

SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
To donate by check, phone, or other method, see our More Ways to Give page.


Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
"Democrats must block Iran war funding in 2026."
As President Donald Trump and Iranian officials traded threats over the weekend, and with the Trump administration reportedly considering renewed attacks against an underground complex it claims is a nuclear site—which Iran denies—critics of the illegal US-Israeli war on the Middle Eastern country called on Democrats to take decisive action to end the conflict after the midterm elections, in which the party could take control of one or both chambers of Congress.
The nonprofit group Just Foreign Policy (JFP) was among those pointing to comments from last week by US Sen. Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), who said members of Congress recently attended a confidential briefing about possible strikes on Iran after the midterms—a plan whose details he called "insane."
As Common Dreams reported Friday, Iranian officials are taking steps to prepare the population for a potential US nuclear attack, which Trump has threatened multiple times since launching the war in February. He went to war with the preemptive aim of defending Israel from Iran's retaliation if the Israeli government waged an attack on its own, according to Secretary of State Marco Rubio.
Iranian Supreme Leader Mojtaba Khamenei warned the US and Israel on Saturday against renewing attacks, saying they would be met with "geographically unrestricted" retaliation. He expressed hope Sunday that "that there is rationality on the other side to prefer diplomacy to other paths."
But with government funding expiring December 11, including money for the US Department of Defense "that is illegally bombing and blockading Iranian civilians," said JFP, "Democrats can block war funding" before the new year.
"Senate Democrats must not send another dollar to [Defense Secretary Pete] Hegseth's War Department unless the US stops the illegal war that is harming 90 million Iranian civilians and 300 million US drivers," said JFP, referring to the skyrocketing gas prices that have resulted from the conflict. "No excuses. Not another dollar for this illegal war."
JFP referred to Murphy's comments at the Middle East Institute last Wednesday, where he said Democrats in Congress must "use our spending power to end the war."
"I imagine what will happen is that there will be a continuing resolution after the election, and we'll push off the budget until January or February of next year," said Murphy. "And then if Democrats are in charge, we will essentially say we want to fund the Department of Defense, but we are not going to fund the Department of Defense if it's funding this war. And so there will have to be some provision in the bill that denies any funding to be used for the continuation of a war against Iran that's making us less safe and costing billions to American citizens."
JFP emphasized that even if Democrats don't win a majority in Congress in Tuesday's elections, Democratic senators would be able to block the continuing resolution that would keep the war funded into February, because Republicans with their current majority would need seven Democrats to join them in supporting the funding.
"Democrats must block Iran war funding in 2026," said JFP. "Democrats do NOT need to win or wait. Murphy's approach here means Democrats would agree to fund the Iran war for months or years to come."
"If Democrats win a big blue wave rebuke of this patently unconstitutional war, and Trump comes out of the midterms escalating it, Democrats should move to block it and impeach him over it," said another commentator. "Voting to enable it would be a corrupt abdication."
Al Jazeera reported Sunday that Iran was continuing negotiations with the US through Qatari mediators, "but it does not have the slightest optimism about Trump’s intentions even for a moment,” according to a security source.
“We think that there may be different voices in the US, but experience has shown that the US president and his circle are succumbing to the temptations of [Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin] Netanyahu and the warmongering extremists who support him,” the source said. “For this reason we are obliged to maintain our focus on being fully prepared for a decisive and punitive defense against any aggression and crime by the United States and Israel.”
As Iran's government takes steps to prepare the nation's people for a possible US nuclear attack, more than 200 global civil society groups on Friday implored Congress to act to stop President Donald Trump from using doomsday weapons to end his illegal 228-day war of choice that he's been unable to win by conventional means.
"In recent weeks, President Trump has threatened to 'hit Iran hard' after the US midterm elections next week," the groups—who are members of the Back From the Brink Coalition—said in a statement to congressional lawmakers. "On October 15, President Trump stated that he would not use nuclear weapons against Iran. But frequent, abrupt changes of policy have become a staple feature of his presidency, and the single statement that he will not use nuclear weapons stands against a string of threats to do just that."
As the statement noted:
On April 7, he declared, “A whole civilization will die tonight, never to be brought back again.” On May 18, he posted an [artificial intelligence]-generated image of himself pushing a red button with nuclear explosions appearing on monitors behind him. On June 8, he threatened Iran, warning that “we have the ultimate alternative, hopefully never to be used again.” On September 20, he told a reporter, “My question is, if and when do I blow the entire nation up?” Speaking at the [United Nations] on September 23, he asked, “Do I annihilate the Islamic Republic, and do it quickly?”
"We cannot discount these as idle threats," the coalition stressed. "The use of even a single nuclear weapon in Iran would destroy a taboo that has held since Nagasaki, with unimaginable consequences for all humanity. The US president should not have the unchecked authority to launch nuclear war."
"We call on the United States Congress to act now to assert its constitutional role as the only branch of government empowered to declare war—and to make clear that it does not authorize or condone the use of nuclear weapons in Iran," the statement concludes.
Despite passing various authorizations for the use of military force, Congress has not declared war since World War II. Since that conflict—which ended with the US waging the only nuclear war in history—the United States has attacked dozens of nations.
The 1973 War Powers Resolution, passed as the US killed hundreds of thousands of Vietnamese, Cambodians, and Laotians during the Vietnam War, was an attempt to check presidents' powers to wage war without congressional authority. However, only a small handful of war powers resolutions have been passed by the full Congress—most recently this year, ordering Trump to end hostilities against Iran—and none have succeeded in stopping any military action.
Democratic members of Congress have expressed alarm at the specter of a Trump nuclear war on Iran. Hinting at the possibility, Sen. Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) said Thursday at the Middle East Institute in Washington, DC that he was recently briefed on "what the war plan would be if we restarted military operations" after the midterms, as threatened by the president.
"I will just say this, their plan is insane," Murphy continued. "It will lead to devastating escalation and the likely destruction of our commitment to the rule of law."
"The plan that they have developed will lead, in my view, to a prolongment and an escalation of this war that will be devastating for our security interests," he added.
Meanwhile, Iran is stepping up preparations for a resumption of US-Israeli attacks, including nuclear strikes. The government is currently holding a "Civil Defense Week" focused on "public preparedness, protecting people and national assets, and ensuring government support for the continuity of essential services," according to state-run Press TV.
Earlier this week, the National Iranian American Council (NIAC)—which is not one of the groups listed on Friday's statement—said that "Trump’s continued threats to annihilate an entire civilization and unleash even more destructive weapons are unconscionable. There is no military solution to this crisis, and another round of attacks would only deepen the suffering of civilians and risk igniting an even wider regional war."
“The Trump administration must change course and should invest in the multilateral regional diplomacy that is underway rather than continuing its destabilizing threats to renew attacks," the group continued. "Congress must also act to prevent further unauthorized military action when it returns after the upcoming election."
"There is still a path away from disaster," NIAC added, "but it requires choosing negotiations over confrontation.”
If carried out, says Sen. Chris Murphy, the attack Trump and Hegseth are plotting "will lead to devastating escalation and the likely destruction of our commitment to the rule of law."
US Sen. Chris Murphy disclosed Wednesday that he was among the members of Congress recently briefed behind closed doors on the Trump administration's discussions of a possible post-midterm assault on Iran, and he came away with a startling assessment: "Their plan is insane."
Murphy (D-Conn.), who recently traveled to Gulf countries to survey the extensive damage Iran has inflicted on American military installations in retaliation for US President Donald Trump's illegal war, said during an event hosted by the Middle East Institute that he and some of his colleagues got the chance during a classified briefing "to have a fairly detailed conversation about what the war plan would be if we restarted military operations."
Without disclosing specific details from the briefing, the senator said administration officials told lawmakers that a renewed assault would be a "short-duration plan"—a common narrative from an administration that pledged shortly after launching the war that it would be over in a matter of weeks.
"It will lead to devastating escalation and the likely destruction of our commitment to the rule of law," Murphy warned of the administration's post-election plan.
Asked to elaborate, he said that "there's been open reporting as to what we may be planning and the civilian infrastructure that we may be targeting."
"They've been asked by the president to develop a plan," Murphy continued. "The plan that they have developed will lead, in my view, to a prolongment and an escalation of this war that would be devastating for our security interests."
Watch:
Ryan Costello, policy director at the National Iranian American Council (NIAC), called Murphy's remarks "a chilling warning that underscores the need to end the Iran war immediately."
In recent days, major media outlets including The Associated Press, CNN, and The Wall Street Journal have reported that the Trump administration has notified Middle East allies of a potential new military assault on Iran following next week's elections in the US.
According to the Journal, the US "has told several Gulf Arab countries to be prepared for a short, intense military campaign" in Iran following the midterms.
Citing unnamed officials, CNN reported that "Trump has not made up his mind on what he will do after the midterms but that he appears to be leaning toward ordering major action." The outlet noted that "leaders in US Central Command and the Pentagon have been developing a wide-ranging target list, which includes Iranian energy infrastructure, military sites, and nuclear facilities."
Sina Toossi, a senior non-resident fellow at the Center for International Policy, said Thursday that he increasingly believes "some level of infrastructure warfare between the US/Israel and Iran, on a scale we haven't yet seen, is inevitable."
"With that said, I wouldn't expect such an infrastructure war to last long, or reach catastrophic levels, largely because I expect Iran would retaliate on a scale that would compel the US to stop quickly," Toossi continued. "Yet if that doesn't happen, the consequences could be disastrous for all sides. The destruction of critical regional energy infrastructure would greatly exacerbate the existing energy crisis, likely push many economies, including the US, into recession, and deal a devastating blow to the rest of Trump's presidency and his legacy."
"Whether that prospect has already deterred him, however, remains quite unclear," he added.
Trump himself has floated a possible attack on Iran while campaigning for Republicans in recent weeks. At a rally in Lubbock, Texas earlier this week, the president told a crowd of supporters: "You'll see Iran in a couple of weeks, if you don't mind."
"There is a way forward, but it can only materialize once the US administration genuinely accepts that it has no military options."
Meanwhile, US Vice President JD Vance—widely viewed as the leading choice to succeed Trump at the top of the Republican ticket in 2028—has reportedly reached out to a leading Iranian official in a bid to revive diplomatic talks.
The Journal reported on Wednesday that Vance, with Trump's approval, "sent a letter to Mohsen Rezaei, the secretary of Iran’s top security body, the Supreme National Security Council, and previously Iran’s longest-serving commander of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps."
"Vance is testing whether Tehran and Washington could find enough common ground to persuade Trump not to give a final order for a short, intense attack on Iran in the coming weeks," the Journal reported. (Trump, who has repeatedly threatened to "annihilate" Iran, publicly denied that he directed Vance to try to revive peace talks with Iran.)
Costello of NIAC said in a statement Thursday that "while the desire to pursue an off-ramp is positive, Trump needs to walk the walk."
"Thus far, there is little to indicate a new approach and a serious desire to end the war," said Costello. "There is no military solution to the conflict with Iran, yet Trump still seems to think there is and that he’ll get to decide when the next round of fighting pauses. These are wrong-headed and dangerous conclusions to hold."
On the Iranian side, Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi wrote in a Financial Times op-ed last week that while Tehran is "firmly committed to seeking a dignified peaceful resolution to the conflict, we are also fully prepared to defend ourselves."
"President Donald Trump entered this war on the basis of fundamentally erroneous assumptions about Iran’s fortitude. It appears that he continues to be wrongly told that our armed forces are unprepared to defend the homeland, despite all evidence to the contrary," Araghchi wrote. "To state the obvious, we have no trust whatsoever in the sincerity of the US administration’s professed desire for peace with Iran."
"Given that the White House has shown no willingness to reach an understanding on the way forward, while also threatening more violence, there is little reason to expect progress now," he added. "In spite of all this, as a career diplomat, I am obliged to do my utmost to give diplomacy a chance, even when hope of success is scant... There is a way forward, but it can only materialize once the US administration genuinely accepts that it has no military options."
"And from what I understand, this is happening both to Democrats and Republicans when they are traveling to the Middle East."
A US senator visiting the Persian Gulf said Tuesday that the Pentagon blocked him from inspecting a heavily damaged American military installation and refused to arrange a briefing on the Iran War, accusing Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth of mounting an "unprecedented" effort to conceal the conflict's costs and consequences from lawmakers and the public.
“This trip confirmed for me that there is an active, unprecedented, unconstitutional effort underway to hide the costs of this war and the implications of this war from Congress and the American people,” Sen. Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) told reporters Tuesday in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.
Murphy said he sought to inspect Al Udeid Air Base in Qatar, the largest US military installation in the Middle East and a crucial hub for American operations in the region. The base was struck by Iranian missiles during the opening days of the war and sustained heavy damage, including a direct hit to its Combined Air Operations Center.
“I've never encountered anything like this in my time in the Senate,” the senator said, describing the Pentagon's actions as “part of a deliberate campaign of obfuscation that my Republican colleagues in Congress should demand an end to."
"We appropriate the money for that military action, and it is an ordinary function of members of Congress to travel around the world and talk to our generals and to our troops about military activities, especially during a time of war," Murphy continued.
"Adding insult to injury, the Department of Defense, under orders from [Defense Secretary] Pete Hegseth, even denied me access to talk to military leadership," he alleged. "They would not provide me even a briefing at the [US] Embassy."
According to Murphy:
Never before has this happened. Never before has a member of Congress been denied access to military facilities and been refused briefings by generals in theater. And from what I understand, this is happening both to Democrats and Republicans when they are traveling to the Middle East.
So just understand what this is: This is Secretary Hegseth deliberately trying to cover up the extent of damage, likely in the billions of dollars, trying to cover up the true cost of this war, trying to hide from you, from the American public, not just from members of Congress, the actual consequences of a war that is spiraling out of control by the day.
"This should be unacceptable to every member of Congress—Republicans and Democrats—and this should be unacceptable to the American public," he added.
The Pentagon defended the decision, saying the senator's office had been informed before his trip that the department would not support his access to Al Udeid. A senior Pentagon official cited a March 3 directive issued by Hegseth restricting travel to the region.
The dispute comes as the Trump administration faces mounting scrutiny over the increasingly protracted war's human and financial costs.
The illegal US-Israeli war of choice has cost the lives of thousands of Iranians, dozens of citizens and residents of Gulf states, and more than 20 US troops.
The 220-day war has already cost US taxpayers more than $40 billion, according to the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office. It has driven up gasoline and energy prices, transportation and food costs, and is having broader inflationary effects caused largely by the disruption to global oil supplies and shipping.
Last week, President Donald Trump ordered the deployment of thousands more troops and another aircraft carrier to the Middle East.
"You know, by the way, we’re kicking Iran’s ass. You do know that, right? And that’ll end soon," the president told a Nebraska rally during a Monday speech in which he suggested he wouldn't mind Iran bombing California cities. "It’s gonna end one way or the other. It’s gonna end very soon.”
"It doesn’t have to be this way. ICE doesn’t have to traumatize children, tear families apart, and treat people like this," said one Austin, Texas official.
Since Republicans in the US Senate this week blocked a bill to make school bus stops off-limits for US Immigration and Customs Enforcement, community members in Pennsylvania and Austin, Texas have expressed outrage by arrests made in front of children—in at least one reported case, leaving a child abandoned as officers detained his mother.
"It doesn’t have to be this way. ICE doesn’t have to traumatize children, tear families apart, and treat people like this," said José "Chito" Vela III, the mayor pro tempore of Austin, on social media late Thursday.
Vela made the comments as he posted a video that he said shows the aftermath of an ICE arrest at a school bus stop, with officers driving away with the mother of a 9-year-old boy who was left with other community members.
"They fucking took her," said one woman angrily as the child sat on the ground crying. "What the fuck are they going to do with the child now? ... Y'all have no fucking shame."
ICE arrested the mom of a 9-year-old at a school bus stop in Austin, leaving him alone and crying. The video has profanity and is heartbreaking to watch, but it shows the fear/pain of what happened.
This is evil. This is wrong. And it has to stop.
Video: Leonardo Pelaez on FB pic.twitter.com/F52rCjZwIF
— Mayor Pro Tem Chito Vela, III (@chitoforatx) October 2, 2026
Vela posted the video a day after Sen. Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) introduced a bill aimed at stopping ICE and other Department of Homeland Security (DHS) agencies from conducting enforcement operations at school bus stops.
In August, Murphy and many of his constituents were outraged when ICE arrested parents at school bus stops in Danbury, Connecticut—detaining them after their children boarded buses, leaving them without anyone to pick them up after school let out and giving the family no time to ensure their children would be cared for.
Murphy said on the Senate floor Wednesday that the bus stop arrests were part of an operation in which 118 people were detained in Connecticut. Federal data has shown that a majority of people being arrested by ICE, which is carrying out President Donald Trump's mass deportation agenda, have no criminal convictions.
“For parents in this body, you know how anxious that first day of school is, how kids are just brimming with nervous anxiety about that first day, and you know what that feels like to watch your kid walk onto that school bus," said Murphy. "Well, what do you think it does to those kids on that first and second day of school to see ICE officers at the school bus stop? Imagine that 6-year-old who boarded the school bus, and when he got back from school that day and got off, his parent wasn't there. A 6-year-old feeling like he had been abandoned. In this case, he may or may not have seen the arrest because it happened almost immediately after he got on.”
The senator added that ICE has "blatantly lied" about its practice of carrying out arrests at school bus stops.
"When they were presented with these stories from Danbury, DHS doubled down and said any claim that ICE targeted parents at a school bus stop is false," he said. "Then just days afterwards, we had the video evidence. This often happens—ICE says something didn't happen, and then we have the video proving that it did."
Also on Wednesday, about 75 community members gathered at the corner of Tremont Avenue and East Fornance Street in Norristown, Pennsylvania, where ICE reportedly detained three people in front of a group of children who were waiting for the school bus.
They called on Democratic Gov. Josh Shapiro and local officials to pass legislation to bar law enforcement from cooperating with ICE.
“When enforcement happens in places where families live their everyday lives, at bus stops, on streets, near schools, or in neighborhoods, the effects can reach beyond the person who is detained,” Jorge Liborio, 16, told WHYY. “It can affect children, parents, coworkers, friends, and entire communities.”
Jay Lee, an advocacy and civic engagement manager at the Woori Center, which provides resources for the area's large immigrant population, said that "attendance is falling" in local schools. Immigrants make up about 18% of Norristown's population.
Chalkbeat reported this week that nearly two years after Trump rescinded a policy that barred immigration enforcement in sensitive areas like schools and hospitals, school attendance dropped below 40% at one Indianapolis school when ICE was conducting operations in the city.
Two federal lawsuits challenging Trump's termination of the sensitive locations policy are ongoing.
On Wednesday, Murphy denounced Republicans for blocking his bill, pointing to Sen. Jim Banks' (R-Ind.) claim that it would create "sanctuary bus stops"—safe havens for immigrants who commit crimes.
"If we prohibit ICE from operating at school bus stops, you know what will happen?" said Banks. "All the illegals in the country will just hide out at bus stops, knowing that ICE isn’t allowed to touch them! Bus stops will become the most unsafe places in the country."
Murphy called Banks' objection "bizarre" and "dishonest."
"I did not anticipate that one of the arguments against this bill would be that it would lead to the development of ‘sanctuary bus stops,'" said the senator. "But what do we imagine here? People are going to live at bus stops? We're going to have encampments around bus stops of people who are here without documentation? I just think it's an example of how this whole debate has gone way off the rails. It is just fundamentally detached from the reality.”
In Austin, Vela said that "families pay the price" when ICE "chooses to use these tactics."
"This is evil. This is wrong. And it has to stop," said Vela. "We must demand accountability. We must demand better. Our children deserve better."
“This is the sort of government propaganda one might expect in North Korea, not the United States of America, and it is an egregious and utterly illegal misuse of Americans’ hard-earned tax dollars,” said four lawmakers.
Outrage mounted Friday over a taxpayer-funded television advertisement glorifying President Donald Trump, with critics describing the 30-second spot as self-aggrandizing propaganda and questioning whether the administration violated federal law restricting the use of public money for partisan communications.
The ad—which aired this week on outlets including Fox News, Newsmax, and CBS—features a dizzying montage of Trump at rallies, White House events, sporting events, and alongside military personnel, captioned, "AMERICA WILL NEVER BE A COMMUNIST COUNTRY."
The refrain of R&B singer JMSN’s “Love Me” plays over the rapid-fire images. The spot concludes with a voiceover from Ultimate Fighting Championship CEO Dana White praising Trump as “the toughest, most resilient person that I’ve ever met.”
At the bottom of the screen, an alarming disclosure appears, reading, "Paid for by the US government."
The White House dismissed criticism of the ad—which aired ahead of November's midterm elections—by calling the spot a "public service announcement" intended to remind Americans “to love their country and understand what makes it worth defending.”
However, on Friday, US Sens. Patty Murray (D-Wash.) and Jack Reed (D-RI), along with Reps. Rosa DeLauro (D-Conn.) and Steny Hoyer (D-Md.), excoriated the clip.
“This is the sort of government propaganda one might expect in North Korea, not the United States of America, and it is an egregious and utterly illegal misuse of Americans’ hard-earned tax dollars,” the four senior congressional appropriators said in a joint statement.
“The law is not complicated," the lawmakers added. "You cannot use taxpayer dollars for political advertisements.”
Federal appropriations law—including the funding bill Trump signed earlier this year—prohibits the use of government funds for unauthorized “publicity or propaganda purposes,” while the Government Accountability Office (GAO) has interpreted the prohibition to encompass communications whose obvious purpose is “self-aggrandizement” or “puffery,” as well as “purely partisan” communications.
The consumer advocacy watchdog group Public Citizen on Friday filed a complaint with the GAO alleging the ad "violates laws prohibiting the use of government resources for propaganda, the Hatch Act, and other related laws."
"Whether or not President Trump was personally involved in the ad, it was conceived, produced, and distributed by Trump’s White House staff," Public Citizen said.
US Sen. Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) said Friday on social media that "every taxpayer, no matter your party, should be outraged by this."
"Your money is being used to fund campaign ads for Trump," the senator added. "It’s totally, completely [illegal]. He’s stealing your money for his campaign."
"The advertisement raises deep concerns about the Trump administration’s use of taxpayer dollars and its compliance with federal laws that prohibit the use of appropriated funds for the promotion of a political party or candidate," Sen. Maggie Hassan (D-NH) said Thursday.
“This taxpayer-funded political advertisement serves as yet another troubling example of President Trump’s growing list of expensive vanity projects—including the White House ballroom—that are estimated to cost over $1.8 billion, money that could have instead [been] spent lowering costs for Americans.”
Sam Stein, co-host of "The Bulwark Podcast," said, "What possible rationale could there be for using tax dollars to play that ad? This is just pure cult propaganda paid for by us."
@timmiller.bsky.social and @samsteindc.bsky.social react to a taxpayer-funded TV ad praising Trump, complete with “Love Me” playing over footage of the president.“This is just pure cult propaganda paid for by us.”
[image or embed]
— The Bulwark (@thebulwark.com) September 24, 2026 at 6:46 PM
Noting that Trump's approval rating has plunged below 30%, Stein added: "People are abandoning him... members of his own party are starting to distance themselves from him, and he uses that moment to have an ad [saying] please love me... It's desperate."
Tim Miller, Stein's co-host, called the ad "alarming" and "Orwellian."
Virginia Kase Solomón, president and CEO of the advocacy group Common Cause, said Friday in a statement that “taxpayer dollars should never be used to bolster the president’s self-esteem because his ego has been damaged."
"Running political messaging stamped with ‘Paid for by the US Government’ dangerously crosses the line from public service into authoritarian self-promotion," she added. "It also raises serious questions about whether it violates federal law barring tax dollars from being used for publicity or propaganda."
Others noted that the ad blasted communism as Trump rolled out the red carpet at a state dinner for Chinese President Ji Xinping, who is also the secretary general of the Chinese Communist Party.
"The clip’s heavy-handed anti-communist messaging also strikes a wildly hypocritical note, if not for anything but the fact that the Supreme Leader that ran it followed up by hosting China’s Xi Jinping with open arms, a flyover of US military planes, and a statue of a bald eagle," Jezebel's Danielle Han wrote on Friday.
Meanwhile, the controversy has spread beyond politics. JMSN—whose real name is Christian Berishaj—said that he never authorized Trump to use “Love Me,” writing that he would “never authorize my music to be used for ANY political agenda or campaign.”
"I am looking at lawyers," he added, "and handling this internally.”
“ICE is not here to protect Danbury,” Sen. Chris Murphy said. “ICE is here to put Danbury into a state of terror.”
National, state, and local Democratic officials joined activists in Danbury, Connecticut on Wednesday to demand accountability for the dozens of immigrants—some of them reportedly in the country legally—detained in recent days by US Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents, including parents who were seized while seeing their children off to school.
“This morning in Danbury, ICE was arresting parents at school bus stops,” US Sen. Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) said in a social media post. He alleged that agents waited until children had boarded buses, potentially leaving them to return home from school without their parents.
“I’m heading to Danbury,” he said. Murphy joined other Connecticut Democrats, including Gov. Ned Lamont, US Rep. Jahana Hayes, Lt. Gov. Susan Bysiewicz, and Danbury Mayor Roberto Alves, as well as immigrant rights advocates at Kennedy Park to condemn the Trump administration's deadly and xenophobic crackdown.
“ICE is not here to protect Danbury,” Murphy told the crowd in the Fairfield County city of 86,000 residents—around 35% of whom are foreign-born immigrants. “ICE is here to put Danbury into a state of terror.”
“Congress should not authorize a single additional dollar for ICE while this illegality continues,” the senator added.
Hayes said, “What I would hate to see is a snowball effect where a parent is detained, and then a child goes into state custody because there's no one to pick them up."
Alves said that nearly 50 community members have been detained this week that he knows of, but warned that the actual number of arrests is likely higher.
"ICE has increased enforcement and stepped up its tactics with an intentional brutality you have all seen," the mayor told the crowd in the park. "The operations coincided with the start of school here in Danbury."
“We’re here because mothers, fathers, workers, and longtime community members are being swept up, with no rhyme or reason, not as part of a targeted campaign of folks who have committed serious crimes," he continued. "We’re seeing racial profiling, random people being picked up off the streets."
“ICE is pulling people after they put their kids on the school bus," Alves said. "Operations in front of a daycare, where 3- to 5-year-olds are looking out the window asking what’s going on. An operation on the first day of school at our second-most-populated, highly diverse elementary school in Danbury as students are being dropped off by parents and school buses."
"This isn’t a coincidence; this is intentional,” he stressed, adding that he received reports of legal residents being detained.
“So when we hear folks say, ‘Oh, we want people to do it the right way,’ the folks doing it the right way are also getting deported," he added. "We can’t stand for that anymore."
Juan Fonseca Tapia, a Mexican immigrant and co-founder of the advocacy group Danbury Unites for Immigrants (DUFI), broke down while recounting what he said he saw during the blitz, including one person getting pepper-sprayed and another taken to the hospital after being struck by an ICE vehicle.
“They were taking people everywhere. They hurt them. They were bleeding," he said. "I saw the chains they put on them—not handcuffs, literal chains.”
DUFI volunteer Clementina Lunar described a father being arrested while putting his child on a school bus.
“When he handed the child to the bus helper, ICE came and took him,” she said.
Lunar added that Danbury residents are mobilizing to help each other and monitor school bus stops.
“There is fear," she said, "but there is also a lot of resilience and resistance."
"I'm all in for Abdul," said US Sen. Chris Murphy.
Democrats from across the ideological spectrum lined up behind Abdul El-Sayed on Wednesday after he clinched the party's nomination for a US Senate seat in Michigan.
Shortly after The Associated Press projected El-Sayed as the victor in the closely watched primary, Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) and Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee Chair Kirsten Gillibrand (D-NY) released a joint statement supporting the newly minted nominee.
"Abdul El-Sayed has run an energetic campaign that inspired thousands of Michiganders across the state, with a clear focus on lowering costs and standing up for working families," they said. "Democrats are united by a common purpose: putting a check on [President] Donald Trump by defeating his Republican enablers and taking back the Senate."
Schumer and Gillibrand also took a shot at El-Sayed's Republican rival, Mike Rogers, whom they described as "a rubber stamp for Donald Trump, backing the same reckless agenda that has driven up costs for working families, imposed chaotic tariffs that have hurt Michigan's auto industry, and put special interests ahead of the people of Michigan."
Rep. Haley Stevens (D-Mich.), El-Sayed's top rival for the Democratic nomination, conceded the race on Wednesday morning and offered "my full support as we work to defeat Mike Rogers this November."
Michigan Gov. Gretchen Whitmer, who had endorsed Stevens, also threw her support behind El-Sayed and all other Michigan Democratic candidates.
"They’ve got my support as we fight like hell together to win in November," said Whitmer. "Together, let’s stop MAGA Republicans so we can get to work and deliver results for the people of Michigan."
Sen. Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) said he was "excited" to see El-Sayed win the primary.
"Voters will have a clear choice in Michigan now," said Murphy. "A corporate-owned Trump loyalist or a doctor who will stand up for the little guy and will hold Trump and the corporations to account. I'm all in for Abdul."
Beth Miller, political director at Jewish Voice for Peace Action, hailed El-Sayed's victory as a "political earthquake," given that it came after the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) spent an estimated $30 million trying to defeat him.
"Voters in one of the most consequential states for the 2028 Presidential race have just sent a clear message," said Miller. "They want candidates who will fight for working families at home while unapologetically speaking out for Palestinian freedom. This cycle, AIPAC is being relegated to the dustbin of history."
According to a Wednesday report from Semafor, Michigan Democrats have already begun pivoting toward the general election campaign by planning negative attacks on GOP rival Rogers as a tool of moneyed interests and labeling him "the biggest name in corruption."
During a Wednesday morning victory speech, El-Sayed accused Rogers of spending 14 years in Congress with the sole goal of "figuring out how to cash out the day he left."
El-Sayed: "Mike Rogers is a guy who wants to put a data center in your backyard so he can make himself feel a little more manly by making an AI video ... he's a guy who went back to Florida so he could lick every single boot Donald Trump owns to bet for his endorsement." pic.twitter.com/ZgvfaJ4PEL
— Aaron Rupar (@atrupar) August 5, 2026
"Mike Rogers is a guy who wants to put a data center in your backyard so he can make himself feel a little more manly by making an AI video," said El-Sayed. "Mike Rogers is a guy who will do anything Blue Cross Blue Shield wants him to do, including raise your rates... Mike Rogers is a guy who has never shied away from a corporation he could do a favor for."
"We should be the party that says 'Donald Trump, end this war, we're going to support the negotiation'—and then we're not going to get into these wars in the future."
Congressman Ro Khanna on Tuesday suggested Democratic voters who believe the party lacks "principles," as a number of respondents said in a new poll, have understandable questions about what Democrats stands for, as he denounced recent comments from several lawmakers who have attacked President Donald Trump for not being hawkish enough when it comes to the war he started in Iran.
"People want a Democratic Party that's going to stand for things, that stands as the party that's anti-war," Khanna told Chris Hayes on MS NOW.
“And we should be the party that says, ‘Donald Trump, end this war, we’re going to support the negotiation’—and then we’re going to not get into these wars in the future,” he added.
Khanna accused his colleagues of sending the message: “Donald Trump, go blow up more things! Why aren’t you destroying more of Iran?”
“I’m not one of those Democrats,” said the congressman, who introduced a war powers resolution with Rep. Thomas Massie (R-Ky.) to stop Trump from launching unauthorized strikes against Iran. “I’m one of the people saying, ‘Yes, let’s get a negotiated settlement. Let’s work toward ending this war.’”
“The Democrats should be for ending this war and be against more of these foreign interventions,” said Khanna. “The last thing we want is to goad Donald Trump into getting us into more conflict there.”
"We should be the party that says 'Donald Trump, end this war, we're going to support the negotiation' — and then we're not going to get into these wars in the future"
@RoKhanna to @ChrisLHayes on some Dems attacking Trump from the right over Iran dealpic.twitter.com/Rxbd7e1iJ6
— Just Foreign Policy (@justfp) May 27, 2026
As examples of what Khanna is talking about, influential Democrats including Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz (D-Fla.) and Sens. Cory Booker (D-NJ) and Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) have spent the last several days provoking the president over Iran, and by complaining that the deal to end the war isn't tough enough on the country, which the US and Israel began preemptively attacking in February in violation of international law.
More than 3,400 people have been killed in Iran since the war started, while Israel has expanded hostilities to Lebanon, killing more than 3,000 people. The casualties in Iran have included about 150 people, mostly children, who were killed in an attack on a girls' school when the war started; Amnesty International has called for the US to be held to account for the bombing. A number of other schools have also been attacked, as well as medical facilities.
Despite the carnage—as well as the economic impact of war, which Iran swiftly responded to by effectively closing the Strait of Hormuz, a key oil shipping route, and sending oil prices skyrocketing—Booker on Sunday debuted what Just Foreign Policy executive director Erik Sperling called "Democrat neocon talking points" regarding reports of an impending peace deal.
The senator said reports of the deal—including the reopening of the strait, a lift of US sanctions allowing Iran to sell oil freely, and an apparent agreement to hold formal talks on Iran's nuclear program later—had him "outraged."
"The president said he went into this to deal with the nuclear program. This does not deal with that," said Booker, adding that the easing of sanctions of Iran would allow them to get "billions more" dollars.
"Giving Iran more money, as he has said, will allow them to do things like fuel their terrorist proxies," the senator added.
His comments were followed by Wasserman Schultz's interview on the same network Tuesday, when she said she was "concerned and frustrated over, again, another potential deal, a negotiation for a negotiation, where we're going to unfreeze Iranian assets" and allowing Iran to "rebuild their ballistic missile program."
Another Democrat comes out to the right of Trump, criticizing US-Iran negotiated deal to end the war:
"We're going to unfreeze Iranian assets and give them billions of dollars to be able to control proxies again?"
Rep. Wasserman-Schultz, former DNC chair https://t.co/D7plRDK0Nk pic.twitter.com/gq50DoaDqp
— Erik Sperling (@ErikSperling) May 26, 2026
Booker has taken more than $800,000 from pro-Israel groups including the American Israel Public Affairs Committee, while Wasserman Schultz has taken more than $1.4 million.
Murphy also condemned the reported deal on social media Sunday, saying that Trump "hasn’t accomplished ANY of his constantly shifting goals."
"Iran still has its ballistic missile and drone program," he said. "They still have a navy that can close the strait. A hardline regime is still in charge."
Jeet Heer of The Nation said that because the war on Iran "is immensely unpopular... prominent Democrats want to outflank Trump by being more hawkish."
Historian and analyst Stephen Wertheim credited Khanna with articulating "what the vast majority of Democrats believe, but too few of their leaders say and mean."
A March poll by Pew Research Center found that nearly 90% of Democrats and Democratic-leaning independents said the Trump administration had made the wrong decision going to war against Iran.
Khanna also spoke to Fox News over the weekend, saying he would support all efforts by Trump to negotiate a peace deal with Iran and expressing approval of the president's apparent rejection of the "Lindsay Graham wing of the party," referring to the South Carolina Republican, an outspoken advocate for military intervention in Iran and elsewhere.
Khanna's comments, said Sperling, represented "what decent, pro-diplomacy messaging looks like."
"This week, Republicans will spend their time trying to get taxpayers to fund Trump’s parties," said Sen. Chris Murphy.
Even as US consumer sentiment hits record lows, gas prices remain stuck above $4.50 per gallon, and millions of Americans face cuts to basic assistance, Republicans in the US Senate are going to try to pass a massive spending bill that includes $1 billion for President Donald Trump's proposed luxury ballroom.
As Punchbowl News reported on Monday, Senate Democrats are planning to put the ballroom project in the spotlight and make supporting it as uncomfortable as possible for their Republican colleagues.
In a letter sent to fellow Democrats, Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) slammed the GOP for giving priority to the president's vanity project amid economic suffering caused by his policies.
"At a time when Americans can't make ends meet, Republicans say 'Let them eat cake,'" Schumer wrote, "and then hand Trump a billion dollars to build a ballroom to serve it in. Americans do not need a ballroom. They need relief."
Schumer went on to blast his GOP colleagues as "Ballroom Republicans" who are "asking working families to pay the price while Donald Trump pockets the perks."
Sen. Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) similarly drew a contrast between the economic pain being felt by Americans with Trump's desire for a luxury ballroom to be constructed at taxpayers' expense.
"Gas is over $6 a gallon in many places," Murphy wrote in a social media post. "Farms are going bankrupt. Billions are being wasted on a war that’s making us weaker. And this week, Republicans will spend their time trying to get taxpayers to fund Trump’s parties."
Rep. Brendan Boyle (D-Pa.), the top Democrat on the House Budget Committee, said that the proposed ballroom "perfectly sums up what Trump really cares about," noting that "while Americans are paying more for gas and millions are losing their healthcare, Trump can only think of his vanity ballroom."
During a Monday appearance on MS NOW, Boyle said "there is no way in hell I am going to vote for $1 billion of taxpayer money to a stupid, unnecessary ballroom," and vowed to reverse the cuts to Medicaid that Republicans made last year with their budget law. The cuts are projected to result in 10 million Americans losing their insurance.
"There is no way in hell I am going to vote for $1 billion of taxpayer money to a stupid, unnecessary ballroom that is nothing but a vanity project for Donald Trump." @CongBoyle pic.twitter.com/jgRUpuN7h8
— Progressive Caucus (@USProgressives) May 11, 2026
\According to Punchbowl News, congressional Republicans behind the scenes have been quietly pleading with leadership to remove funding for the ballroom from the budget bill, as they think voting to fund the president's project would be politically toxic for them this fall.
"The ballroom security money is the biggest problem for the reconciliation bill, and it caught lots of GOP lawmakers off guard," Punchbowl News explained. "Moderate Republicans in both chambers are privately raising objections, bristling at the political downside of blessing Trump’s controversial ballroom project."
The Trump administration is apparently aware of Republicans' objections, and Punchbowl News' Laura Weiss reported on Monday that the White House is dispatching Secret Service Director Sean Curran to address lawmakers' concerns during a Tuesday luncheon.
Weiss noted that Republicans in swing districts "are privately balking at the reconciliation money for securing" the ballroom, but added that the Trump administration "really wants it."