republican Conference Chair Lisa McClain (R-Mich.) tells us on t his week's episode of Playbook Deep Dive. 'He gives us a lot of latitude on how to get there, so he's not a micromanager. But he is very clear on his expectations.' (You can listen to that interview on Apple Podcasts or Spotify.)
What Trump wants: The president's tax priorities, as Benjamin and Meredith report, include 'eliminating a tax break for owners of sports teams' as well as zeroing out 'taxes on overtime pay, tips and Social Security.' Also on the table, per Bloomberg's Akayla Gardner, Billy House, and Alicia Diaz: 'ending the carried interest tax break used by private equity fund managers and expanding the state and local tax deduction,' which is a top priority for a number of swing-district Republicans in blue states.
The potential cost: Depending on the details, a package like that would reduce revenue by between $5–11.2 trillion over 10 years, according to a new analysis from the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget, while boosting debt 'to between 132 and 149 percent of GDP by 2035, if not offset.'
Where some offsets might come from: 'Trump has vowed to 'love and cherish' Medicaid — but the White House and House Republicans will continue to build support within the party for making deep cuts to the program,' Ben Leonard and Adam Cancryn report. Working with the administration, 'the House Energy and Commerce Committee was already on track to slash hundreds of billions of dollars from programs within the panel's purview to offset the budget reconciliation effort, much of it coming from Medicaid.' (Cue the attack ads!)
Meanwhile, in the Senate: Budget Chair Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) has indicated he's ready to start moving on his two-bill plan next week, and Majority Whip John Barrasso told our colleague Jordain Carney yesterday that Graham 'is ready to go.'
Which brings us to tonight: Republican senators will be in Palm Beach for the annual NRSC retreat at The Breakers, and will make the jaunt to Mar-a-Lago this evening for a senators-and-spouses dinner with the president where they'll make the case for their two-bill approach.
But the lobbying won't stop there: Assuming that House Republicans work through the weekend, Speaker Johnson will surely lobby Trump for the House approach on Sunday, when the two are due to attend the Super Bowl together in New Orleans.
MEANWHILE IN THE WHITE HOUSE
TRUMP'S FRIDAY: The president is today hosting Japanese PM Shigeru Ishiba — the second foreign leader to visit the White House this week seeking favor and face time with Trump.
A standard foreign visit: Trump will greet Ishiba in the driveway just after 11 a.m., they'll then head to the Oval Office, where you can be sure reporters will yell questions. After a bilateral meeting, the two will do a press conference in the East Room where, if the past is any indication, Trump will make lots of news — both on the scheduled topic and off.
On the agenda: A White House official tells Playbook that the two 'will discuss trade and investment, economic security, and defense industrial cooperation, among other topics.' Experts on U.S.-Japan relations aren't forecasting any huge announcements; they're expecting this to be more of a sizing up, if you will. (Then again, this is Trump, so be ready for anything.)
What the U.S. wants: Under the surface of those public-facing agenda items, one topic looms large: countering China. The timing of foreign visits at the beginning of the administration tells you a lot about their priorities, and that the Japanese PM was invited so soon indicates just how important countering China's influence in Asia is to this White House. (We're told that a surefire sign they went deep on specifics is if Taiwan comes up.)
What Japan wants: There's an international angle and a domestic one. I'm told that Ishiba hopes to double check that the U.S. is still on Team Japan and nothing has changed in that key strategic partnership. But, just as importantly, Ishiba wants to prove to his own people that the powerful new leader of America is ready to, at the very least, have a friendly relationship with him.
What Ishiba wants: 'For Ishiba, this is a very high-stakes meeting,' said Yuki Tatsumi, former special assistant for political affairs at the Japanese Embassy in Washington and current director of the Japan Program at the Stimson Center. 'He wants to show to Japanese constituents that he's a strong and confident enough leader to be able to build, if not a personally friendly relationship with Trump, at least a positive [one].' In that, Trump's chummy relationship with the late Japanese PM Shinzo Abe provides a pretty easy blueprint for Ishiba to follow.
What Trump wants: At the end of the day, every meeting Trump has with foreign leaders is about how that relationship can make the U.S. more dominant. I'm told that Trump may bring up deals that Japan made with the Biden administration that he is interested in, if not renegotiating, then at least kicking the tires to make sure they are in line with his priorities.
On deck: After Ishiba, the next foreign leaders scheduled to visit the White House are Jordan's King Abdullah II on Feb. 11 and Indian PM Narendra Modi on Feb. 13, per Eric Bazail-Eimil and Robbie Gramer of our sister newsletter, National Security Daily.
WHIPLASH WEEK
HOW DO YOU COVER A WEEK LIKE THAT? Our White House Bureau Chief Dasha Burns emails in with her reflections on a head-spinning week in Washington …
THE ART DEALER: If you can remember back as far as Monday, the week kicked off with America poised to enter a trade war with its closest neighbors … before President Trump suddenly struck last-minute agreements with both Mexico and Canada. The White House comms team was buzzing with excitement. 'Art of the deal!' one person cheered. 'Have you read it? This is straight out of the book!'
The chaos is the strategy: Plenty of observers have opined about the upsides and downsides of the tariff whiplash. But for those close to President Trump, that debate misses the point: He is a destabilizing force; the chaos is the strategy. And they say it's getting results. (Naturally, opponents disagree.)
And so to the Middle East: The following day, standing next to Israeli PM Benjamin Netanyahu in the East Room, the president described his vision of turning war-torn Gaza into the 'Riviera of the Middle East,' prompting a uniform double-take among the assembled press.
That statement has meaning: The common mantra from Trump allies is to 'take him seriously, not literally.' For reporters, this is the daily tightrope we now live on: Take the president too literally and we risk raising a false alarm. Don't take him seriously enough, and we risk missing a hugely important story. Before the election, the press may have treated his Gaza comments as just another outlandish campaign promise. But on Tuesday, these words weren't coming from a candidate; they were being said by the sitting president during his administration's first White House visit from a foreign leader.
So what's a White House reporter to do? My approach is to report what the president says, check its factuality, note the tenacity with which he does or doesn't double down — and then start making calls to understand what happened behind the scenes. Following his Gaza remarks, a White House aide told me the whole thing was designed to send a message that we are not where we were before, and we're not going back. Trump is injecting 'intentional uncertainty' into the process, they said. It is, once again, 'The Art of the Deal.'
Substance vs. signal: A big part of the so-called 'art' is just that: optics, visuals, PR. Among the flurry of executive orders the president has signed, quite a few lack real teeth to consequentially change policy without additional action from Congress. But what they lack in substance they make up for in signal. Already, companies are dismantling DEI initiatives — the NFL is even removing the 'End Racism' slogan from the endzones for the Super Bowl. That's not happening because of the hard power of the pen atop the Resolute Desk; it's happening because of the president's soft power — his ability to influence private and public sectors alike.
Business as usual: 'If it looks like things are a little chaotic, it's not,' Peter Navarro told me during my on-stage interview with him this week. 'It's genius.' Navarro's view may or may not be your main takeaway from a week of Trump's 'out of the box' ideas — but it's important to understand that this is the strategy. The real estate mogul's worldview that Trump sold in 'The Art of the Deal' has informed his method on everything from tariffs to immigration policy to the humanitarian crisis in Gaza. And if you want to prepare yourself for what the next four years will be like in Trump's Washington, you need to get comfortable (again) with whiplash, shock and confusion.
JOBS JOBS JOBS
BY THE NUMBERS: The January jobs report comes out at 8:30 a.m., and Dow Jones economists' predictions are for 169,000 new jobs and a 4.1 percent unemployment rate, per CNBC. It's far too early to gauge Trump's impact on hiring around the country, but there's a deluge of news on a different kind of jobs report: all his cuts to federal workers (and beyond).
Writ large: More than 60,000 workers have now opted in to the offer to leave their jobs and get paid through September, though a judge yesterday extended its deadline at least a few days, Reuters' Daniel Wiessner, Tim Reid and Nathan Layne report.
USAID: The Trump administration plans to reduce the agency's headcount from five digits to fewer than 300 employees, per NYT's Karoun Demirjian and Aishvarya Kavi. That could mean nearly 14,000 people placed indefinitely on administrative leave. There was fresh pushback last night, as employee unions filed the first lawsuits against the USAID gutting and the foreign aid freeze, per CNN's Jennifer Hansler and Devan Cole.
HHS: A coming White House executive order will force thousands of firings across the federal health agencies, WSJ's Liz Essley Whyte and Betsy McKay scooped, though the White House denied it.
EPA: The administration axed much of the agency's Office of Environmental Justice, putting 168 employees on leave, Alex Guillén and Annie Snider report. More broadly, upward of 300 career staffers have already left since the election, per ProPublica.
FEC: Democratic Chair Ellen Weintraub announced that Trump had tried to remove her — but his method wasn't legal, she said, appearing to reject the attempt.
And beyond … in the private sector: The knock-on effects of Trump's efforts to gut the federal government are playing out across the country, where related layoffs have already hit several thousand people in the past two weeks, WaPo's Abha Bhattarai reports. Thanks to the federal funding freeze and other cuts, the 'wave of job losses … could pick up steam in the coming weeks, threatening the broader labor market.'
NOW HERE COMES RUSSELL VOUGHT: The new OMB director will be sworn in today after he was confirmed last night in a 53-47 party-line vote. But even before he arrives, Vought's broader project to gut the federal government is already well underway, as our Megan Messerly writes in a must-read story that just published. Despite the pause placed on Trump's mass federal funding freeze, tens of billions of dollars are on hold for energy, transportation and other projects that Congress has already appropriated (which Democrats say is illegal), Reuters' Bo Erickson and Richard Cowan report. Some community health centers have closed, per Roll Call's Jessie Hellmann and Sandhya Raman.
USAID in the crosshairs: The foreign aid agency has, of course, been the earliest and biggest target. In Trump's very first week back in office, Treasury chief of staff Dan Katz tried to get DOGE-affiliated software exec Tom Krause access to actually freeze foreign aid payments, NYT's Andrew Duehren, Alan Rappeport and Teddy Schleifer revealed. These guys, remember, are only meant to have read-only access.
Rearguard action: Secretary of State Marco Rubio has told diplomats that they're 'not walking away from foreign aid,' NYT's Michael Crowley scooped. But in the meantime, the large-scale dismantling of U.S. foreign aid continues to have huge real-world effects. Anti-famine systems have been laid low, Reuters reports. Anti-trafficking work in Latin America has been hit hard, per CBS News. Thirty clinical trials were frozen midair, with some patients left with experimental medical devices still in their bodies, per NYT. Damage to Ukraine's energy system could boost Russian President Vladimir Putin, per Semafor. And billions of dollars that flow into the U.S. economy — like supporting farms to produce food aid — are at risk, per WaPo.
The Muskovites: A judge yesterday reached an agreement with the Treasury and staff unions to temporarily limit DOGE's access to the payments system, per Bloomberg. Only Tom Krause and Marko Elez were given access, and at a read-only level. But a few hours later, as you may have seen, Elez resigned — after WSJ's Katherine Long dug up a series of proudly racist X posts. ('Just for the record, I was racist before it was cool,' read one.)
The next lawsuit: New York AG Letitia James and a dozen other Democratic AGs sued over DOGE's access to government systems, per NYT's Hurubie Meko.
But still it goes on: WaPo reports that DOGE staffers accessed sensitive, restricted employee records via OPM. And Energy Secretary Chris Wright gave DOGE access to DOE's IT system, which includes info about nuclear weapons, per CNN's Zachary Cohen.
Up next: DOGE now has its eyes on the Social Security Administration, Semafor's Shelby Talcott reports. It's also developing an AI chatbot, GSAi, Wired's Paresh Dave, Zoë Schiffer and Makena Kelly report. … The Labor Department has indefinitely suspended the Federal Advisory Council on Occupational Safety and Health, surprising even its GOP members, NOTUS' Katherine Swartz scooped. … And DOJ employees are now concerned Elon Musk could make public the names of law enforcement officers, per WaPo's Spencer Hsu and Jeremy Roebuck. And on and on it goes.
BEYOND THE BELTWAY
IMMIGRATION FILES: DHS Secretary Kristi Noem will visit Guantánamo Bay today, as flights there of detained migrants are expected to ramp up to a daily cadence, CBS' Camilo Montoya-Galvez and Eleanor Watson scooped.
In the courts: Federal judge John Coughenour again slapped down Trump's effort to end birthright citizenship, issuing a preliminary nationwide injunction, The Seattle Times' David Gutman reports. Coughenour accused Trump of trying to alter the Constitution and said the president sees the rule of law as 'something to navigate around or simply ignore.' This is headed to a federal appeals court now.
MIDDLE EAST LATEST: Speaker Johnson is due to meet with Benjamin Netanyahu at 10 a.m., after Trump signed an executive order yesterday targeting the International Criminal Court for sanctions because it accused Israeli leaders of war crimes. (CNN has more on that.) Rubio intends to go to the region in the middle of the month, Axios' Barak Ravid scooped. The Middle East, of course, is still reeling from Trump's proposal to seize Gaza, with Egypt privately pressuring the U.S. against it, per AP's Samy Magdy.
BEST OF THE REST
FOR YOUR RADAR: Trump's anti-transgender drive continues as the Education Department launched civil rights probes into Penn, San Jose State and the Massachusetts Interscholastic Athletic Association over their inclusion of trans girls and women in women's sports, per NYT's Zach Montague. Prompted by Trump's executive order, the NCAA announced it would bar trans women from taking part in women's competitions, per ABC's Kiara Alfonseca.
On the flip side: Advocacy groups sued yesterday over Trump's transgender military ban, per ABC's Deena Zaru.
DEMOCRACY DIES IN DARKNESS: Federal employees will know a lot less about the world after the White House ordered the General Services Administration to end all its media subscription contracts, Axios' Zachary Basu and Marc Caputo scooped.
2026 WATCH: Florida first lady Casey DeSantis is 'seriously considering' running for governor, NBC's Matt Dixon scooped. … Genesee County Sheriff Chris Swanson jumped into Michigan's Democratic gubernatorial primary, per The Detroit News' Beth LeBlanc and Craig Mauger.
BILL TO WATCH: Nearly 100 Democrats joined with Republicans to pass the HALT Fentanyl Act in the House, Ben Leonard reports. The growing bipartisan support for toughening criminal penalties could give the legislation a good shot of becoming law, unlike last Congress, when Dem concerns about mass incarceration tanked it.
NOMINATION TO WATCH: Hawkish GOP senators have some reservations about Elbridge Colby and some other Pentagon picks whom they view as too isolationist, Roll Call's John Donnelly reports.
THE WEEKEND AHEAD
SUNDAY SO FAR …
FOX 'Fox News Sunday': Speaker Mike Johnson … Louisiana first lady Sharon Landry. Panel: Will Cain and Clay Travis. NFL panel: Terry Bradshaw, Jimmy Johnson, Michael Strahan and Howie Long.
Fox News 'Sunday Morning Futures': Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth … Woody Johnson … U.S. Ambassador to Israel-designate Mike Huckabee.
CNN 'State of the Union': DHS Secretary Kristi Noem … Sen. Cory Booker (D-N.J.).
NBC 'Meet the Press': National security adviser Mike Waltz … Sen. Andy Kim (D-N.J.) … Amanda Gorman. Panel: Sara Fagen, Gabe Gutierrez, Andrea Mitchell and Symone Sanders Townsend.
CBS 'Face the Nation': Sen. Bill Hagerty (R-Tenn.) … Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-Minn.) … Rep. Michael McCaul (R-Texas).
ABC 'This Week': Sen. Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) … Rep. Mike Turner (R-Ohio). Panel: Terry Moran, Asma Khalid, Sarah Isgur and Susan Glasser.
MSNBC 'The Weekend': Sen. Angela Alsobrooks (D-Md.) … Norm Eisen … Brendan Ballou.
NewsNation 'The Hill Sunday': Delaware Gov. Matt Meyer … John Yoo. Panel: George Will, Burgess Everett and Julie Mason.
TALK OF THE TOWN
Andrea Mitchell has her last day in the anchor chair on MSNBC today.
Kamala Harris and Doug Emhoff checked out the Lakers game.
Mark Zuckerberg was at the White House yesterday.
Lorne Michaels faced serious internal 'Saturday Night Live' pushback over Donald Trump hosting in 2015, a new book reveals.
Patrick Mahomes rejected Tommy Tuberville's claim that he recruited the star athlete.
Tucker Carlson's ALP feels pretty similar to Zyn, Ian Ward finds.
PLAYBOOK METRO SECTION — The FAA will reduce the number of hourly arrivals at Reagan National Airport, Reuters' David Shepardson scooped. And CBS' Olivia Rinaldi and Kris Van Cleave report that last year, FAA Administrator Michael Whitaker wanted to close one of the airport's three runways after near-accidents. … Meanwhile, Sen. Mike Lee (R-Utah) and Rep. Andy Ogles (R-Tenn.) introduced a bill to end D.C. home rule, per The Daily Caller's Henry Rodgers.
OUT AND ABOUT — The Atlanta Journal-Constitution hosted a live taping of its 'Politically Georgia' podcast at Washington's Martin Luther King Jr. Memorial Library yesterday evening. Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-Ga.) talked about DOGE and running for office; Ayesha Rascoe, Dana Bash and Kasie Hunt talked about covering the second Trump term; Keneshia Grant and Minkah Makalani discussed the dismantling of DEI; and VA Secretary Doug Collins said a federal hiring freeze won't block veterans' care.
— SPOTTED at an annual dinner for the DSCC hosted by lobbyists from Kountoupes Denham Carr & Reid on Wednesday night, raising more than $225,000: DSCC Chair Kirsten Gillibrand (D-N.Y.), Sens. Lisa Blunt Rochester (D-Del.), Adam Schiff (D-Calif.), Dick Durbin (D-Ill.), Ruben Gallego (D-Ariz.), Ed Markey (D-Mass.), Elissa Slotkin (D-Mich.) and Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.), Seth Radus, Cristina Chou, Doug Calidas, Janelle McClure, Virginia Zigras, Amy Rosenbaum, Joy McGlaun, Corey Miller, Haider Murtaza, Elizabeth Sharp, Rich Santoro, Justin Goldberger, Natalie Armijo and Marty McGuinness.
FIRST IN PLAYBOOK — Carl Sceusa will be the next president of IMGE, a GOP-aligned digital marketing firm. He's a longtime GOP operative and former chief executive of WinRed. Current IMGE leader Ethan Eilon will remain with the company as a senior partner.
— Jack Stukel is launching Summa Insights in partnership with ColdSpark, providing opposition research and other intelligence to campaigns, groups and companies. He previously was research director at the NRSC for the 2024 cycle.
MEDIA MOVE — Kate Sullivan is joining Bloomberg News as a White House correspondent. She previously was a campaign reporter and producer at CNN.
TRANSITIONS — Don Andres is joining BGR Group as a VP in its appropriations practice. He most recently was chief of staff for Rep. Norma Torres (D-Calif.). … Annie Clark is joining Rokk Solutions as SVP. She previously was comms director for Sen. Susan Collins (R-Maine) and the Senate Appropriations Committee. …
… Elizabeth-Burton Jones is now comms director for Rep. John McGuire (R-Va.). She previously was comms director for Rep. Kelly Armstrong (R-N.D.). … Caroline Carter will be deputy comms director for Sen. Jim Justice (R-W.Va.). She most recently has been digital director for Sen. Eric Schmitt (R-Mo.).
ENGAGED — Jeff Hasselman, who advises blockchain and crypto startups at 926 Ventures and is an Amazon Web Services alum, proposed to Denise Grace Gitsham, founder of Vitamin D Public Relations, a NewsNation contributor and a former Republican congressional candidate, on Sunday at the Caribou Club in Aspen, Colorado. They met on Bumble in May. Pic
WELCOME TO THE WORLD — Cara Edmundowicz Aftuck, a veteran GOP fundraiser, and Philip Aftuck, managing director of investments at The Bernstein Companies, welcomed Philip Maxwell Aftuck Jr. ('Max') on Wednesday (with the cool birthdate of 2/5/25). He joins big sister Margaux. Pic
HAPPY BIRTHDAY: Sen. John Hickenlooper (D-Colo.) … PBS' Laura Barrón-López … Dave Levinthal … Beth Frerking … IMF's Jeff Kearns … former Reps. Allen West (R-Fla.), Stephen Fincher (R-Tenn.), Doc Hastings (R-Wash.) and Michael Grimm (R-N.Y.) … John 'Rage' Criscuolo of Squire Patton Boggs (41) … Emily Hampsten … Patrick Ferrise … Judge James Gilbert of the U.S. Postal Service … Carleton Bryant … Community Change's Jasmine Nazarett … Jessica Kershaw ... Miguel L'Heureux ... Christine Grimaldi … Jeff Marschner … Invariant's Mary Beth Stanton … Justin Papp … Josh, Rachel and Eric Mogil … Austin Myhre of Sen. Raphael Warnock's (D-Ga.) office … Monica Medina … POLITICO's Patricia Iscaro and Marvellous Ogudoro … Marley Ward … Gay Talese (93)
Did someone forward this email to you? Sign up here.
Send Playbookers tips to playbook@politico.com or text us at 202-556-3307. Playbook couldn't happen without our deputy editor Zack Stanton and Playbook Daily Briefing producer Callan Tansill-Suddath.
Correction: Yesterday's Playbook misstated the location in the Capitol where President Donald Trump would be speaking. It was Statuary Hall.

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Iowa governor rejects GOP bill to increase regulations of Summit's carbon dioxide pipeline
Iowa governor rejects GOP bill to increase regulations of Summit's carbon dioxide pipeline

San Francisco Chronicle​

time33 minutes ago

  • San Francisco Chronicle​

Iowa governor rejects GOP bill to increase regulations of Summit's carbon dioxide pipeline

DES MOINES, Iowa (AP) — Iowa Gov. Kim Reynolds on Wednesday rejected a bill that could have introduced more complications for a massive carbon-capture pipeline project routed across several Midwestern states, issuing a rare veto in the Republican-controlled statehouse. The legislation was designed by Iowa House Republicans to increase regulations of Summit Carbon Solutions' estimated $8.9 billion, 2,500-mile (4,023-kilometer) project that cuts across Iowa and already has an approved permit in the state. But the bill provoked loud opposition from members of Iowa's powerful ethanol industry, which argued the project is essential for Iowa's agricultural dominance, for farmers and for construction jobs. And it exposed a rift within the party over how to protect property rights. 'While I shared the bill's goal of protecting landowners, good policy should draw clear, careful lines. This bill doesn't,' said Reynolds, a Republican, in the explanation of her veto. 'It combines valid concerns with vague legal standards and sweeping mandates that reach far beyond their intended targets.' Despite her veto, Reynolds said she was 'committed to working with the legislature to strengthen landowner protections, modernize permitting, and respect private property.' Iowa state Rep. Bobby Kaufmann, a Republican who supported the bill in the House, said Wednesday that her commitment is too little, too late. 'If she was willing to work with us on this, where in the world has she been the last three years?' Kaufmann said. 'She is clearly not siding with the constitutional rights of landowners but rather she's siding with special interests.' Summit has said it has invested nearly $175 million to enter into voluntary agreements with landowners in Iowa and more than $1 billion on the project overall. In a statement, Summit thanked the governor for a thoughtful review of the bill and said their goal is to proceed with voluntary agreements with landowners. Even with the relief from Reynolds' veto, Summit will likely have to readjust plans after South Dakota's governor signed a ban on the use of eminent domain — the government seizure of private property with compensation — to acquire land for carbon dioxide pipelines. Summit's permit application was also rejected in South Dakota. The project has permit approvals in Iowa, Minnesota and North Dakota but faces various court challenges. The Iowa bill would have prohibited the renewal of permits for a carbon dioxide pipeline, limited the use of such a pipeline to 25 years and significantly increased the insurance coverage requirements for the pipeline company. Those provisions would likely have made it less financially feasible for a company to build a carbon dioxide pipeline. 'We look forward to continued discussions with state leaders as we advance this important project,' Summit said Wednesday. 'At a time when farmers are facing increasing pressures, this project opens the door to new markets and helps strengthen America's energy dominance for the long term.' Rift in Republican-controlled statehouse Republican House Speaker Pat Grassley said after Reynolds' veto that he would pursue a special session to vote on an override, saying in a statement that the veto 'is a major setback for Iowa.' The Iowa Constitution states that a request for special session from two-thirds of both chambers, or the governor, can bring lawmakers back to Des Moines. Two-thirds of both chambers would need to vote for an override for the bill to become law without the governor's approval. 'We will not stop fighting and stand firm on our commitment until landowners' in Iowa are protected against Eminent Domain for private gain,' Grassley said. Senate Majority Leader Jack Whitver suggested that would be unlikely in his chamber. Thirteen Republican senators had joined with 14 Democrats in voting in favor of the bill, but 21 Republicans and one Democrat voted against it. 'Based on the votes on that bill in the Iowa Senate, a significant majority of our caucus supports a better policy to protect landowner rights. I expect that majority of our caucus would not be interested in any attempt to override her veto,' he said. As the legislative session wound down, a dozen Republican senators insisted their leaders bring the House-approved bill to the floor for a vote after several years of inaction. The stalemate ended in a long and divisive debate among the Iowa Senate's Republican supermajority, with senators openly criticizing one another and exposing the closed-door discussions that got them there. Summit's project and its critics The Summit pipeline was proposed to carry carbon emissions from ethanol plants in Iowa, Minnesota, Nebraska, North Dakota and South Dakota to be stored underground permanently in North Dakota. By lowering carbon emissions from the plants, the pipeline would lower their carbon intensity scores and make them more competitive in the renewable fuels market. The project would also allow ethanol producers and Summit to tap into federal tax credits. The pipeline's many critics have for years begged lawmakers for action. They accuse Summit of stepping on their property rights and downplaying the safety risks of building the pipeline alongside family homes, near schools and across ranches. Lee Enterprises and The Associated Press reviewed hundreds of cases that reveal the great legal lengths the company went to to get the project built. In South Dakota, in particular, a slew of eminent domain legal actions to obtain land sparked a groundswell of opposition that was closely watched by lawmakers in Iowa as well. A group of landowners released a statement Wednesday calling the veto a slap in the face. 'Big money, greed & self interest won the day,' said Jan Norris, a landowner in southwest Iowa whose neighbor is in the pipeline's route. 'Our property rights are for sale to the highest bidder.'

Families file suit challenging Arkansas law that requires Ten Commandments be posted in classrooms
Families file suit challenging Arkansas law that requires Ten Commandments be posted in classrooms

San Francisco Chronicle​

time34 minutes ago

  • San Francisco Chronicle​

Families file suit challenging Arkansas law that requires Ten Commandments be posted in classrooms

LITTLE ROCK, Ark. (AP) — Seven Arkansas families filed a lawsuit Wednesday challenging an upcoming state requirement that public school classrooms have posted copies of the Ten Commandments, saying the new law will violate their constitutional rights. The federal lawsuit challenges a measure Republican Gov. Sarah Huckabee Sanders signed into law earlier this year, similar to a requirement enacted by Louisiana and one that Texas' governor has said he'll sign. The Arkansas law takes effect in August and requires the Ten Commandments to be prominently displayed in public school classrooms and libraries. 'Permanently posting the Ten Commandments in every classroom and library — rendering them unavoidable — unconstitutionally pressures students into religious observance, veneration, and adoption of the state's favored religious scripture,' the lawsuit said. The suit was filed on behalf of the families by the American Civil Liberties Union, Americans United for the Separation of Church and State and the Freedom from Religion Foundation. The lawsuit names four school districts in northwest Arkansas — Fayetteville, Bentonville, Siloam Springs and Springdale — as defendants. A spokesperson for Fayetteville schools said the district would not comment on pending litigation, while the other three districts did not immediately respond to requests for comment. A spokesperson for Attorney General Tim Griffin said his office was reviewing the lawsuit and considering options. Attorneys for the families, who are Jewish, Unitarian Universalist or nonreligious, said they planned to ask the federal judge in Fayetteville for a preliminary injunction blocking the law's enforcement. The attorneys say the law violates longstanding Supreme Court precedent and the families' First Amendment rights. 'By imposing a Christian-centric translation of the Ten Commandments on our children for nearly every hour of every day of their public-school education, this law will infringe on our rights as parents and create an unwelcoming and religiously coercive school environment for our children," Samantha Stinson, one of the plaintiffs, said in a news release. Louisiana was the first state to enact such a requirement, and a federal judge blocked the measure before it was to take effect Jan 1. Proponents of Louisiana's law say that ruling only applies to the five school boards listed in the suit, but The Associated Press is unaware of any posters being displayed in schools as the litigation continues.

Growing Fears of Massive Strikes On Iran As Nuclear Negotiations Sputter
Growing Fears of Massive Strikes On Iran As Nuclear Negotiations Sputter

Yahoo

time38 minutes ago

  • Yahoo

Growing Fears of Massive Strikes On Iran As Nuclear Negotiations Sputter

U.S. President Donald Trump has been presented with a broad array of potential military options against Iran should ongoing nuclear negotiations with that country fail. Israel is already reportedly moving ever closer to at least being in a position to launch its own strikes on Iranian nuclear sites. The direct and indirect blowback from any such operations against Iran could be immense. Fears that U.S.-Iranian nuclear talks are on the verge of collapse have been steadily growing in the past week or so amid statements from both sides outlining potentially intractable positions. Iran's ability to continue domestic enrichment of nuclear material that could be used to produce nuclear weapons has emerged as a key stumbling block to reaching a deal. 'If the President directed [it], is CENTCOM [U.S. Central Command] prepared to respond with overwhelming force to prevent a nuclear-armed Iran?' Congressman Mike Rogers, an Alabama Republican, asked U.S. Army Gen. Michael 'Erik' Kurilla at a hearing of the House Armed Services Committee today. Kurilla is currently head of CENTCOM, making him the top officer overseeing operations across the Middle East. 'I have provided the Secretary of Defense [Pete Hegseth] and the President [Trump] a wide range of options,' Kurilla said in response. 'I take that as a yes?' Rogers, the present chairman of the House Armed Services Committee, asked in return, appearing to refer to the specific wording of his question, to include the possible use of 'overwhelming force.' 'Yes,' Kurrila said. Top U.S. military commander in the Middle East General Kurilla confirms that he has presented military options on Iran to President Trump & SecDef Hegseth in House Armed Services Committee this morning. — Brian Katulis (@Katulis) June 10, 2025 It is important to note here that U.S. presidents and defense secretaries regularly ask to be briefed on potential military options in light of crises or heightened risks of one erupting. Being presented with a full range of operational possibilities, including large-scale strikes or other significant direct action, does not mean the United States is automatically committed to pursuing any specific course of action, something we will come back to later on. Publicly, Trump has consistently advocated for reaching a deal with Iran to avoid any need to take military action, though he has also raised the possibility of military action in the event talks reach a dead end. He has separately said that he has pressed his Israeli counterpart, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, to hold off on striking Iranian targets while negotiations are ongoing. There have been reports of significant friction between the two world leaders, as well. Amid all this, the U.S. president is said to be facing increasingly intense pressure from a faction of domestic political allies to acquiesce to and/or join in on Israeli attacks on Iran, according to a new report just today from Politico. There have been reports for weeks already that the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) have been actively planning and otherwise preparing to launch strikes on Iran, and the country's nuclear sites in particular. Israel's Haaretz newspaper reported yesterday that those plans continue to advance, while the country's Channel 12 television station had said that more active preparations, including the prepositioning of munitions, may now be underway. It is also worth noting that there have been persistent reports about possible Israeli strikes on Iran for some time, but that this actually came to pass on a more limited level last year. Authorities in Israel have also demonstrated a new willingness to launch overt attacks beyond the country's borders, in general. Preparations for an Israeli strike against Iran's nuclear facilities are said to be nearing completion, with the final steps, including the transfer of munitions and operational planning, currently ongoing, according to Channel 12. — OSINTdefender (@sentdefender) June 9, 2025 'Iran is acting much differently in negotiations than it did just days ago,' Trump said in an interview today with Fox News' Bret Baier. 'Much more aggressive. It's surprising to me. It's disappointing, but we are set to meet again tomorrow – we'll see.' Trump had told reporters that the next round of U.S.-Iranian nuclear talks was scheduled for Thursday during a question-and-answer session around an Invest America roundtable with multiple corporate CEOs at the White House yesterday. It is unclear whether or not this plan has changed. 'We have a meeting with Iran on Thursday. So we're going to wait till Thursday,' Trump had said. 'They're just asking for things that you can't do. They don't want to give up what they have to give up. You know what that is. They seek enrichment. We can't have enrichment. We want just the opposite.' US President Donald Trump told reporters that the next round of nuclear talks between Washington and Tehran will be held on Thursday, adding that Iran is demanding things "that you can't do." He noted that Tehran is insisting on uranium enrichment. — Rudaw English (@RudawEnglish) June 9, 2025 'And so far, they're not there. I hate to say that, because the alternative is a very, very dire one, but they're not there,' the U.S. president continued. 'They have given us their thoughts on the deal. I said, you know, it's just not acceptable.' 'We discussed a lot of things, and it went very well, very smooth. We'll see what happens. You know, we're trying to do something with a country we just spoke about, Iran,' Trump said at the same White House event yesterday in response to questions about a telephone conversation earlier in the day with Netanyahu. 'They [the Iranians] are good negotiators, but they're tough. Sometimes they can be too tough. That's the problem, we're trying to make a deal so that there's no destruction and death. And we've told them that, and I've told them that. I hope that's the way it works out, but it might not work out that way. We'll soon find out.' Trump response when he said the US officials have meeting with the Iranians on Thursday and that he discussed Lebanon with Netanyahu . — Hiba Nasr (@HibaNasr) June 9, 2025 Iran 'won't be enriching,' Trump had already told reporters this past weekend. 'If they enrich, then we're going to have to do it the other way.' Domestic Iranian capacity to enrich Uranium to a level of purity required to make effective nuclear weapons has long been a sticking point between Tehran and much of the international community. The U.S. Intelligence Community, among others, continues to assess that Iran does not have an active nuclear weapons program, but that the country has put itself in a position where it could build one within as little as a week if it chose to do so. The United States, Israel, and others, including the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), have also accused Iran of lying, or at least being far less than forthcoming, about the full extent of its nuclear efforts to date. Signals from the Trump administration on the enrichment issue specifically have been mixed in recent weeks. Axios reported just last week that a proposed U.S. deal might allow Iran to continue enriching uranium to lower purity levels associated with civilian nuclear generation. A previous multi-national deal with Iran that the United States was party to, called the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), had also put limits on Iranian enrichment, but did not require it to be stopped outright. Trump withdrew the United States from the JCPOA in 2018 during his first term in office. Iran announced in 2020 that it was no longer abiding by any of the agreement's stipulations. For its part, Iran has stressed repeatedly that it is not willing to completely abandon its domestic enrichment efforts. Iranian authorities have also said they want a clear, formalized plan for relief from U.S. sanctions as part of any new nuclear agreement. 'The U.S. proposal is not acceptable to us. It was not the result of previous rounds of negotiations. We will present our own proposal to the other side via Oman after it is finalized. This proposal is reasonable, logical, and balanced,' Iranian foreign ministry spokesperson Esmaeil Baghaei said early today, according to Reuters. 'We must ensure before the lifting of sanctions that Iran will effectively benefit economically and that its banking and trade relations with other countries will return to normal.' 'Uranium enrichment is the key to our nuclear program and the enemies have focused on the enrichment,' Iranian Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei also said last week during a televised address, again per Reuters. 'The proposal that the Americans have presented is 100% against our interests … The rude and arrogant leaders of America repeatedly demand that we should not have a nuclear programme. Who are you to decide whether Iran should have enrichment?' Majid Takht-e-Ravanchi, Iran's Deputy Foreign Minister for Political Affairs, also indicated yesterday that Iran could be looking to extend negotiations without necessarily outright rejecting a particular proposal. 'Our proposal is certainly not a one-sentence or one-paragraph text that can be easily dismissed,' Takht-e-Ravanchi explained in an interview with state-run IRNA. 'It contains elements that demonstrate our seriousness, show that our position has a defined framework, and indicate that we intend to work based on established principles. Our approach is logical.' 'The reality is that we are not discussing an excessively lengthy text at this stage because we do not intend to present a comprehensive, time-consuming agreement or understanding. The proposal we have submitted serves as a framework for an agreement. If there is mutual understanding regarding this framework, we can then begin more detailed negotiations on specific issues.' If U.S. negotiations with Iran do collapse, and American and/or Israeli attacks on nuclear facilities or other targets follow, it is unclear what the scale and scope of that operation might be, as already noted. The IDF has already demonstrated an ability to launch precision standoff strikes on Iran with virtual impunity in the past year, but only against targets on the surface. Israeli forces would face significantly greater challenges in neutralizing deeply buried sites tied to Iran's nuclear program. TWZ highlighted this reality after Israel announced its special operations forces had conducted a dramatic ground raid on an underground missile production facility in Syria last year. 'What member states decide to do is their prerogative,' IAEA Director-General Rafael Grossi told The Jerusalem Post yesterday. 'I don't advise the Israeli government. They will decide what's best.' 'But one thing is certain,' he added, 'The [Iranian nuclear] program runs wide and deep. And when I say 'deep,' I mean it. Many of these facilities are extremely well-protected. Disrupting them would require overwhelming and devastating force.' This is where questions about U.S. participation typically come into the picture. America's armed forces have a unique conventional deep-penetrating strike capability in the form of B-2 Spirit stealth bombers armed with GBU-57/B Massive Ordnance Penetrator (MOP) bunker buster bombs. TWZ highlighted the significance of this combination in reporting around the unusually large deployment of six B-2s to the Indian Ocean island of Diego Garcia between March and May of this year, as well as the use of those bombers in strikes on Yemen last October. In both cases, we also pointed out the clear strategic signalling aimed at Iran. The B-2 bombers on Diego Garcia represented just a portion of the additional U.S. forces and materiel that flowed into the Middle East since the beginning of the year. In addition, last week, reports began to emerge that the U.S. military had diverted counter-drone capabilities originally intended to be delivered to Ukraine to American forces in the Middle East. Like Israel, the U.S. military could also launch its own standoff strikes on Iran via other aircraft, as well as ships and submarines, but would face similar limitations in the kinds of targets it might be able to prosecute. Questions have even been raised in the past about whether some of Iran's underground nuclear facilities might be beyond the reach even of the MOP. Strikes that do not fully destroy facilities could still put them out of commission for at least a limited time. Ground raids could also be launched as part of what might be a protracted campaign. Any such operation would require a much larger force package beyond just the assets tasked with carrying out the strikes, including to suppress and destroy hostile air defenses, and would present additional risks as a result. U.S. operations targeting Iranian-backed Houthi militants in Yemen in the past year or so have highlighted how even more rudimentary air defenses can still present real threats to even advanced American aircraft, as you can read more about here. All of this would be further magnified by any need to mount a combat search and rescue effort to recover American personnel should their aircraft be downed inside Iran. The Houthis' arsenal of ballistic and cruise missiles, as well as kamikaze drones, which the group has amassed with immense help from Iran, also underscores the dangers U.S. warships could face from Iranian retaliation. TWZ already explored the potential broader ramifications of a major conflict between the United States and Iran in detail earlier this year amid another spike in tensions between the two countries. Iran has long vowed to carry out a broad retaliatory response if its nuclear facilities are targeted. This could include missile and drone attacks on Israeli and U.S. interests across the Middle East on a scale and scope not seen ever before, as well as similar actions by proxy forces like the Houthis, along with terrorist attacks globally. 'We have a rule in CENTCOM: you improve your foxhole every single day,' Kurrila also said at today's hearing. Kurilla says an Israeli attack on Iran would increase the risks to safety of US troops in the region. 'We have a rule in CENTCOM: you improve your foxhole every single day.' — Jared Szuba (@JM_Szuba) June 10, 2025 Just this week, Iranian authorities explicitly threatened to strike Israeli nuclear sites if their own are targeted. This followed claims from Iran's intelligence minister, Esmail Khatib, that his country is in possession of a trove of secrets about Israel's unacknowledged nuclear arsenal, which he has also threatened to publicly release. This remains largely unconfirmed, but IAEA's Grossi has indicated that the information Iran has relates primarily to Israel's publicly acknowledged Soreq nuclear research facility. It's also worth noting that Iran's general ability to threaten missile and drone attacks on targets further away from its shores has steadily grown in recent years. The U.S. Air Force's deployment in May of a contingent of F-15E Strike Eagle combat jets to provide force protection on Diego Garcia, which TWZ was first to report, highlights this fact. The island, where a force of a B-52 bombers also remains forward-deployed, has historically been seen as being less vulnerable, especially to smaller potential adversaries like Iran, simply due to its remoteness. Grossi, among others, has also warned that attacks on Iran's nuclear facilities could prompt the country to start an active nuclear weapons program. The U.S. Intelligence Community has publicly assessed that Iranian Supreme Leader Khamenei is already under increasing pressure from domestic hardliners to do so. There is clear potential for other second-order impacts, as well. Iranian authorities have threatened the possibility of blockading the Strait of Hormuz, which links the Persian Gulf to the Gulf of Oman, in times of heightened tensions in the past. Doing so would have major impacts on global oil and natural gas supplies. Yemen's Houthis have already massively disrupted international shipping with attacks on commercial vessels in and around the Red Sea in the past year or so. Regional and global impacts could draw in other countries and create additional complexities. Russia and China, for instance, have deep ties to Iran and interests in keeping the current regime in Tehran in place. All told, it remains to be seen whether the United States and/or Israel will launch attacks on Iran, including its nuclear sites. At the same time, that decision looks to heavily hinge on the increasingly uncertain future of ongoing U.S.-Iranian negotiations. Contact the author: joe@

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store