Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley and Sen. Amy Klobuchar introduced a bipartisan measure to crack down on money laundering by increasing penalties and ensuring laws apply to systems used by drug traffickers and terrorists.

Grassley, R-Iowa, and Klobuchar, D-Minn., introduced the ‘Combating Money Laundering, Terrorist Finance and Counterfeiting Act’ Friday to enhance criminal money laundering statutes.

The bill would update counterfeiting laws to prohibit state-of-the-art counterfeiting methods and increase penalties for bulk cash smuggling.

The bill would also ensure money laundering laws apply to informal value transfer systems that are often used by drug traffickers and terrorists.

The introduction of the bill comes as Trump administration officials warn that hostile actors, like cartels and terrorists, are funding operations through complex financial channels across the U.S. border. 

Grassley and Klobuchar also said the bill would prohibit the cross-border shipment of blank checks for the purpose of evading reporting requirements.

‘Criminal enterprises and terrorist organizations depend on ill-begotten cash to carry out their dark deeds. As money laundering methods have evolved over time, so must the government’s efforts to exact justice,’ Grassley said, adding that their bill would ensure law enforcement ‘has the tools they need to track down dirty money, hold criminals accountable and prevent further crimes.’

Klobuchar added that as criminals and terrorist organizations ‘develop new methods to launder money, we must provide our law enforcement with the tools they need to keep American communities safe.’

‘This bipartisan legislation makes necessary updates to anti-money laundering statutes and counterfeiting laws, ensuring the law enforcement community can stay one step ahead of those working to undermine our nation’s safety and security,’ she said.

The bill also would establish a new money laundering violation that would prohibit the transfer of funds into or out of the United States — funds specifically being transferred with the intent to violate U.S. income tax laws.

The bill would also prohibit conspiracies to create illegal money services businesses; grant wiretapping authority to investigate currency reporting, bulk cash smuggling, illegal money services businesses and counterfeiting offenses; and grant the U.S. Secret Service the explicit authority to investigate ransomware crimes and other uses of unlicensed money transmitting; and would ensure compliance with financial institutions. 

The measure has wide support in the law enforcement community and has been endorsed by the Fraternal Order of Police, the National Association of Assistant U.S. Attorneys, the National Association of Police Organizations and the National District Attorneys Association.

‘By clarifying the law in response to recent court decisions, strengthening penalties and expanding investigative authorities, this legislation will restore critical law enforcement tools and help disrupt transnational criminal organizations,’ Patrick Yoes, president of the Fraternal Order of Police said, adding that the organization ‘strongly supports this bill, which would prevent criminals and terrorists from profiting from their crimes and protect public safety and national security.’

The National Association of Assistant U.S. Attorneys also endorsed the bill saying the ‘targeted reforms will strengthen investigations, improve prosecutorial clarity and better reflect how modern money-laundering schemes actually operate.’

The House of Representatives’ top Democrat claimed Republicans’ election security bill was tantamount to ‘voter suppression’ on Monday.

House Majority Leader Hakeem Jeffries, D-N.Y., criticized the House GOP-led SAVE America Act during his weekly press conference ahead of an expected vote on the bill coming as early as Wednesday.

‘Republicans have adopted voter suppression as an electoral strategy. That’s what the so-called SAVE Act is all about,’ Jeffries said.

He said the bill getting a vote this week is ‘worse than’ a previous iteration simply called the Safeguarding American Voter Eligibility (SAVE) Act, which passed the House in April 2025 with support from all Republicans and four Democrats.

The main thrust of the SAVE Act was implementing a new proof of citizenship requirement in the voter registration process in all 50 states.

The new bill, led by Rep. Chip Roy, R-Texas, and Sen. Mike Lee, R-Utah, would also create a federal voter ID standard at the polls, requiring people to show a form of identification when casting a ballot in national elections.

Jeffries also pointed to a provision that would require information-sharing between state election officials and federal authorities in verifying citizenship on current voter rolls, accusing Republicans of trying to give Americans’ data to Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE).

‘This version, as I understand it, will actually give [the Department of Homeland Security] the power to get voting records from states across the country. Why would these extremists think that’s a good idea?’ Jeffries said.

‘Who’d want DHS and ICE, who have been brutally, viciously and violently targeting everyday Americans, to have more data about the American people? It’s outrageous. Something is really wrong with these folks. I think they’re trying to lose elections at this point.’

There is no validated evidence to date that non-citizen voting has swayed the results of any federal election.

But Republicans have argued that the influx of illegal immigrants under the Biden administration has made the problem a real possibility in coming elections.

Nevertheless, voter ID provisions have proven popular in multiple public surveys.

A Pew Research Center poll released in August 2025 showed a whopping 83% of people supported government-issued photo ID requirements for showing up to vote, compared to just 16% of people who disapproved of it.

Jeffries also said the bill would die in the Senate, where at least some Democrats are needed under current rules to overcome a filibuster and advance the legislation.

‘It’s not going to pass. If it squeaks by the House, it’s dead on arrival in the Senate. They’re wasting time,’ he said.

The real possibility of the bill failing in the Senate is why a group of House conservatives are pushing for Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D., to upend the chamber’s rules on the filibuster to get rid of the 60-vote threshold needed to overcome one. Thune has not committed to any route.

The Senate is scrambling to avoid a third government shutdown under President Donald Trump, and after negotiations seemingly appeared to hit a brick wall, lawmakers are cautiously optimistic that a deal could be made. 

Senate Republicans received Senate Democrats’ ‘partisan wishlist’ of demands over the weekend, sources familiar with negotiations told Fox News Digital. The White House sent over its own counter-proposal, but several lawmakers weren’t clear what was in package as of Monday night. 

Some, including Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D., wouldn’t say, but noted that congressional Democrats and the White House were ‘trading papers,’ and signaled that the back and forth activity was a good sign of negotiations moving forward. 

But lawmakers aren’t out of the woods yet, a reality that Thune warned of since Senate Democrats demanded a two-week funding extension for the Department of Homeland Security (DHS). Congress has until Friday to avert a shutdown and little time to actually move a short-term patch from one side of the building to the other. 

Republicans are mulling another short-term extension, known as a continuing resolution (CR), to avert a partial shutdown. Thune said whether Democrats would sign off depended on how well background negotiations were going, but hinted that so far, things were moving toward a solution. 

‘I think, based on what I’m familiar with about the discussion so far, I think there is, but we’ll know more when the proposal comes back,’ Thune said. ‘Let’s have a chance to evaluate it.’ 

Thune later said that he planned to tee up another CR on Tuesday, but noted that the length would ‘have to be negotiated. But let’s see what the next day brings and we’ll go from there.’

Democrats’ prime objective is reining in Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), following the fatal shootings of Alex Pretti and Renee Nicole Good. 

The proposal they submitted included items that are a bridge too far for Republicans, including requiring ICE agents to get judicial warrants, de-mask and have identification ready — some in the GOP warn doing so would lead to more agents being doxxed, or when a person’s private information is made public, like their address. 

Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., warned that the ‘clock is ticking’ for Republicans to respond. 

‘We have sent you our proposals, and they are exceedingly reasonable,’ Schumer said on the Senate floor. ‘I hope our colleagues on the other side, many of whom, at least here in the Senate, recognize that things need to change, show they’re ready to act in a meaningful way.’

Prior to Democrats finally handing over the legislative version of their demands on Saturday, Republicans publicly questioned if they actually wanted to have serious negotiations. That changed over the weekend. 

A White House official told Fox News that ‘President Trump has been consistent, he wants the government open and the Administration has been working with both parties to ensure the American people don’t have to endure another drawn-out, senseless, and hurtful shutdown.’

Meanwhile, the scope and scale of a possible third closure would be limited to just the DHS, but would really only have an effect on FEMA, TSA, the Coast Guard and other priorities under the agency’s umbrella. That’s because ICE and immigration operations are flush with billions from Trump’s ‘big, beautiful bill.’ 

‘To say that the security of Americans is not paramount, I think, would be a huge mistake for the Democrats, and I certainly hope that they’ll continue to operate in good faith,’ Sen. Katie Britt, R-Ala., and the chair of the Homeland Security spending panel, said.

‘Because you do realize, ICE and [Customs and Border Patrol] would continue to be funded,’ she continued. 

Things are also about to get complicated quickly in the upper chamber. Lawmakers are set to leave Washington, D.C., for a weeklong recess this Thursday, and many are headed overseas to the Munich Security Conference. 

That starts on the day of the deadline and lasts through the weekend. Thune warned that it was possible he would cancel the upcoming recess, especially if there was little progress toward avoiding a DHS shutdown. 

Still, Senate Democrats believe that the ball is in the GOP’s court and are waiting for their counterparts to act. 

‘I mean, I think they’re pretty reasonable,’ Sen. Chris Murphy, D-Conn., and the top Democrat on the Senate Homeland Security Appropriations panel, said.

‘I mean, we did not ask for the moon,’ he continued. ‘We asked for targeted but impactful changes in the way that ICE is terrorizing American cities. So obviously we’re willing to negotiate.’

Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi said his country would not negotiate on its ballistic missile program, rejecting a core U.S. demand and further dimming prospects for a breakthrough deal.

He again warned in an interview with Al Jazeera that Tehran, Iran, would target U.S. bases in the Middle East if provoked, calling Iran’s missile program ‘never negotiable.’

The warnings came as U.S. and Iranian negotiators met in early February in Oman, even as Washington continued to build up military forces across the region — a posture U.S. officials say is meant to deter further escalation but which analysts argue also underscores how far apart the two sides remain.

Despite the imbalance in military power, analysts say Iran believes it can withstand U.S. pressure by signaling greater resolve — and by betting that Washington’s appetite for war is limited.

While the U.S. possesses overwhelming military capabilities, Defense Priorities analyst Rosemary Kelanic said Iran is relying on the logic of asymmetric conflict.

‘One country is much stronger, but the weaker country cares more,’ Kelanic said. ‘And historically, the country that cares more often wins by outlasting the stronger one.’

‘Iran is trying to signal resolve as strongly as it can, but it likely doubts U.S. resolve — because from Tehran’s perspective, the stakes for Iran are existential, while the stakes for the United States are not,’ she added.

Behnam Taleblu, a senior fellow at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, said Tehran’s primary leverage is its ability to threaten wider regional instability, even if it cannot win a prolonged conflict.

‘The Islamic Republic’s leverage is the threat of a region-wide war,’ Taleblu said, noting that while U.S. and Israeli defenses could intercept most attacks, ‘something will get hit.’

Iran buying time

Analysts across the spectrum agree that Iran is using negotiations less as a path to compromise than as a way to delay decisive action.

Oren Kessler, analyst at global consulting firm Wikistrat, said Iran is using talks to stabilize its position internally while avoiding concessions on core security issues.

‘Both sides want a deal, but their red lines are very hard for the other side to overcome,’ Kesler said. ‘The talks are going well in the sense that they’re happening, but they’re not really going anywhere.’

Taleblu echoed that assessment, arguing that Tehran is treating diplomacy as a shield rather than a solution.

‘The regime is treating negotiations as a lifeline rather than a way to resolve the core problem,’ he said.

Taleblu added that Iran’s leadership sees talks as a way to deter a strike in the short term, weaken domestic opposition in the medium term, and eventually secure sanctions relief to stabilize its economy.

Secretary of State Marco Rubio has insisted that limits on Iran’s ballistic missiles must be part of any agreement to avoid military action.

‘At the end of the day, the United States is prepared to engage, and has always been prepared to engage with Iran,’ Rubio said in early February. ‘In order for talks to actually lead to something meaningful, they will have to include certain things, and that includes the range of their ballistic missiles. That includes their sponsorship of terrorist organizations across the region. That includes the nuclear program. And that includes the treatment of their own people.’

Anti-government protests beginning at the start of 2026 led to a brutal crackdown in Iran. The regime has admitted to 3,117 deaths linked to the demonstrations, though human rights groups and Iranian resistance organizations peg the death toll as much higher. 

The U.S. also has demanded that Iran give up all enriched uranium stockpiles, which can be used for civilian energy at low levels but for nuclear weapons at higher concentrations.

Araghchi told Al Jazeera that Iran is willing to negotiate on nuclear issues but insisted enrichment is an ‘inalienable right’ that ‘must continue.’

‘We are ready to reach a reassuring agreement on enrichment,’ he said. ‘The Iranian nuclear case will only be resolved through negotiations.’

Iran’s atomic chief said Monday that Tehran would consider diluting its 60% enriched uranium — a level close to weapons-grade — but only in exchange for the lifting of all sanctions.

As negotiations unfolded, the U.S. continued to expand its military footprint in the Middle East.

In late January, the U.S. dispatched a carrier strike group centered on the USS Abraham Lincoln to the North Arabian Sea, accompanied by multiple destroyers and other naval assets. Additional F-15E strike aircraft and air defense systems have also been repositioned at bases across the region, alongside thousands of U.S. troops.

Taleblu said the administration may be using diplomacy to buy time of its own.

‘The charitable interpretation is that the president is buying time — moving assets, strengthening missile defense, and preparing military options,’ he said. ‘The less charitable interpretation is that the United States is taking Iran’s threats as highly credible and still chasing the optics of a deal.’

In 2025, five rounds of talks similarly stalled over U.S. demands that Iran abandon enrichment entirely — talks that ultimately collapsed into Operation Midnight Hammer, a U.S.-led bombing campaign against Iranian nuclear facilities.

President Donald Trump vowed to impose ‘very severe consequences’ on Russia in 2025 if it didn’t commit to a deal to end its war on Ukraine.

As the war nears its four-year anniversary in late February, national security experts tell Fox News Digital that Russia is facing tangible consequences for the war. Those are through its network of proxy countries that have directly endured the might of the U.S. military and subsequently left Russia with fewer streams of revenue and resources, they say. 

‘The President’s moves as it pertains to Russia are really strategic,’ Morgan Murphy, who previously served as the senior public diplomacy advisor to the president’s special envoy to Ukraine in 2025, told Fox News Digital. ‘So if you look at what he’s done with Iran and with Venezuela, these are two Russian proxies, right? Iran is a close ally of Russia.’

‘They sell a lot of drones to Russia,’ Murphy, who is running as a GOP Senate candidate to represent Alabama, continued. ‘Venezuela was again a proxy of Russia here in our hemisphere, and Trump is in the process of taking Iran off the table. He’s certainly taken Venezuela off the chessboard, and that that has to change Putin’s calculus, because he sees in President Trump a president who follows what he says he’s going to do.’ 

Russia’s war on Ukraine has persisted since Feb. 24, 2022, about a year after Trump’s first administration ended and during President Joe Biden’s presidency. Trump campaigned on ending the war upon his second inauguration in 2025, but ending the war has proven more difficult than anticipated as the U.S. continues negotiations. 

A White House official who spoke to Fox Digital said Trump is driven by humanitarian concerns and wants the conflict ended to stop the needless loss of life. The official added that in recent months his team has made major headway toward a settlement, pointing to Trump’s own remarks that ‘very good things’ are developing between Ukraine and Russia.

According to the official, recent negotiations in Abu Dhabi, United Arab Emirates, were substantive and constructive, with U.S., Ukrainian and Russian delegations agreeing to a 314-person prisoner exchange — the first in five months. While more work is ahead, the official argued that breakthroughs like this show sustained diplomacy is producing real, measurable progress toward ending the war.

Trump launched a series of strikes on Iran in June 2025 that hobbled the country’s covert nuclear program. Massive protests swept Iran in December 2025 as citizens spoke out against the government and its cratering economy. 

Iran violently cracked down on the nationwide protests, with thousands of citizens reportedly killed and the Trump administration warning Iran that it would face U.S. military action if the executions and killings continued. 

The U.S. and Iran held discussions in Oman Friday as Tehran, Iran, continues to obscure its nuclear ambitions, with military intervention on the table as the U.S. seeks to prevent Iran from having nuclear weapons capabilities. 

Iran and Russia have grown into a tighter wartime partnership in recent years, with U.S. and allied officials citing Iran’s supply of armed drones and other defense cooperation that has helped power Russia’s attacks in Ukraine — drawing the two heavily sanctioned regimes closer economically and militarily.

Ret. Air Force Gen. Bruce Carlson pointed to the Trump administration’s actions on Iran and Venezuela as evidence of how Trump is strategically pressuring Russia via its proxies to end the war in Ukraine. 

‘In any campaign, you don’t just target command centers — you cut supply lines and logistics,’ Carlson said. ‘Pressuring Russian proxies does exactly that. Venezuela, Iran, and the shadow fleet are key arteries feeding Russia’s war in Ukraine. Additionally, by pressing Europe to increase NATO spending and move off Russian oil and gas, we are directly altering Moscow’s decision-making.’

Carlson argued that, strategically, the trend lines are moving against Moscow as the U.S. ramps up pressure on Russia’s partners — leaving Putin with fewer backers, tighter resources and less flexibility, and undermining any assumption that dragging out the war comes without a cost. 

The retired Air Force general added that Putin and his proxies operate as a single ecosystem: Russia’s campaign relies on outside suppliers and sanctions-busting networks, so hitting any link in that chain can weaken Russia’s revenue and its ability to sustain attacks on Ukrainian civilians.

‘But ensuring a lasting and fair peace is not solely about pressuring Russia. As the cold winter continues in Ukraine, there are increasing concerns on Ukraine’s energy needs and air defense systems. U.S. and European support remain vital,’ he added. 

As tensions with Iran heighten, the Trump administration successfully captured Venezuelan dictator Nicolás Maduro on sweeping narco-trafficking charges in January. 

Venezuela is another Russian ally, publicly backing Moscow and maintaining high-level diplomatic ties, while giving Russia a Western Hemisphere foothold through military-technical cooperation and deep dependence on Russian arms — a relationship that has triggered U.S. sanctions actions tied to Venezuela’s oil sector and Russian-linked firms.

‘The removal of Maduro stripped Moscow of a key client in our hemisphere, and the increased pressure on Iran threatens the weapons and drone supply chain that Russia uses against Ukrainian civilians,’ Carrie Filipetti, executive director of foreign policy group the Vandenberg Coalition, told Fox News Digital. ‘This is how we have to change Putin’s long-term calculus.’

‘For the first time, the United States has used the power of American diplomacy to bring Ukraine and Russia into trilateral diplomatic talks,’ Filipetti added. ‘Combined with the threat of additional sanctions reliance and increased pressure on the countries that buy Russian energy, these steps are critical to shaking Russia’s assumption that time is on its side.’ 

Ret. Air Force Lt. Gen. Richard Newton told Fox News Digital that when Trump warned Russia of severe consequences in 2025 if Moscow did not end the war, the threat was followed by tangible consequences that reverberated through the Kremlin. 

‘Deterrence and leverage requires our adversaries (to) believe we will act,’ Newton said. ‘President Trump is doing just that by disrupting the systems that fund and sustain Putin’s war. The capture of Maduro and the just announced trade deal with India’s Prime Minister Modi — that forces India off of Russian oil — is a major blow to Russia’s war machine.’

The White House said in February that it struck with India to increase U.S. energy imports and stop buying Russian oil. The U.S. tops the world in daily oil production, with Saudi Arabia and Russia following behind. 

Filipetti argued that peace in Ukraine is only obtained by forcing Russia to face ‘real consequences.’

‘Vladimir Putin is responsible for a war of aggression marked by atrocities against Ukrainian civilians, and any lasting peace must impose real consequences on Russia itself. And weakening Russia’s proxies and isolating Putin is one of the most effective ways to reduce his ability to wage war,’ Filipetti said.

‘When it comes to China, North Korea, and Iran — without question these authoritarians are facing a very different calculus than just a few months ago,’ she said. 

While Newton pointed to a shadow-fleet sanctions package and another sanctions package that are moving through Congress, along with higher NATO spending and a tougher allied military posture, as key pressure points he says could help drive a peace deal.

Republican South Carolina Sen. Lindsey Graham is promoting a sweeping Russia sanctions bill that would tighten the screws on Moscow by punishing countries and companies that keep buying Russian energy with secondary sanctions and tariffs, while a separate bipartisan ‘shadow fleet’ package would target the tankers, insurers and shell networks Russia uses to move oil and evade sanctions.

Murphy argued that Trump already has sketched what he sees as a realistic off-ramp for Moscow — one he says even some Democrats would recognize as the best deal Putin is likely to get — including restoring Russia’s seat at the top diplomatic table, reopening some Western commercial access, and acknowledging Russia’s current occupation of Ukrainian territory without formally recognizing sovereignty. 

Murphy likened that offer to a ‘golden bridge’ for Putin to exit the war, but said the Kremlin has so far declined it, making the next move ultimately Russia’s choice — and raising the question of how many more casualties Moscow is willing to absorb with no clear endpoint in sight.

The war underscores a Russian worldview U.S. negotiators often misread through a Western lens, Murphy said, explaining Russia is shaped by catastrophic losses in World War I and World War II and a deep-seated suspicion that invasion is a recurring threat. He said that unpredictability is why the U.S. military has long used the ‘Crazy Ivan’ moniker for Russian behavior. 

Trump is meanwhile putting himself in the Russians’ shoes, Murphy argued, and meeting the moment with a clearer-eyed read of Moscow’s mindset and history. 

‘It is a decision that the Russians are going to have to make. How many more lives do they want to feed into this meat grinder? How many more deaths are they willing to endure?’ Murphy said. 

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy told reporters in February that the U.S. set a June deadline for Moscow and Kyiv to strike an agreement to end the war, teeing up heightened tensions ahead of the U.S. midterms in November.