Democrat

Tina Peters, who served prison time for tampering with voting machines on behalf of the MAGA movement, has declined a job offer helping to oversee elections in a conservative Northern California county.

“She declined the offer because she’s running around the country right now trying to secure the elections,” Clint Curtis, the Shasta County registrar of voters, said in an interview Tuesday. “Shasta County lost out.”

Last month, Curtis set off alarm bells across California by telling reporters he planned to hire Peters, a former county clerk in Colorado who was released early from prison this summer amid a pressure campaign by President Trump.

Curtis, himself a longtime election denier, told The Times he had planned to hire Peters as a consultant “to assist with supervision of the November election.”

Peters’ attorney, Peter Ticktin, said in an interview Tuesday that she had given serious consideration to the job offer but that he had not discussed it with her in recent days. It would “not have been a full-time position,” because she is so busy, he said.

“There’s far more for her to do than get tied up in one county,” Ticktin said. “At this point, she is an American icon. I mean, think about it: How many people meet with the president of the United States in the Oval Office?”

In California, talk of hiring Peters drew swift condemnation from Gov. Gavin Newsom and other Democratic lawmakers who vowed to fight her employment.

The public observation area installed at the Shasta County elections office in Redding by Clint Curtis, the registrar of voters.

(Jason Armond / Los Angeles Times)

On Monday, Newsom wrote in a sarcastic post on X: “A convicted MAGA election tamperer working in an elections office. What could possibly go wrong?”

He added, in all caps: “TINA, NOT IN CALIFORNIA! ELECTION DENIER FELONS NOT WELCOME HERE!!!”

In a separate social media post, the governor’s press office called the job offer “a disgrace” and said Newsom had directed corrections officials to “make every effort” to reject transfer of her parole supervision into the state.

Peters is not supposed to leave Colorado without permission from her parole officer, although she did visit Trump at the White House.

Curtis called the governor “crazy” and said he was amused that Newsom — who has advocated for prison reform and rehabilitation for criminals — was focused on Peters’ felony conviction.

“California is kind of a second-chance state,” Curtis said. “Except for Tina Peters. No second chance for her in Shasta County.”

Peters, the former clerk in Mesa County, Colo., was convicted in 2024 and sentenced to nine years behind bars for breaching her county’s voting machines as part of a scheme to show that the 2020 election was rigged against Trump, a claim that has been repeatedly debunked in court.

She was found guilty of helping an associate of MAGA conspiracy theorist and MyPillow founder Mike Lindell gain unauthorized access to Mesa County’s Dominion election equipment in 2021 and make copies of its hard drive before and after a software upgrade.

After months of haranguing from Trump, Colorado Gov. Jared Polis, a Democrat, commuted Peters’ sentence. She was released in June after serving less than a quarter of the nine years.

In interviews with right-wing media, Curtis said Peters essentially would do the job of assistant registrar but would be brought on as a consultant to get around the county’s slow hiring process.

Brent Turner, the Shasta County assistant registrar, said his job was not open because he had not quit. He told The Times on Tuesday that he was happy Peters had declined his boss’ offer.

Shasta County Registrar Clint Curtis stands in the election counting area on Feb. 25 in Redding.

(Jason Armond / Los Angeles Times)

“I’m glad that Gavin is paying attention,” said Turner, a Democrat from San Francisco and a longtime election reform activist who has pushed for non-proprietary open-source voting systems with software code that can be examined by anyone.

Curtis handpicked Turner as his assistant last year.

Last month, Curtis told the hosts of “Jefferson State of Mine,” a radio show by leaders of the State of Jefferson secession movement, that Turner “got sick on me” and that he was hoping his assistant would “just, like, retire on June 2 and go away and let me fill [the position], but he didn’t.”

Turner, who is on medical leave, said he had not given Curtis permission to speak publicly about his health and that he had not spoken to his boss since Curtis began talking about hiring Peters.

“It’s been aggravating and unfortunate,” Turner said. “But we’re undaunted, as election officials and workers. And the fact is, there’s work to be done now, so the sooner we put this behind us, the better.”

Curtis was appointed by the Shasta County Board of Supervisors last year after two previous registrars resigned. He will be out of office in January after losing the June primary to Joanna Francescut, a longtime assistant registrar whom he had fired.

Curtis has sequestered primary ballots in a room in the elections office in Redding, sealing the doors with locks and duct tape and telling reporters that the ballots did not look, feel or smell right.

Both Curtis and county officials — who have condemned his actions — have asked the FBI and other authorities to investigate.

The high desert is not typically a place you look for a wave. But in the vast expanse between the Sierra Nevada and Utah border, a not-exactly-wide-open race for Congress is testing whether a blue wave, should one come November, is ankle-high or something more akin to a political tsunami.

Nevada’s 2nd District has been represented by just four lawmakers since its creation more than 40 years ago. All those representatives have been Republicans.

November’s contest should be another shoo-in for the GOP and its nominee, David Flippo. The district, which takes in northern Nevada, is overwhelmingly white and rural, which makes it solidly conservative. In 2024, Donald Trump beat Kamala Harris by a decisive 56% to 42%; only Washoe County, home to Reno, kept things that close. Trump won other portions of the district by 50 percentage points or more.

But inflation, Trump’s sagging approval rating and other factors — northern resentment toward southern Nevada, where Flippo lived until fairly recently, the refusal of the incumbent to support his party’s nominee — offer Democrats the not-entirely-far-fetched hope of a major upset.

“It will be an interesting summer and fall,” Mark Amodei, who has represented the district for 15 years, wrote on social media after the June primary. “But I believe it’s fair to say that CD-2, for the first time in its history, isn’t a Republican guarantee.”

That’s just about the kindest thing the congressman has had to say about his would-be successor.

All of which make the sprawling district in Nevada’s rough and rocky Great Basin an improbable political bellwether. A win on such forbidding terrain would almost certainly mean a nationwide Democratic gain of 30 or more seats in November; they need to flip just three to take control of the House.

Flippo, 63, a 25-year Air Force veteran and Trump stalwart, arrived in the district from Las Vegas. He ran for Congress there in 2024, losing in the Republican primary. He was preparing for a second try in the Democratic-leaning 4th District when Amodei unexpectedly announced his retirement in February. So Flippo hightailed it north to run in the far more hospitable 2nd District.

He took on the favored candidate of Amodei and others in the GOP establishment, James Settelmeyer, a former minority leader of the state Senate. Backed by a constellation of MAGA celebrities, Flippo waged a fiercely negative campaign, accusing “Tampon Jim” of voting to put menstrual products in boys’ bathrooms and coddling undocumented immigrants, among other distortions. With Trump’s endorsement, Flippo handily defeated Settelmeyer and 11 other primary opponents.

“”Absolutely scurrilous campaign against … one of the nicest guys around,” Amodei said afterward, on the program “Nevada Newsmakers.” “The voters are never wrong. But guess what? Mark Amodei’s not endorsing [Flippo.] I wish him all the best. No way. No, thank you.”

Apart from his exceedingly short-term residency in the district, questions have also been raised about Flippo’s opaque finances. He has lent his campaign more than $1.6 million and failed to provide the personal disclosure information required of federal candidates. There is also no record of Flippo filing the required statement during his 2024 campaign, according to the Washington news outlet NOTUS.

In addition, it reported that Flippo was fired from a job in the financial services industry after his company accused him of violating policies and regulations.

So, a carpetbagger with a sketchy history.

Flippo’s main opponent is Teresa Benitez-Thompson, 48, a longtime Reno resident, former member of the state Assembly and a relatively moderate Democrat. Those credentials also buoy Democratic hopes. The party’s congressional campaign committee has, for the first time in decades, added Nevada’s 2nd District to its target list, though it remains to be seen how much time and money national Democrats commit to the race.

To prevail, Benitez-Thompson would have to defy political gravity, which is to say overcome the reflexive partisanship that has typified politics in this age of deep voter polarization.

In the last two midterm elections, according to the Pew Research Center, more than 90% of Republican and Republican-leaning voters supported GOP candidates for the House. In other words, the kind of crossover voters that Benitez-Thompson needs to win have become rare indeed.

““Trump is a huge liability for Republicans; there is no question that the GOP is going to have huge turnout problems, meaning that in a lot of races, Democrats are going to greatly exceed expectations,” the veteran election handicapper Charlie Cook wrote in a recent midterm analysis. “But converting Republican voters to actually back a Democrat — even for a day — is so much harder now.”

Jon Ralston, one of Nevada’s leading political savants, agreed.

“Some of those rural Nevada voters would rather commit hara-kiri than vote for a Democrat,” Ralston said. (No, Japan’s ancient suicide ritual is not particularly associated with honor or custom in the cow counties, as Nevada’s lightly populated stretches are known. But you get the point.)

“I don’t think it’s impossible,” Ralston, founder and chief executive of the Nevada Independent news site, said of a Democratic upset. “But I remain skeptical.”

Here’s the thing, though, about wave elections — and, to be clear, your friendly political columnist is offering no predictions ahead of November. Like a massive ocean swell, which can bear all kinds of flotsam and jetsam ashore, a political wave that is big enough, broad enough and strong enough can carry all manner of unlikely candidates to victory.

Even in the bone-dry desert.

AUSTIN, Texas — Democrats seeking the party’s presidential nomination in 2028 will need to prove themselves early on in states where Black and Latino voters and union members are key supporters, under an election year calendar approved Saturday.

The primary lineup pushes Iowa from the traditional top spot and makes South Carolina the leadoff state, voting on Jan. 22, 2028, followed by Nevada on Feb. 1. New Hampshire, New Mexico, Michigan and Virginia round out the early states, throughout February, according to the plan endorsed by the Democratic National Committee at its meeting in Texas.

DNC Chairman Ken Martin said that to win the general election, “you have to be battle-tested in a way that you already have campaigned in front of and for the support of various communities throughout the country.” That is why the calendar designed by the party matters, he said in an interview.

Some potential candidates in what is expected to be a large field have visited early-voting states such as South Carolina. Party leaders have said the order gives candidates the best shot at winning back the White House after President Trump’s final term.

“They have to show that they can go to the South and talk to Black voters and rural voters, as well as out west, talking ranching and mining issues, to a border state, to union members,” said party strategist Karen Finney, who has worked on multiple presidential campaigns. “Whoever survives will be battle-tested.”

Former presidential candidate Howard Dean, a onetime Vermont governor, recalled his tenure as national party chairman, when Democrats solidified Nevada and South Carolina as early states behind Iowa and New Hampshire. The latest change is even better, he said.

“These states look more like the country” as a whole, he said, “whereas Iowa and New Hampshire don’t.”

Rita Hart, chair of the Iowa Democratic Party, said bypassing her state in the early going would sideline important voter voices and give a political edge to Republicans, who are expected to keep Iowa atop their calendar.

Nonwhite voters claim top billing

As the first-in-the-South primary, South Carolina was more decisive than Iowa and New Hampshire for nominees Barack Obama in 2008, Hillary Clinton in 2016 and Joe Biden in 2020. All three dominated among South Carolina’s large Black population, which can yield more than half the state’s Democratic primary electorate.

With Nevada and New Mexico following, that will require candidates to court more Latino voters early in the process.

Shifting from Iowa and New Hampshire does not mean little-known candidates cannot catch fire, as Pete Buttigieg did in Iowa and New Hampshire in 2020, when he was a 37-year-old former mayor. They just will not be able to do it with an almost entirely white audience.

“If you can’t go to every part of this country and make your case, you should not be running for president,” Finney said.

Progressive vs. establishment dynamics

There is disagreement over how Democrats’ split between progressives and mainstream liberals may or may not surface in the nominating calendar.

“I think our primary voters up north are probably a little different than primary voters in South Carolina,” said Boyd Brown, a former DNC member from South Carolina. “It’s not the woke ideologies that we just can’t get away from” in other places, Brown said.

Nina Smith, a former Buttigieg advisor who works closely with progressive causes, disagreed. Smith said Black South Carolinians, especially, have gravitated to more moderate candidates — twice rejecting Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders in favor of Clinton and Biden.

But, she said, “Southern Black voters are more progressive than they’re given credit for” on policy but also “realists” about what is possible.

“Living through Jim Crow and other oppressive structures will force you to take that approach,” she said.

Smith said that with South Carolina leading off and many Southern states following on Super Tuesday soon after the early lineup concludes, progressives will have to take the time to listen and then tailor their messages.

“A lot of Black voters don’t necessarily see themselves in the ideas and arguments that progressives put forward,” she said.

Unions in the spotlight

Nevada has the service industry unions because of Las Vegas; Michigan has the auto industry and associated manufacturing support industries; Virginia is home to more federal workers than any other state.

“Labor is still so important,” Dean said.

Beyond seeking the backing of organized labor, the campaigns and the party will look to unions for help in spreading Democrats’ message to voters and getting people to the polls.

Scheduling efficiency

Campaigns struggle to balance many demands such as meeting voters in person, raising money and the logistics of travel. As a result, places such as Nevada have gotten short shrift in the past because candidates, most from the eastern part of the country, have concluded the investment of time is not worth it.

An expanded calendar offers more clustering opportunities.

A swing to the West could hit two early states — Nevada and New Mexico — and include a fundraising stop in California, full of Democratic donors. A South Carolina trip could mean fundraisers and public appearances in Atlanta along with Charlotte and Raleigh, both in North Carolina. Virginia offers proximity to donors and national TV studios in Washington; the same options are available by adding a New York City stop on the way to New Hampshire.

Bre Maxwell is a DNC member from South Carolina who said the state’s smaller size and lower media costs are a financial equalizer, allowing not only the best-funded candidates to have an impact.

“They can campaign from the top to the bottom in a day,” Maxwell said.

Keeping a focus on November

Of the six early states, all but South Carolina have been competitive in general elections.

That means that even before Super Tuesday, the Democratic candidates will have spent significant time and resources in states worth a combined 43 electoral college votes. That is not insignificant on the way to the 270 needed to win.

Television ads and news coverage can spill over, as well. Markets targeting parts of South Carolina also reach portions of North Carolina and Georgia.

After all, Brown said, the point is to put a Democrat in the White House.

“This is not a social or a debate club. It is a political party,” he said.

Catalini and Barrow write for the Associated Press. Barrow reported from Atlanta. AP writer Meg Kinnard in Columbia, S.C., contributed to this report.

WASHINGTON — Democrats seeking to retake control of Congress are planning broad investigations into President Trump and his family’s business dealings as part of an agenda focused on alleged corruption and economic harm, while keeping impeachment an option rather than an immediate priority.

The strategy would use subpoenas, committee hearings, possible criminal referrals and the budget as leverage to examine whether Trump, his family and close associates have used the federal government and public contracts for personal or financial gain.

House Democrats in key leadership posts told The Times the groundwork is already being laid out for probes into the president’s reported $2.2 billion in gains last year, the business ventures of his son-in-law Jared Kushner and his sons Eric and Don Jr., and the family’s crypto projects. There is also interest in scrutinizing Trump’s pardons and commutations to allies and the Department of Justice’s handling of the Jeffrey Epstein case.

With less than three months before the midterm elections, the prospect of sweeping investigations has hung over Trump as his approval ratings hit new lows and Democrats gain momentum. But the White House has dismissed Democrats’ plans as partisan and unfounded.

“President Trump only acts in the best interests of the American public — which is why they overwhelmingly re‑elected him to this office, despite years of lies and false accusations against him and his businesses from the fake news media,” White House spokesperson Anna Kelly said in a statement. “There are no conflicts of interest.”

Asked about the possibility of being impeached for a third time and being investigated, Trump told Punchbowl News last week that it would be “very unfair,” in part because “a lot of people are saying I am one of the greatest presidents ever.”

For Democrats, impeachment remains an option, but they are reluctant to make it a centerpiece of their agenda this time around. They argued the process could distract from oversight that would address alleged corruption and the ways it is hurting Americans economically.

“We shouldn’t take off the table that he can be impeached again,” Rep. Robert Garcia (D-Long Beach), the top Democrat on the House Oversight Committee, said in an interview. “But I think right now we’ve got to stop the Trump harm and investigate those who are helping him.”

Rep. Jamie Raskin, the top Democrat on the House Judiciary Committee, which plays a key role in the impeachment process, has also paused at making impeachment a priority. The Maryland lawmaker argued that Trump is “very eager” for Democrats to impeach him so he can mobilize his political base.

“We’re not going to play into the game,” Raskin told MS NOW’s “The Weekend” on Sunday.

In a statement to The Times, Raskin said the priority would be in expanding ongoing investigations into Trump’s pardons, what he called the “weaponization of the Department of Justice against chosen enemies in the nonprofit world,” “rampant violations of the foreign emoluments clause,” and the “theft and waste of public resources by Trump and his Cabinet of corruption.”

Sen. Adam Schiff (D-Calif.), who led the investigation that resulted in Trump’s first impeachment, said he is keeping his “mind open” on whether another impeachment would make sense for Democrats a third time. He argued the “power of the purse” — or using the budget to take aim at Trump’s agenda — would be a more effective tool.

“We’re going to need to do a lot of oversight of this administration, and I think it will be important in doing that oversight to always bring it back to why people should care about it and how the corruption of this regime is really raising their costs,” Schiff said.

Other Democrats are equally wary about using their renewed power to launch a third impeachment trial against Trump.

“We all know that this man has already been impeached twice. … I don’t know that we have to go to that well a third time,” Rep. Sydney Kamlager-Dove (D-Los Angeles) said.

Probes trickle down

Beyond the president’s business dealings, rank-and-file Democrats are coordinating other efforts to target Trump administration officials and senior aides over policy decisions they argue should force them out of their jobs.

Last week, Kamlager-Dove introduced articles of impeachment against Russell Vought, the White House budget director, arguing that he broke the law when the administration canceled federal funding to Democratic states including California for political reasons.

While she is cautious about impeaching Trump for a third time, she believes it would be effective to “remove Trump’s reapers who are willfully breaking the law.”

“I’m coordinating with leadership so that we have the best path forward for this,” she said. “It’s about being unified. It’s about working in a coordinated fashion, and it’s about understanding the end goal.”

Rep. James Walkinshaw (D-Va.), a member of the House Oversight Committee, said there needs to be more scrutiny over the White House’s budget-cutting team, the Department of Government Efficiency. Democrats should inquire more, he said, into allegations that a former DOGE official copied the Social Security numbers, names and personal information of millions of Americans to a private cloud that lacked adequate security.

He said the public still does not know enough about the situation or whether the data is secure or if it was breached, and said lawmakers should examine whether any laws or policies were violated.

“If there was political motivation to access and put at risk the Social Security numbers and the personal information of every single American, that sounds pretty criminal to me,” Walkinshaw said.

In May, three Democrats — Reps. Mike Levin of California, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez of New York and Jason Crow of Colorado — launched the End Corruption Caucus, creating another vehicle for oversight ideas should Democrats take control of the House.

The push and pull

As Democrats prepare for investigations, there are already questions about the type of resistance that could come from Trump and administration officials, all of whom have shown a willingness to buck Congress.

In a sign of what could be a potential hurdle, the Department of Justice issued a memo Monday evening that says communications between Trump and advisors who do not work for his administration can be protected under executive privilege.

“Restricting executive privilege to purely intragovernmental communications would foreclose the President from relying on an array of important sources that he may find necessary to the effective discharge of his responsibilities of office,” the memo from the department’s Office of Legal Counsel said.

The White House described the memo as a “narrow legal analysis, not an extension of executive privilege.”

But some Democrats see it as an example of how the Trump administration may be gearing up for Democratic-led investigations.

“This dubious expansion of executive privilege to cover Trump’s outside advisors is a clear attack on Congress’ oversight powers, and creates an environment ripe for corruption that protects only the president and his friends. We are ready to fight to uphold our power and authority,” Garcia said.

Walkinshaw added that he predicts the Trump administration is going to “flat-out refuse to engage with or respond to Democrats” if they take control.

If that happens, Democrats already expect to fight back.

“We have contempt tools, we have inherent contempt, we have criminal contempt,” he said. “We just have to be prepared to exercise the full extent of our constitutional tools, and I predict that will happen very early.”

Joshua Kushner’s sudden rise to co-ownership of the most storied team in professional basketball might seem like it came out of the blue — but it’s been a long time coming.

A scion of the wealthy Kushner family whose older brother, Jared, is married to President Trump’s daughter, and whose father, Charles, is the U.S. ambassador to France, has successfully staked out his own lucrative business career.

He is worth an estimated $5.2 billion by Forbes.

And along the way, the New York-based entrepreneur and venture capitalist has exhibited a deep interest in sports investments.

Just this summer, there were reports that Joshua Kushner and new Laker’s co-owner Bob Iger, the former Walt Disney Co. chief executive, had hired investment bankers to consider a bid for the National Basketball Association’s expansion team in Las Vegas — before setting their sights on the Lakers.

Kushner already holds a stake that in the Miami Heat that he will divest, according to The Athletic, and previously sold a stake in the Memphis Grizzlies. His wife, model Karlie Kloss, has a stake in the WNBA’s New York Liberty.

Kushner’s Thrive Capital also was named the lead investor in FIFA President Gianni Infantino’s ill-fated plan this year to spin off a $20 billion commercial subsidiary to handle the soccer federation’s broadcast, sponsorship, ticketing and event operations.

Infantino withdrew the proposal last month after withering criticism that he was overly commercializing the sport, as well as of Kushner’s ties to Trump and his controversial presidency.

Kushner announced on X in April that he also was in the process of taking a stake in the San Francisco Giants. It was not his first interest in baseball. In 2017, he reached a preliminary agreement to buy the Miami Marlins for $1.6 billion, but the deal fell through.

Kushner’s father made his fortune in commercial and residential real estate, and early on his youngest son decided to go into business but forge his own career, even as he maintained his ties to Kushner Cos., the family firm.

After graduating from Harvard University, Kushner got his MBA from the school. But before he had even graduated in 2011, he founded his venture capital firm Thrive Capital. He also worked at top investment bank Goldman Sachs.

The venture capital firm reportedly scored with investments in Instagram, online eyewear retailer Warby Parker, music streaming service Spotify, payments processor Stripe and Elon Musk’s SpaceX long before it went public this year.

In 2012, Kushner displayed an entrepreneurial streak, co-founding Oscar, a health tech and insurer that is now publicly traded with a market capitalization of about $9 billion.

This year, Thrive raised $10 billion, it’s largest fundraising round yet, drawing investment’s from global billionaires such as India’s Mukesh Ambani, the world’s twelfth richest person, according to Bloomberg. Iger reportedly invested $175 million to purchase a 3.3% stake in Thrive.

Interest in the firm came after it scored a huge win with an investment in artificial intelligence pioneer OpenAI in January 2023, just months after the debut of ChatGPT. At the time, the startup was valued at $29 billion, and now its valuation is approaching $1 trillion.

A lifelong Democrat, Kushner attended the 2017 Women’s March in Washington, a day after Trump’s first inauguration. Kushner has funded Democratic politicians and causes almost exclusively, including $250,000 in donations to the Growth Democrats PAC during the 2024 election cycle.

“It is no secret that liberal values have guided my life and that I have supported political leaders that share similar values,” Kushner told Forbes in 2017.

In 2024, Kushner and Kloss purchased the iconic Midcentury Modern home in Malibu known as the “Wave House,” designed by famed architect Harry Gesner. According to The Wall Street Journal, the couple paid $29.5 million for the six-bedroom, 6,200-square-foot house that abuts the Pacific Ocean—$20 million less than the asking price when it was listed for sale in 2023.

Kushner, however, has not been able to shed his controversial association with his family or the family real estate firm.

A property management company owned by the family in 2022 agreed to pay $3.25 million in civil penalties and restitution to settle a lawsuit brought by the state of Maryland. The suit alleged that tenants in thousands of rental units were charged illegal fees while failing to maintain the properties. In reaching the settlement, the company did not admit wrongdoing.

Kushner’s effort to fashion his own identity also has been tarnished by his controversial father.

Charles Kushner was made ambassador to France last year by Trump, but only after the president pardoned the New Jersey developer in 2020. The elder Kushner spent nearly two years in custody following a federal tax fraud investigation.

Not long after assuming his post, Kushner sparked a diplomatic clash with France, accusing the country of not doing enough to stem antisemitism in the country following the start of the Hamas-Israeli conflict.

Correspondent A.J. Perez, the Associated Press and Bloomberg News contributed to this report.

July 15 (UPI) — The U.S. House of Representatives on Wednesday voted to defeat an amendment cutting military aid to Israel by billions of dollars, although more than 100 Democrats voted for the measure.

Rep. Thomas Massie, R-Ky., proposed the amendment, which was attached to a spending bill. It would have cut $3.3 billion in aid, much of which would have gone to Israel’s military. The amendment failed by a 104-314 vote, with Massie and 103 Democrats voting for it. Ten Democrats voted only “present,” with 98 voting against it.

Even defeated, the measure’s support was a rebuke to the Israeli government of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and its attacks on Gaza. The government faces accusations of genocide against the Palestinian people.

However, some Democrats said the measure was designed to spread division among their party and called it “deeply flawed” even if they voted for it.

Rep. Katherine Clark, D-Mass., House minority whip, voted for the measure, while also saying that it was “not an attempt to have a serious and necessary debate” about military aid to Israel but “more stunts from congressional Republicans who would rather score cheap political points than lead.”

Still, Clark said, “It is clear that the status quo is not tenable.We should not provide a blank check for military aid to any country that does not comply with U.S. law, interests and values. The Netanyahu government has failed to meet that standard.”

Clark is the second-highest ranking House Democrat. The top Democrat in the House, Rep. Hakeem Jeffries, D-N.Y., and Democratic Caucus Chairman Rep.Pete Aguilar, D-Calif., both voted against the measure. Jeffries said he would not try to get other Democrats to oppose the bill but encouraged them to vote their conscience.

Rep. Greg Casar, D-Texas, the leader of the Congressional Progressive Caucus, encouraged support for the measure before the vote, saying voters are looking for leaders who will question blind U.S. support for Israel.

“Think about this for just a moment,” Casar said after the vote. “Starting today, a majority of Democrats in this building refused to vote to send billions of dollars in weapons to the Israeli military. That sends a strong message to Netanyahu that the days are over of an unaccountable blank check to his wars and his war crimes, at least from the Democratic Party.”

As rights advocates decry the detention of United States Congressman Ro Khanna by armed Israeli settlers, Israel and its allies are launching political attacks to discredit the progressive legislator.

Israeli officials have already ruled out apologising to Khanna or holding the settlers accountable. Instead, several have gone on the offensive against the congressman.

Khanna said he was travelling to a Palestinian village in the occupied West Bank on Wednesday when armed settlers stopped his van for 20 minutes. The settlers were later joined by Israeli soldiers who continued to block the road.

The whole ordeal lasted more than an hour, according to Khanna, and was only resolved after he reached out to the US embassy in Israel.

On Sunday, Michael Leiter, Israel’s ambassador to the US, appeared to blame Khanna for the mistreatment he received, saying that the California Democrat had failed to coordinate his trip with the Israeli government.

“He decided to coordinate his trip not with Israel, but with Palestinian activists and with J Street,” Leiter told CBS News, referencing a Jewish nonprofit.

Leiter went on to claim, without evidence, that Khanna may have waited to release his video of Wednesday’s incident to distract from his support for politician Graham Platner.

Platner dropped out of the Senate race in Maine on Friday amid sexual misconduct allegations. Khanna published his video on Saturday.

“Maybe this had more something to do with his support of Graham Platner beforehand and the difficulties he had with that, and trying to shift the focus to something else. Perhaps? I’m asking a question,” Leiter said.

Khanna is not backing down, however. He said he did inform Israel of his travel and has called for the arrest of settlers who held up his van.

Khanna responds

The Israeli military has disputed Khanna’s version of the events, saying that it “dispersed” civilians who were blocking the road. But in an appearance on Sunday with NBC News, Khanna refuted that account.

“The [Israeli military] is lying,” Khanna said.

“What happened was unprecedented. They had violent settlers detain American citizens, including an American government official. You had these settlers brandishing M4s [rifles], kicking the tyres of our van, laughing at us, mocking at us, videotaping us.”

He added that the Israeli military participated in blocking their path and detaining them.

“How dare they mistreat people with an American passport that way?” Khanna said.

Pro-Israel politicians, however, claimed that Khanna provoked his own detention by carrying out a political stunt.

“Sounds like another plea for publicity. Anything to get in front of the camera. Why else would you be there? It isn’t your country,” Republican Congressman Greg Murphy wrote in a social media post.

Critics were quick to point out that Murphy’s first trip as part of a congressional delegation was to Israel.

Khanna also responded to Murphy, urging him to be on “Team America” and join the push for any settlers and soldiers who mistreat US citizens to face consequences.

“I would be calling for that if you had been in our shoes,” Khanna said.

Conservative commentator Tucker Carlson was among those who came to Khanna’s defence. He criticised Mike Huckabee, the US ambassador to Israel, for failing to speak out about the incident.

“An American member of congress is threatened by foreign terrorists carrying American rifles, backed by a foreign military paid for by American taxpayers, and the US ambassador to that country says not a word in defense of his own countryman,” Carlson wrote on the social media platform X.

“It’s too much, too insulting and humiliating to America.”

Still, many pro-Israel figures in the US expressed scepticism about Khanna’s experience. David Friedman, a former US envoy to Israel, accused Khanna of “self-victimization”.

Friedman argued, without evidence, that Khanna had purposely entered a restricted zone to provoke the incident.

“As was entirely predictable, he was asked a few questions and sent on his way. But he got the photo op and all he needed for his pre-conceived false narrative,” Friedman said in a social media post. “Well played Ro.”

Several other pro-Israel advocates echoed that take.

Attacks on US citizens

Israel’s military and settler presence in the occupied West Bank is illegal under international law.

The International Court of Justice (ICJ) ruled in 2024 that the Israeli occupation of the Palestinian territory, including Gaza, is unlawful.

“Israeli settlements in the West Bank and East Jerusalem, and the regime associated with them, have been established and are being maintained in violation of international law,” the top United Nations tribunal said.

Israeli settlers – often under the protection of the Israeli military – regularly attack Palestinian communities in the West Bank, ransacking farms and property and assaulting people who come in their way. That includes Americans.

One year ago, for instance, Israeli settlers beat 20-year-old US citizen Sayfollah Musallet to death.

Three weeks later, another American citizen, a father of five from Chicago named Khamis Ayyad, was also killed in a settler attack.

No suspects have been charged with crimes after the two attacks.

Despite well-documented abuses against US citizens, Israel was added to the US visa waiver programme in 2023, allowing Israelis to travel visa-free to the US.

Israel is the largest cumulative recipient of US military aid in history, having received more than $21bn in the last two years alone.

A Democratic senator alleges that whistleblowers have detailed several problems stemming from rushed or improper reconstruction of the Kennedy Center, adding a new layer to the travails of the arts complex after President Trump tried to seize control of it and its name.

Sheldon Whitehouse of Rhode Island said in a release Saturday that he had received a whistleblower disclosure from the Government Accountability Project, a nonprofit whistleblower protection group, alleging that “the Center rushed a series of renovations driven by the President’s aesthetic whims and his desire to star in a series of televised events in December.”

“The Center’s subservience to the President’s desires and its corner-cutting contracting practices have resulted in steel columns that are rusting through fresh paint, a reflecting pool that may have to be torn out and rebuilt, and a brand-new bathroom floor torn out over an offending tile color,” Whitehouse said. “This is waste, and it treats a national memorial to President Kennedy as if it were a private renovation project.”

Whitehouse released a letter he wrote to the Kennedy Center’s executive director, Matt Floca, seeking answers by July 23. He said the whistleblower report included “firsthand accounts of multiple former Center project managers, supported by contemporaneous documents and photographs.” He also included an 83-page appendix full of internal center documents, emails and photos of apparently shoddy construction.

The allegations in the letter include that the center rushed work before it was authorized by Congress because it wanted it to be complete for Trump to accept the so-called FIFA Peace Prize that the soccer federation awarded him.

In doing so, the letter alleges, the center didn’t follow required contracting guidelines and wasted money replacing a bathroom because the president didn’t like the color and inking no-bid contracts. One $8-million contract to replace the concert hall’s floor went to a firm with no experience in concert halls, Whitehouse contended.

The Kennedy Center did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

Trump seized control of the arts and culture venue named for President Kennedy at the beginning of his second term. Trump ousted the center’s leadership and replaced it with a Board of Trustees that named him chairman and added his name to the building.

Democrats sued to remove it, and a federal judge ruled that Trump’s name must come off the venue, noting that only Congress has authority to rename it. Trump also tried to close the center for two years, only to be ordered by the court to keep it open.

Many artists have boycotted the venue in protest of the president’s actions.

Riccardi writes for the Associated Press.

July 5 (UPI) — Mallory McMorrow, a state lawmaker who made in early splash in the race for the Democratic nod in Michigan’s key U.S. senate race, suspended her campaign on Sunday in a surprise move.

McMorrow, who positioned herself between the national party leadership favorite Rep. Haley Stevens and progressive challenger Abdul El-Sayed, said in a social media post she is pulling out of the race “with a deep, deep sense of gratitude.”

“For our thousands of volunteers, for everyone who donated what you could — building a campaign with zero corporate PAC dollars,” she said, adding that while she is suspending her campaign, “I am not leaving the fight.”

McMorrow reiterated her call for “new leadership and a better Democratic Party,” whose top voices, including Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, have endorsed Stevens to take on the Republican nominee, former Rep. Mike Rogers, in November’s general election.

Her withdrawal leaves Stevens and El-Sayed as the remaining candidates for the Aug. 4 primary, which is now shaping up to be a major test of whether El-Sayed can extend progressives’ winning streak against more establishment figures in Democratic primaries.

“Whoever wins this primary on August 4th will have my full support,” she declared.

The Michigan race is seen as a key in the Democrats’ hopes of capitalizing on the unpopularity of President Donald Trump and flipping the Senate from Republican control in November. To do so, they must keep it in the “blue” column as it is being vacated by Democrat Gary Peters.

McMorrow was an early front-runner in the race and had raised more than $8.6 million by the end of March but has since fallen behind El-Sayed and Stevens in the polls, the Detroit Free Press reported.

El-Sayed, a former Detroit public health official who has the backing of progressive stalwarts Sen. Bernie Sanders and Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, has seen a surge of support since May and last month won the endorsement of the United Auto Workers.

Four-term congresswoman Stevens, meanwhile, is picking up backing from some of McMorrow’s supporters, including Michigan Attorney General Dana Nessel, who on Sunday called Stevens “a seasoned fighter for Michigan who knows how to work in a difficult environment to get essential policies across the finish line.”

New Jersey is launching a new fee on companies whose workers have Medicaid health coverage instead of being covered by their employers. Other states are considering it, too.

Democratic lawmakers and governors see it as a way to help pay for the joint federal and state insurance program that covers low-income residents as federal policy changes are expected to make the program more expensive for states and may lead to a reduction in the number of people with coverage.

Proponents also say it’s about fairness because employers benefit from having some lower-income workers with taxpayer-funded health coverage.

Business groups object. So do some liberal policy organizations.

New Jersey is putting the fee in place

New Jersey Gov. Mikie Sherrill signed a measure Tuesday night to charge employers that have at least 50 workers covered by Medicaid, and the state budget she approved earlier in the week counts on raising $145 million this year from the program.

Under the plan, companies will be billed for each employee and employees’ dependent receiving Medicaid, the joint state-federal insurance program.

The fees per person would start at $325 a year for companies with 50 to 249 Medicaid beneficiaries and top out at $725 annually for employers with at least 500 recipients.

A bill passed this week in California doesn’t impose a charge now, but it does direct the state administration to present lawmakers options for doing so next year.

Finishing the job would fall to the successor of Gov. Gavin Newsom, a Democrat who is leaving office in January. Democratic gubernatorial candidate Xavier Becerra has made an employer charge part of his election platform.

State Sen. John Laird, a Democrat who sponsored the California proposal, said the big tax and policy law President Trump signed a year ago was a major factor in the need for action because it could prompt the state to spend more on Medicaid to plug holes left by federal changes.

The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office expects more than 10 million people will be uninsured because of the law by 2034. It requires some beneficiaries to work, be in school or volunteer — and requires even more to document whether they meet the requirements.

Most employees at the bigger companies would not be at risk of losing Medicaid coverage as long as they’re working at least 20 hours a week.

Laird also said there’s an equity issue involved.

“If you’re a small business person in California, you are quite likely paying for health insurance for your employees. And through your taxes, you’re paying for health insurance for some of the biggest employers in California,” he said. “And that’s not fair.”

Legislation with similar intents passed one legislative chamber in both Colorado and Oregon this year, but neither made it to law. A measure was also introduced in Washington.

Connecticut Gov. Ned Lamont, a Democrat who is seeking a third term in November’s election, has called for the same move there with the idea of making it a part of the state budget that would kick in two years from now.

Opposition comes from business and some liberal groups

It’s no surprise that business organizations have criticized the approach, which would add to their expenses.

“The fact remains that many job-creators are still going to be penalized for something they have no control over,” Christopher Emigholz, the chief government affairs officer at the New Jersey Business and Industry Assn., said in a statement. “If an employee declines an employer-provided health plan because they’d rather be on Medicaid, it is unfair to penalize the employer for that employee’s decision.”

Some left-leaning policy organizations also oppose the charges.

Gideon Lukens, who analyzes health policy at the left-leaning Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, said that while the idea may be well-intentioned, it could lead companies to employ fewer people from low-income household or single parents. He said companies could also consider the policy in decisions about whom to hire or lay off — and also on where to locate or how many workers to employ.

And, he said, it could make employees — or potential employees — less likely to enroll in Medicaid knowing it would make them less attractive to employers.

“Usually, when I see a tax on something it’s going to discourage whatever being taxed,” he said in an interview.

New Jersey’s legislation tries to address some of the concerns. It would exempt temporary, seasonal and part-time employees. It would also bar employment decisions based on a workers’ Medicaid status.

Charging companies whose workers are covered by Medicaid isn’t a new idea. At least two states have previously enacted it, and it’s been proposed in Congress.

Massachusetts lawmakers in 2017 adopted a charge on employers up to $750 per nondisabled worker who was covered through Medicaid or a state-subsidized health exchange plan. The program began in 2018 was not renewed when it expired the next year.

An even earlier policy in Maryland, in 2006, immediately affected only Walmart. An industry group challenged it in court and won, stopping the fees.

The latest generation of proposals may avoid that legal pitfall by not referencing those health plans in the legislation.

Mulvihill writes for the Associated Press.

WASHINGTON — The Senate for the first time approved a war powers resolution Tuesday seeking to block U.S. military action against Iran, as lawmakers warily watch President Trump’s efforts to resolve a conflict that the administration launched on its own and now needs Congress to fund.

It was the 10th time the Senate has tried to stop the war, and the outcome, on a vote of 50 to 48, was a stunning turnaround from past efforts. While the resolution is largely symbolic, and does not fully carry the force of law, it reflects the growing concerns from a number of Republican lawmakers in both the House and Senate over both the war and the deal Trump struck with Iran to end it. The House approved the resolution earlier this month.

“Time after time, the vast majority of Senate Republicans sided with Trump and his war instead of the American people,” said Senate Democratic Leader Chuck Schumer of New York.

Schumer said Americans have paid the price for “Trump’s historic blunder in Iran. It’ll go down in the history books as one of the worst foreign policy forays America has ever made.”

In the past, as many as four GOP senators have voted for the war powers resolutions, and they did so Tuesday — Republicans Lisa Murkowski of Alaska, Susan Collins of Maine, Rand Paul of Kentucky and Bill Cassidy of Louisiana. One Democrat, Sen. John Fetterman of Pennsylvania, voted against the resolution.

On this vote, the absence of two Republicans, including Sen. Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, who was admitted to the hospital recently for an undisclosed matter, left the GOP without a full majority to halt the effort. Sen. Dave McCormick (R-Pa.) also missed the vote.

The vote also comes as the Pentagon is seeking $80 billion from Congress, mostly for the Iran war as it backfills munitions and stockpiles.

Trump to meet senators as Republicans balk at Iran deal

Trump himself is headed to the Capitol this week to meet with GOP senators as Vice President JD Vance has been overseas working to negotiate with Iran to end its nuclear ambitions — which had been among the stated rationales for the war.

The president is not pleased with the Republicans who have been critical of the deal he struck with Iran, according to one GOP senator granted anonymity to discuss the private dynamics.

The terms of the Iran deal are spelled out in a memorandum of understanding that Trump signed last week, starting a 60-day clock for the sides to reach a broader agreement over ending Iran’s nuclear program.

But Republicans have particularly objected to the $300-billion fund to help Iran rebuild, which is far greater than the $1.7 billion then-President Obama refunded the country under his administration’s 2015 Iran deal.

“I believe President Trump is getting very poor advice on Iran,” Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) said last week on his podcast after the deal was made public.

Democrats have repeatedly forced Iran votes

Over and again, Democrats have been forcing votes on the Iran war, almost since the U.S. and Israel launched missile strikes on Iran on Feb. 28.

Nearly each week they’re in session, the Senate Democrats have put forward war powers resolutions, but they have failed to amass the majority needed for passage in the narrowly split chamber, where Trump’s Republican Party holds the majority.

The House pushed its own version to passage earlier this month, with four Republicans joining all Democrats in approving the war powers resolution, over the objections of House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) and the GOP leadership.

While such resolutions do not go to the president for his signature, passage stands as a powerful, if symbolic, statement from Congress and a rebuke of the administration’s military actions.

Sen. Tim Kaine, the Democrat from Virginia who has led his party’s efforts, said the pause in warfighting, as Trump’s team works to shore up a fragile ceasefire, provides the perfect time for Congress to step back and assess “what should the next chapter be.”

Hegseth seeks $80 billion from Congress for the Iran war

Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth is also on Capitol Hill this week, seeking roughly $80 billion in supplemental funding to shore up defense supplies in the aftermath of the Iran war, which is drawing scrutiny when many Americans are reeling from high gas prices and costs of living.

The Pentagon early on had estimated the war cost $11.3 billion during its first week, and experts have put the overall price tag at close to $100 billion.

The Defense Department’s funding request is part of a broader beef-up of military money the White House wants as part of its budget request this year.

The Trump administration is seeking $1.5 trillion in defense funding this year — a 50% increase — including $350 billion that it wants in a so-called budget reconciliation package. Johnson and GOP leaders are working to pass that package on their own, over the objections of Democrats, much the way they approved Trump’s big tax cuts bill last year.

The 2025 tax cuts package also included a sizable increase of about $175 billion for the military.

Mascaro writes for the Associated Press.

Senators Elizabeth Warren (D-MA) and Bernie Moreno (R-OH) urged Congress to boost the payroll tax cap to save Social Security benefits, according to an op-ed piece published by the New York Times on Tuesday.

As the law currently stands, the payroll

MINNEAPOLIS — The man charged in the political assassinations of the top Democrat in the Minnesota House and her husband, as well as the nonfatal shootings of a state senator and his wife, pleaded guilty in federal court Thursday after prosecutors said they would not seek the death penalty.

Vance Boelter was charged with murdering Minnesota House Speaker Melissa Hortman and her husband, Mark Hortman, and with shooting state Sen. John Hoffman and his wife, Yvette Hoffman. Boelter came to their doors in the early hours of June 14, 2025, disguised as a police officer and driving a fake squad car.

The Hortmans’ golden retriever was so gravely injured that it had to be euthanized.

Boelter, 58, was captured near his home in rural Green Isle the day after the shootings following what prosecutors have called the largest search for a suspect in Minnesota history. He also faces state charges, which have been on hold pending the resolution of his federal case.

The U.S. attorney’s office in Minneapolis notified the court Wednesday that the Justice Department would not seek the death penalty against Boelter in accordance with a proposed plea agreement, and the court set the change-of-plea hearing for Thursday.

Minnesota abolished capital punishment in 1911 and has never had a federal death penalty case. Daniel Borgertpoepping, a spokesperson for the Hennepin County Attorney’s Office, said the federal plea deal would not affect Boelter’s state charges.

While the Trump administration has pushed for greater use of capital punishment, there were questions about whether Boelter’s case would qualify for the death penalty under federal law.

Prosecutors have called the shootings political. When they announced the federal indictment in July, they released a rambling handwritten letter they say Boelter wrote to FBI Director Kash Patel in which he confessed to the attacks. However, the letter didn’t make clear why he targeted the Hortmans or the Hoffmans.

In some messages to media, Boelter referenced a vague and cryptic “investigation” he had been carrying out, sometimes suggesting it was about the COVID-19 vaccine.

Friends described Boelter as an evangelical Christian and occasional preacher and missionary, who held politically conservative views and had been struggling to find work.

John Hoffman said in a lawsuit filed against Boelter in April that his left arm and hand likely would never fully recover, and that he also had permanent injuries to his digestive and urinary systems.

Yvette Hoffman was left with permanent physical weakness, the lawsuit said, while their adult daughter, Hope Hoffman, who was there and called 911 but was not shot, suffered severe psychological trauma.

SACRAMENTO — State Treasurer Fiona Ma and former California Senate Majority Leader Gloria Romero have been declared the two winners of a crowded primary election for lieutenant governor, securing themselves spots on the November ballot.

Ma is a Democrat. Romero is a former Democrat who said she registered as a Republican after splitting with Democrats over the push to oust President Biden as the party’s presidential nominee in 2024.

Both were declared as the top-two winners by the Associated Press. Under California’s primary system, the first and second place finisher advances to the November general election, regardless of their political affiliation.

Ma is a certified public accountant serving as state treasurer. She previously sat on the California Board of Equalization and the San Francisco Board of Supervisors. She also served three terms in the California Assembly.

Romero is an adjunct professor at Pepperdine School of Public Policy. She served as a Democrat in the Assembly and state Senate, becoming the Senate’s first woman majority leader in 2005.

Other notable candidates included former Stockton Mayor Michael Tubbs and Josh Fryday, a member of Gov. Gavin Newsom’s cabinet. Both are Democrats.

The position is largely ceremonial. The lieutenant governor serves on various boards that oversee the University of California, California State University and community college systems, and can be called upon to break a tie in the state Senate. If the sitting governor dies, resigns or is removed from office, the lieutenant governor would assume the role.

Ma and Romero have offered some similar viewpoints. Both candidates previously expressed support for the death penalty and opposition to the state’s plan to ban the sale of new gas-powered cars by 2035.

Neither candidate supports the controversial Billionaire’s Tax Act. Romero, however, has further vowed to shun all potential tax increases.

Ma and Romero will now face off in November. The winner will replace Lt. Gov. Eleni Kounalakis, who is finishing her second term and could not seek reelection. Kounalakis instead ran for state treasurer.

A congressional panel in the United States has rejected an effort to revoke a provision from the defence budget that would further integrate the US and Israeli militaries.

An amendment to sink the pro-Israel measure, introduced by Democratic Congressman Ro Khanna, failed in a voice call on Thursday in the House Armed Services Committee.

That defeat paves the way for the proposal to advance to the floor of the House of Representatives.

Khanna had argued that the provision in the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA), formally called Section 224, rewards Benjamin Netanyahu at a time when the Israeli prime minister is trying to dictate US policy in the Middle East.

The progressive Democrat cited recent reports that President Donald Trump is angry at Netanyahu over Israel’s escalation in Lebanon.

“Everyone in America — whether you’re a Republican, an independent or a Democrat — says that we need to tell Netanyahu that America calls the shots, not the prime minister of any other country,” Khanna said.

“They want less cooperation and blank checks to Israel, not more. Only the United States Congress would dream up at this moment, ‘Let’s actually do more for Israel.’”

The vote on the amendment was taken by calling on committee members to say aloud either “yes” and “no”, and the “nays” clearly were more numerous. It was not recorded as a roll-call vote, which would require each member’s preference to be logged.

Section 224 would require the Pentagon chief “to designate an executive agent responsible for synchronising cooperative efforts between the United States and Israel”.

That official would be in charge of overseeing several joint initiatives, “including bilateral defence technology research, development, testing, evaluation, integration, and industrial cooperation”, the NDAA reads.

Netanyahu’s endorsement

Critics have raised concern that Section 224 may make US military aid to Israel more opaque, concealing the assistance as cooperation rather than a separate expense.

The measure also risks tethering the US military to its Israeli counterpart technologically at a time when the American public is rapidly turning against Israel, according to recent public opinion polls.

“As political pressure builds to reduce US military assistance to Israel, Section 224 provides the framework for continuing — and expanding — US-Israel military ties by entrenching Israeli technology within the US defense supply chain in a way that would shield it from the annual appropriations process,” the nonprofit lobbying group A New Policy said in a brief last week.

“The use of must-pass legislation as the NDAA as a mechanism of integration speaks to the plummeting popularity of continuing unconditional support to Israel.”

The measure comes as Netanyahu pushes to transform US aid to Israel from direct assistance to military “cooperation”.

The Israeli prime minister wrote a letter to Republican Congressman Marlin Stutzman endorsing a bill facilitating that transition.

In the letter, Netanyahu said, “The time has now arrived for us to move from aid recipient to partner.”

He added he supported Stutzman’s plan for a “new framework of joint defense cooperation, codevelopment, coproduction and mutual investment in areas including advanced missile defense, artificial intelligence … and next generation military platforms”.

Referencing the letter on Thursday, Khanna argued that Section 224 “directly” follows Netanyahu’s language.

“I am for Team America. I am for the interests of this country, and I believe that when Donald Trump ran, he ran ‘America First’,” the Democrat said.

“That includes American interests against any foreign country. We should have American sovereignty and make it clear that we strike 224. If we want to give aid to Israel, if we want to sell them weapons, that should be a vote for the entire Congress.”

But both Democrats and Republicans pushed back against his argument, saying that the provision aims to streamline existing cooperative programmes that benefit the US.

Key Democrat backs Section 224

Congressman Adam Smith, the top Democrat on the panel, said he was “very sympathetic” to Khanna’s frustration with Netanyahu.

“Mr Netanyahu insisted on this war with Iran that has strengthened Iran and weakened our position. I do not like his leadership of Israel or where he is going,” Smith said.

But he added that it is in the US’s interests to have deep military ties with Israel, a country accused by leading rights groups and United Nations investigators of committing genocide in Gaza.

“The reason that we have these partnerships with Israel, where we may not have as many developed partnerships with other NATO countries, is because Israel has actually been having to fight,” Smith said.

“They have faced drone attacks and missile attacks. They have had to develop new technologies, technologies that we’ve benefitted from.”

Rights advocates often decry the promotion of Israel’s weapons as “battle-tested” — because they have been tested on the Palestinian and Lebanese communities that they devastated, killing tens of thousands of people along the way.

Earlier on Thursday, Palestinian rights advocates warned against approving Section 224 during a news conference on Capitol Hill.

“It is unfathomable that this is the American response to a country that has, over the past two and a half years, carried out a genocide against Palestinians and started wars in both Iran and Lebanon,” said Margaret DeReus, the executive director at the Institute for Middle East Understanding (IMEU).

Republican Congressman Thomas Massie has promised to introduce an amendment to revoke Section 224 when the NDAA goes to a full House vote.