In a stunning break from his party, Pennsylvania Senator John Fetterman has thrown his support behind President Donald Trump’s audacious airstrikes on Iran’s nuclear facilities, a move that’s sent shockwaves through Washington. While Democrats typically clash with Trump, Fetterman’s bold endorsement of the Saturday attack has spotlighted deep divisions within the party and ignited a fierce debate over war powers.
Fetterman didn’t mince words on X, where he reposted Trump’s announcement and declared, “As I’ve long maintained, this was the correct move by @POTUS. Iran is the world’s leading sponsor of terrorism and cannot have nuclear capabilities. I’m grateful for and salute the finest military in the world.” His post, paired with a screenshot of Trump’s statement, underscores his unwavering stance on Iran’s nuclear threat.
A Divided Congress Reacts
The strikes, which Trump claimed “completely obliterated” three key Iranian nuclear sites, have drawn a mixed bag of reactions. Many Republicans are rallying behind the president, praising his decisive action, though some worry it could alienate MAGA voters who backed Trump’s anti-foreign-intervention campaign promises. “Most Republicans are willing to give great deference to President Trump to strike Iran without Congressional authorization,” Fox News reported Saturday, but cautioned that the move might “peel off some pro-MAGA supporters.”
Democrats, meanwhile, are split. Pro-Israel Democrats echo Fetterman’s call to counter Iran’s threat to Israel, but others, like Senators Chuck Schumer and Tim Kaine, are crying foul over Trump’s sidestepping of Congress. Kaine is pushing for a Senate vote later this week to debate U.S. military engagement abroad, while Representatives Thomas Massie (R-Ky.) and Ro Khanna (D-Calif.) have introduced a resolution to block further U.S. involvement in Iran. The question of who holds the reins—Congress or the White House—looms large.
What’s at Stake?
Lawmakers across the aisle are bracing for Iran’s response. Fears of retaliation, including attacks by Iranian proxies or even sleeper cells on U.S. soil, are keeping Congress on edge. The CIA’s John Ratcliffe is set to brief the Senate Tuesday, shedding light on the risks and the administration’s next steps. With Iran’s nuclear sites reportedly crippled, speculation is swirling about what the U.S. might do next to keep Tehran in check.
Retired Brigadier General Mark Kimmitt, speaking on CNN, lauded Trump’s “deception and trickery” in orchestrating the strikes. “I’m intrigued and, frankly, impressed,” Kimmitt told Anderson Cooper. He suggested Trump’s earlier talk of a two-week pause was a ruse, likening it to a classic Trump deal: “He’s negotiating to buy an apartment, but suddenly the apartment’s destroyed.” Kimmitt praised the strategy for minimizing U.S. casualties but warned that Iran’s proxy networks, though weakened, remain a “significant threat” to American troops and interests, especially in Iraq.
Fetterman’s Lone Stand
Fetterman’s support for the strikes isn’t a one-off—he’s been vocal about Iran’s dangers for months. Back in April, he urged Trump to “waste” Iran’s nuclear facilities, dismissing peace talks as futile with a regime he calls destabilizing. His pro-Israel stance and willingness to break with Democratic orthodoxy have made him a lightning rod, with some speculating he’s inching toward the GOP. Yet, Fetterman insists he’s staying put, telling Recount in January, “I’d make a pretty terrible Republican.”
As the dust settles, Fetterman’s defiance and Trump’s gamble have thrust U.S.-Iran tensions into uncharted territory. With Congress divided and Iran’s next move unclear, one thing’s certain: this story’s far from over.
