Rep. Randy Fine (R-FL) believes that he was sent to Congress, at least in part, to take a leading role in fighting for the Jewish community against antisemitism.

Fine, during a lengthy interview with Jewish Insider in his congressional office earlier this month, said he sees himself as having a mostly unique ability among House members to help tackle the rise of antisemitism nationwide, as one of only four Jewish Republicans in the lower chamber. 

“I think I can play that role. I’m willing to do it. Certainly happy to share the spotlight with the other three [Jewish Republicans] if they wish to do it, but, but this is deeply personal to me,” the Republican firebrand said. “This affects my children and so I understand it better than others.”

He has recently taken to wearing a kippah on the Hill at the request of one of his sons, as a symbol for those in the Jewish community for those who do not feel safe doing the same.

“I believe that God puts us where he wants us to be,” Fine said, describing his quick rise from the Florida House to the state Senate — where he served for only a few months — and then to an unexpected vacancy in Congress. “This must be why. This is what He wants me to do. … I think this is one of the reasons that I am here, to solve this problem, much like we did in Florida.”

He said that he is in Congress to fight for his district, but that he believes can also be a fighter for the entire Jewish community and “everyone who believes in the idea of Judeo-Christian values.” 

Fine sees the war in Gaza and the global rise of antisemitism as a civilizational battle against extremist groups — both Hamas and anti-Israel forces in the United States — that want to see a global Islamic caliphate and are “spiritual cousins” of the Nazi regime. His often-hardline rhetoric on these issues has frequently sparked controversy.

He argued that it “remains to be seen” if the House Republican caucus and leadership are serious about the issue, saying that there has been a “great willingness to pass strongly worded letters, but I didn’t come here to do strongly worded letters.”

Asked about Trump administration officials with a history of antisemitic rhetoric such as Pentagon press secretary Kingsley Wilson and Office of Special Counsel nominee Paul Ingrassia, Fine demurred, saying he wasn’t familiar with the officials or their backgrounds and would want to examine them further before speaking about them.

At another point in the interview, Fine said that President Donald Trump and members of his team know that he’s not “afraid to call [antisemitism and anti-Israel attitudes] out on our side.”

“I’ve been very critical publicly of Thomas Massie, who I think is an embarrassment to the Republican Party,” Fine volunteered, referring to the libertarian-minded House member from Kentucky. “The guy makes me sick that I have to be in the same room with him at times.”

Massie did not respond to a request for comment.

He also said that, while he hasn’t had a chance to meet many of the Jewish Democrats in Congress yet, he’s willing to “work with anyone who wants to solve this problem, but I think that it helps to have someone in the majority to take the lead.”

He named Rep. Jared Moskowitz (D-FL), a former colleague in the Statehouse and his neighbor in the House offices, as a likely Democratic partner on future efforts. He said he’d also spoken on occasion with Rep. Dan Goldman (D-NY), whose office is across the hall from Fine’s. Goldman also co-chairs the House antisemitism task force.

​​”The fight against antisemitism is a moral one that must cross party lines and transcend political divisions,” Goldman told JI. “I am eager to work with Congressman Fine and anyone else committed to the fight against bigotry and hate towards the Jewish community and anyone else.”

Fine argued that Florida, his home state, has developed a successful strategy for dealing with antisemitism and antisemitic violence, a trend for which he believes he holds significant responsibility, pointing to multiple pieces of legislation he passed while in the Statehouse.

Antisemitic incidents in Florida dropped 24% in 2024, but were still up 277% from 2020, according to Anti-Defamation League statistics.

“This can all be done. We largely solved this problem in Florida,” Fine said in a prior interview with JI. “If you are willing to fight, if you do not let Muslim terrorists scare you, you can win. … We do not have these same problems in Florida and it is because I fought for this for eight and a half years. This is fixable, but not if we continue to be afraid to face evil and not be afraid to call it evil.”

“All the antisemites discover free speech when it comes to the Jews. You can’t call a black student the N word and go, ‘Free speech,’” Fine said. “We said, ‘You’ve got to treat antisemitism the same way. You don’t get to discriminate in how you deal with discrimination.’ We’ve identified certain behaviors, not speech, but certain behaviors that antisemites used to target Jews. We made them illegal, and we put in huge penalties for doing them. They stopped.”

He offered as one example legislation allowing people to run over demonstrators blocking roads — ”blocking roads is a form of terrorism,” Fine said — which he said had stopped that issue in Florida.

As another example, he said that antisemitism is treated “the exact same way as racism” on college campuses in Florida. He argued that free speech has been used as a cover for antisemitic activity that would be unequivocally condemned if it targeted another minority group.

“All the antisemites discover free speech when it comes to the Jews. You can’t call a black student the N word and go, ‘Free speech,’” Fine said. “We said, ‘You’ve got to treat antisemitism the same way. You don’t get to discriminate in how you deal with discrimination.’ We’ve identified certain behaviors, not speech, but certain behaviors that antisemites used to target Jews. We made them illegal, and we put in huge penalties for doing them. They stopped.”

He added that rhetoric like “globalize the intifada” constitutes a call for violence and should be an imprisonable offense.

Fine also noted that he passed legislation to provide dedicated security funding for Jewish day schools in Florida, the first state to do so.

The newly-elected congressman told JI, in the sit-down in his congressional office, that he’s entering Congress in a different position than he did in the Florida House in 2016, when antisemitism was not an issue he expected to work on.

That changed six months into his term, when a spate of bomb threats targeted Jewish day schools in Florida. He said the Orthodox Union approached him at that time to ask him to lead the security legislation for Jewish day schools. He said he was initially reluctant to do so, given that his district contained no Jewish day schools, but was told that “you’re the only one who can.”

“It was incredibly hard to get the funding,” Fine said. “I learned from that, ‘If I don’t do this, no one else will.’ And the difference in coming to Congress is I knew walking in the door that this would be part of what I came here to do.”

His work in Florida earned him the nickname “the Hebrew Hammer,” from a friend in the Florida legislature, Sen. Joe Gruters. That nickname now adorns a plaque gifted to him by the Orthodox Union’s Teach Coalition that hangs on his congressional office’s wall — next to shofar — as well as a mezuzah on his office door.

Fine said he was initially reluctant to accept the nickname, but it caught on anyway.

Looking toward the Middle East, the Florida congressman has attracted controversy for his calls for an aggressive bombing campaign in Gaza to force Hamas into an unconditional surrender. (Contrary to some reports, Fine has denied that he wants to see the territory nuked.) 

He has also argued that “Palestinians in Gaza are on a level of evil that we saw in Japan and we saw in Germany back in World War II.”

Fine’s comments about Palestinians and Muslims — he argues that support for peace and coexistence is more “radical” and unusual in the Muslim community than extremist ideologies — have elicited repeated accusations of Islamophobia.

Asked about the administration’s push for a negotiated cease-fire with Hamas, Fine described Trump as a dealmaker who believes that any deal is possible “and I hope that he’s right.” He said he believes Trump is also focused on returning the hostages. 

Fine said some interim deals with Hamas may be possible along the way, but he does not anticipate that Hamas will agree to a final and full surrender “unless the pain is sufficiently great to do that.”

Beyond the war, he said that there must be a “deprogramming” effort in Gaza, similar to that undertaken in post-World War II Germany, to counter the antisemitic hate and violence inculcated in the Palestinian population. It’s a process that he said may take a long time.

“One of the biggest problems we have in the world is there is evil in this world and people refuse to acknowledge it,” Fine said, pointing to audio that circulated following the Oct. 7, 2023, Hamas-led terrorist attacks on Israel of a Palestinian mother and her son crying with joy as the son exclaimed that he had murdered Jews in the attack. “These are not like us. This is not someone that you can sit down and break bread with and just talk it out. This is someone who must be defeated,” Fine said.

Though Fine argues that extremist antisemitic sentiments are mainstream among Muslims, he said that there are countries like the United Arab Emirates that are safe for Jews, and he’d like to see a similar change among Palestinians. 

He said he doesn’t have the answers at this point on which country our countries can organize and lead the deprogramming effort — in an “ideal world, it might be a UAE or a Saudi Arabia,” but they may not “want the headache.” 

“It might be Israel. There are 2 million Muslims who live in Israel,” Fine said. “I don’t think Israel wants the job, but that may be the only solution. I don’t know, but what you can’t do is you can’t have terrorists run the show. That much I know.”

“What I think we need to be doing is taking out Iran’s nuclear capabilities and hope that in the process of that, the Iranian people, who are a great people, will rise up and make Persia great again,” Fine said on CNN.

Asked about the future of the West Bank — which Fine refers to as Judea and Samaria — Fine said that he would prefer that Israelis and Palestinians be able to live in peace, but he is not sure that is a possibility, suggesting that the Palestinians “may have to go to the Palestinian country and live there,” referring to Jordan, which has a large Palestinian population.

“Right now, they live in the Jewish country, so I think the best outcome is they say, ‘Hey, we want to be happy, collaborative, constructive members of Israeli society,’” Fine said. “That’s what I hope happens. I don’t think there’s any reason why everyone shouldn’t be able to get along … But I think you have something broken in that society.”

Fine, who spoke to JI prior to the start of Israel’s military campaign in Iran, has repeatedly praised Israel’s strikes, backing President Donald Trump’s approach to the conflict.

“What I think we need to be doing is taking out Iran’s nuclear capabilities and hope that in the process of that, the Iranian people, who are a great people, will rise up and make Persia great again,” Fine said on CNN.

“The overwhelming majority of Republicans stand with Israel and support what I’m supporting, which is supplying Israel with the material they need to beat this genocidal Iranian regime,” Fine added.

He has criticized individuals like Tucker Carlson who have called for the U.S. to abandon Israel, characterizing opposition to the operation as fueled by “Qatar-funded troll farms.”

“The bombings will continue until morale improves,” Fine has also said, repeatedly invoking one of his catch-phrases: “bombs away.”

Prior to the strikes, Fine said he was skeptical of Iran’s willingness to abandon its pursuit of a nuclear weapon through talks, but said he was going to trust Trump to try to reach a deal, describing a deal as preferable to a war. He emphasized that Iran cannot, under any circumstances, be allowed to have a nuclear weapon.

And he said he would not support a deal with Iran that does not address its support for terrorism — which Secretary of State Marco Rubio has said was not part of the talks — arguing that funding from sanctions relief is fungible and Iran can divert it toward malign activities.

But he also said that he did not want to “judge until I see the end product,” saying he has “a lot of confidence in the president. He has been Israel’s greatest champion, American Jews’ greatest champion. And I don’t think he’s going to sell us out.”

He noted as well that he is close to Trump and members of the administration and that Trump knew he would be coming to Congress as a Jewish member and a champion for Israel.

The freshman congressman expressed deep criticisms of Qatar, saying he was “convinced” that opposition to him in his congressional special election race, totaling around $10 million in support of his opponent’s campaign, was “largely funded by Qatar.” He suggested that out-of-state volunteers for his opponent he met on the campaign trail had been paid to come to the district.

Democrats, energized by opposition to Trump, mobilized for the race, bringing it closer than most anticipated it would be.

Asked how his views of Qatar color his opinion of the Gulf state’s offer of a Boeing 747 to the administration for use as Air Force One and Trump’s dealmaking with the Qatari government, Fine said, “I think the president, to try to resolve issues, believes sometimes in offering big carrots. He’s a big guy, big carrot, big stick. I think he’s trying to embrace them into our way of thinking. Maybe it will work.”

He said that giving the jet to the United States, purported to be worth around $400 million, will, at minimum, deprive the country of $400 million it could otherwise provide to Hamas, “but I do have real reservations about Qatar. I think there’s a lot of bad that comes out of there, and it’s a concern that I have.”

He said that the kingdom must stop its donations of millions of dollars to U.S. universities and the U.S. should dig into the Muslim Brotherhood and Qatar’s relationship with it. He suggested that Qatar’s army of lobbyists in Washington might attempt to block impending efforts to designate that organization as a Foreign Terrorist Organization.

“I don’t back down from a fight … I’m not here focused on what’s next or [an] election. I’m here to do the right thing,” Fine said. “I don’t engage in political calculations to do what I do. I think Qatar is a problem, and I think we’re gonna have to deal with it.”

Sen. Ted Cruz’s (R-TX) interview on Tucker Carlson’s podcast published on Wednesday devolved into a shouting match at times between the two GOP heavyweights, with insults and charges of ignorance and antisemitism dominating the two-hour conversation between one of the Republican Party’s biggest pro-Israel champions and one of the most vocal critics of the U.S.-Israel relationship.

The interview was relatively civil for the first hour, but began to devolve when Carlson and Cruz started debating the benefits of the U.S. relationship with Israel and the merits of Israel and the United States allegedly spying on one another. 

Carlson pressed Cruz to say that allies spying on one another was wrong, which Cruz responded to by asking why Carlson and others had an “obsession with Israel” while ignoring similar behavior from other allies. Carlson rejected that he was “obsessed with Israel” before noting that he has never taken money from AIPAC, which he referred to as “the Israel lobby.” 

The conversation started to become more animated as the two could not find common ground on the role and purpose of AIPAC, with Carlson insisting that the organization, which is made up of U.S. citizens advocating for the U.S.-Israel relationship, needed to be registered under the Foreign Agents Registration Act — an argument sometimes used as an antisemitic dog whistle accusing Jewish supporters of Israel of dual loyalty — and Cruz vehemently disagreeing. 

The interview grew more tense after Cruz accused Carlson of having an “obsession with Israel” and asked why he was so focused on asking, “What about the Jews? What about the Jews?” without being critical of other foreign governments.

“Oh, I’m an antisemite now?” Carlson replied wryly. 

“You’re asking, ‘Why are the Jews controlling our foreign policy?” Cruz told Carlson after the latter said he had accused him of antisemitism in a “sleazy feline way.”

Cruz told Carlson to give him “another reason why the obsession is Israel,” to which Carlson responded: “I am in no sense obsessed with Israel. We are on the brink of war with Iran, and so these are valid questions.”

“You asked me why I’m obsessed with Israel three minutes after telling me that when you first ran for Congress, you elucidated one of your main goals, which is to defend Israel. I’m the one who’s obsessed with Israel,” Carlson said, adding, “Shame on you for conflating” Jews and Israel.

“Israel and Jews have nothing to do with each other?” Cruz asked after Carlson claimed there was not a correlation.

Carlson said he was “totally opposed” to Iran’s desire to kill all Jews and Americans, which Cruz replied to by saying: “Except you don’t want to do anything about it.” 

The two then sparred over Carlson’s focus on Israel’s influence on U.S. foreign policy, with Cruz claiming Carlson was placing too much emphasis on the Jewish state while ignoring the malign influence of other governments. 

“I don’t even like talking about Israel. I never do because it’s not worth being called antisemites from AIPAC recipients,” Carlson said. “But now we are on the verge of joining a war and I just want to be clear about why we’re doing this.”

Carlson stated that anyone who criticized Israel’s actions were “instantly called an antisemite for asking questions” and said Israel was “the only government that no one will ever criticize.” Cruz said he rejected that assertion, pointing to statements from Rep. Rashida Tlaib (D-MI), a progressive House lawmaker and frequent critic of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. Carlson scoffed at Cruz’s Tlaib reference, explaining that he was referring to the consequences for “Republicans that I would vote for, including you.” 

Regarding Iran, the two sparred over the regime’s apparent efforts to assassinate Trump, which Carlson denied had occurred.

“I voted for Donald Trump. I campaigned for Donald Trump. He’s our president, and we’re on the cusp of a war. So if there’s evidence that Iran paid a hitman to kill Donald Trump and is currently doing that, where is that? What are you even talking about? I’ve never heard that before. Where’s the evidence? Who are these people? Why haven’t they been arrested? Why are we not at war with Iran?” Carlson asked.

The Justice Department, in November 2024, did, in fact, indict multiple individuals in connection to the assassination plot, arresting two individuals involved in the scheme in the United States and issuing a warrant for a third, described as an Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps asset.

The plot had been extensively reported upon, both at the time and in the months since. Cruz criticized Carlson for his suspicions about the plot.

The former Fox host asked Cruz shortly after to explain why he’d be proud to say that he came to Washington with the goal of being the most pro-Israel member of Congress, to which Cruz responded by citing his Christian faith, after which the two sparred about Christian scripture. 

The senator subsequently argued that he does not solely cite his faith as his reason for supporting Israel in his professional capacity, telling Carlson that he had championed the Jewish state because of his belief that Israel is our best ally in the Middle East. 

“I think the most acute national security threat facing America right now is the threat of a nuclear Iran. I think China is the biggest long-term threat, but acute in the near term is a nuclear Iran. And I think Israel is doing a massive favor to America right now by trying to take out Iran’s nuclear capacity,” he continued, later adding, “You want to ask: how does supporting Israel benefit us? Right now, this tiny little country the size of the state of New Jersey is fighting our enemies for us and taking out their top military leadership and trying to take out their nuclear capacity. That makes America much safer.”

Returning to the subject of Cruz’s faith, the Texas senator said that his support for Israel was also rooted in his Christian faith, citing the biblical phrase: “Those who bless Israel will be blessed and those who curse Israel will be cursed.”

Carlson mocked the fact that Cruz’s faith informed his pro-Israel views, and asked specifically the biblical citation. After Cruz acknowledged he didn’t know the exact verse, the podcast host then incorrectly answered his own question, mistakenly saying it was in Genesis.  (The verse is from Numbers 24:9.)

The interview again devolved into chaos after Cruz acknowledged that upon sharp questioning that he did not know the exact population size of Iran, prompting both men to question what the other knew, if anything, about the country. Carlson accused Cruz of being dismissive of the consequences of the military actions he was calling for, while Cruz accused Carlson of adopting the foreign policy platform of progressive Democrats. 

The first 60 minutes of the interview, which was released on Wednesday, was largely civil with Carlson asking Cruz to explain his support for Israel’s operation to destroy Iran’s nuclear program and regime change in Tehran.

The Texas senator argued that his recent comments in favor of toppling Iran’s supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, were not an endorsement of a U.S. military invasion of Iran but rather of the idea of a democratic Iran. 

The two initially agreed that it would be better for the U.S. without an Iranian regime that aspires to destroy Western civilization and that they were frustrated by the interventionist versus isolationist binary that has increasingly characterized Republican foreign policy.

“For a long time, people have perceived two different poles of Republican foreign policy. There have been interventionists, and those have been people like John McCain and Lindsey Graham George W. Bush, and there have been isolationists, and the most prominent of those have been Ron Paul and Rand Paul and there are others. People perceive those are the two choices, you’ve got to be one of the other. I’ve always thought both were wrong. I don’t agree with either one,” Cruz said.

“For whatever it’s worth, I agree with you. I don’t know who set up that binary, but there are lots of choices, actually,” Carlson responded. Carlson is seen by many, however, as one of the leading figures of the isolationist wing.

The two men described themselves as non-interventionist hawks, with each saying they believed in the principle that the “central touchpoint for U.S. foreign policy and for any question of military intervention should be the vital national security interests of the United States” before disagreeing on whether the situation in Middle East qualified as such. 

Jewish Insider’s senior congressional correspondent Marc Rod contributed to this report.

Many of the highest-ranking Senate Republicans, along with leading pro-Israel Democrats, expressed support for Israel’s preemptive strikes on Iran, but a number of skeptical lawmakers — mostly Democrats — expressed concern that the strikes could set off a broader war in the region.

Sen. Tom Cotton (R-AR), the chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee said, minutes after reports of the operation began, “Proud to stand with Israel.” Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) soon followed, saying, “Game on. Pray for Israel.”

Cotton later added that “We back Israel to the hilt, all the way,” adding that if “the ayatollahs harm a single American, that will be the end of the ayatollahs.”

House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-LA), said “Israel IS right—and has a right—to defend itself!”

Sen. Jim Risch (R-ID), the chair of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee said, “We stand with Israel tonight and pray for the safety of its people and the success of this unilateral, defensive action.”

“I am also praying for the brave U.S. service members in the Middle East who keep America safe — Iran would be foolish to attack the United States,” Risch continued.

Senate Majority Leader John Thune (R-SD) emphasized that Iran has been trying for years to wipe out Israel, and that it had just been found in violation of its nonproliferation obligations. He called for efforts toward peace and warned Iran against attacking American troops.

“Today, Israel has determined that it must take decisive action to defend the Israeli people,” Thune said. “The United States Senate stands ready to work with President Trump and with our allies in Israel to restore peace in the region and, first and foremost, to defend the American people from Iranian aggression, especially our troops and civilians serving overseas. Iran should heavily consider the consequences before considering any action against Americans in the region.”

Sen. Rick Scott (R-FL) said, “I ask every American to join me in praying for the safety of U.S. personnel in the Middle East and the safety and success of Israel as it takes action against a leading state sponsor of terrorism and our shared enemy, Iran.” 

Rep. Mike Lawler (R-NY), the chair of the House Foreign Affairs Committee’s Middle East subcommittee, also expressed support for Israel’s preemptive strike.

“Having just visited the region two weeks ago, I support Israel’s decision to preemptively strike Iran and dismantle its nuclear program,” Lawler said. “Iran cannot have nuclear weapons — a position the US and our allies have held for decades. Peace through strength.”

House Majority Leader Steve Scalise (R-LA) said that Iran’s refusal to dismantle its nuclear program is a danger to the U.S. and an existential threat to Israel. “Tonight Israel is taking action to defend itself, and we stand with Israel. Our prayers are with them and all American personnel in the region.”

Rep. Elise Stefanik (R-NY), the administration’s former nominee to be U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, said, “The U.S. stands strongly with our ally and partner Israel.”

“May God Bless Israel & the brave IAF [Israeli Air Force] soldiers as they protect their national security and the world’s safety,” Stefanik said. “I know President Trump’s top priority is protecting the American people, our brave U.S. service members, and our national security by ensuring the full dismantlement of Iran’s nuclear program to ensure they can never develop a nuclear weapon.”

Sen. John Cornyn (R-TX) said, “Israel has an unquestionable right to defend itself” and that he is “proud to stand with Israel.”

Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX) said that Iran had “given President Trump the middle finger” on demands to dismantle its nuclear capacity. Israel is acting to defend themselves, and we should stand with them.”

Sen. John Fetterman (D-PA) said that he supports the attack and “Our commitment to Israel must be absolute.”

“Keep wiping out Iranian leadership and the nuclear personnel,” Fetterman said. “We must provide whatever is necessary — military, intelligence, weaponry — to fully back Israel in striking Iran.”

Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz (D-FL) said: “If Israel’s strikes set back Iran’s nuclear program, we’ll all be safer,” adding that the U.S. must protect U.S. citizens and personnel and “must support Israel’s defense.”

Rep. Ritchie Torres (D-NY) said that “Israel is not the aggressor. It is defending itself against an existential threat that long predates the present preemptive strike. The true aggressor is the Islamic Republic and its empire of terror — an empire stained with the blood of innocent Israelis.”

Rep. Greg Landsman (D-OH), also noting that the International Atomic Energy Agency had just declared Iran to be in violation of its nonproliferation obligations, said that “Israel is justifiably defending itself and its people.”

“Diplomacy has been given every opportunity, but the Iranian regime refuses to give up their nuclear ambitions,” Landsman said. “There will be peace when Iran no longer has a nuclear program, a civil one sure, and their terror armies dismantled.”

Rep. Josh Gottheimer (D-NJ) said, “I fully stand with the people of Israel and support her right to defend herself against Iran’s nuclear and terror programs.”

Rep. Rick Crawford (R-AR), the chair of the House Intelligence Committee, emphasized that the U.S. was not involved in the strikes. He pointed blame toward Iran but also called for steps to wind down the conflict quickly.

“I will say I regret that we have come to this breaking point. However, under no circumstance can Iran get its hands on a nuclear weapon,” Crawford said. “A nuclear Iran would only embolden our adversaries and not only pose an undeniable threat to Israel, but also the United States and our Arab allies.”

“Iran pushed the world to this point through its blatant, relentless destabilizing behavior. Israel and others in the region have every right to take the actions needed to defend themselves,” Crawford continued. “I commend the Trump Administration for its tireless efforts to bring peace and stability to the region. I am hopeful a remedy is reached sooner rather than later to stabilize this situation before the stakes get any higher.”

A number of congressional Democrats — and one notable isolationist House Republican — are expressing concern that the strikes will spark a broader war in the region and several described the strikes as designed to sabotage U.S. nuclear negotiations with Tehran.

Sen. Jack Reed (D-RI), the top Democrat on the Senate Armed Services Committee, condemned the strikes as a “reckless escalation that risks igniting regional violence.” 

“These strikes threaten not only the lives of innocent civilians but the stability of the entire Middle East and the safety of American citizens and forces,” Reed said. “While tensions between Israel and Iran are real and complex, military aggression of this scale is never the answer.”

He called on both Israel and Iran to “show immediate restraint” and the Trump administration to push for “diplomatic de-escalation before this crisis spirals further out of control.”

Rep. Warren Davidson (R-OH), a Republican aligned with the isolationist wing of the party, also appeared to decry the strikes.

“I’m sad to say but some members of Congress and US Senators seem giddy about the prospects of a bigger war,” Davidson said, appending an emoji of a bandaged, frowning face.

House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-NY) stopped short of praising or criticizing the Israeli attack, while blaming President Donald Trump for failing to bring peace to the Middle East and calling for de-escalation.

“I’m hopeful that cooler heads will prevail in the Middle East and the situation is de-escalated,” Jeffries said. “We certainly believe that Iran should never be allowed to become nuclear capable. They are an enemy not just to Israel, but to the United States and to the free world. But we also want to see a reduction in hostilities.”

Sen. Andy Kim (D-NJ) said the strikes appear aimed at undermining U.S. negotiations with Iran, which were scheduled to continue this weekend in Oman.

“Iran should know that any targeting of U.S. forces and personnel stationed across the Middle East in retaliation for Israel’s actions would be a grave mistake. I urge the Trump administration to ensure that the protection of our personnel is our top priority,” Kim said. 

“Conflict should always be a last resort, especially when diplomacy is ongoing. This decision by [Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin] Netanyahu to go against American efforts and go alone in strikes puts American and Israeli lives on the line. We should do everything we can to stop this moment from spiraling into a wider conflict and bring parties back to the table to ensure that Iran does not obtain a nuclear weapon.”

Sen. Chris Murphy (D-CT) also described the attack as a sabotage of the nuclear talks and said it shows that world leaders do not respect President Donald Trump. He added in a statement, “we have no obligation to follow Israel into a war we did not ask for and will make us less safe.”

Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-MA), a progressive Israel critic, said the strikes were “deeply disturbing.”

“I don’t agree often with the Trump administration, but I think here it’s important to say we need more negotiation, we need deescalation,” Warren said. “We need to get to a deal.”

Rep. Greg Casar (D-TX), who chairs the Congressional Progressive Caucus, emphasized that the Trump administration needs congressional approval to bring U.S. troops into “Netanyahu’s war.”

“Netanyahu’s reckless strike risks provoking a wider war and pulling in the United States,” Casar said. “Trump must oppose Netanyahu’s escalation and pursue a diplomatic path to deal with Iran’s nuclear program. “

With a cryptic video that Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard posted on X on Tuesday morning, the Democratic-congresswoman-turned-America-First-advocate reignited simmering concerns about the unorthodox intelligence chief among both her longtime detractors and some Republicans who voted to confirm her earlier this year.

“She obviously needs to change her meds,” Sen. John Kennedy (R-LA) told Jewish Insider of Gabbard. Kennedy, like all Republicans except Sen. Mitch McConnell (R-KY), voted to confirm Gabbard in February. 

“I only saw a post that she did, which I thought was a very strange one since many people believe that, unfortunate though it was, the nuclear bomb that was dropped in World War II at Hiroshima actually saved a lot of lives, a lot of American lives,” Sen. Susan Collins (R-ME) told JI of Gabbard’s video. 

In the social media video, Gabbard describes a recent visit to Hiroshima, Japan, where she learned about the toll of the atomic bomb dropped on the city by American troops in 1945, which spurred a Japanese surrender and the end of World War II. She warned that the world faces another “nuclear holocaust” unless people “reject this path to nuclear war.”

“This is the reality of what’s at stake, what we are facing now, because as we stand here today, closer to the brink of nuclear annihilation than ever before, political elite warmongers are carelessly fomenting fear and tensions between nuclear powers,” said Gabbard, not specifying who she was referring to by “political elite warmongers” or which countries she may have been calling out. 

Gabbard’s video decrying “warmongers” prompted concern from Republicans seeking a more traditionally conservative foreign policy worldview. 

“She seems to be doing her best audition to be head of the Quincy Institute,” a senior employee at a pro-Israel advocacy group said of Gabbard.

One Senate Republican, speaking on condition of anonymity, questioned Gabbard’s logic in raising the human toll of Hiroshima and her “warmongers” comment.

“I’m not sure I understand why the DNI would even need to make that point,” the senator said of the Hiroshima focus, later adding: “I don’t seek nuclear war. I don’t know anyone who wants nuclear war. There’s plenty of ideological diversity here, but pretty much universal opposition to that.”

Since taking office, Gabbard, who in 2020 was a surrogate for progressive Sen. Bernie Sanders’ (I-VT) presidential campaign, has generally been aligned with the isolationist wing of the Republican Party, which is increasingly ascendant in the Trump administration. William Ruger, the official she tapped for the high-level position that prepares the president’s daily intelligence briefing, came from Koch-affiliated institutions and has called for “American restraint” on the world stage. 

During her nomination battle, Gabbard faced criticism, including from some Republicans — focused in particular on a congressional trip to Syria in 2017 when she met with Syrian dictator Bashar al-Assad, her parroting of Russian propaganda about the country’s war with Ukraine and her defense of Edward Snowden, the former intelligence official who leaked classified information before fleeing the country. 

“It defies belief that someone would be criticizing [President Harry] Truman’s act of winning a war. We really need to get back to winning wars when we fight,” Eric Levine, a prominent Republican fundraiser in New York who urged senators to oppose Gabbard’s confirmation, told JI on Tuesday. 

Levine raised concerns about Gabbard’s ability to influence President Donald Trump’s approach to Iran, as nuclear negotiations between the U.S. and Iran are set to continue this weekend. He said that if Trump does the “right thing” — meaning he ends the Iran negotiations and supports a strike on Iran’s nuclear infrastructure — then the U.S. will “save a lot of lives, just like Harry Truman did, and will not require the dropping of a nuclear bomb.” 

“I’m very concerned about the isolationist wing of the Republican Party,” Levine continued. “I don’t know who’s winning out, because we don’t know what the end result is in Iran yet.”

Several Republican senators questioned why Gabbard would make the video in the first place.

“I thought it was not appropriate,” Sen. John Cornyn (R-TX) told JI.

Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) described the impact of the bomb as “horrible” but said it was necessary to end the war, in which his father had fought. 

“Dropping those bombs probably saved a million servicemen’s lives. If you don’t want to get nuked, don’t start barbaric wars,” Graham told JI. “I think it’s a horrible thing to happen to people, but it was brought on by Japan, and if I were Harry Truman, I would have done the same thing because the casualty estimates were a million dead Americans invading mainland Japan.”

Alexa Henning, Gabbard’s deputy chief of staff, declined to say whether Gabbard was referring in the video to a specific nation or to specific people. 

“Acknowledging the past is critical to inform the future. President Trump has repeatedly stated in the past that he recognizes the immeasurable suffering, and annihilation can be caused by nuclear war, which is why he has been unequivocal that we all need to do everything possible to work towards peace,” Henning said in a statement. “DNI Gabbard supports President Trump’s clearly stated objectives of bringing about lasting peace and stability and preventing war.”

Despite the criticism coming even from some allies, Gabbard’s views do not appear to have gone outside the realm of what Trump hopes to see from her. 

Sen. Markwayne Mullin (R-OK), a personal friend of Gabbard’s from their shared time in the House, defended Gabbard’s post and her service as DNI. 

“I think she’s doing a great job … She’s doing exactly what the president wanted her to do,” Mullin told JI. “People have been critical of her, and this is D.C., right? You’re going to get criticized for walking down the stairs wrong, so criticism is part of the job.”

The House voted on Monday to pass two resolutions condemning recent antisemitic attacks. One, led by Republicans, which focused on the Boulder, Colo., attack and immigration issues, and split the Democratic caucus. The other, which was bipartisan and highlighted a series of antisemitic attacks, passed nearly unanimously, with just two lawmakers voting present.

The first resolution attracted controversy among Democrats ahead of the vote, but it passed by a 280-133 vote. Seventy-five Democrats, mostly moderates and pro-Israel members, ultimately voted in favor of the resolution and 113 voted against it. 

Another five Democrats, Reps. Herb Conaway (D-NJ), Shomari Figures (D-AL), Sarah McBride (D-DE), Johnny Olszewski (D-MD) and Dina Titus (D-NV), and one Republican, Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-GA), voted present.

The resolution stated that the Boulder attack, perpetrated by an Egyptian national who overstayed a visa and work permit who threw a Molotov cocktail at activists raising awareness for the hostages in Gaza, “highlights the need to aggressively vet aliens who apply for visas” and “demonstrates the dangers of not removing from the country aliens who fail to comply with the terms of their visas.” 

It also praised law enforcement and Immigration and Customs Enforcement and emphasized the need for “free and open communication” between state and federal law enforcement — an apparent reference to Colorado sanctuary state policies that limit such cooperation.

Prior to the vote, Republicans softened the resolution amid strident criticism from Democrats, stripping out one section that described the slogan “Free Palestine” as antisemitic and another one that explicitly condemned Colorado’s sanctuary state policies.

The second resolution, which condemns “the rise in ideologically motivated attacks on Jewish individuals in the United States,” including the attack in Boulder, the Capital Jewish Museum murders and the arson targeting Pennsylvania Gov. Josh Shapiro, passed with 400 votes in favor. Reps. Rashida Tlaib (D-MI) and Greene voted present. No members voted against the latter resolution.

“We cannot ignore these attacks or dismiss them as isolated incidents,” Rep. Jeff Van Drew (R-NJ), who led the bipartisan resolution, said in a statement. “They are part of a serious and dangerous trend that must be condemned by all of us. Today, the House stood firmly in support of respect and dignity for everyone because we know that every American deserves to live without fear in their own community.”

Greene said in an X post that “antisemitic hate crimes are wrong, but so are all hate crimes. Yet Congress never votes on hate crimes committed against white people, Christians, men, the homeless, or countless others.”

She objected to the fact that Congress has voted on “endless resolutions” on antisemitism while “Americans from every background are being murdered — even in the womb.”

“Prioritizing one group of Americans and/or one foreign country above our own people is fueling resentment and actually driving more division, including antisemitism,” Greene continued.

Ahead of the vote, a group of Jewish House Democrats had urged congressional leaders to take substantive action beyond passing nonbinding resolutions to combat antisemitism, primarily by passing the Antisemitism Awareness Act and bolstering Nonprofit Security Grant Program funding.

Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX) argued on Wednesday that sanctions on Iran’s nuclear program can’t be separated from other sanctions on the regime as part of a nuclear deal, comparing the approach apparently being taken by the Trump administration to that of the Obama administration.

Secretary of State Marco Rubio has said in congressional testimony this week that talks with Tehran have revolved solely around Iran’s nuclear program and have not addressed its sponsorship of terrorism or its ballistic missile program, but said that sanctions related to terrorism and missiles would remain in place if those issues are not addressed in a potential deal.

“The Obama administration invented the category of ‘nuclear sanctions’ as an excuse to give the Ayatollah whatever he wanted for a nuclear deal,” Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX) said to Jewish Insider. 

“It has nothing to do with how Congress passed or past presidents implemented sanctions against the Iranian regime, which was to use our most powerful sanctions against the full range of Iran’s aggression. President Trump rightly refused to certify and then withdrew from the deal because he said that lifting these ‘nuclear sanctions’ gave Iran too much for too little benefit,” he continued.

Congressional Republicans argued in the past, when the original nuclear deal included a similar formula, that the distinctions between nuclear and non-nuclear sanctions were largely specious. Those same lawmakers have maintained that any new funding the regime received would ultimately fuel proxy terrorism and regional destabilization, regardless of the targets of those sanctions.

Sen. Thom Tillis (R-NC) expressed confidence that the Trump administration understood that any deal must be multi-faceted, though he noted that Congressional Republicans haven’t been briefed on the talks.

“I have to believe at the end of the day, they realize that it’s not just about enrichment, but it’s all the other enabling capabilities, because the reality is the world’s a dangerous place and if they had that underlying capability, maybe then they’ll build their own bomb,” Tillis told JI.

“We got to support Israel. Iran uses proxies to attack America and Israel, they chant ‘Death to America.’ So what they’ve got to do is they’ve got to stop enriching uranium, that’s number one. And number two, we’ve got to make sure they have no money to give their proxies,” Sen. Rick Scott (R-FL) said when asked his position on a deal.

Sen. James Lankford (R-OK) told JI he hadn’t kept up with Rubio’s testimony, but said that addressing Iran’s proxy terrorism is crucial.

“Iran’s the largest state sponsor of terrorism. Israel is fighting proxies all the way around them. The entire region’s destabilized. Egypt is struggling economically because of the Houthis and what they’re doing,” Lankford said. “The proxies are the problem in the area and you can’t disconnect Iran and the regime and what they’re doing in the entire region to destabilize the region.”

Another Senate Republican, speaking on condition of anonymity to speak candidly, said he has faith in Rubio, but that an arrangement as outlined by Rubio would require “an awful lot of trust built into it, and I don’t trust Iran.”

“Money is obviously fungible. And the whole point of proxies is you can do whatever you want without doing whatever you want [directly],” the senator said. “There’s just an awful lot of trust built into.”

The senator said, “There’s probably a time where I’d be willing to give them a little bit of room, but they’re an awfully long ways down the road, so I don’t know. I just hope they keep a very, very tight grip on a very, very short leash.”

Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) told JI that, “I like the American position, the administration’s position of no enrichment, complete dismantlement … and [would] have to include their missile program.”

“Anything short of that would be inadequate,” he added.

Sen. Mike Rounds (R-SD) similarly argued that a deal around Iran’s nuclear weapons would likely include addressing Iran’s pursuit of intercontinental ballistic missiles. He added that Iran should not receive any sanctions relief without addressing its nuclear buildup.

Other senators seem to be focusing their attention more on ensuring that dismantling Iran’s enrichment remains a red line for the United States.

“At the end of the day, we’ve got to see what the final package is,” Sen. Pete Ricketts (R-NE), who recently led nearly all Senate Republicans on a letter insisting on full dismantlement, said. “The biggest issue is going to be the enrichment part. If we can crack the enrichment nut, that’s a big deal.”

Sen. John Kennedy (R-LA) similarly said, “The president’s been very clear. I think the Republican side of the aisle in the Senate has been very clear. No enrichment, zero, zilch, nada, no centrifuges. The Iranian leadership doesn’t need it. They can import uranium for civil nuclear energy, so they can either take it or leave it. We can do it the easy way, the hard way.”

Georgia Gov. Brian Kemp, one of the most popular officials in the state, announced on Monday he will not challenge Sen. Jon Ossoff (D-GA) when he is up for reelection in 2026, dealing a blow to Senate Republicans, who were hoping his candidacy would have given Republicans an edge in a critical battleground.

Kemp said in a statement on Monday that he had “decided that being on the ballot next year is not the right decision for me and my family.”

“I spoke with President Trump and Senate leadership earlier today and expressed my commitment to work alongside them to ensure we have a strong Republican nominee who can win next November, and ultimately be a conservative voice in the US Senate who will put hardworking Georgians first. I am confident we will be united in that important effort, and I look forward to electing the next generation of leaders up and down the ballot here in the Peach State who will keep our state and nation headed in the right direction in 2026 and beyond,” Kemp said. 

National Republicans and top Senate GOP leaders had been lobbying Kemp to consider challenging Ossoff for months, with a recent poll commissioned by the Atlanta Journal-Constitution showing Kemp with a narrow advantage over the Democratic senator.

Without Kemp in the race, the GOP nominee is more likely to appeal to the right-wing activists that play an outsized role in today’s Georgia Republican party. Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-GA) has been mentioned as a possible candidate in the race. Other potential candidates include: Reps. Mike Collins (R-GA), Rich McCormick (R-GA) and Buddy Carter (R-GA), all of whom are among the most conservative lawmakers in the House.

Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger, a more moderate alternative, has also been mentioned as a potential candidate. 

Pro-Israel elements of the Democratic Party expressed an openness to backing Kemp over Ossoff, if the governor ran for the Senate. Ossoff’s vote last year to block military aid to Israel alienated many Jewish voters in the state, and the backlash played a role in his rejection of additional similar measures targeting the Jewish state when they came up for a vote last month. 

But Kemp’s decision not to run could help push skeptical Jewish Democrats and independents back toward Ossoff’s column, especially if the Democratic senator works more closely with the Jewish community in the state, which is strongly supportive of Israel.   

A spokesperson for the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee said in a statement: “Brian Kemp’s decision to not run for Senate in 2026 is yet another embarrassing Republican Senate recruitment failure as they face a building midterm backlash where every GOP candidate will be forced to answer for Trump’s harmful agenda.”

Jewish Insider’s senior congressional correspondent Marc Rod contributed to this report.

Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) expressed concern on Monday about the isolationist arm of the Republican Party, making him one of the most high-profile administration allies to publicly criticize a key faction of President Donald Trump’s base.

“On the right, there’s a growing isolationist movement that I fight all the time,” Graham said at an Orthodox Union Advocacy Center attorneys conference in Fort Lauderdale, Fla. 

What alarms him, Graham continued, is that Republican isolationists are now beginning to target Israel as they seek to limit America’s activity on the world stage. He noted that many right-wing isolationists view Israel as the driver of Washington’s global interventionist approach.  

“It’s beginning to include Israel,” he said. “In the past it really hasn’t, but now it’s more open, and so there is an element of our party that’s saying, We don’t want to get sucked into endless war because of Israel.”

Graham’s comments come just a day after he told Fox News that the U.S. should back Israel if it attacks Iran’s nuclear capability, even as Trump has been floating the idea of negotiations with Iran. Graham said on Monday that he planned to urge Israel to take stronger action against Iran in a meeting with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu in Washington this week. 

Vice President J.D. Vance gave a speech at the isolationist Quincy Institute in May 2024 in which he argued that the America First worldview should differentiate between U.S. support for Israel and U.S. involvement in other foreign conflicts — particularly Ukraine, as many Republicans have grown skeptical of U.S. military assistance to Kyiv. 

“It’s sort of weird that this town assumes that Israel and Ukraine are exactly the same. They’re not, of course, and I think it’s important to analyze them in separate buckets,” Vance said last year. 

Graham’s remarks underscore concerns from some Republicans that the isolationist wing of the party is now targeting Israel, too, as it seeks to shape Trump’s foreign policy. 

Isolationist foreign policy advocates have been elevated to key roles in the Department of Defense, but even hawkish congressional Republicans such as Graham have been reticent to publicly criticize them. 

Michael DiMino, Trump’s pick for deputy assistant secretary of defense for the Middle East, and Dan Caldwell, a Pentagon advisor who is playing a behind-the-scenes role guiding personnel decisions, have both made statements indicating that are at odds with the Middle East policy of Trump’s first term.

Elbridge Colby, Trump’s nominee for the Senate-confirmed post of undersecretary of defense for policy, has argued in favor of accommodating Iran’s regional expansionist agenda and opposed military action against Iran’s nuclear program.

Rep. Lee Zeldin (R-NY) defended the Republican Party against allegations of antisemitism in its ranks during a web event Monday held in conjunction with the Republican National Convention, which kicked off today in Charlotte, N.C.

“I, personally, haven’t encountered any antisemitism within the Republican Party,” Zeldin, who is one of two Jewish Republican members of Congress, said. “From a personal perspective, I can tell you — from kindergarten through 12th grade, college, law school and four years of active duty, I never once experienced antisemitism at all.”

The New York congressman said during Monday’s call, which was hosted by the American Jewish Committee, that he’s only faced antisemitism in recent years, something he attributes to the current political atmosphere. He estimated “several thousand” instances of being called a Nazi or a Nazi sympathizer but added, “I’m not aware of any of it coming from within the Republican Party.” 

Zeldin instead assigned blame to the Democratic Party, pointing in particular to comments made by Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-MN) in 2019. ”I spent four years in the New York State Senate, and through my first four years in the U.S. House of Representatives, I didn’t experience it inside the actual chamber until the beginning of 2019,” Zeldin said. “That became an issue within the House Democratic Caucus in the first half of 2019.” He recalled that the House of Representatives passed a watered-down resolution against hate following Omar’s comments regarding AIPAC and lawmakers’ support for Israel. Zeldin noted that a few months earlier, in January 2019, the House voted in near unanimous fashion on a resolution to condemn Rep. Steve King (R-IA) following comments from the congressman that appeared to defend white nationalists and white supremacists. Republicans “named names, there was a resolution that passed, that member lost his committee assignments,” said Zeldin. “We shouldn’t have double standards, we shouldn’t have moral equivalencies.” 

Zeldin suggested that if Omar’s statements had been made by a Republican legislator, “I guarantee you that we would have passed a resolution that singularly, emphatically and forcefully condemned antisemitism. There would have been no moral equivalencies, that member would have been removed from her committee assignments, and it would have been basically a unanimous effort in doing so.”

A number of Republican candidates have faced criticism this cycle for promoting antisemitic stereotypes. Georgia Senator David Purdue, who is facing a tough reelection challenge from Jon Ossoff, came under fire last month for a campaign advertisement that appeared to enlarge Ossoff’s nose. In the state’s 14th congressional district, Marjorie Taylor Greene, who has made claims about George Soros and the Rothschilds, won her party’s runoff and is all but guaranteed a seat in the next Congress.

Zeldin also suggested that the reason there’s not a major shift in support for President Donald Trump among Jewish voters is because Israel is “not popping at the top of their list” of priorities. “I’ll talk to a Jewish voter, and it’s possible that if I ask them for their top 15 issues, they might just not mention Israel,” he explained.