The House speaker cautioned that the party is likely bound for a major debate over foreign policy after President Trump leaves office
Kent Nishimura/Getty Images
House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-LA) does an interview with CNN at the U.S. Capitol on April 17, 2024 in Washington, D.C.
House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-LA) spoke about his efforts to hold the line against the isolationist wing of the Republican Party in a private meeting with pro-Israel leaders on Capitol Hill on Wednesday, several individuals who attended the meeting told Jewish Insider.
Johnson, who described himself to the group as a “Reagan Republican” focused on “peace through strength,” acknowledged that isolationism is rising in the Republican Party, and that the party is likely bound for a major debate on the issue after President Donald Trump leaves office.
And Johnson told the group that, in his candidate recruiting efforts, he’s working to filter out isolationists to prevent that wing of the party from growing larger in the House, four people who attended the meeting said.
“The speaker was very, very direct about the U.S. role with Israel and in the world and understands that there are voices that don’t agree in both parties, on both extremes, and urges us all to be involved in fighting back against those extremes,” Eric Fingerhut, the CEO of the Jewish Federations of North America, told JI.
One attendee said Johnson had also expressed a strong interest in finding new funding methods for humanitarian aid in Gaza, outside of the United Nations.
Johnson also discussed his recent trip to Israel and his and his wife’s lengthy dinner with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and his wife, Sara, with whom he said he has become close friends. He said that he and Netanyahu had discussed that there are no good options ahead in Gaza, one attendee told JI.
The speaker also told the group he is eager to return to Israel to address the Knesset, after he was unable to do so as scheduled in June due to the Israel-Iran war.
Johnson emphasized his commitment to working across the aisle to support Israel and the Jewish community, an individual in the room said. With a government shutdown deadline fast-approaching at the end of the month, Johnson said he’s committed to continuing to work through the regular appropriations process and negotiating with the Senate, and noted that various Jewish communal priorities would be part of that process.
One source said Johnson had also highlighted the fact that he was the highest-ranking elected official to visit a settlement in the West Bank, which the source noted puts him at odds with many in the Jewish community.
Rep. Tim Walberg (R-MI), who also addressed the meeting, provided an overview of the investigations that the House Education and Workforce Committee is conducting into antisemitism, as well as noted he’d been texting recently with Anti-Defamation League CEO Jonathan Greenblatt about the proliferation of antisemitic conspiracy theories about the killing of influencer Charlie Kirk.
Rabbi Levi Shemtov of American Friends of Lubavitch (Chabad) delivered a prayer and Reps. David Kustoff (R-TN), Randy Fine (R-FL) and Craig Goldman (R-TX) also spoke to the group.
One attendee described Johnson as clearly knowledgeable about and comfortable with the issues at play and the meeting overall as cordial and non-contentious.
“There’s just a remarkable sense of gratitude from all across the Jewish community for the leadership that Speaker Johnson has brought to the U.S.-Israel relationship,” Fingerhut said. “He was not someone who was that well-known to our community before he became speaker, but he’s comprehensively knowledgeable. It’s clearly something he feels very personally about.”
The organizations in attendance included: The Louis D. Brandeis Center for Human Rights Under Law, the Republican Jewish Coalition, Agudath Israel of America, AIPAC, the Simon Wiesenthal Center, Conference of Presidents of Major American Jewish Organizations, National Council of Jewish Women, Syngeros Holdings, CUFI Action, the Orthodox Union, the U.S.-China Economic and Security Review Commission, Standard Industries, the American Jewish Committee, Zionist Organization of America, National Debt Relief, Jewish Institute for National Security of America, the Deborah Project, Foundation for Defense of Democracies, Coalition for Jewish Values and the Endowment for Middle East Truth.
The president said he was looking for ‘total complete victory’ over Iran
BRENDAN SMIALOWSKI/AFP via Getty Images
President Donald Trump speaks to the press in the Oval Office on June 18, 2025.
President Donald Trump on Wednesday rebuked Republican isolationists who have argued it’s not necessary to prevent Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon, dismissing them as not being his true supporters.
“My supporters are for me. My supporters are America First and Make America Great Again,” Trump said from the Oval Office, in response to a question about the foreign policy debates between hawks and isolationists in the GOP base. “My supporters don’t want to see Iran have a nuclear weapon. … Very simple: If they think it’s OK for Iran to have a nuclear weapon, then they should oppose me.”
The president said he believes Iran would use a nuclear weapon if it had one.
“I don’t want to get involved either, but I’ve been saying for 20 years, maybe longer, that Iran cannot have a nuclear weapon,” Trump said. “I’ve been saying it for a long time, and I think they were a few weeks away from having one.”
He highlighted apparent logical inconsistencies in isolationists’ position on the issue.
“The problem is they get themselves into a thing: They don’t want them to have nuclear, but then they say, ‘Well, we don’t want to fight,’” Trump said. “Well, you’re going to have to make a choice because it’s possible that you’re going to have to fight for them not to have nuclear.”
Trump softened some of his previous criticism of Tucker Carlson, a prominent voice in isolationist circles whom the president had rebuked earlier this week for railing against U.S. support for Israel. He said that Carlson had called him to apologize.
Trump said he’d pressed Carlson on whether he would accept a nuclear-armed Iran, and said that Carlson “sort of didn’t like that. I said, ‘Well, if it’s OK with you, then you and I do have a difference,’ but it’s really not OK with him.”
“Therefore, you may have to fight and maybe it’ll end, and maybe it’ll end very quickly, but there’s no way that you can allow — whether you have to fight or not — you can have Iran to have a nuclear weapon, because the entire world will blow up,” Trump continued.
Trump said he planned to hold a meeting in the Situation Room on Wednesday afternoon to discuss the situation in the Middle East, but said he would delay a decision on striking Iran as long as possible.
“I like to make the final decision one second before it’s due,” he said. “With war, things change. It can go from one extreme to the other. War is very bad. There was no reason for this to be a war.”
The president said that the United States is the only country with the capabilities to destroy the deeply buried Fordow nuclear facility, but reiterated that he had not yet made the decision to do so.
Trump said that the success of Israel’s operations on their first night of bombing raids last week had made him more willing to consider possible U.S. involvement and strikes.
He also sent somewhat mixed messages on whether he’s open to continued talks with Iran.
“I had a great deal for them. They should have made that deal. Sixty days we talked about it, and in the end they decided not to do it. And now they wish they did it, and they want to meet,” Trump said. “It’s a little late to meet, but they want to meet and they want to come to the White House … so we’ll see. I may do that. It’s a shame, it could have been done the easy way.”
He said that he’s seeking “total complete victory” over Iran, in which it cannot have nuclear weapons.
“Iran was very close to signing what would have been a very good agreement for them and maybe that could still happen, I guess,” he said, adding that Iranian negotiators’ interest in visiting the White House is “a big statement, but it’s very late.”
Trump also noted that it may be difficult for Iranian negotiators to actually leave the country to visit the White House for negotiations.
The latest comments appeared somewhat less aggressive than Trump’s warnings the previous day that the U.S. could assassinate Iran’s supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei.
Trump today was largely noncommittal on the issue of regime change in Iran saying, “Sure, anything could happen. That? That could happen.”
Hawley himself has previously advocated for a more restrained approach to U.S. foreign engagement and aligns with the national conservative movement
Al Drago/Getty Images
Sen. Josh Hawley (R-MO) speaks to reporters prior to the Senate Republicans weekly policy luncheon, in the US Capitol on March 25, 2025 in Washington, DC.
Sen. Josh Hawley (R-MO) says he doesn’t share the concerns of some in the isolationist wing of the Republican Party that U.S. engagement in Israel’s military operation to destroy Iran’s nuclear program would lead to a global war or another prolonged conflict in the Middle East, citing his confidence in President Donald Trump’s ability to avoid either outcome.
The Missouri senator told Jewish Insider, following a conversation with Trump on Tuesday morning, that he trusted the president to navigate the situation without dragging the U.S. into a broader war, an issue that has caused growing consternation among commentator Tucker Carlson and other neo-isolationists in the GOP. Hawley has previously advocated for a more restrained approach to U.S. foreign engagement and aligns with the national conservative movement.
“I just don’t think that. I think Donald Trump is the least likely person to let that happen,” Hawley said when asked what he’d say to those who argue Trump’s actions will embroil the U.S. in a war. “I think he’s pretty careful, and I think he’s got a pretty good sense of our security interests, obviously our allies. So I feel pretty good with him in charge.”
Hawley made similar comments in a separate conversation with JI on Monday, saying at the time, “I think the president has a pretty clear assessment of what is good, what is in America’s interests. He’s been really clear on this, America’s interest and the world’s interest is to not have Iran have a nuclear weapon.”
“There’s all kinds of paths to that, and that’s what the president is saying about negotiating. Iran ought to come and do this peacefully and give up their nuclear program. You can get there that way, but at the end of the day, we’re going to get to the point where they don’t have a nuclear weapon and they don’t have a nuclear program,” Hawley explained.
“If they keep going down this path, good luck,” he added.
Hawley also praised Trump’s approach to addressing the conflict and the threat posed by a nuclear Iran while cautioning against engaging in conjecture about what the Israelis were asking of the Trump administration.
“I think the president has struck the right position, which is supportive of Israel’s right of self-defense, which is what this really is, and supporting them publicly while they defend themselves. I think that’s the right position to stick on. I know what the speculation is in the press about what Israel may want to do or not do next, but let’s see what they actually ask us for,” he told JI on Monday.
Following his Tuesday conversation with Trump, Hawley reiterated his support for the president’s response since Israel first struck Iran last week. “He’s handled this situation very deftly. I think his message has been pretty clear, which is that Iran is not going to get a nuke. So they can either surrender their nuclear program peaceably, and he’s willing to [have] the United States facilitate that, or the Israelis are going to blow their program to smithereens. Right now they’re choosing the smithereens route. Doesn’t seem very wise to me,” he said.
Speaking to reporters later Tuesday, Hawley said he wouldn’t support Sen. Tim Kaine’s (D-VA) war powers resolution blocking the U.S. from taking military action in support of Israel’s operation against the Iranian regime, citing his opposition to the legislation broadly.
“I tend to think the War Powers Act is unconstitutional, and I don’t think the president needs preclearance to do one-off military strikes. That doesn’t mean that they’re necessarily a good idea, but I don’t think he needs preclearance from Congress. I don’t know quite how that would function,” Hawley said.
‘Let him go get a television network and say it so that people listen,’ the president said Monday
Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images
(L-R) Tucker Carlson, U.S. Rep. Byron Donalds (R-FL), Republican presidential candidate, former U.S. President Donald Trump, and Republican vice presidential candidate, U.S. Sen. J.D. Vance (R-OH) appear on the first day of the Republican National Convention at the Fiserv Forum on July 15, 2024 in Milwaukee, Wisconsin.
President Donald Trump dismissed Tucker Carlson at several points on Monday over Carlson’s comments opposing Trump’s support for Israeli strikes on Iran.
Trump, in recent days, has distanced himself from isolationist figures in the party who have condemned the strikes on Iran. Asked Monday at the G7 Summit in Canada about Carlson’s comments accusing Trump of being “complicit” in the war, Trump quipped, “I don’t know what Tucker Carlson is saying. Let him go get a television network and say it so that people listen.”
Trump later posted on his Truth Social platform, “Somebody please explain to kooky Tucker Carlson that, ‘Iran CAN NOT HAVE A NUCLEAR WEAPON!’”
Over the weekend, Trump had also criticized isolationists in his party,, declaring in an interview, “I think I’m the one that decides” what constitutes America First, adding, “For those people who say they want peace—you can’t have peace if Iran has a nuclear weapon.”
Carlson, who recently called for the U.S. to abandon Israel and to not provide any further funding or weapons, again criticized U.S. support for Israel in an appearance on former Trump advisor Steve Bannon’s show on Monday, and claimed that the administration was following direction from “foreign governments” aiming to enact “regime change” in Iran and who were dictating to the U.S. who its enemies should be.
While arguing that involvement in the conflict was not in the U.S.’ interests, neither Carlson nor Bannon mentioned or acknowledged Iran and its proxy forces’ role in the deaths of Americans across the Middle East in recent decades.
Please log in if you already have a subscription, or subscribe to access the latest updates.




































































Continue with Google
Continue with Apple