Trump backs languishing Russia sanctions bill — with path forward unclear: ‘Growing very frustrated’
A White House official told The Post that President Trump “supports this legislation,” for which he’d previously signaled support, though stopped short of full-throated endorsement. Getty Images
Rep. Brian Fitzpatrick argued that the United States must sharply escalate economic pressure on Russia to force Moscow into serious negotiations to end its war with Ukraine.
“When it comes to Russia, I think we need to do everything possible to strangle their economy to force them to actually come to the negotiating table, which they’ve not been willing to do honestly with Ukraine,” Fitzpatrick said. “This is a matter of war and peace. This is existential and critical.”
Fitzpatrick said he is proud of the sanctions legislation and emphasized that President Trump supports its passage. “I’m proud of this bill and that the president actually really does want this to pass Congress,” he added.
Some officials have previously warned that sweeping sanctions could undermine peace talks aimed at ending the nearly four-year conflict. However, optimism has faded as the Kremlin has continued to resist proposals put forward by U.S. Special Envoy Steve Witkoff and Jared Kushner following extended negotiations with both Moscow and Kyiv.
Kremlin Pushback
Russia’s Foreign Ministry strongly criticized a central component of the proposal on Thursday — a joint U.S.-European plan to provide security assurances to Ukraine — calling it “a true axis of war.”
According to the ministry, the plan is “extremely far from a peace settlement” and instead promotes “militarization, escalation and further conflict aggravation,” particularly through measures designed to deter Russia from launching another invasion if a cease-fire were reached.
Tensions escalated further this week after U.S. forces seized a Russian-flagged oil tanker as part of a quarantine on Venezuelan oil exports. Ukrainian officials said the move demonstrated that President Trump is willing to exert economic pressure on Moscow.
The Kremlin condemned the seizure as “a gross violation of fundamental principles and norms.” The action also carries an “America First” component: the U.S. is expected to oversee Venezuelan crude oil sales, positioning Washington to challenge Russia’s influence in global energy markets.
Economic analysts predict that increased Venezuelan oil sales under U.S. oversight could drive down global crude prices — a strategy President Trump has long supported as a way to weaken Russia’s war financing.
Legislative Uncertainty
The sanctions bill has been stalled for months as House Speaker Mike Johnson and Senate Majority Leader John Thune have disagreed over which chamber should take it up first. Both chambers are under pressure to complete annual appropriations bills before government funding expires on Jan. 30.
That impasse has led some lawmakers to consider alternative tactics. One Democratic lawmaker said a discharge petition could be used to force a House vote.
Fitzpatrick said he believes such a petition could secure the required 218 signatures and rejected claims that the legislation would interfere with diplomacy.
“It gives him [President Trump] another arrow in his quiver when it comes to bringing peace,” Fitzpatrick said. “And it’s not gonna interrupt peace talks.”
While the Senate version of the bill has more than 80 co-sponsors, aides say some Democrats oppose its proposed tariffs. The legislation, authored by Sen. Lindsey Graham, would impose a 500% tariff on countries that import Russian energy — a major source of revenue for Moscow’s war effort.
“One of my biggest longstanding frustrations with Dems when it comes to Russia — all talk, little action,” said a source familiar with the internal debate.
Which Chamber Moves First?
Senate leaders suggested this week that the bill is more likely to originate in the House, citing constitutional rules requiring revenue measures to start there.
“I think it probably originates in the House,” Thune told reporters. He added that Sen. Graham has been coordinating closely with the White House and that signals from President Trump suggest the timing may now be right.
Johnson, however, has argued that moving the bill through the Senate first could be faster if it passes with a large bipartisan margin.
“A revenue measure does need to emanate in the House. That is true,” Fitzpatrick said. “It is a lot quicker in the Senate. That’s also true.”
Despite the procedural debate, Fitzpatrick stressed the urgency of action. “The question is whether the Senate has a fast-track method to expedite this,” he said. “But I think it’s gotta move.”
About Post Author
