What we know about the 45-day ceasefire proposal for war with Iran
President Donald Trump speaks as U.S. Secretary of War Pete Hegseth (C) and Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff General Dan Caine look on. (Andrew Harnik/Getty Images)
(WASHINGTON) — President Donald Trump on Monday called a proposal to end the war with Iran a “significant step” but “not good enough” to persuade him to end his military campaign.
“They are negotiating now, and they have made a very significant step,” Trump said to reporters as he attended the annual White House Easter Egg Roll. “We’ll see what happens.”
It was not immediately clear which proposal Trump was referring to. The president had touted ongoing negotiations with more “moderate” parties but tensions ramped up over the weekend after the downing of a U.S. fighter plane.
According to a U.S. official and another person close to the ongoing talks, mediators are attempting broker a 45-day ceasefire between the U.S. and Iran ahead of Trump’s latest deadline, which calls for Iran to fully open the Strait of Hormuz by 8 p.m. ET on Tuesday or face attacks on bridges and energy infrastructure.
Iran signaled it would not accept the mediators’ proposal on Monday, responding instead with its own 10-point plan, which a U.S. official described as maximalist.
In the past, Iran has said it wants a permanent commitment from the U.S. to end the attacks rather than a shorter-term ceasefire.
Trump has moved the deadline several times citing progress in ongoing negotiations only to renew the threat of military destruction once again.
Both sources downplayed expectations that a deal could be reached in time, saying that so far Iran has refused to cede what it views as its main leverage in the negotiations: control over the Strait of Hormuz and its stockpile of highly enriched uranium.
“We are obliterating their country. And I hate to do it, but we’re obliterating and they just don’t want to say ‘uncle.’ They don’t want to cry, as the expression goes, ‘uncle.’ But they will,” Trump said. “And if they don’t, they’ll have no bridges, they’ll have no power plants, they’ll have no anything.”
But the president also seemed to acknowledge that the conflict was unpopular domestically.
“Unfortunately, the American people would like to see us come home,” he said.
Earlier on Monday, a White House official said the proposal was just “one of many ideas” and indicated that the president had not signed off on it.
Mediators are floating confidence-building measures aimed at bringing both sides closer to an agreement, sources say, and stressing to the Iranian regime that even though Trump has previously moved back deadlines he has set, Tehran would likely need to signal a willingness to make major concessions in order to buy more time for negotiations to play out.
In their public messaging, Iranian leaders have signaled little room for compromise, issuing demands the U.S. views as maximalist.
Mediators have floated the idea that perhaps access to the Strait of Hormuz and the elimination of Iran’s uranium stockpile could be fully resolved after a ceasefire is reached. However, a U.S. official said it appeared highly unlikely the Trump administration could be convinced to accept those terms–particularly on the Strait of Hormuz.
Bill Clinton speaks onstage during the Clinton Global Initiative 2025 Annual Meeting at New York Hilton Midtown on September 25, 2025 in New York City. (Photo by JP Yim/Getty Images for New York Hilton Midtown)
(WASHINGTON) — Former President Bill Clinton, in his opening statement at his historic closed-door deposition before the Republican-led House Oversight Committee on Friday, denied any knowledge of the crimes committed by convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein, going on to say making his wife Hillary Clinton testify “was simply not right.”
In his statement as released, he stated that he will often say, “I do not recall” throughout his questioning because the events were “all a long time ago.”
“I saw nothing, and I did nothing wrong,” Clinton said, according to the statement.
The former president is being grilled by the committee as part of its investigation into Epstein in Chappaqua, New York — marking a historic moment for a former president. Friday’s deposition is the first time a former president has been compelled to testify before a congressional panel.
He is facing questions under oath about his relationship with Epstein and photos that show the former president with both Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell, Epstein’s co-conspirator who was sentenced to 20 years in prison for sex trafficking and other crimes.
The former president’s testimony comes a day after the committee questioned former Secretary of State and first lady Hillary Clinton over the couple’s dealings with the convicted sex offender.
On Friday, Bill Clinton said he had to “get personal” and blasted the committee for forcing his wife to answer their questions.
“You made Hillary come in. She had nothing to do with Jeffrey Epstein. Nothing. She has no memory of even meeting him. She neither traveled with him nor visited any of his properties,” he said in his statements as released. “Whether you subpoenaed 10 people or 10,000, including her was simply not right.”
In her deposition Thursday, Hillary Clinton said she did not know Epstein, could not recall ever encountering him and never visited him on his island or at his home or office.
Hillary Clinton, on Thursday, also gave a preview of how her husband, former President Bill Clinton, will handle his own deposition.
“I think it is fair to say that the vast majority of people who had contact with him before his criminal pleas in ’08 were like most people — they did not know what he was doing. And I think that that is exactly what my husband will testify to tomorrow,” she said.
Neither Bill Clinton nor Hillary Clinton has been accused of wrongdoing and both deny having any knowledge of Epstein’s crimes.
No Epstein survivor or associate has ever made a public allegation of wrongdoing or inappropriate behavior by the former president or his wife in connection with his prior relationship with Epstein.
Bill Clinton said in his opening statement that he had “no idea of the crimes Epstein was committing.”
“No matter how many photos you show me, I have two things that at the end of the day matter more than your interpretation of those 20-year-old photos. I know what I saw, and more importantly, what I didn’t see. I know what I did, and more importantly, what I didn’t do,” he said in his statement as released.
Oversight Committee Chairman James Comer reiterated Friday morning that the Clintons have been called to testify to try to answer questions about Epstein.
“No one’s accusing anyone of any wrongdoing, but I think the American people have a lot of questions, and our House Oversight Committee is committed to getting answers,” Comer said Friday morning.
Bill Clinton’s association with Epstein was first noted publicly in 2002 after reporters learned of the former president’s flight that year on Epstein’s jet for a humanitarian mission to multiple African nations.
Bill Clinton told New York Magazine through a spokesperson at the time that “Jeffrey is both a highly successful financier and a committed philanthropist with a keen sense of global markets and an in-depth knowledge of 21st century science.”
Maxwell said in a recorded interview last year with Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche, that it was she, not Epstein, who had a friendship with Bill Clinton, and that she was the one who suggested and organized his trips on Epstein’s aircraft.
The Clintons were subpoenaed to appear under oath in front of the committee for a deposition in January, but failed to comply, arguing the subpoenas were without legal merit. Rather, they proposed a four-hour transcribed interview instead.
David Kendall, the Clintons’ lawyer, argued that the couple has no information relevant to the committee’s investigation of the federal government’s handling of investigations into Epstein and Maxwell, and should not be required to appear for in-person testimony.
Kendall contended the Clintons should be permitted to provide the limited information they have to the committee in writing.
Comer had long threatened to hold the Clintons in contempt if they failed to appear before the committee, so when they didn’t, a contempt resolution was drafted and put to a vote.
The Oversight Committee passed the contempt resolution with nine Democrats voting in favor of it, teeing it up for a full House vote.
At the last minute, just before the resolution was to be voted on in the House, the Clintons agreed to sit for a deposition, postponing further consideration of a contempt vote.
Democrats on the committee said they hope this week’s testimony from the Clintons spark Republican committee members to investigate more of Epstein’s ties to President Donald Trump.
Trump has repeatedly denied any knowledge of Epstein’s crimes and has said that he cut off contact with his former friend more than 20 years ago.
“We have said from day one that we want to talk to former President Bill Clinton, and the other person we want to talk to is current President Donald Trump,” Rep. Robert Garcia, the top Democrat on the committee, said Friday. “And so we should be very clear that now that we’re going to hear from former President Clinton, I hope that Chairman Comer and the Republicans will join us in demanding that the person who actually appears more times in the files than the former president who we want to speak with is President Donald Trump.”
While the Clintons have agreed to speak with the committee behind closed doors, they have still pushed for public hearings as part of the committee’s investigation.
“I will not sit idly as they use me as a prop in a closed-door kangaroo court by a Republican Party running scared,” Bill Clinton wrote in a lengthy post on X. “If they want answers, let’s stop the games & do this the right way: in a public hearing, where the American people can see for themselves what this is really about.”
House Majority Leader Steve Scalise, R-Louisiana, appears on ABC News’ “This Week” on March 29, 2026. (ABC News)
(WASHINGTON) — House Majority Leader Steve Scalise did not refute the possibility of American ground troops entering Iran when asked on Sunday, even as many in his party have voiced concerns about such a move.
“There are no boots on the ground today, but we’re having a lot of conversations about what could happen next,” Scalise told ABC News’ “This Week” co-anchor Jonathan Karl. “But I think most people, most civilized people, recognize a nuclear-armed Iran is not an option that any of us want.”
The war with Iran has now surpassed a month of fighting and some congressional Republicans — including Scalise’s Louisiana colleague Sen. John Kennedy — have said President Donald Trump would need to come to Congress to seek authorization for any ground troops in Iran. When asked by Karl if he agreed with that proposition, Scalise did not answer directly, but said that Trump had already done that.
“The president has already come to Congress,” Scalise said. “They’ve let all of the congressional leadership know in advance of the strikes, but they’ve also had briefings on Capitol Hill.”
He added, “I was at one of those classified briefings with Republicans and Democrats, and they took questions from everybody. There were a lot of questions from people on both sides.”
Trump never officially sought congressional authorization before the war with Iran began, but his administration alerted a select group of top lawmakers, known as the “Gang of Eight,” before the initial strikes. And while the president continues to call the operation a “war,” he has also said that he cannot call it a war because he did not seek authorization from Congress.
Scalise said that he would not answer whether there would be widespread support from Republicans for ground troops in Iran because it has not yet happened.
“We’re not at that point yet. Obviously you’re seeing troop movement and we’ve got a number of bases in that region, too, that have been there for a long time,” Scalise said. “So until that day comes, I’m not going to speculate, and you’re not going to see the president go negotiate this in public.”
In a separate interview on “This Week,” Sen. Chris Van Hollen, D-Md., said Congress should not allocate any more money “for an illegal war of choice.”
“[This is] a war that is now making us less, not more safe and has already cost American lives, is costing billions of dollars every day, oil and gas prices are going up,” Van Hollen, a member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, said. “So the president who said he was going to focus on bringing down prices and ending foreign wars has started foreign wars along with Prime Minister Netanyahu and prices are going through the roof. So no, we should not keep funding an illegal war of choice that’s making us less safe.”
Unlike Scalise, Van Hollen does not believe the administration’s briefings have been substantive enough.
“I have been to these briefings,” Van Hollen said. “What you learned in these briefings is exactly what you’re hearing outside the briefings, which is they don’t have any particular objective. It’s a constantly changing objective. And there’s no endgame whatsoever.”
President Donald Trump speaks as Vice President JD Vance listens in the Oval Office of the White House, March 16, 2026, in Washington. (Alex Wong/Getty Images)
(WASHINGTON) — The Senate is expected to take up the SAVE America Act this week after President Donald Trump earlier this month thrust the bill into focus with a threat to withhold his signature on all other legislation until the GOP voting reform bill hits his desk.
Debate on the bill could kick off in the Senate as soon as Tuesday, but on Monday the president seemed doubtful that it would get to his desk.
“I think it’s imperative that it gets done. I’m not sure it is,” Trump said when asked about the bill’s outlook.
“I hope [Senate Majority Leader] John Thune can get it across the line. He’s trying. I mean, he told me this morning. I spoke to him, he’s trying,” Trump said. “I think it’ll be a very, very bad thing for our country if they don’t. We’re just asking for basic things,” Trump said.
Things could get quite heated on the floor, but ultimately the legislation, despite having a passionate base of GOP supporters, will almost certainly fail.
Here’s a look at what to know about this bill as it takes center stage this week:
What is the SAVE America Act?
The SAVE America Act is a Republican-led election reform bill that would require photo ID at polling places and mandate that states obtain proof of citizenship before registering a person to vote in a federal election.
Trump has said that passing the SAVE America Act is a top priority. The president has also tacked additional provisions onto the list of things he would like to see in the law: restricting mail-in ballots, banning transgender women from playing in women’s sports and gender-affirming surgeries for minors.
Will the bill the Senate is considering include Trump’s additional demands?
The Senate is expected to consider amendments to the SAVE America Act aimed at adding Trump’s demands. But those amendments would need 60 votes to pass, and are not expected to get enough support to ultimately be tacked onto the bill.
What do Democrats think of the bill?
Senate Democrats have been clear they intend to oppose this legislation, which they say would make it more difficult for millions of Americans to vote.
During a press call on Sunday, Democratic Leader Chuck Schumer called the bill “one of the most despicable pieces of legislation I’ve come across in the many years I’ve been a legislator.”
Democrats have been quick to underscore that the bill does more than require voters to show ID at the polling place. They say it amounts to an effort to nationalize elections and could lead to many people being turned away at their polling place.
What can be expected on the Senate floor this week?
The Senate is expected to hold a potentially lengthy debate on the floor this week as they consider the bill.
It will be a contentious couple of days during which the floor will be open for nearly unlimited debate on the bill. This debate could stretch into this weekend, but the result is already baked. When lawmakers run out of steam to keep debating, there will be a vote to move forward with the bill that requires 60 votes to advance. Democrats will almost certainly block it, and the bill will fail.
Will the SAVE America Act pass?
It is highly unlikely that the SAVE America Act will pass the Senate.
Though there’s going to be a lot of debate on the bill, the Senate rules that require 60 votes to pass most legislative matters will remain intact. That means that even if every Senate Republican were to cast a vote in favor of this legislation, at least seven Democrats would need to support it for it to pass.
Democrats have vowed to block the bill. Without their support, it will fail.
Could senators change the rules?
Yes, they could. But they won’t.
The Senate filibuster rule requires 60 votes to pass most legislative matters into law. Senators have the ability to change their rules with a simple majority of votes, and they’ve faced considerable pressure from Trump and others to do so.
But Thune has been consistent throughout his time as party leader about the lack of support within the Republican conference to change the Senate’s rules. Thune is a supporter of the Senate filibuster, and he has been clear there are not the votes to change the filibuster rule.
Senators are not expected to make modifications to the threshold of votes necessary to pass this bill. Without those changes, its hard to see how this would pass.
If the Senate fails to pass it, what happens?
Then it’s back to the drawing board.
This week’s actions amount to a good-faith effort by Senate Republicans to demonstrate that they are trying to make good on Trump’s priority. But this is largely a messaging vote unlikely to get the support it needs.
The House could take further action to try to revive the bill. But Democratic opposition in the Senate makes it unlikely that any renewed efforts will see a different outcome.
What’s less clear is whether this will be enough to back Trump off of his threat to withhold his signature on all other bills.
Editor’s note: This story has been updated to reflect the elements of the House-passed bill.
