

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.
"This is not diplomacy; this is corruption at the expense of US national security."
US President Donald Trump on Monday sent his proposed nuclear agreement with Saudi Arabia to Congress, and a leading Senate Democrat responded on Wednesday with a call for his colleagues to "block this dangerous deal."
That call came from Sen. Ed Markey (D-Mass.), co-chair of the bicameral Nuclear Weapons and Arms Control Working Group.
The 30-year deal was reached in July. It would allow US companies to share nuclear energy technology with Saudi Arabia, without safeguards to ensure that the Middle East kingdom would not use the materials to build nuclear weapons.
Following the White House submission to Congress, first reported by The Wall Street Journal, lawmakers have 90 days of continuous session to review the pact—as required by Section 123 of the Atomic Energy Act—and either object or let it take effect.
Since US Energy Secretary Chris Wright and Saudi Energy Minister Prince Abdulaziz bin Salman signed the deal in July, nonproliferation experts have expressed concerns. Kelsey Davenport from the Arms Control Association said at the time that the "inadequate" deal "sets a terrible precedent" because it "goes against long-standing bipartisan support for negotiating nuclear cooperation agreements that prohibit enrichment and reprocessing," and "Congress should vote to disapprove it."
Markey echoed expert concerns on Wednesday. He said that "as a US senator, Marco Rubio once understood that handing Saudi Arabia the technology to produce nuclear weapons was a terrible idea. But now, as secretary of state, Rubio is doing exactly that, and he and Trump are pursuing the most reckless nuclear deal in US history."
"This giveaway to Saudi Arabia is the starting gun for a Middle East nuclear arms race," he argued. "Congress must reject it."
Markey also said that "if the Trump administration wants to stop a Saudi bomb, it should require the nonproliferation gold standard, which would ban enrichment and reprocessing and require International Atomic Energy Agency additional protocol safeguards in Saudi Arabia. If Riyadh did not want a bomb, it would accept the gold standard. But the opposite is happening."
"Why? Maybe we should ask Saudi ruler Mohammed bin Salman, who has said repeatedly that he wants a nuclear bomb," the senator suggested, before taking aim at the president's son-in-law. "Or maybe we should ask Jared Kushner, who accepted a $2 billion investment from a Saudi sovereign wealth fund after leaving the White House at the end of the first Trump administration."
"This is not diplomacy; this is corruption at the expense of US national security," Markey concluded. "Congress must stop this dangerous agreement before it triggers a new nuclear arms race in the Middle East."
Even if the Republican-controlled Congress doesn't heed warnings from Markey and nonproliferation experts and block the deal, Trump may ultimately do so himself.
Administration officials have confirmed to journalists this week that the president will only let the pact move forward if Saudi Arabia agrees to a condition he imposed only after negotiations: joining the Abraham Accords, an initiative from Trump's first term that led to various countries normalizing diplomatic relations with Israel.
As CNN reported Wednesday:
Wright, speaking at a Wednesday press conference with the head of the International Atomic Energy Agency, said that the nuclear agreement and Abraham Accords negotiations "will be worked in parallel."
A Saudi official responded to a CNN query saying, "Saudi-US relations are ever-evolving and have continued to broaden and to deepen over the years."
"Saudi Arabia is looking forward to working closely with the US administration and Congress on ways to strengthen our partnership," the official added.
Congressional consideration of the agreement comes amid an illegal US-Israeli war on Iran. Trump continues to claim the military campaign is aimed at stopping the Iranian government from building nuclear arms—even though he tore up the Obama administration's related agreement during his first term, and the American intelligence community concluded before the current conflict that Tehran wasn't pursuing such weapons.
Last week, former Republican Georgia Congresswoman Marjorie Taylor Greene claimed that members of Trump's administration "are discussing using nuclear weapons on Iran in strategy meetings." In response, Jamal Abdi, president of the National Iranian American Council, said that "we must shut the Pandora’s box of the Iran War before more horrors are unleashed—including the possible use of nuclear weapons. The longer this catastrophic war of choice continues, the more horrors we risk unleashing that many of us would have previously found unthinkable."
In addition to the United States and Israel, the countries known to have nuclear weapons are China, France, India, North Korea, Pakistan, Russia, and the United Kingdom. According to the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute, as of January, the estimated global inventory of warheads is 12,187—about 9,745 of which are in military stockpiles for potential use.
"Without a fundamental shift in US objectives and acceptance of a new regional balance, this conflict could drag on with profound and lasting economic consequences," said one analyst.
US President Donald Trump's illegal war of choice against Iran further spiraled out of control on Wednesday as American forces teamed up with Saudi Arabia to bomb Iraq, strikes that came hours after the US military said it intercepted an Iranian ballistic missile attack on American forces in Jordan.
The US Central Command said its strikes in Iraq targeted "Iran-aligned terrorists that the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) directed to attack US forces and Saudi energy infrastructure." The office of Iraqi President Nizar Amidi condemned the US-Saudi airstrikes as "an unacceptable attack and a blatant violation of Iraq's sovereignty." According to Iraq’s Popular Mobilization Forces, at least 20 of its members were killed by the US-Saudi attacks.
The exchange marked the first military escalation since the US and Iran paused strikes over the weekend, briefly hinting at the possibility of a return to diplomatic talks that have thus far not produced a lasting peace agreement.
Trump signaled Wednesday that the US onslaught—which is historically unpopular with the American public—was far from over.
"We're going to beat the fucking shit out of them," Trump told Fox News, according to reporter Trey Yingst. "We'll be hitting them hard."
"We're going to beat the fuc*ing sh*t out of them," President Trump told Fox News after Iran launched a surprise attack against U.S. forces. "We'll be hitting them hard."
The President says U.S. strikes overnight against Iran-backed militias in Iraq were coordinated with the… pic.twitter.com/AeLbEGFCFi
— Trey Yingst (@TreyYingst) July 29, 2026
Iran's Foreign Ministry said in a statement Wednesday that the US-Saudi bombing of Iraq was aimed at expanding "the scope of the war and conflict in the West Asia region."
"The warmongering US regime and its accomplices in the region [are] responsible for the dangerous consequences of these criminal, inhumane, and provocative acts," the foreign ministry added.
Shortly after the flurry of attacks, CNN published a survey showing that 67% of Americans believe that Trump's military actions in Iran have "hurt the US" as oil prices surged once again. Nearly three-quarters of Americans believe Trump does not "have a clear plan for handling the situation in Iran," according to the poll.
"It remains remarkable that Trump won two elections criticizing America’s Middle East wars, attacking the Bush era, and disavowing the regime change business," Sina Toossi, a senior fellow at the Center for International Policy, wrote on social media. "Yet with each passing day, his presidency and legacy are becoming consumed with a Middle East quagmire of his own making."
"Investors should stop assuming this war is nearing its end," Toossi added. "The conditions for a durable settlement do not yet exist. Without a fundamental shift in US objectives and acceptance of a new regional balance, this conflict could drag on with profound and lasting economic consequences."
One expert described the reported deal as "tantamount to the United States giving up on nonproliferation."
Nonproliferation experts are raising alarms after Reuters reported on Tuesday that President Donald Trump's administration plans to ask Congress to approve a deal that could allow Saudi Arabia to develop nuclear weapons.
According to Reuters, an agreement crafted by the Trump administration would allow the US to share nuclear power technology with the Saudis without proper safeguards that "would stop materials being used in nuclear weapons programs."
Specifically, Reuters' sources said the deal "does not include the 'Gold Standard' that would block the kingdom from enriching uranium and reprocessing spent nuclear fuel, both of which are potential pathways to nuclear weapons."
Kelsey Davenport, director for nonprolifertion policy at the Arms Control Association, warned in a Tuesday social media post that the reported agreement "sets a terrible precedent" because it "goes against long-standing bipartisan support for negotiating nuclear cooperation agreements that prohibit enrichment and reprocessing."
"If the deal is inadequate, which it seems to be," Davenport added, "Congress should vote to disapprove it."
Andrea Stricker, deputy director and research fellow at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies' Nonproliferation Program, said that "Congress should block" the deal, which she warned could lead other states in the region to seek their own nuclear weapons.
If Congress fails to block the deal, Stricker added, then "one hopes the policy will be reversed by a subsequent administration before too much damage is done in terms of watering down safeguards, setting negative precedents for other states, and failing to contain the spread of enrichment and reprocessing."
James Acton, co-director of the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace's Nuclear Policy Program, said the reported Saudi nuclear deal is "tantamount to the United States giving up on nonproliferation."
"Saudi officials are open about a potential interest in nuclear weapons," Acton said. "The United States should do nothing to facilitate enrichment or reprocessing in the Kingdom."
Emma Ashford, senior fellow at the Stimson Center, agreed that the reported agreement would mean the end of US attempts to curtail the spread of nuclear weapons, and noted the irony of the Trump administration "bombing Iran to prevent them ever having enrichment, while giving it to the Saudis."
Rosemary Kelanic, director of the Middle East Program at Defense Priorities, called the reported deal a "terrible idea" that "goes against decades of US policy to give enrichment technology to a country that doesn't already possess it."
Kelanic also warned that the agreement would empower the Saudi government in ways that could come back to bite the US.
"Aside from the proliferation risks, uranium enrichment would give Saudi Arabia a potent source of leverage to extract future concessions from Washington," Kelanic explained, "including new security guarantees, by threatening to weaponize its program unless the United States promises enhanced military protection. That has happened before, for instance in South Korea and West Germany, where the U.S. traded protection to persuade partners to abandon nuclear programs."
Rep. Gregory Meeks (D-NY), ranking member of the House Foreign Relations Committee, expressed "deep concerns" about the reported deal, which he said "would significantly erode existing nonproliferation standards."
"Any agreement must include appropriate limits on enrichment and reprocessing," Meeks emphasized, "as well as the [International Atomic Energy Agency's] Additional Protocol."
"Numerous recently released documents now show he acted aggressively on behalf of multiple foreign governments... in order to influence policies of the first Trump administration."
The top Democrat on the House Judiciary Committee, Rep. Jamie Raskin, launched an investigation Monday into whether the disgraced financier Jeffrey Epstein worked on behalf of foreign governments to influence President Donald Trump during his first term.
In a letter addressed to acting Attorney General Todd Blanche; Trump’s nominee to be director of national intelligence, Jay Clayton; and Secretary of State Marco Rubio, Raskin (D-Md.) said that files provided to the Judiciary Committee show “substantial evidence” that Epstein acted to advance the interests of Saudi Arabia and Kuwait, advised the Russian government on its dealings with Trump, and worked as a consultant to former Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Barak.
“Jeffrey Epstein never registered as a foreign agent," Raskin said. "Yet numerous recently released documents now show he acted aggressively on behalf of multiple foreign governments, including several with interests adverse to the United States, in order to influence policies of the first Trump administration."
Epstein, a convicted sex criminal who was found dead in his jail cell in 2019 after being charged with trafficking minors, has long been surrounded by questions about his relationships to foreign governments. But this is the first time an inquiry from the US Congress has expressly focused on them.
Raskin called attention to a trip taken by Epstein to Riyadh in November 2016, the week of Trump's first election, during which he met with Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman (MBS) before sending one of his representatives an email offering to become the "financial confidant" to members of the Saudi government. "I am happy to represent [Kingdom of Saudi Arabia] interests. period," he said.
Epstein also apparently offered to represent Saudi Arabia's sovereign wealth fund in the US and serve as an adviser to a development project overseen by MBS. The crown prince's response to the proposal has not been provided to the committee, according to Raskin.
Several emails to friends and confidantes indicate that around the same time, Epstein was regularly boasting of his visits to Trump Tower and meetings with "Trump people" during the presidential transition, which he said presented "lots of opportunity."
Other correspondence seems to indicate that Epstein coached the emir of Kuwait on how to deal with Trump. In May 2017, prior to a summit of Gulf states in Riyadh, Epstein wrote to an unnamed political figure that he had “much to do around the Trump trip.”
The figure responded that he wanted “tips on how we should communicate with Trump,” specifically on the Saudi-led war against Yemen; Kuwait had played host to three months of UN-led negotiations related to the conflict the year before.
It is unclear from the records which US officials, if any, Epstein intended to engage on Kuwait's behalf.
Raskin also highlighted what is perhaps Epstein's most well-documented foreign government contact, Ehud Barak, who served as Israel's prime minister from 1999 to 2001 and later its minister of defense.
According to a trove of leaked emails published by Drop Site News last year, Epstein worked to create a backchannel between Barak and the Russian government and helped him to pursue a meeting with President Vladimir Putin in 2013 as he pushed for Russia to abandon its support for then-Syrian President Bashar al-Assad, which was a major national security priority of Israel.
Epstein also provided information about US officials to Barak as he tried to push the Obama administration to take a harder stance toward Iran and Syria.
It is one of many instances in which Epstein and Barak worked to advance Israeli interests across the world, including brokering security and surveillance agreements with the governments of Mongolia and Côte d'Ivoire and helping to build the relationship between Israel and the United Arab Emirates.
Other emails reveal Epstein advising high-ranking Russian officials on how to deal with Trump as they sought to avoid sanctions placed by the US over its interference in the 2016 election and its aggression toward Ukraine.
Raskin said that Epstein seemed to be consciously acting as a foreign agent despite never registering as one under the Foreign Agents Registration Act (FARA). The congressman pointed to exchanges in which Epstein appeared to advise Trump's former chief strategist Steve Bannon on how to avoid FARA reporting requirements.
Raskin argued that Epstein's deep well of knowledge about Trump and his apparent access to members of his circle "posed a major national security liability." Epstein often bragged that he had leverage over the president and said he was "the one able to take [Trump] down."
The congressman argued for transparency in light of the administration’s efforts to delay the release of the files and withhold information despite congressional requirements.
Beyond potentially embarrassing revelations about Trump, he said the repeated use of the White House Situation Room to discuss the Epstein scandal indicated that it posed possible national security concerns that have not been disclosed to the public.
Raskin called on the Department of Justice and State Department to release all files referencing Epstein and other foreign nations and information that may point to his efforts to avoid FARA requirements.
"The Titanic is now hitting the iceberg and there are not enough lifeboats for the world economy," said one observer.
Houthi rebels in Yemen on Monday announced they were imposing a maritime embargo against Saudi Arabia in yet another threat to global petroleum supplies amid the US war on Iran.
Yahya Saree, spokesperson for the Houthis, said in a video announcement that the militia would be enforcing the shipping embargo in retaliation for last week's bombing of Sanaa Airport, which the group blamed on the Saudis.
BREAKING: Yemen's Houthis announce 'sea navigation ban' on Saudi Arabia. pic.twitter.com/HDzghEi9Ct
— Clash Report (@clashreport) July 20, 2026
After Iran shut down the Strait of Hormuz in response to US President Donald Trump's illegal war of choice earlier this year, global oil markets became even more dependent on shipping supplies through the Strait of Bab al-Mandeb, a waterway adjacent to the coast of Yemen.
According to Javier Blas, energy and commodities columnist at Bloomberg, Saudi Arabia has been shipping roughly 4.5 million barrels of oil per day through shipping channels in the Red Sea, with "most of it" traveling through the Strait of Bab al-Mandeb.
The Houthis' announcement of an embargo against the Saudis comes as the US has continued burning through its crude inventories.
Data released by US Energy Information Administration revealed that US crude inventories fell by 1.7 million barrels over the week ending July 10, leaving stocks at their lowest level since 1983.
University of Chicago political scientist Robert Pape warned that the Houthis shutting down another vital global shipping lane could be a disaster for the global economy given that it could mean a "loss of another 4 to 5 million [oil] barrels a day."
"The Titanic is now hitting the iceberg," Pape added, "and there are not enough lifeboats for the world economy."
Nicholas Grossman, professor of international relations at the University of Illinois, noted that there are now multiple factors throttling global energy shipments.
"Iran blocking Strait of Hormuz," Grossman wrote. "US blocking Iranian shipping. Iran bombing energy facilities in Gulf Arab states. US bombing energy facilities in Iran. Ukraine bombing energy facilities in Russia. Houthis disrupting Red Sea shipping. Oil and gas reserves running dry. It's a lot, and adding up."
Juliette Kayyem, senior lecturer at Harvard's Kennedy School and a former Obama administration official, wrote that the potential shutdown of global energy supplies should make US policymakers rethink what they can achieve using American military force.
"A bunch of military and conventional wisdom analysts assured the American public that our air dominance was unparalleled," wrote Kayyem. "The 'never right but always certain' crowd didn’t realize the war was going to be fought on water."
“This alarming spike in the use of the death penalty is due to a small, isolated group of states willing to carry out executions at all costs, despite the continued global trend towards abolition," said Amnesty International's secretary general Agnès Callamard.
With its number of state-sponsored executions nearly doubling in 2025, the United States joined an ignominious handful of nations around the globe that helped bring death penalty punishments worldwide last year to their highest level in nearly half a century.
Amnesty International released its annual review of the death penalty on Monday, showing that the "staggering" overall increase of executions—up from 1,518 in 2024 to at least 2,707 people—was due "to a handful of governments determined to rule by fear."
While 17 nations carried out at least one death sentence in 2025, it was significant increases in five of those countries—the United States, Iran, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Egypt, and Singapore—that account for the historic spike. With rates in those countries doubling or even tripling compared to the 2024 figures, Amnesty found, executions overall rose by 78% worldwide in 2025.
As the human rights group notes:
Iranian authorities, the main drivers behind the spike, executed at least 2,159 people, more than double its 2024 figure. Elsewhere, Saudi Arabia raised its execution tally to at least 356, using the death penalty extensively for drug-related offenses. Executions in Kuwait almost tripled (from 6 to 17), while they near doubled in Egypt (from 13 to 23), Singapore (from 9 to 17), and the United States of America (from 25 to 47).
Notably, the 2025 total put forth by Amnesty does not include thousands of executions the human rights group believes were carried out in China, which it says likely carries out thousands each year.
“This alarming spike in the use of the death penalty is due to a small, isolated group of states willing to carry out executions at all costs, despite the continued global trend towards abolition," said Agnès Callamard, Amnesty International’s secretary general. "From China, Iran, North Korea and Saudi Arabia to Yemen, Kuwait, Singapore and the USA, this shameless minority are weaponizing the death penalty to instill fear, crush dissent and show the strength state institutions have over disadvantaged people and marginalized communities."
Under President Donald Trump, who has championed the return of the federal death penalty during both his first and second terms in office, the 47 executions took place across 11 states, with the highest number being carried out in Florida, where 19 people were killed.

Despite the surge in countries like the US and Iran, Amnesty highlighted that "progress was made elsewhere around the world, proving hope is stronger than fear."
The report notes that no "executions or death sentences were recorded in Europe and Central Asia" and that, for the 17th consecutive year, the US remained the "only country in the Americas to execute people, with close to half of all US executions carried out in Florida."
The group celebrated legislative progress in countries like Nigeria and Lebanon, where bills were introduced in the last year to abolish the death penalty once and for all.
“With human rights under threat around the world, millions of people continue to fight against the death penalty each year in a powerful demonstration of our shared humanity,” said Callamard in her statement. “Total abolition is possible if we all stand strong against the isolated few. We must keep the flame of abolition burning bright until the world is entirely free from the shadows of the gallows."
"Trump again says the quiet part out loud—America entered the Iran war to support a genocidal ethno-state and brutal absolute autocracies, all of whom are his political and commercial financiers."
During his campaign for reelection, one of President Donald Trump's central pitches was that the US needed to stay out of foreign wars in order to prioritize "America first."
But his decision to join Israel and launch a massive war with Iran, which has caused turmoil across the American economy, has left many voters rather skeptical of these motivations, believing the war benefits other nations—particularly Israel—more than the US.
That perception has not been assuaged by statements from officials like Secretary of State Marco Rubio, who acknowledged in the early days of the war that a so-called "imminent threat" to the US only existed because Israel had planned to attack, or by the president's recent comment that he doesn't "think about Americans' financial situation" regarding the war.
In an interview with Sean Hannity on Fox News on Thursday, Trump appeared to further affirm that the Iran invasion's impact on his own country is far from top-of-mind.
Trump was asked by Hannity about his weekslong effort to reopen the Strait of Hormuz, which Iran closed in response to the war's launch, causing a spike in global oil prices that has hit the US. Reopening the strait has become one of Trump's main demands as he pushes for a deal with Iran, even though it was open before the war began.
But Trump said on Thursday that other countries "need the strait more than we need it open." He cited his administration's aggressive expansion of oil drilling, which he has claimed would make the US more resilient to the oil shock, although it hasn't been enough to stop gas prices from soaring above $4.50/gallon on average.
"We don't need it at all," Trump said, to which Hannity responded incredulously, "We don't need it at all?"
"We don't need it at all," Trump reiterated. “I mean, you could make the case, you know, like why are we even, we’re doing it to help Israel, and to help Saudi Arabia, and to help Qatar and [the United Arab Emirates] and, you know, Kuwait and other countries, Bahrain—”
Hannity interjected: "It also helps China."
Speaking of his summit this week with Chinese leaders, including President Xi Jinping, Trump said: "Actually, I told him today, I said, 'You know, we're helping you, and we're helping you in another way,' because I don't think they want, I don't think China wants Iran to have a nuclear weapon either.'"
Trump's director of national intelligence, Tulsi Gabbard, testified in a written statement to Congress in March that Iran had not tried to rebuild its nuclear enrichment capability after earlier US and Israeli attacks last June, which undercut one of the administration's primary rationales for war.
Trump's former National Counterterrorism Center director, Joe Kent, said last week that the US intelligence community agreed in the days leading up to the war that "Iran wasn’t developing a nuclear weapon,” but said that these assessments were undermined by persuasion from "a foreign government—Israel," which "won the argument and forced us into this war."
Many of the US's Persian Gulf allies have publicly tried to distance themselves from the war, especially in the face of retaliation from Iran. But The Associated Press has reported that countries like the UAE, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, and Bahrain have pushed Trump behind the scenes to continue escalating the war in an effort to weaken Iran militarily and force more permanent changes to the regime.
Some have noted the Trump family’s close personal ties to the Gulf regimes—from his family’s cryptocurrency venture which is buoyed by a $500 million investment from a powerful member of Abu Dhabi’s ruling family; to his son in law Jared Kushner’s private equity firm, which has received $2 billion from Saudi Arabia’s public investment fund; to his real estate empire which has lucrative Trump-branded properties popping up across the region.
Independent journalist Borzou Daragahi said that with his latest comments, "Trump again says the quiet part out loud—America entered the Iran war to support a genocidal ethno-state and brutal absolute autocracies, all of whom are his political and commercial financiers."
"You cannot faithfully represent the United States with billions of dollars in Saudi and Emirati cash burning a hole in every pocket of every suit you own," said Rep. Jamie Raskin.
The ranking Democrat on the House Judiciary Committee on Friday morning announced a "sweeping" probe into alleged self-enrichment by Jared Kushner, the son-in-law of US President Donald Trump who has served as a high-profile White House envoy in the Middle East while also, according to Congressman Jamie Raskin, "soliciting billions of dollars from Gulf monarchies for [his] private business ventures."
In a letter addressed to Kushner, the Maryland Democrat charges that by pushing for investments in his international investment firm, A Fin Management LLC (Affinity), while also serving as “Special Envoy for Peace” for the Trump administration, he has created "a glaring and incurable conflict of interest" in the eyes of the American people.
While Raskin points out that Kushner repeatedly vowed to stay out of government during Trump's second term and, going further, said he would not raise funds for Affinity during that time, both promises were "quickly" broken.
In April of 2022, the New York Times reported how Kushner had secured a $2 billion investment from a sovereign wealth fund directed by Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman, also known as MbS. In 2018, during Trump's first term, investigations were demanded over accusations that previous financial ties meant that MbS had Kushner "in his pocket."
According to Raskin's letter on Friday:
Mr. Kushner’s investment firm, Affinity Partners, has amassed approximately $6.16 billion in assets under management—including $1.2 billion in the past year alone—with an extraordinary 99 percent of its funding derived from foreign nationals. These include sovereign wealth funds operated by the governments of Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, and Qatar. At the same time, Mr. Kushner has assumed a central role in sensitive geopolitical negotiations across the Middle East and beyond.
Despite explicit public assurances that he would avoid both government service and fundraising during President Trump’s second term, Mr. Kushner has done precisely the opposite. He has inserted himself into the world’s most volatile global conflicts as one of the United States’ chief negotiators all while deepening his financial reliance on, and entanglement with, foreign governments.
Citing the horrific US complicity in Israel's ongoing attacks on Gaza as well as Trump's illegal war of choice against Iran, Raskin's letter to Kushner charges that "your decision to play completely irreconcilable and unethical dual roles has been haunting American foreign policy since President Trump returned to Washington in 2025."
Noting that the Crown Prince of Saudi Arabia remains "your largest investor through Affinity and thus possesses significant financial leverage over" Kushner, Raskin explains to the president's son-in-law in his letter that "you cannot both be a diplomat and a financial pawn of the Saudi monarchy at the same time; you cannot faithfully represent the United States with billions of dollars in Saudi and Emirati cash burning a hole in every pocket of every suit you own."
Due to these concerns, explained Raskin, the House Committee on the Judiciary investigation will probe "your conduct and that of your firm with the goal of learning information critical to reforming our bribery laws, conflict of interest provisions, other statutes and rules governing the conduct of government and special government employees, and FARA."
Offering a list of requests, the letter demands that Kushner provide a detailed account of his communications with various investment partners and entities related to his business dealings and that of his work as special envoy to the president, with a deadline of April 30 to comply.
"This investigation will be a priority for our Committee in the coming period," Raskin's letter states. "We expect your full cooperation and that you will provide us with all relevant documents that touch upon how your business interests, family wealth, and governmental duties and missions have merged and converged."
"Crown Prince MBS wants Trump to keep pouring Americans—and billions—into his illegal war with Iran," said one Democratic congressman.
The Pentagon is preparing to deploy around 3,000 troops to the Middle East as thousands of Marines also head to the region amid the US-Israeli war on Iran, stoking fears of a possible ground invasion that is reportedly being pushed by Saudi Arabia's de facto ruler.
Two unidentified US officials told The Wall Street Journal and other media outlets Tuesday that soldiers from the Army's elite 82nd Airborne Division quick reaction brigade—which can send troops almost anywhere in the world in under a day's time—would be ordered to deploy in the coming hours.
While the officials said that no decision has been made regarding a ground invasion of Iran, the deployment marks the latest escalation in the 24-day war—which President Donald Trump claimed was "very complete, pretty much" over two weeks ago.
The United States already has approximately 50,000 troops in the Middle East, where the US has attacked four countries—Iran, Iraq, Syria, and Yemen—along with Libya and Somalia in Africa and Afghanistan and Pakistan in South Asia, since 2001.
The US deployments come as Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman—who is often called by his initials MBS—is reportedly pushing Trump to launch a ground invasion of Iran with the objective of toppling its current government, which, despite assassinations of numerous leaders, has so far demonstrated a resiliency experts say is rooted in its decentralized and highly flexible "horizontal" command structure.
According to The New York Times, the crown prince is arguing that the war on Iran offers a "historic opportunity" to reshape the Middle East. Saudi officials denied any such lobbying.
This, as Gulf monarchies are reportedly inching closer to getting directly involved in the war, as Iranian counterattacks target regional US allies including Bahrain, Iraq, Israel, Jordan, Kuwait, Oman, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, and the United Arab Emirates.
Previous reporting by The Washington Post and others detailed how, before the war, MBS and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu allegedly pressed Trump to attack Iran for the second time in as many years.
Asked during a Tuesday White House press conference if MBS has "been encouraging you to do certain things related to Iran," the president replied: "He's a warrior. Yeah, he does. He's a warrior. He's fighting with us, by the way."
Reporter: There’s been reporting that the crown prince of Saudi Arabia has been encouraging you to do certain things related to Iran.
Trump: He is a warrior, he is fighting with us pic.twitter.com/SA1wklQNJk
— Acyn (@Acyn) March 24, 2026
Lauren Harper, the Daniel Ellsberg chair on government secrecy at the Freedom of the Press Foundation, said on Bluesky Tuesday that MBS' reported lobbying of Trump "is a great example of why a strong Presidential Records Act is essential for accountability."
Following Trump's deletion of social media posts—including a racist video amplifying lies about the 2020 election in which former President Barack Obama and his wife Michelle Obama are portrayed as apes—there have been renewed calls for robust enforcement of the Presidential Records Act (PRA), which requires preservation of “the activities, deliberations, decisions, and policies that reflect the performance of the president’s constitutional, statutory, or other official or ceremonial duties.”
"Want to read the notes or the telcons (telephone conversations) between Trump and MBS re: Iran? Then you need an enforceable PRA that doesn’t let Trump get away with not keeping or destroying records," Harper wrote.
US Rep. Eugene Vindman (D-Va.) said Tuesday on Bluesky: "I’ve listened to Trump’s calls with foreign leaders. The American people deserve to know exactly what he promised MBS—and at what cost to our troops and our values."
Crown Prince MBS wants Trump to keep pouring Americans—and billions—into his illegal war with Iran.This is the same MBS U.S. intelligence tied to the murder of Jamal Khashoggi. And Trump’s response? “Things happen.”
— Congressman Eugene Vindman (VA-07) (@gene4va.bsky.social) March 24, 2026 at 11:26 AM
Some critics took aim at Trump's campaign promise of no new wars, part of his so-called "America First" agenda.
"The America First guy keeps getting headlines about the war with Iran being pursued to fulfill the aims of Netanyahu or MBS," said Chad Stanton, political director at the faith-based progressive advocacy group SojoAction.
"While US servicemembers die in another forever war in the Middle East, Donald Trump’s 'peace envoy' is raising money for his private equity firm," wrote US Sen. Elizabeth Warren.
Jared Kushner, US President Donald Trump's son-in-law, is reportedly trying to entice governments in the Middle East to invest billions in his private equity firm while he simultaneously works as "a special envoy for peace"—a role he appears to have used to help convince Trump to wage war on Iran.
The New York Times reported late last week that Kushner "has spoken with potential investors in recent weeks about raising $5 billion or more for Affinity Partners, his investment firm."
Citing five unnamed people with knowledge of the talks, the Times reported that "Affinity’s representatives have already met with Saudi Arabia’s Public Investment Fund," Affinity's largest investor. Saudi Arabia's leader, Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman, reportedly played a significant role in the behind-the-scenes lobbying campaign urging Trump to attack Iran—Saudi Arabia's top regional rival.
Bin Salman controls the Saudi Public Investment Fund, which pumped $2 billion into Kushner's firm in 2022.
"Mr. Kushner’s fundraising is expected to stretch on for the better part of this year," the Times added. "The efforts show the blurring of the lines between public service and private profit-seeking during Mr. Trump’s second term. Only a few weeks ago, in his role as Mr. Trump’s 'peace envoy,' Mr. Kushner met in Geneva with Iran’s foreign minister. The US and Israeli bombing campaign in Iran began shortly after those meetings concluded without a deal on Iran’s nuclear program."
Last week, Trump said he decided to attack Iran in coordination with Israel—whose prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, is a personal friend of Kushner's—because the president "thought they were going to attack us," a view he claimed to have reached after listening to "what Steve [Witkoff] and Jared and Pete [Hegseth] and others were telling me."
US Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) wrote in response to the Times reporting that "while US servicemembers die in another forever war in the Middle East, Donald Trump’s 'peace envoy' is raising money for his private equity firm."
Abbas Araghchi, Iran's foreign minister, wrote in a social media post on Sunday that a "fair and equitable deal" between the US and Iran "was within reach" before Trump and Netanyahu started bombing.
"Those providing poor advice to POTUS are responsible for bloodshed," Araghchi wrote, attaching a screenshot of the Times story on Kushner's fundraising efforts. "This war is imposed on both Americans and Iranians."
I've been told that family of a U.S. soldier killed in the war of choice on Iran is relying on public donations.
As fair and equitable deal was within reach, those providing poor advice to POTUS are responsible for bloodshed.
This war is imposed on both Americans and Iranians. pic.twitter.com/fR15XKjfYk
— Seyed Abbas Araghchi (@araghchi) March 15, 2026
Judd Legum, founder and author of the Popular Information newsletter, noted last week that Kushner's participation in the Geneva diplomatic talks that preceded the US-Israeli assault on Iran "violated his pledge not to be involved in foreign policy in a second Trump administration."
On Monday, Legum observed that Kushner also said in December 2024 that his private equity firm would not "have to raise capital for the next four years," allowing him to "avoid any conflicts" of interest.
Trump formally named Kushner a "special envoy for peace" last month, a move that means the president's son-in-law is now required by law to file a financial disclosure report. Kushner has just days left before the 30-day deadline to file the disclosure.
Donald Sherman, president and CEO of Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington, wrote in a letter to the White House last week that "Mr. Kushner’s history of financial gains resulting from his time as a White House advisor during President Trump’s first term raises serious concerns about potential conflicts of interest that must be addressed before Mr. Kushner participates in any additional matters that may relate to his own financial interests or those of his investors."
"The risk of Mr. Kushner’s potential conflicts is particularly concerning because his private investment firm has very publicly done significant business with foreign partners who also have interests in the conflicts on which he has been assigned to work," Sherman noted.