US GOP Civil War Erupts On Two Fronts: A.P. Luna Freezes The House Floor, Trump Gets "Brother'd" By Bill Cassidy In Senate Over SAVE Act

  • 🇵🇦 Nuestro primer dominio localizado está en español en kiwifarms.pa. Our first localized domain is on Spanish on kiwifarms.pa.
  • Want to keep track of this thread?
    Accounts can bookmark posts, watch threads for updates, and jump back to where you stopped reading.
    Create account

The Republican Party's long-simmering tensions over election integrity exploded into open warfare on Wednesday, with chaos breaking out simultaneously in the House and Senate - and President Trump caught in the middle of both.

It started, as these things often do, with a procedural knife fight.

Rep. Anna Paulina Luna (R-FL) and a band of House conservatives declared they would refuse to support any rule votes this week unless Senate Republicans finally moved the SAVE America Act - the proof-of-citizenship and voter ID bill that has passed the House multiple times but remains stuck in the upper chamber. Without a rule, the House can't conduct normal business. Leadership blinked. The scheduled rule vote was pulled. The floor froze.

The House GOP is attempting to move a Senate Bill with NO VOTER ID and NO SAVE AMERICA ACT. I will have to be a NO on rules for this week (and maybe even longer) if they don't stop the games. I am not the only one. Other House Members are frustrated at the games being played. This is a problem. The President agrees that the Senate needs to move Voter ID. Other Frontline Members depend on Voter ID legislation getting passed. Stop catering to a Senate that doesn't do their jobs.

— Rep. Anna Paulina Luna (@RepLuna) June 23, 2026

Limited to suspension votes and with tomorrow already off the table, GOP leaders were left scrambling: send everyone home? Let a rule fail on the floor? Cut a deal? Try again next week? The options were all bad.

And of course, Trump then lit a match... Hours before a planned signing ceremony for the popular bipartisan housing bill (passed 358-32 in the House and 85-5 in the Senate), the president abruptly canceled it on Truth Social, declaring he would not sign the measure "until such time as we pass the desperately needed SAVE AMERICA ACT, which I consider to be a National Emergency."

The housing bill - a rare bipartisan win on affordability - was suddenly held hostage to a voting bill Democrats have no intention of supporting and that Senate Republicans still can't get to 60 votes.

The Senate Meeting Turns Ugly​

According to multiple senators in the room who spoke to Punchbowl's Andrew Desiderio, Trump arrived in a sour mood and used much of the session to vent. He hammered the SAVE Act, the filibuster, and his decision to kill the housing signing. Nobody pushed back.

The temperature in the room reportedly dropped. Trump, already irritated over Iran war powers votes, was further agitated. One senator later described the entire session to Desiderio as "more of a venting session for the president."

Bill Cassidy, freed from re-election concerns, was apparently done pretending otherwise.

The SAVE America Act: The Prize Everyone's Fighting Over​

At the center of the storm sits the SAVE America Act - the bill requiring documentary proof of citizenship to register to vote in federal elections and photo ID at the polls. Supporters call it basic election security. Opponents call it a solution in search of a problem that will disenfranchise legitimate voters.

The House has passed it. The Senate has not. And with the filibuster still in place, it's not clear how it gets to 60 without major concessions or rule changes - neither of which Senate leadership appears eager to deliver.

House conservatives have decided they're done waiting politely. Luna and her allies are using the only leverage they have: the ability to make the House floor a dysfunctional mess.

I stand with @repluna and @potus. The Save America Act must pass.

Ilegal foreign voters are electing America-hating communists. Add me to the list, it’s that important.

— Congressman Max Miller (@RepMaxMiller) June 24, 2026

Trump, frustrated with the Senate's math problem, decided to take a popular bipartisan win off the table until they fix it.

And in the Senate lunch, one of the president's former allies decided the deference phase of the relationship was over.

Where Things Stand​

As of mid-afternoon Wednesday:
  • The House is in procedural limbo, limited to suspension votes.
  • The housing bill signing is canceled.
  • Senate Republicans just sat through a venting session from an unhappy president.
  • A lame-duck senator called the Commander-in-Chief "brother" to his face.
In short - this is a collision of three different Republican power centers - House hardliners, Senate institutionalists, and a president who wants results now - all using the same bill as a weapon against each other.



Earlier...

President Donald Trump abruptly canceled a planned Capitol Hill signing ceremony for a sweeping bipartisan housing affordability bill Wednesday, saying he would not move forward until Congress passes the SAVE America Act, an elections measure he has elevated as a top legislative priority.

In a Truth Social post shortly before the scheduled event, Trump said the housing news conference and signing were "cancelled" until passage of the SAVE America Act, which he described as a "National Emergency."

1782334628046.png

The 21st Century ROAD to Housing Act cleared the Senate 85-5, with Republican leaders insisting the CBDC restriction ride along with one of the most bipartisan bills in years. The House passed the bill Tuesday 358-32, putting the measure on a direct path to President Donald Trump's desk for signature.

And so - Trump's cancellation upended what was expected to be a rare bipartisan victory lap for lawmakers, who had sent Trump the 21st Century ROAD to Housing Act after months of negotiations. The bill, one of the most significant federal housing packages in decades, passed the House Tuesday evening by a wide margin after clearing the Senate 85-5 a day earlier.

Just hours before Trump comes to the Capitol for a celebratory bill signing for the housing bill, he says it is of "minor importance" and notes Elizabeth Warren's involvement.

In case you missed it, Trump is pushing for SAVE America Act and to blow up the filibuster -- neither of which have the requisite votes for passage.

Should be a very interesting day.

— Jake Sherman (@JakeSherman) June 24, 2026
1782334728148.png

One of the most politically prominent pieces of the bill would limit large institutional investors from purchasing certain existing single-family homes. Supporters argue that such restrictions could help reduce competition for individual buyers in markets where corporate ownership is concentrated, while the final version preserves a carveout for new construction.

It explicitly shields private stablecoins, carving out any "open, permissionless, and private" dollar-denominated asset.

The bill's broad coalition had made it a rare point of agreement in a divided Congress. Republicans emphasized deregulation, supply growth and limits on Wall Street homebuying. Democrats pointed to affordability, renter protections and housing access. Lawmakers from both parties had hoped the signing would mark a tangible response to high rents, elevated mortgage costs and a shortage of affordable homes.

Now, the bill in legislative limbo with Trump using the housing package as leverage to force Senate action on election rules. The SAVE America Act has been a priority for Trump and his allies, but it faces strong Democratic opposition and an uncertain path in the Senate.

That said, if Trump continues to withhold his signature - and does nothing, the bill is likely to become law regardless. Under the Constitution, a bill presented to the president becomes law automatically after 10 days if he neither signs nor vetoes it - provided Congress remains in session. With August recess still weeks away and both chambers having passed the measure by margins far exceeding the two-thirds threshold needed to override a veto, the CBDC ban appears headed into law with or without a ceremony.
 
I am being perfectly cordial. You have been berating and wishing violence upon me though, Sir Muttley. Are you perhaps staring at your own reflection?
a smack upside the head is hardly violence, what am i gonna getcha through the screen?

it's the perfect response to someone acting obtuse about the desire for voter ID
and please you have to know I'm just joking around because you're pretending like you don't know what things are
what else are we supposed to do other than try to rile you up?
 
a smack upside the head is hardly violence, what am i gonna getcha through the screen?

it's the perfect response to someone acting obtuse about the desire for voter ID
and please you have to know I'm just joking around because you're pretending like you don't know what things are
what else are we supposed to do other than try to rile you up?
Oh boy a 3some, tempting my dudes but while I was born in California, my mom raised a heterosexual male. Sorry Georgie, Sir Muttley. 💔

Like I said there is demand for voter id, right alongside the demand for honor amongst rivals and a high trust society. These ideals die when things like Charlie Kirk’s live assassination become the norm, and civil discourse is no longer possible. Voter ID will help after war is won, when there is actually a United States again.

Other than that, the holdouts clinging to such ideas are the ‘principled Conservatives’ who lose graciously.
 
How many people have you personally verified this about? Show your work!
I don't think I know anyone who's against voter ID other than black people. And I live in LA

But if you're going back & forth with someone else I don't want to fill up your replies we can always argue about nonsense later
Seriously though, reconsider how reasonable it is to be obtuse on this one, it doesn't check out!
 
Seriously though, reconsider how reasonable it is to be obtuse on this one, it doesn't check out!
I am not being obtuse, you are asking me to accept ‘polling’ from groups inherently invested in controlling what the public believes. There is ample historical evidence of such data being shown to be outright lies with no consequences for the fake data creators, no evidence of any visible movement or organizations trying to affect this type of change in a loud and large manner that would at least prove it another way, nor even if we just concede the theory it is true that it is anyway a priority for the people supporting it beyond ‘yeah I think elections should be fair sure I guess can I go back to GTA5 now?’

Sir Muttley, I am indeed saddened you are getting so flustered about such a simple thing as healthy skepticism in light of this cornucopia of ‘trust me bro stop being so obtuse dude! Gotta smack yourself!’

Quite unbecoming.
 
You said it was a threesome with George! I am not flustered I was trying to be cool and fuck off a bit

But what is wrong with someone wanting voter ID "sure that makes sense whatever" and going back to GTA? What do you think there is some reason born of deep insight and introspection that you'll decide you don't want to make sure it's only citizens voting?

The only real reasons to be against it are you stand on the issue as voter's rights for support as a democrat, or maybe, you're some kind of retard libertarian who views it as some kind of liberty violation. If you're someone inclined towards either of those positions, let's say you're black and you think the man is out to stop you from voting, you already know. You're not mistakenly answering yes to get back to GTA5. You already know off-hand. Same with the libertarian retard, he already has his list of issues.

But the thing is this, this an issue where almost all right wing people minus some libertarians support voter ID, and there's quite a few moderate liberals/democrats who do too, and there are also people in the socialist and tankie camps even who favor it too, as a proletarian issue.

Unless you are talking to black people it's way harder to find people who are against voter ID than who are for it.
 
But the thing is this, this an issue where almost all right wing people minus some libertarians support voter ID, and there's quite a few moderate liberals/democrats who do too, and there are also people in the socialist and tankie camps even who favor it too, as a proletarian issue.

Unless you are talking to black people it's way harder to find people who are against voter ID than who are for it
These are all arguments you are making but I don’t see any actual work proving it though.

The argument I am making is that the data you are relying on is as likely to come from a pajeet masturbating than real polling. Polling that I remind you only includes sample sizes which then are used to infer the national average. Which is in itself always been a flawed metric.

And beyond that the number of people who truly give a shit about politics beyond prices and employment, is like 30%. Remember the average turnout during presidential elections.

So again, 80%? Lol, okay. See you tomorrow if you have more silly arguments to throw here.
 
Okay but we're not talking about who's showing up to the polls to vote on the issues, your hypothetical was literally an annoyed person trying to go back to GTA5, the average guy.

You were talking about what they thought and I am saying it's easier to find someone who wants voter ID than doesn't. If you took any 10 people at random the mean of those who will support will be >5.
 
I am not being obtuse, you are asking me to accept ‘polling’ from groups inherently invested in controlling what the public believes. There is ample historical evidence of such data being shown to be outright lies with no consequences for the fake data creators, no evidence of any visible movement or organizations trying to affect this type of change in a loud and large manner that would at least prove it another way, nor even if we just concede the theory it is true that it is anyway a priority for the people supporting it beyond ‘yeah I think elections should be fair sure I guess can I go back to GTA5 now?’

Sir Muttley, I am indeed saddened you are getting so flustered about such a simple thing as healthy skepticism in light of this cornucopia of ‘trust me bro stop being so obtuse dude! Gotta smack yourself!’

Quite unbecoming.
Counterpoint: you need more proof to buy a 18 pack of Busch Light than you do to vote.
 
I guess we will see in ten days. Let me know where this 80% clamoring for SAVE is, I am sure they are organizing protests and calling their representatives demanding they pass it, that’s how such a large massive demographic concerned about secure elections would act…right?

lol. Some troll 🧌
"If you don't organize a protest then you must not support it".

You're fucking retarded.
 
"If you don't organize a protest then you must not support it".

You're fucking retarded.
I understand your frustration, Bachelor Philosopher
ezgif.com-video-to-gif-converter.gif

But I find your arguments seem unconvincing

You were talking about what they thought and I am saying it's easier to find someone who wants voter ID than doesn't. If you took any 10 people at random the mean of those who will support will be >5.
This is a supposition, but have you provided anything to gife it weight?

Counterpoint: you need more proof to buy a 18 pack of Busch Light than you do to vote
True, never said it wasn’t. Though considering the deterioration of some areas I question if that is still universally true or just what we believe is still true.

Sorry my brethren, I must sleep for I have work in the morn. Sperg on simple refusal to blindly accept ‘trust me bro’ arguments, I will visit again once the dawn rises anew!
IMG_1443.gif
 
Ostatnio edytowane:
I understand your frustration, Bachelor Philosopher
Wyświetl załącznik 9189929
But I find your arguments seem unconvincing
I bet you're considerably more fucked up and ugly than whoever that guy is. Post a video of you doing the same thing. Bet you won't.

You're supposition is that people must not support it because they haven't personally organized a protest. That is retarded. You are retarded. You didn't even deny it.
 
Wstecz
Top Na dole