Republicans are sounding the alarm that President Donald Trump’s demand to cancel August recess could cost the GOP seats in the midterms.

As the upcoming jailbreak from Washington, D.C., fast approaches, Trump’s most-prized legislative push remains stalled. He wants Republicans to stay put until it’s finished, but the political reality says otherwise.

And it comes as Republicans are desperate to get out of the Beltway and sell their accomplishments, rather than their shortcomings, to voters on the campaign trail. The GOP has more to lose than Democrats this cycle, too, with three vulnerable incumbents and a handful of others on the periphery.

REPUBLICAN SAYS TRUMP’S TOP ELECTION PRIORITY ‘DEAD’ IN SENATE AS GOP FRACTURES AHEAD OF MIDTERMS

«Canceling August recess, where we have to have our members out campaigning and connecting with their voters, and people not understanding that, is about as tone-deaf as telling everybody to stay home in 2020 when we lost [Kelly] Loefler and [David] Purdue,» Sen. Thom Tillis, R-N.C., told Fox News Digital.

«It’s the same sort of thought process,» he continued. «It’s thinking that one branch runs this country and it doesn’t. If we don’t keep majorities, people are gonna regret it.»

Several of Tillis’ colleagues, however, disagree, and want the Senate to stay put until the SAVE America Act passes, be it through the party-line budget reconciliation process or by nuking the filibuster.

GOP RIFT GROWS AS THUNE HITS BRAKES ON TRUMP’S ELECTION BILL TO AVERT SHUTDOWN

Trump’s pressure, the online zeitgeist and the political hot potato of the situation have put incumbents in a tough spot: go home and admit defeat, or stay put and push legislation that so far has not gone anywhere.

For many Republicans, they openly acknowledge that it’s a math problem in the Senate — the GOP does not have the votes to pass the SAVE America Act. Some argue that keeping the Senate in town likely wouldn’t change the minds of those who oppose it.

«If it would make a difference in the outcome, I’m fine with that, but it won’t make a difference, which I don’t believe it will, that it’s an act of futility,» Sen. John Cornyn, R-Texas, told Fox News Digital.

TRUMP UNLOADS ON CORNYN, TIES AG NOMINATION FIGHT TO BITTER TEXAS PRIMARY

Republican Sens. John Cornyn and Thom Tillis are obstructing President Donald Trump’s attorney general nominee Todd Blanche. (Nathan Posner/Anadolu via Getty Images; Aaron Schwartz/CNP/Bloomberg via Getty Images; Tom Williams/CQ-Roll Call, Inc. via Getty Images)

Both Cornyn and Tillis are retiring — Tillis opted to get out during the tumultuous period that was passing the «big, beautiful bill,» and Cornyn was kneecapped by Trump, who backed Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton over him in a grueling primary battle.

But Cornyn noted that if he was still running for office, he might have a change of heart.

«I don’t know how that would come out, but if I was running for reelection, I would vote to stay,» he said.

Cornyn’s point is the line that some vulnerable Republicans are toeing. Two Republicans running in tight races, Sens. Jon Husted, R-Ohio, and Dan Sullivan, R-Alaska, told Fox News Digital that they have been voraciously pushing for the SAVE America Act.

But, Sullivan said that he didn’t want to comment on the president’s push to cancel recess, while Husted said it was always preferable to be back in Ohio with his constituents.

«But I also have a job here, and if the job requires me to be here, then I’ll be here,» he said.

Others in less tight races who support the legislation still understand the reality in the upper chamber: without changing the minds of a cohort of Republicans who have voted against it and flipping several Democrats, the SAVE America Act is going nowhere.

«I think to cancel the whole recess would be a problem, but I think to keep us up here another week or 10 days, certainly, I’m willing to do it. I’d stay here till November if I thought it would change things,» Sen. Roger Marshall, R-Kan., told Fox News Digital.

But he acknowledged that coming home empty-handed was a problem, too.

«The base would be mad if we don’t make the best effort possible to get this voter ID across the finish line,» Marshall said.

No sé qué clase de alcalde de la ciudad de Nueva York será Zohran Mamdani, pero ya ha demostrado ser una verdadera decepción como estadista. Nueva York es la única ciudad en el mundo en la que al menos 750.000 judíos y 750.000 musulmanes viven lado a lado. En lugar de ser un constructor de puentes entre ellos, Mamdani, el primer alcalde musulmán de la ciudad, ha elegido ser un destructor de puentes —usando el conflicto israelí-palestino como su hacha. Es un verdadero desperdicio de un talento político carismático.

Considere la reciente maniobra de Mamdani: amenazar con arrestar al primer ministro de Israel, Benjamin Netanyahu, cuando venga a la ciudad de Nueva York para la reunión de las Naciones Unidas en septiembre. La Corte Penal Internacional emitió una orden de arresto contra Netanyahu en 2024, alegando que cometió crímenes de lesa humanidad en la Franja de Gaza. Aunque finalmente Mamdani reconoció que la ciudad no tenía tal autoridad legal —y, en su lugar, instó al gobierno federal a ejecutar la orden días antes de la visita del líder israelí a Washington—, fue precisamente el tipo de gesto que Netanyahu utilizará en su campaña para ser reelegido el 27 de octubre. Yo mismo podría escribir el anuncio de campaña de Bibi: “El único lugar seguro para los judíos es Israel. Solo hay que ver lo que está sucediendo en Nueva York. El único líder que puede proteger a los israelíes soy yo: Bibi”.

En mi opinión, los puntos de vista extremos de Mamdani y de Netanyahu son dos caras de la misma moneda: Bibi no reconoce el derecho del pueblo palestino a la autodeterminación en su patria nacional y cree que solo Israel debe gobernar el territorio que se extiende desde el mar Mediterráneo hasta el río Jordán. Pero los palestinos son un pueblo —más de 7 millones de ellos viven en ese espacio— y no van a desaparecer ni a renunciar a su derecho a un Estado, sin importar la fantasía que propaguen Bibi y sus seguidores. Lo que realmente vende Bibi es una guerra perpetua entre israelíes y palestinos. Hoy permite que los colonos en Cisjordania destruyan aldeas palestinas, y cuando estos se resisten, su gobierno lo llama terrorismo.

Mamdani tampoco aboga por una solución de dos Estados. Sostiene que los judíos no tienen derecho a la autodeterminación en un Estado propio —un Estado judío en su patria bíblica, en esa misma región que va del mar Mediterráneo al río Jordán—. Pero más de 7 millones de judíos también viven en ese espacio, y ellos tampoco van a desaparecer ni a renunciar a su derecho a un Estado judío, sin importar lo que digan Mamdani y otros socialistas democráticos. Así que, en la práctica, también promueven una guerra perpetua.

¿Qué pasaría si Mamdani realmente quisiera ser un constructor de puentes entre israelíes y palestinos, un papel para el que tiene una capacidad y un talento únicos? Si así fuera, declararía su intención de que, el día en que Bibi llegue a la ciudad de Nueva York para la Asamblea General de la ONU, convocaría un seminario en su oficina e invitaría a expertos israelíes, palestinos, árabes, musulmanes y judíos para discutir la única solución justa y estable: cómo forjar dos Estados separados para dos pueblos que viven en esa zona entre el río y el mar.

Invitaría a representantes saudíes para discutir la Iniciativa de Paz Árabe, que fue lanzada en esta columna en 2002 por el príncipe heredero saudí Abdullah bin Abdul Aziz al-Saud. Invitaría a Bill Clinton, Barack Obama y George W. Bush para que cada uno hable sobre sus respectivos planes de dos Estados para dos pueblos. Invitaría a líderes palestinos como Salam Fayyad, el ex primer ministro de la Autoridad Palestina, quien hizo tanto en su mandato para construir instituciones palestinas para un Estado palestino junto a Israel, para debatir cómo revivirían ese esfuerzo hoy en día.

Lo más importante es que invitaría a representantes de organizaciones judeo-árabes que intentan forjar dos Estados para dos pueblos, como Abraham Initiatives. No debe confundirse con los Acuerdos de Abraham; esta es una organización en Israel que trabaja en la reconciliación entre ciudadanos palestinos y judíos de Israel. (He donado dinero al grupo.) Invitaría a representantes de EcoPeace Middle East, una organización israelí-palestina-jordana dedicada a impulsar la reconciliación a través de proyectos medioambientales compartidos. (También he donado dinero a ella.) E invitaría al nuevo partido israelí Un Lugar para Todos Nosotros, creado antes de las próximas elecciones con una lista conjunta de palestinos israelíes y judíos israelíes, liderado por Rula Daoud y Alon-Lee Green.

En un ensayo publicado en Haaretz, Green explicó que el nuevo partido “no es un partido judío (con una representación árabe simbólica) ni un partido árabe (con una representación judía simbólica), sino un partido conjunto árabe-judío”. Propone construir “una paz que pondrá fin a la ocupación y permitirá el establecimiento de un Estado palestino independiente, junto al Estado de Israel”.

Por último, para añadir un poco de brillo, podría invitar a la actriz Natalie Portman. Me impresionó mucho el discurso que pronunció en una reciente recaudación de fondos online para Un Lugar para Todos Nosotros. Según un informe en Haaretz, Portman “enfatizó su identidad como mujer judía y ciudadana israelí, destacando que su padre nació y creció en Israel y que ella tiene ‘un profundo amor, como muchos de ustedes también, por los pueblos de esta región —todos los pueblos de esta región— y por la tierra, y por el futuro’”.

Como les dijo Portman a los partidarios del partido: “Lucharon por el regreso de los rehenes. Se opusieron a la guerra de aniquilación y lucharon por los niños de Gaza. Exigieron calles más seguras, salarios más justos… El ‘establishment’ quiere decirnos que esto es imposible, que la verdadera asociación es imposible. Quieren minimizar lo que estos increíbles líderes están haciendo aquí ahora mismo, y tienen miedo de lo que representa este movimiento”.

Eso es lo que suena como un liderazgo constructivo. Un Lugar para Todos Nosotros sigue apareciendo en las encuestas muy por debajo del umbral necesario para ganar un escaño en la Knéset. Pero también está comenzando. Si prefiere una versión más pragmática de ese mensaje, consulte el sitio web de Commanders for Israel’s Security, que reúne a casi 600 coroneles y generales retirados del ejército israelí, así como a veteranos del Mossad, del Shin Bet (Seguridad Interna), de la policía y del cuerpo diplomático, que están comprometidos a oponerse a la anexión israelí de Cisjordania y a trabajar por una solución de dos Estados.

Imagine si Mamdani, en vez de participar en una maniobra inútil de considerar públicamente el arresto de Netanyahu, convocara a todos estos defensores israelíes, palestinos, árabes y estadounidenses de los dos Estados para dos pueblos, y luego invitara a Netanyahu a dirigirse a ellos. Que sea Bibi quien diga: “No, no quiero tener nada que ver con defensores israelíes, palestinos, árabes y estadounidenses de dos Estados para dos pueblos”.

Al menos enviaría el mensaje a los votantes israelíes de centro-derecha, centro e izquierda de que el mundo no los odia, que el alcalde de la ciudad de Nueva York no va tras ellos y que lo único que quiere toda la comunidad internacional es que israelíes y palestinos sean socios constructivos, dispuestos a explorar la única alternativa realista a una guerra perpetua.

No tengo idea de si eso ayudaría. Pero sé con certeza que lo que está haciendo Mamdani solo está generando más votantes para Netanyahu entre los israelíes que creen que Bibi es su único protector, y que su actitud intransigente es su única salvación.

Si eso es lo que Mamdani quiere hacer ahora con su plataforma —echar más leña a un fuego que ya arde por sí solo—, es un desperdicio de su talento, un desperdicio de su cargo, un desperdicio de su aliento y un desperdicio de nuestro tiempo.

© The New York Times 2026.

Nearly two decades before the latest war with Iran, an explosively formed penetrator tore through a U.S. Army vehicle on a Baghdad road, killing Staff Sgt. William Brooks and leaving Sgt. (Ret.) Robert Bartlett with injuries so severe that he says he «died three times.»

The weapon was part of a broader Iranian campaign that armed and trained proxy forces to target American troops in Iraq, according to federal court findings. In cases involving hundreds of U.S. victims, judges found that Iran manufactured or supplied the weapons used in the attacks and that the assailants were trained or directed by the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps.

«It cut me in half from my temple down through my jaw, and then took my gunner’s legs off, and then took the top of my truck commander’s head off,» Bartlett told Fox News Digital. «I would end up dying three times and spent four years at the old Walter Reed receiving surgeries, reconstruction and rebuilding.»

ARMY IDS 2 VICTIMS KILLED IN JORDAN AIR BASE ATTACK; TRUMP: IRAN WILL PAY ‘MANY TIMES OVER’

Bartlett was driving an armored Humvee on Route Pluto in Baghdad, May 3, 2005, when an explosively formed penetrator tore through the vehicle. Staff Sgt. William Brooks was killed, while Bartlett and two other soldiers were wounded. Bartlett suffered massive facial trauma.

The Army casualty report described Bartlett as «very seriously injured,» with massive facial and dental trauma. He was the vehicle’s driver during the route-security mission when an explosive detonated from its right side.

Bartlett said the weapon was an Iranian-supplied explosively formed penetrator linked to the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps’ campaign to arm militias attacking American forces in Iraq.

«When you’re blown up, you don’t know what’s hit you,» he said. «You get the information after, when the intelligence reports come down and command lets you know what you got hit by.»

Bartlett’s survival places him alongside two Gold Star families who say Iran’s long-running campaign against Americans did not begin with the latest fighting — and cannot be understood solely through the current headlines.

Capt. Shawn English was killed by an explosively formed penetrator in Baghdad Dec. 3, 2006. Maj. Stuart Wolfer was killed when a rocket struck a gym inside a U.S. base in Baghdad’s International Zone on April 6, 2008.

In the federal cases involving Sgt. (Ret.) Robert Bartlett, Capt. Shawn English and Maj. Stuart Wolfer, the courts found both that Iran manufactured or supplied the weapons used in the attacks and that the assailants were trained or directed by the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps.

I’VE STUDIED MILITARY STRATEGY. TRUMP NOW FACES IRAN’S OLDEST BATTLEFIELD TRICK

Capt. Shawn English with his three sons. English was killed in Baghdad on Dec. 3, 2006, when an Iranian explosive device struck his vehicle. (Courtesy of the English family)

Federal courts later held Iran liable for providing weapons, training, financing and other material support to the proxy forces responsible for attacks on U.S. personnel in Iraq.

For their loved ones, those findings offered formal acknowledgment of Iran’s role. They did not end the grief.

‘It’s really hard to only have memories’

«He really was my best friend,» Wolfer’s sister, Beverly Wolfer Nerenberg, said in tears before her voice broke. «Sorry, even 18 years later, it doesn’t get easier to talk about.»

At her wedding, she chose not to have bridesmaids. Instead, her brother stood beside her as her «man of honor.»

«I couldn’t think of anybody else who I was closer to, who really understood me and knew me,» she said.

Wolfer was 36 and the father of three young daughters when he was killed.

His sister said he had gone to exercise with a friend when an incoming-fire warning sounded. Those inside the gym had only seconds to react and dropped to the floor because there was no time to reach a protected space.

A military investigation found that a rocket struck the gym’s roof at approximately 3:28 p.m., sending shrapnel into the building. Wolfer and Col. Stephen Scott were almost directly beneath the point of impact and suffered severe injuries. Wolfer was transported to a combat support hospital, where he was pronounced dead.

Wolfer’s daughters were approximately ages 5, 3 and 18 months old when their father died, according to his sister.

«I’m beyond grateful and proud of my nieces and how they’ve grown up,» Wolfer Nerenberg said. «But it’s really hard to only have memories.»

MILITARY FAMILIES WANT DOJ TO DISTRIBUTE NEARLY $800M FROM FRENCH CEMENT COMPANY FOUND GUILTY OF BRIBING ISIS

Maj. Stuart Wolfer, who was killed in Baghdad on April 6, 2008, when an Iranian rocket struck a gym on a U.S. base. (Courtesy of the Wolfer family)

She described the family as the keepers of Wolfer’s memory, preserving it for children who had little time to know him.

Her family was told soon after the attack that the rocket had come from the direction of Sadr City, Iraq, and was Iranian, she said.

«This war began a long time ago,» Wolfer Nerenberg said. «For many of us, the past 18 years has been one long continuous war.»

The weapon he feared killed him

Tricia English said her husband understood the threat posed by explosively formed penetrators, or EFPs —sophisticated roadside bombs designed to punch through armored military vehicles — before one killed him.

During a period of leave shortly before his death, Capt. English appeared distracted and remained awake late into the night working on his computer, she recalled.

«He told me that there were these weapons —specifically called them EFPs — that they had discovered,» she said. «They knew where they were coming from, and it was really bad.»

«He knew it was Iranian,» she added.

English was serving on a military transition team working with Iraqi forces when the EFP struck his vehicle during a convoy operation.

An Army investigation said his mixed American-Iraqi patrol was traveling north when an explosively formed projectile struck the right side of his vehicle. English was evacuated to a combat support hospital and died from his wounds.

His widow said he remained conscious during part of the evacuation and that she was told his last conscious message was: «Tell Trish and the boys that I love them.»

«You think after 20 years it wouldn’t be this hard,» she said, struggling to continue.

English said the military initially described the weapon simply as a roadside bomb or improvised explosive device. The legal proceedings later exposed her to evidence about the weapon, the people who supplied it and the broader network behind the attack.

«Sitting in the courtroom, I then got so much more information about what really happened and what this really looked like,» she said. «That was traumatizing. But he deserved it. I needed to stand up for him.»

‘Doing right by them’

Bartlett said he joined the litigation not only for himself, but for those who never returned.

«My buddy died, and plenty of my guys — plenty of people — died over there at the hands of the IRGC,» he said.

«If I was sent back, if I died and saw the other side and came back, and I’m not doing right by them and their families who didn’t get to have their child come home, then I’m not doing justice,» he said. «I’m not living my faith, and I’m not living what I fought to protect, which is the truth.»

The legal cases were brought under the terrorism exception to the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act, which allows certain American victims to sue designated state sponsors of terrorism.

Iran generally did not appear to defend the cases, resulting in default proceedings. However, the judges still required the plaintiffs to produce evidence demonstrating that Iran’s material support was a substantial factor in the attacks.

The resulting judgments found that Iran, acting through the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps and its Quds Force, supplied Shiite militia groups with funding, training, weapons and technical assistance used to target Americans. Iran has not voluntarily paid the judgments, and the plaintiffs continue to face significant obstacles collecting the money they were awarded.

‘We weren’t at war with Iran’

Iran saw the fall of Saddam Hussein as both an opportunity and a threat.

With its longtime enemy removed and U.S. troops stationed next door, Tehran sought to shape Iraq’s political and security system, expand its regional influence and pressure Washington without confronting the U.S. military directly. The Quds Force cultivated Iraqi militias as proxies, providing weapons, funding and training that allowed Iran to attack American forces while maintaining a degree of deniability.

The Treasury Department has described the Quds Force as Iran’s main instrument for supporting militant groups to advance the regime’s national interests.

Tricia English said the distinction matters because American troops in Iraq were being targeted by a country against which the United States had not formally gone to war.

«We weren’t at war with Iran,» she said.

The EFP attacks required Iran’s expertise, money, intelligence, manufacturing and organized networks to transport and deploy the weapons, she said.

«To have such a sophisticated, targeted, supported, funded (operation) — it was so sophisticated,» she said. «I think it’s important for Americans to see that.»

For Bartlett and the English and Wolfer families, the latest war is not the beginning of America’s confrontation with Iran. It is another chapter in a conflict they have carried in their bodies and families for nearly two decades.

«This war began a long time ago,» Wolfer Nerenberg said. «For many of us, the past 18 years has been one long continuous war.»

For those who buried their loved ones or carried the effects of Iranian-supplied weapons home in their bodies, Iran’s war against Americans did not begin with the latest fighting — and it has never truly ended.

The court cases presented evidence that the IRGC’s Quds Force built, funded, armed and directed Shiite militia networks, supplying them with sophisticated anti-armor weapons designed to penetrate American military vehicles. The litigation also examined Iranian support for Sunni terrorist organizations operating in Iraq.

The cases challenge the perception that the attacks were solely the work of an organic Iraqi insurgency. Instead, the court findings described a broader Iranian system of proxy warfare that allowed Tehran to target American personnel through militia groups operating on the ground.

She English said successive administrations have invoked Iran’s record of killing Americans when convenient, while the families have continued waiting for meaningful accountability.

«Shawn did his job every single time his country asked him to do it, regardless of who was in power,» she said. «It’s been a little disheartening to watch our country — various administrations, people in power—not do theirs when it comes to this.»

Bartlett said Americans exhausted by decades of war must still confront the history behind the current conflict.

An armed member of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) monitors the area while mourners participate in the funeral for the late Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei and his family in Tehran, Iran, on July 6, 2026. (Morteza Nikoubazl/NurPhoto via Getty Images)

«You can’t add to truth and you can’t take away from it,» he said. «It just is what it is.»

For the families, that truth is measured not only in court judgments or military reports, but in missing fathers, brothers and friends—and in wounds that still hurt as sharply as they did when the telephone first rang.