Trump Allies Tucker Carlson, MTG And Steve Bannon Pushing Back Against His Suggestions He Might Attack Iran
A growing coalition of Republicans are speaking out against U.S. involvement in the Israel-Iran conflict, indicating they could break with President Donald Trump if he decides to strike Iran.
President Donald Trump speaks to the press as workers install a large flag pole on the South Lawn of ... More the White House in Washington, DC on June 18, 2025. (Photo by BRENDAN SMIALOWSKI/AFP via Getty Images)
The issue has divided his Republican allies, with war hawks such as Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., a close confidant to Trump on military matters, suggesting the U.S. should do whatever it takes to stop Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon, while self-described 'America First' Republicans, such as Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene, R-Ga., have openly opposed the idea.
Greene derided Republicans who she said are 'slobbering for the U.s. to become fully involved' in the conflict in a post on X, writing that 'everyone is finding out who are the real America First/MAGA and were fake,' warning that entering the war could be expensive and deadly.
Former Fox News host Tucker Carlson, who is also against U.S. intervention, clashed with Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, in an interview posted Tuesday in which Carlson accused Cruz of not knowing enough about Iran to want the U.S. to become involved in the conflict, after Cruz told Fox News on Sunday 'it is very much in the interest of America to see regime change in Iran.'
Trump ally Steve Bannon also told reporters Wednesday 'the Israelis have to finish what they started' and that Trump 'should take time to think this through with his advisers.'
Trump told reporters Wednesday 'we're not looking for a long-term war . . . I only want one thing—Iran cannot have a nuclear weapon, that's it,' appearing to respond to concerns from some of his Republican allies that U.S. military involvement could start a years-long war.
Trump suggested Wednesday the GOP resistance wouldn't affect his decision: 'I may have some people that are a little bit unhappy now, but I have some people that are very happy . . . very simply, Iran cannot have a nuclear weapon.'
Trump refused to say Wednesday whether he's leaning toward becoming involved in the conflict, telling reporters 'I may do it, I may not,' when asked if he would strike Iran's nuclear facilities. Trump's rhetoric toward Iran has become increasingly threatening in recent days, as Israel has claimed Tehran has launched hundreds of missiles and drones since Friday. On Tuesday, Trump warned that he knew where Iran's Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, was hiding, and that he wouldn't accept anything less than 'unconditional surrender' from Tehran.
Iran Calls Trump Claim They Reached Out 'Despicable' (Forbes)
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
8 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Social Security fund could run out in 8 years, trustees say. Is there hope?
Social Security's reserves could vanish in eight years, roughly on par with previous estimates, according to a new report. At that point, if no adjustments are made, the entitlement program's trust fund will be able to pay out just 77% of benefits to seniors. Medicare is in the same boat. That's the latest projection for the Old-Age and Survivors Insurance (OASI) Trust Fund, according to the 2025 Social Security and Medicare Trustees annual report released Wednesday. Is there any hope? Only if Congress gets its act together and makes some fixes, which are doable. "A huge number that lawmakers have allowed this to run out of control — but it doesn't change the fact that we have the tools we need to address this problem and turn the ship around," Emerson Sprick, an economist and associate director of the Economic Policy Program at the Bipartisan Policy Center, told Yahoo Finance. Some slightly good news: If the OASI were combined with the fund that pays out disability benefits — the Disability Insurance Trust Fund — the reserve fund would not go broke until the third quarter of 2034, three quarters sooner than reported last year, and it would shell out 81% of scheduled benefits. However, the two funds can't be combined, at least for now. The combined projection of the two funds is frequently used to indicate the overall status of the Social Security program. But the situation is worse than you think. 'Since last year's report, one law was enacted that is projected to have a substantial effect on Social Security's financial status — The Social Security Fairness Act was enacted on January 5th, 2025,' said a senior government official. Read more: What is the retirement age for Social Security, 401(k), and IRA withdrawals? This law, the Social Security Fairness Act, impacts more than 3 million Social Security recipients by increasing monthly benefits for certain types of workers, including some teachers, firefighters, and police officers in many states, federal employees covered by the Civil Service Retirement System, and people whose work had been covered by a foreign social security system. 'Although it's not reflected in the projected year of trust fund depletion, the report shows clearly that Social Security's financial outlook has worsened over the last year, mainly due to the enactment of the act," said Sprick, the economist. The Medicare Hospital Insurance trust fund will also exhaust its reserves in 2033, three years earlier than projected last year, primarily due to the change in projected expenditures. The projected shortfall for Medicare — which covers 67.6 million people: 60.3 million aged 65 and older, and 7.3 million disabled — largely stems from the rising cost of healthcare. This increase is mainly a result of higher-than-anticipated 2024 expenditures and higher projected spending for inpatient hospital and hospice services, according to the senior government official. Read more: Medicare open enrollment: How to add or adjust your coverage How broadly would these cuts be felt? The Social Security program paid nearly $1.47 trillion in benefits last year to about 68 million Americans. For about half of seniors, Social Security provides at least half of their income, and for about 1 in 4 seniors, it accounts for at least 90% of their income. By subscribing, you are agreeing to Yahoo's Terms and Privacy Policy There are plenty of factors beyond the new law that are responsible for the dwindling till and have been festering for years. Stepping back to look at the bigger picture over 75 years, the Trustees project that the Social Security trust funds face a 3.82% taxable payroll shortfall, up significantly from 3.5% last year, according to the senior official. That's a persistent problem — the share of total earnings subject to payroll tax has decreased significantly. Social Security is mostly a pay-as-you-go program. Payroll taxes collected from workers now pay out the benefits to current recipients. Part of the problem is that people are living longer and the birth rate is falling, so the ratio of workers to beneficiaries is shrinking. During 2024, an estimated 184 million people had earnings covered by Social Security and paid payroll taxes on those earnings. Total income, including interest, to the combined OASI and DI Trust Funds amounted to $1.42 trillion in 2024. Almost 91% of that revenue, or $1.29 trillion, came from payroll taxes, $55 billion from taxation of Social Security benefits, and $69 billion in interest earned on the government bonds held by the trust funds. However, much of wage growth has gone to higher earners, reducing the percentage of wages subject to Social Security tax, the official said. 'Earnings for the roughly 6% of workers above the taxable maximum level increased much more rapidly than earnings for the 94% of workers below the taxable maximum level, so that the share of total earnings subject to the payroll tax has declined." The ceiling: $176,100. That means payroll taxes will contribute a smaller percentage to Social Security's revenues. This factor is largely responsible for the worsening financial status of the trust funds compared to the projections in 1983 after the last major amendments, when the combined trust funds were projected to become depleted after 2050. Read more: When will I get my Social Security check? Payment schedule for 2025. Certainly, other issues will be tossed into the equation moving ahead. One possibility that the trustees will be watching is the impact the administration's immigration policy might have on future population growth and, subsequently, future workers paying into the Social Security system, including the number of foreign-born workers who pay into the program. 'Congress must act," AARP CEO Myechia Minter-Jordan said in a solutions exist to fix the shortfall, including ratcheting up payroll taxes, which currently fund the program at 12.4%, split evenly between employees and employers. Other proposals include raising the retirement age for younger workers or lifting the cap on the amount of a person's income that is subject to the Social Security tax. For 2025, the Social Security tax limit is $176,100. The current rate for Medicare is 1.45% for the employer and 1.45% for the employee, or 2.9% total. There is no wage cap for Medicare. And employers are responsible for withholding 0.9% additional Medicare tax on an individual's wages paid in excess of $200,000. 'Congress has always acted to avert past shortfalls, and will again. Allowing a 15-20% immediate benefit cut to go into effect would be political suicide,' said Nancy Altman, president of Social Security Works. Congress has eight years, and the clock is ticking. Kerry Hannon is a Senior Columnist at Yahoo Finance. She is a career and retirement strategist and the author of 14 books, including the forthcoming "Retirement Bites: A Gen X Guide to Securing Your Financial Future," "In Control at 50+: How to Succeed in the New World of Work" and "Never Too Old to Get Rich." Follow her on Bluesky. Sign up for the Mind Your Money newsletter Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data
The Hill
12 minutes ago
- The Hill
Trump talk of joining Iran-Israel conflict unnerves lawmakers in both parties
Senators in both parties are growing increasingly nervous about the possibility that President Trump could insert the United States directly in the Israel-Iran war with a decision to bomb Iran to prevent it from obtaining a nuclear weapon. It's not clear whether Trump has made a decision himself on an issue that divides his own party and the MAGA movement. On Wednesday, he said, 'I may do it, I may not do it. I mean, nobody knows what I'm going to do.' The Wall Street Journal later in the day reported that Trump had told senior aides he had approved of an attack plan for Iran but was holding off on giving a final order to see if that country abandons its nuclear program. On Capitol Hill, there is broad support in both parties for Israel, but there is also fear about getting drawn into a larger war in the Middle East. 'I'm uncomfortable,' said Sen. John Hickenlooper (D-Colo.), who noted that Trump campaign on keeping the U.S. out of foreign conflicts. Since taking office, Trump has so far unsuccessfully sought to get peace deals in the Russia-Ukraine war and in the Middle East. 'These decisions are always a function of assessing risk accurately and your reward,' said Hickenlooper. 'What do we get out of it? And I'm not sure what's in it for the American people. That's the argument the president ran on.' 'We run the risk of getting dragged into a much more serious conflict,' he continued, while noting he's '100 percent' on the Israeli side. 'But I'm not sure this is necessary to their survival for us to do something like this.' Lawmakers are also worried about what their constituents back home are thinking. Sen. Shelley Moore Capito ( said U.S. officials 'need to be contemplative and look at all the ramifications.' 'I'd imagine every American's like, 'hoo, this situation's spiraling,'' she said. While Capito expressed concern, she also said she believes Trump will only strike Tehran if he feels fully compelled to do so beyond a reasonable doubt. 'I don't really worry with this president because he doesn't pay as much attention to the rhetoric, when the Ayatollah says, 'ohhh we'll ruin you,'' Capito said. 'I just think … slow it down if you can, make sure you're making the right decision. I trust the president to make the right decision, but it's tough.' According to one Senate GOP aide, the GOP conference has a 'healthy mix' on the question of getting more involved. At one end is Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.), a close ally of Trump but also a hawkish member who is pushing for regime change. Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) represents another end of the spectrum, and has called for the U.S. to stay out of the situation entirely. Sen. Josh Hawley (R-Mo.) told reporters Wednesday that he was wary of the U.S. getting increasingly ingrained in yet another conflict in the Middle East. 'I don't want us fighting a war. I don't want another Mideast war,' he told CNN. 'I'm a little concerned about our sudden military buildup in the region.' Hawley said he had spoke to Trump on Tuesday night. 'I think Trump's message to them is if you don't [give up nukes], you're on your own with Israel,' Hawley said of the Iranians. 'I think all that's fine. It's a very different thing though for us to then say, but we are going to offensively … go strike Iran or insert ourselves into the conflict,' he continued, adding that a U.S. offensive is something 'I'd be real concerned about.' 'I don't think there's a need for the United States to affirmatively insert ourselves,' he said. Democrats are pressing for more information. Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) on Wednesday told reporters that he requested an all-senators classified briefing that is set for early next week. Sen. Mark Warner (Va.), the top Democrat on the Senate Intelligence Committee, separately expressed frustration about being kept in the dark. 'I'm a member, as you said, of the gang of eight and we're supposed to know. I have no foggy idea what this administration's plans are or what the foreign policy is vis-a-vis Iran,' he said on CNN on Wednesday afternoon. The surprise for some Republicans is that it is clear Trump is seriously considering joining the assault on Iran. This is a shift given Trump's aversion to foreign wars. The president has been a harsh critic of the Iraq and Afghanistan conflicts. Rep. Warren Davidson (R-Ohio) posted a meme on X exemplifying the MAGA coalition's lack of enthusiasm for a more intense role in Iran. Democrats, meanwhile, are divided on the possibility of asserting Congress's authority over war powers amid talk of a U.S. strike on Tehran. Sen. Tim Kaine (D-Va.) launched a push to curb the president's ability to launch a unilateral strike earlier in the week by rolling out his measure to require congressional authorization or a formal declaration of war before action can be taken. However, only a few of his colleagues have backed his effort publicly, with leadership keeping their options open. 'Senate Democrats, if necessary, will not hesitate to assert our prerogatives and our ability on this bill,' Schumer said. Republicans broadly believe that Trump has the authority to order a strike on Iran if he so chooses. The line they do not want to see crossed is the putting of troops on the ground in the region, and some of them do not see Trump taking that kind of step. 'We're not talking about American boots on the ground,' said Sen. John Cornyn (R-Texas). 'That would be something different.'
Yahoo
18 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Republicans uncover no new intel on Biden during hearing on his cognitive abilities
The Senate Judiciary subcommittee held a hearing Wednesday digging into the cognitive abilities of former President Joe Biden and claims of whether his aides helped what they say was a cover up of his alleged mental decline -- claims the former president and many on his staff have denied. The probe didn't uncover any new information on the former president -- with Democratic members of the subcommittee boycotting the hearing. Democratic senators on the committee walked out of the hearing shortly after it began, with Democratic Sen. Dick Durbin blasting the panel for even holding the hearing, while he says a number of timely investigations should be going on related to President Donald Trump's current actions. "So far this year, the Republican majority on this committee has not held a single oversight hearing, despite numerous critical challenges facing the nation that are under our jurisdiction," Durbin said. MORE: GOP senators plan hearing on Biden's perceived cognitive decline The GOP panel repeatedly accused Democrats -- and the media -- of concealing the former president's alleged real health conditions in order to prevent Trump's 2024 victory. "Today's hearing is about competency, corruption and cover up within the Biden administration. Simply put, the last administration was rudderless from one crisis to another. The Biden Administration failed and folded. The partisan media did their best to cover up those failures," Senate Judiciary Chairman Chuck Grassley claimed. Former White House press secretary Sean Spicer, who was among the witnesses, compared his time working under Trump in his first term to his observations of Biden, praising Trump's energy and mental focus. Spicer never worked for the Biden administration. Spicer also criticized "legacy media" for questions raised about Trump's fitness for office in his first term, while he claims they were not questioning Biden the same way. "Many, rightly so, believe the media in this country is culpable in covering up the obvious decline of the 46th president and leaders of the free world -- the president of the United States. The scrutiny that was baselessly directed at President Trump during his first term was wholly absent from the media coverage of the Biden White House," Spicer claimed. Republicans on the committee also focused on Trump -- saying he is in command and makes skillful decisions. "The public is counting on us to ensure this never happens again, because we won't always be fortunate enough to have a leader like President Trump, who is so unmistakably in command," Republican Sen. Eric Schmitt said. In May, Senate Republicans announced their plans to launch the probe into Biden's mental fitness while in office -- including his use of autopen, a mechanical device to automatically add a signature to a document that's been utilized by several past presidents, including Trump in his first term. The hearing also comes after Trump earlier this month ordered Attorney General Pam Bondi to investigate whether Biden's administration sought to conspire to cover up his alleged mental state while in office. The move by the White House represents a significant escalation, as it is a directive to the Justice Department to formally investigate. MORE: Trump directs DOJ, White House counsel to investigate Biden's mental state in office Biden responded to the Trump order, saying "Let me be clear: I made the decisions during my presidency." "I made the decisions about the pardons, executive orders, legislation, and proclamations. Any suggestion that I didn't is ridiculous and false," Biden said in a statement. In May, House Oversight Chairman James Comer requested Biden's White House physician, Kevin O'Connor, appear for a transcribed interview as part of an investigation into Biden's mental fitness and use of a presidential autopen while in office. Comer asked O'Connor to sit for an interview on June 25. The calls for the probes into Biden also come after the recent release of "Original Sin" by CNN host Jake Tapper and Axios reporter Alex Thompson, claiming the Bidens had a "capacity for denial and the lengths they would go to avoid transparency about health issues." In response to the book's release, a Biden spokesman said "there is nothing in this book that shows Joe Biden failed to do his job, as the authors have alleged, nor did they prove their allegation that there was a cover up or conspiracy." On Wednesday morning, Trump -- who often criticizes Biden -- lambasted the former president's use of autopen and claimed that Biden didn't have control while leading the country. "All these people, all the scum that was around the Oval, you know, the Oval Office, or around the beautiful Resolute desk, telling this guy here, 'Do this,' 'Do that,' and not even tell him. They just go over to the autopen and sign whatever the hell they wanted to sign," he said. Trump claimed that it was aides who were making decisions for Biden -- employing the autopen to carry out an agenda. "He wasn't for open borders, he wasn't for transgender for everybody. He wasn't for men playing in women's sports. But he has no idea what the hell -- he has no idea," Trump claimed.
