Donald Trump blasted Lindsey Graham on Monday, arguing the senator’s outspoken conservative stance in favor of strict abortion limits is politically disastrous for Republicans.

The South Carolina senator had “respectfully” disagreed with Trump’s stance, announced Monday morning, that abortion limits should be left up to individual states. Graham reiterated his own support for a controversial 15-week ban — illustrating rare daylight between the two men, who started off as political rivals but became close allies during Trump’s presidency.

“Many Good Republicans lost Elections because of this Issue, and people like Lindsey Graham, that are unrelenting, are handing Democrats their dream of the House, Senate, and perhaps even the Presidency,” Trump wrote on his Truth Social platform, shortly after Graham issued his statement.

Graham specifically asserted the notion of leaving abortion decisions to the states was wrong. He vowed to continue pursuing a national minimum standard limiting care after 15 weeks of a pregnancy — a bill that conservatives applauded when the South Carolinian introduced it last term but was panned as politically unhelpful by many Republicans, given it had no chance of passing Congress.

And in the Capitol hallways Monday afternoon, Graham was undeterred by Trump’s attacks on him. He argued his position opposing abortions after 15 weeks is broadly popular but declined to directly address Trump’s personal hits.

“We should draw a line,” Graham said in a brief interview. “I believe what I believe. … The idea of the Republican Party abandoning the opposition to late-term abortion, I think would be a mistake, because most Americans oppose late-term abortion.”

Asked if he would once again introduce his 15-week abortion ban, Graham replied: “We’ll talk about that.” He clarified that he did support in-vitro fertilization, as well as exceptions for abortions in cases of rape, incest and to protect the life with the mother. And the South Carolinian added that he took some solace in the fact that Trump’s statement did not explicitly threaten a veto of legislation like his.

“I think he’s been a good pro-life president. We’ll see,” Graham said.

Unlike the GOP senator, Trump wasn’t afraid to get more personal in his critiques, over a series of social media posts. The former president said “I blame myself for Lindsey Graham” and urged the South Carolina Republican and Marjorie Dannenfelser — the president of leading anti-abortion group Susan B. Anthony Pro-Life America, who had also expressed disappointment with Trump’s stance — to study the Constitution.

“When they do, they should proudly get on with helping Republicans to WIN ELECTIONS, rather than making it impossible for them to do so!” Trump wrote in another post.

Graham and Trump have been close allies — and frequent golfing buddies — in recent years, but they enjoy a complicated history. Back in 2016, when the South Carolinian was fresh off an unsuccessful presidential bid, argued Republicans should have “kicked him out of the party” and described Trump as a “a race-baiting, xenophobic, religious bigot” in December 2015.

In the hours following the Jan. 6 attack on the Capitol, Graham took to the Senate floor to say “Trump and I, we’ve had a hell of a journey” but “all I can say is count me out. Enough is enough.”

More recently, though, the former president defended last summer Graham amid a hostile crowd in South Carolina, saying the senator is “there when you need him” amid a chorus of boos from rally-goers.

Other Republicans had Trump’s back on his abortion stance, though they argued his announcement wouldn’t have much of an effect on lawmakers.

“As a practical matter, I don’t see 60 votes for a national standard,” Sen. John Cornyn (R-Texas), who is running to be the next Senate GOP leader, said in a brief interview. “Everybody’s entitled to their opinion, but I think I agree with President Trump.”

Ursula Perano contributed to this report.

The Justice Department is rebuffing House Republicans’ demands to hand over audio of former special counsel Robert Hur’s interview with President Joe Biden.

The DOJ sent a letter to Oversight Chair James Comer (R-Ky.) and Judiciary Committee Chair Jim Jordan (R-Ohio) saying it would not turn over the audio by the House GOP’s Monday deadline. Officials warned that handing over the interview audio could negatively impact future investigations.

“Even assuming the Committees did have a remaining investigative purpose behind their request for the audio files that has not been rebutted by the information produced so far — and they has not identified one — it is critical for the Department to understand why the Committees believe they have a remaining need for the information in these files,” assistant attorney general Carlos Uriarte wrote in the letter to Comer and Jordan, a copy of which was obtained by POLITICO.

They did, however, hand over the transcript of the Hur team interview with Mark Zwonitzer, Biden’s ghost writer.

House Republicans have warned they could hold Attorney General Merrick Garland in contempt of Congress if the Justice Department didn’t hand over information from Hur’s investigation into Biden’s handling of classified documents. The Justice Department previously handed over transcripts of Hur’s interview with Biden, as well as providing access to documents referenced in his report, but Republicans specifically wanted the audio of the interview.

Hur’s report said that Biden would be perceived in any court proceedings as a “sympathetic, well-meaning elderly man with a poor memory,” a description Republicans quickly latched onto.

Spokespeople for Comer and Jordan didn’t immediately respond to the Justice Department letter. Republicans doubled down on their request for audio of the interview in a letter last month, telling the Justice Department that the House GOP’s subpoena creates a “legal obligation” for the DOJ to hand it over.

Republicans requested information related to Hur’s investigation as part of their sweeping impeachment inquiry into Biden. While that probe has largely focused on the business deals of his family members, it’s also folded in his handling of classified documents.

The Justice Department, in its response on Monday, said granting access to the audio recording increases the likelihood that “future prosecutors will be unable to secure this level of cooperation” and “risks seriously chilling our ability to conduct investigations and prosecutions.”

And officials offered a broad criticism of the House GOP’s contempt threat, given that they have handed over or provided access to a swath of documents from Hur’s investigation.

“We are therefore concerned that the Committees are disappointed not because you didn’t receive information, but because you did. We urge the Committees to avoid conflict rather than seek,” Uriarte added.

Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) on Monday broke with Donald Trump over the former president’s call for states to set any future limits on abortion — a rare glimpse of daylight between the presumptive nominee and conservative lawmakers.

“I respectfully disagree with President Trump’s statement that abortion is a states’ rights issue,” Graham said in a statement. Trump also declined to endorse any national limits on abortion, including the 15-week limit that Graham has controversially floated in the past.

The South Carolina Republican added that he would stand by his call for “a national minimum standard limiting abortion at fifteen weeks.” He has, however, yet to reintroduce his legislation proposing that standard during the current Congress.

Trump said in 2016 that “there has to be some form of punishment” for women who seek abortion care and has touted his efforts to pave the way for the Supreme Court’s 2022 reversal of Roe v. Wade. Given that past rhetoric, Democrats are unlikely to stop hitting him on the issue as it continues to split Trump from his party’s right flank.

It rained plenty last week in the nation’s capital during the last week of Congress’ recess. But as lawmakers return, the only thing they’ll find at the end of any rainbow is a cavalcade of outstanding issues to address.

Foreign aid: Watch Speaker Mike Johnson this week for any indication of how he plans to proceed on a foreign aid package aimed at helping Ukraine and Israel, as he’s floated “innovations” to garner more GOP support for the legislation.

DHS impeachment: The Senate returns tonight and will vote to advance the nomination of a Nebraska federal judicial nominee. However, the week’s real action kicks off Wednesday, when the chamber is expected to receive the articles of impeachment against Alejandro Mayorkas.

One key thing to watch Monday night: Any signs of senatorial attendance issues, as Democrats mull whether to try and speedily end the Homeland Security secretary impeachment trial on a majority-threshold vote. Any major absences could complicate that math.

Surveillance authority: Over in the House, the chamber intends to move legislation to reauthorize a controversial surveillance authority, known as Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act. The House Rules Committee intends to meet on Tuesday to consider the pending bill.

The House returns to Washington for its first votes of the week on Tuesday.

Speaker Mike Johnson is kicking off a third round of debate over a controversial surveillance power with a warning to his conference: If they fail, they could be jammed by the Senate.

Johnson’s letter to his colleagues comes as the House is expected to vote next week on legislation reauthorizing and making changes to Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA). The spy power targets foreigners outside of the United States, but has come under scrutiny for its ability to sweep in Americans.

It remains far from clear if the House will be able to pass the bill, or even get it to the floor. Republicans’ infighting, and their single-digit margin, has already forced Johnson to punt twice, and there’s lingering skepticism this go-round will end differently. Congress has until April 19 to reauthorize the spy authority.

Johnson, in his letter, warned that if the House fails for a third time to pass a bill, the Senate will send it a so-called “clean” extension of the spy power with no changes, potentially boxing the House into accepting that or letting the authority lapse.

“If our bill fails, we will be faced with an impossible choice and can expect the Senate to jam us with a clean extension that includes no reforms at all. That is clearly an unacceptable option,” Johnson wrote in the letter.

The bill rolled out by House Republicans on Friday largely resembles a proposal from February that would extend the program, while also making changes aimed at bolstering oversight and training and the program’s transparency.

But Friday’s bill includes a notable change from the February bill — it appears to remove a section on reports to Congress related to commercially available data. The language was added into the bill in February by leadership so that a bipartisan proposal restricting data brokers from selling consumer information to law enforcement could get a vote as part of the House’s debate on Section 702, despite being unrelated to the authority. The move in February infuriated Intelligence Committee Republicans and led to them threatening to tank the bill. Johnson instead punted for a second time.

Johnson doesn’t address the change in his Friday letter — though he noted that he’ll hold a series of meetings with his members next week about the bill. A coalition of Judiciary Committee Republicans and Freedom Caucus members have made getting a vote on the data broker amendment one of their red lines.

They didn’t immediately weigh in Friday after the legislation was rolled out. Several aides involved in the debate indicated they were in a wait-and-see mode, while others warned that the amendment’s absence could imperil Johnson’s ability to bring a bill to the floor for a third time. In a potential fig leaf, House Republican leadership announced on Friday night that they could take up the proposal separately as a standalone bill next week.

That won’t be the only fight as Johnson tries to bring a bill to the floor next week.

A coalition of privacy hawks and the intelligence community and its allies are gearing up for a contentious fight over a proposal to require a warrant before searching data collected under Section 702 for information related to Americans. The provision is not in the bill released on Friday but is expected to get a vote as part of the debate.

Including a warrant requirement for searches related to Americans has been a long-sought goal for a bipartisan coalition that spans progressive, privacy-minded lawmakers and libertarian-leaning Republicans. They’ve seen their ranks grow in recent years after a series of high-profile missteps by the FBI, which also led to a series of internal reforms within the bureau.

But the administration, and intelligence community allies on Capitol Hill, are warning that requiring a warrant would effectively neuter Section 702. Intelligence community officials are scheduled to brief the House on Wednesday, where they will likely make that point behind closed doors as well.

A senior administration official said they were “optimistic” that they could be able to defeat a warrant requirement amendment. (Senior administration officials declined to say during a call with reporters on Friday if the White House would threaten to veto the bill if a warrant requirement is added, noting it’s up to President Joe Biden.)

“It will be a real detriment to the American people and national security,” a senior administration official said.

The warrant requirement proposal is getting a vote as part of a deal with leadership ensuring that members of both the Intelligence Committee and the Judiciary Committee, who are on opposite sides of the debate, would get amendment votes. And outside groups are keeping a close eye on what amendments the two panels put forward as part of Tuesday’s meeting in the Rules Committee to tee up the floor debate.

The American Immigration Council sent a memo to congressional Democrats urging them to vote against an amendment, if it is offered by Intelligence Committee members, that would allow foreigners who are applying for a visa, immigration or asylum to be vetted under Section 702.

“Expanding the warrantless surveillance of immigrants traveling to the United States is unnecessary and will only further exacerbate visa processing backlogs,” the immigration advocacy group wrote in the memo, a copy of which was obtained by POLITICO.

Tim Kaine, Democrats’ vice presidential nominee in 2016 and a leading voice in the party on foreign policy, delivered a rare rebuke of the Biden administration’s approach to Israel on Friday — the latest sign of a growing groundswell of discontent after a strike in Gaza killed seven aid workers.

The Virginia senator said in a statement that American’s current position toward its ally is “not working,” adding that Israeli’s deadly attack on World Central Kitchen workers this week “crystallizes the frustration that is at a boiling point.”

Kaine praised President Joe Biden for nudging Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu “to open another border crossing from Israel to allow robust delivery of humanitarian aid. But this was an obvious solution that should have happened months ago.” He added that the Biden administration should prioritize giving Israel defensive weapons while “withholding bombs and other offensive weapons that can kill and wound civilians and humanitarian aid workers.”

His statement follows renewed pressure on Biden to get tougher from a longtime critic of the Israeli government, Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.).

Asked what Biden’s message to the Israeli leader should be, the prominent progressive and vocal Netanyahu critic replied to the “Pod Save America” podcast in an episode released Friday: “Mr. Netanyahu, I’m here to inform you that … if thousands of trucks do not get in to start feeding starving people — all military aid will cease. Have a nice day.”

“One day the president is angry at Netanyahu, the next day he’s very angry. And the next day is very, very angry, you know. So what?” added Sanders, in a pointed bit of criticism just two days after appearing with Biden at a White House drug pricing event. “You cannot continue to talk about your worries about [the] humanitarian situation in Gaza, and then give Netanyahu $10 billion or more bombs. You cannot do that. That is hypocritical.”

The $10 billion figure is a reference to the Senate-passed foreign aid package that Sanders recently opposed over its unconditional aid for Israel; it also included assistance for Ukraine and Taiwan. It faces an uncertain future in the GOP-led House as Speaker Mike Johnson mulls how to proceed.

Sanders, whose liberal supporters represent a constituency that Biden has struggled to win over ahead of the November election, acknowledged that many Palestinian Americans and young people are frustrated with Biden’s handling of Israel’s ongoing war in Gaza. But, he argued, voting for Donald Trump or a third-party candidate this fall would lead to worse outcomes.

“I say to that young person: Your gut feeling is right,” Sanders continued. “But all that I ask is, let’s not make a horrible situation even worse. Trump will be worse on that issue, let alone every other issue.”

Sanders, who ran against Biden in Democrats’ 2020 presidential primary, said he’s “working day and night” to move the president on Israel. He urged frustrated young voters to help out progressives — like Reps. Jamaal Bowman (D-N.Y.) and Cori Bush (D-Mo.) — who’ve faced attacks from the American Israel Public Affairs Committee in their competitive primaries.

“Support the many many good progressive candidates who are today under assault from AIPAC and other super PACs out there,” Sanders advised young progressives.

Majority Leader Chuck Schumer has a long to-do list in the coming weeks, from the impeachment trial of Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas to lapsing surveillance authorities to foreign aid.

In a dear colleague letter released Friday, Schumer said senators will be sworn in as jurors for the Mayorkas trial on Wednesday. He added that “your presence next week is essential,” nodding to the possibility Democrats move to quickly dismiss the trial, which only requires a simple majority-threshold vote.

Schumer also said he’s spoken to Speaker Mike Johnson on foreign aid and “I believe that he understands the threat of further delaying” the Senate-passed package, which includes billions in funds for Ukraine, Israel and Taiwan as well as humanitarian assistance. Johnson has not committed to moving on the Senate bill and has floated alternative paths for foreign aid, and his timeline for any floor vote is unclear.

“It is a matter of the highest urgency that Speaker Johnson and House Leadership put the Senate’s bipartisan supplemental package on the House floor, because I am confident that if he puts it on the floor, it will pass,” the majority leader wrote.

Plus, the Senate leader said his chamber “must be ready to act quickly on a bipartisan basis” once the House passes legislation reauthorizing the controversial surveillance authority, known as Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, ahead of an April 19 lapse. House GOP leaders have struggled to build consensus around a reauthorization bill, amid party infighting.

And Schumer floated possible action to rebuild the collapsed Francis Scott Key Bridge in Baltimore, though he noted quick movement would require “bipartisan cooperation.” Schumer also mentioned reauthorizing legislation on the Federal Aviation Administration before a May 10 deadline. Other possible activity includes expanding the Child Tax Credit, action on the House-passed TikTok legislation, rail safety legislation and cannabis banking, among other areas.

The House Freedom Caucus signaled Friday that they’re open to giving federal funds to rebuild the Francis Scott Key Bridge in Baltimore, but they have a few significant conditions.

The conservative hardliners’ caveats include: They want the Biden administration to reverse course on its pause on new export terminal permits for liquefied natural gas (LNG) and for any spending to be fully offset by cuts elsewhere. Notably, Speaker Mike Johnson had recently floated a proposal to link long-stalled Ukraine aid with easing that same energy policy.

Meanwhile, Biden is preparing to visit the site of the collapsed bridge on Friday, and Office of Management and Budget director Shalanda Young asked congressional leaders to authorize “a 100 percent Federal cost share” in a Friday letter.

While federal funding to help rebuild the bridge has gotten bipartisan backing, the Freedom Caucus’ position shows the challenges ahead as Congress mulls its response. Johnson wouldn’t necessarily need those votes to pass a spending bill, assuming widespread Democratic support, but he could be wary of further angering his right flank, particularly with a pending effort to boot him from the speakership.

And it’s not just Freedom Caucus Republicans who’ve cautioned against a hasty federal response to the Baltimore tragedy. Many GOP lawmakers have urged that officials exhaust existing federal pots of money before considering new spending.

“If it proves necessary to appropriate taxpayer money to get one of America’s busiest ports back online, Congress should ensure it is fully offset and that burdensome regulations … are waived,” the Freedom Caucus position reads, pointing to various environmental and labor rules.

The group also demanded pursuit of “maximum liability from the foreign shipping companies upfront” and said the Biden administration’s LNG export permitting pause “must be lifted” before Congress considers any emergency funds.