Texas Weekly Online

Texas-trans-white
Menu
Menu

Year: 2025

Fox News Politics Newsletter: Judge tosses Comey, James indictments

Fox News Politics Newsletter: Judge tosses Comey, James indictments

Welcome to the Fox News Politics newsletter, with the latest updates on the Trump administration, Capitol Hill and more Fox News politics content. Here’s what’s happening… -Pentagon threatens to court martial Democratic senator over ‘refuse illegal orders’ video -Trump’s main DOGE office shutters — but its war on government waste isn’t over -Firm that propelled Mamdani to victory in NY looks to unseat House GOP members in PA A federal judge threw out the indictments against James Comey and Letitia James on Monday, finding they were illegitimate because they were brought by an unqualified U.S. attorney. Judge Cameron Currie dismissed the false statements charges against Comey and bank fraud charges against James without prejudice, meaning the charges could be brought again. “I conclude that the Attorney General’s attempt to install Ms. Halligan as Interim U.S. Attorney for the Eastern District of Virginia was invalid and that Ms. Halligan has been unlawfully serving in that role since September 22, 2025,” Currie wrote…READ MORE. CHA-CHING, USA!: Lutnick expects Supreme Court to side with Trump on tariffs, opening door to $2K payouts ‘RECORD SETTING’: Trump says those against tariffs ‘serving hostile foreign interests,’ ‘full benefit’ yet to be seen TERROR FOILED: ‘People would have died’: Inside the FBI’s Halloween takedown that exposed a global terror network GLOBAL WARNING: Trump signals plan to designate Muslim Brotherhood a terrorist organization  MINERAL WARFARE: From Mojave to Beijing: how America quietly conceded the rare earth race IMPORT ALERT: ‘Made in China?’ House panel demands Amazon come clean on product origins OPEN COMMUNICATION: Trump speaks with Chinese President Xi, White House official confirms DOUBLE STANDARD: Dems fine firing troops over Biden’s vax order but furious over Trump ‘treason’ talk, GOP vet says COST-CUTTING TIME: Mike Johnson says House GOP working full steam ahead on Trump’s ‘affordability agenda’ NO CASH FOR CHAOS: GOP senator calls Mamdani’s Netanyahu arrest vow a ‘grave threat’ as he introduces defund bill DEAL MAKER WINS: How one Alabama senator’s quiet diplomacy helped end the longest shutdown in US history BACK TO REALITY: Mamdani pledges NYC to remain sanctuary city after chummy Trump meeting MAP WARS: Deep-pocketed conservative group once at odds with Trump now all-in to ‘help him win’ Get the latest updates on the Trump administration and Congress, exclusive interviews and more on FoxNews.com.

America’s smallest cattle herd in 70 years means rebuilding will take years and beef prices could stay high

America’s smallest cattle herd in 70 years means rebuilding will take years and beef prices could stay high

America’s ranchers are facing their smallest cattle herd in 70 years. Years of punishing drought, rising costs and an aging ranching workforce have thinned herds across the country. Ranchers and agricultural economists alike say rebuilding will take years and beef prices aren’t likely to ease anytime soon. “The biggest thing has been drought,” said Eric Belasco, head of the agricultural economics department at Montana State University. BEEF PRICES ARE CLOSE TO RECORD HIGHS — BUT AMERICANS AREN’T CUTTING BACK He said years of dry weather have wiped out grasslands across the West and Plains, leaving ranchers without enough feed or water to sustain their herds. Many have been forced to sell cattle early, even the cows needed to produce the next generation of calves, making it hard to rebuild.  “It’s not going to be a quick fix, you’re not going to solve it overnight,” Belasco told Fox News Digital.  Belasco said the aftereffects of years of drought are still being felt and until ranchers can rebuild their herds, consumers will keep paying the price. “The primary reason you see prices so high is because we haven’t seen any kind of inventory rebuilding,” he said. “Until you see that rebuild, you probably won’t see prices coming back down again.” That slow rebuilding is a challenge for the cattle industry, according to Derrell Peel, a professor of agricultural economics at Oklahoma State University. “The fact of the matter is there’s really nothing anybody can do to change this very quickly,” Peel said. “We’re in a tight supply situation that took several years to develop, and it’ll take several years to get out of it.” Peel, who specializes in livestock marketing, said there’s no quick way to ease pressure on beef prices, since it takes roughly two years to bring animals to market and several years to rebuild herds. TRUMP’S BEEF IMPORT PLAN IGNORES KEY ISSUE SQUEEZING AMERICAN CATTLE RANCHERS Even as ranchers wait for herds to recover, parched conditions are working against them, turning pastures to dust and feed into a luxury.  Research from the Kansas City Federal Reserve found that with each step up in drought severity, cattle-producing regions see about a 12% drop in hay production, a 5% rise in hay prices, a 1% reduction in herd size and a 4% decrease in farm income. To cope, many ranchers are shrinking their herds. A 2022 Farm Bureau survey found that about two in three ranchers have sold animals off, leaving them with roughly one-third fewer cattle than before. Few people see the challenges of ranching more clearly than Cole Bolton, owner of K&C Cattle Company, whose pastures stretch along the soft edge of the Texas Hill Country. “I think it’s going to take a while to fix this crisis that we’re in with the cattle shortage. My message to consumers is simple, folks, be patient. We’ve got to build back our herds,” Bolton told Fox News Digital. Bolton said the region, known for its red dirt and family-run ranches, has gone nearly three months without rain. While showers were finally arriving, he noted that the cattle industry has weathered one setback after another, from market turmoil to extreme conditions, over the past five years. The growing strain highlights how persistent drought is reshaping the ranching industry and tightening the nation’s livestock supply. That pressure is being felt not just on ranches but also at the grocery store. According to USDA data, the average retail price of beef rose from about $8.51 a pound in August 2024 to $9.85 a pound a year later, a gain of roughly 16%.  The “5-market steer price” represents what ranchers earn for live cattle before they’re processed into meat. The “farm-to-retail” spread reflects everything that happens after that – the costs and profits tied to slaughtering, processing, packaging, shipping and selling beef in stores. Much of that work — and the profits it generates — are concentrated among the industry’s “big four” meatpackers: Tyson Foods, JBS, Cargill and National Beef. Together, these data points show that while ranchers are earning slightly more for their cattle than they were a few years ago, the biggest price increases are happening well after the animals leave the pasture. Despite the markups between the ranch and the grocery store, demand hasn’t wavered. Americans are still buying beef more than ever. Beef remains the dominant player in the fresh-meat aisle, with $44.3 billion in sales over the past year, a 12% increase that outpaced chicken, pork and turkey, according to Beef Research, a contractor to the National Cattlemen’s Beef Association. Glynn Tonsor, a professor of agricultural economics at Kansas State University, told Fox News Digital that strong consumer demand will continue to drive beef prices higher. “There’s nothing that forces me or you or anybody else when we go into the grocery store to pay more for beef. People are choosing to,” he said. “The consumer desire for beef is strong and, regardless of the supply-side situation, that has the effect of pulling prices up.”

Justice Thomas rebukes SCOTUS for denying widow’s case, says it lets government dodge blame

Justice Thomas rebukes SCOTUS for denying widow’s case, says it lets government dodge blame

Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas voiced disagreement Monday with his colleagues’ decision to reject a widow’s request that the high court consider whether the federal government owes her for her husband’s death. Thomas said that if the justices had taken up the case, it would have been an opportunity to rein in a decades-old precedent that says servicemembers’ families cannot file wrongful death lawsuits against the government if the victim was killed while performing his or her job duties. “We should have granted certiorari. Doing so would have provided clarity about [Feres v. United States] to lower courts that have long asked for it,” Thomas wrote. TRUMP’S PRESIDENCY FACES CRUCIAL TESTS AS SUPREME COURT BEGINS PIVOTAL TERM The case centered on Air Force Staff Sergeant Cameron Beck, who was killed in 2021. Beck had been leaving a military base in Missouri on his motorcycle to meet his wife and then seven-year-old for lunch when a civilian government employee, distracted by her cell phone, struck Beck. He died on the scene, and the woman later admitted in a plea deal to causing the accident. When Beck’s widow tried to sue the government for her husband’s death, a federal court rejected the claim, as did the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit. Both cited the Feres case, finding that the United States was immunized from such lawsuits because Beck was in the military. Thomas said Feres should be overturned and that, in any case, the lower courts took a far too expansive view of it in Beck’s widow’s lawsuit. Beck was not performing any military service and was completely off duty at the time, Thomas said. Normally, that would be an “open and shut” wrongful death case, he said. SCOTUS ALLOWS TRUMP TO FIRE BIDEN-APPOINTED FTC COMMISSIONER “If the Court does not want to overrule its precedents in this area, it should at least be willing to enforce them,” Thomas wrote. Thomas said Beck “was not ordered on a military mission to go home for lunch with his family. So Mrs. Beck should have prevailed under Feres.” Four justices must support taking up a petition for the Supreme Court to do so. Justice Sonia Sotomayor said in a statement she supported rejecting the application, but she explained that she felt Congress needed to adjust the laws to override current precedents. “I write … to underscore that this important issue deserves further congressional attention, without which Feres will continue to produce deeply unfair results like the one in this case and the others discussed in Justice Thomas’s dissenting opinion,” Sotomayor wrote.

How one Alabama senator’s quiet diplomacy helped end longest shutdown in US history

How one Alabama senator’s quiet diplomacy helped end longest shutdown in US history

One Senate Republican proved that it’s still possible to bridge the chasm between the aisles after brokering an end to the longest government shutdown in history. The 43-day impasse in Congress may have ended in the House, but it was in the Senate that Sen. Katie Britt, R-Ala., worked to build an old-fashioned bipartisan coalition to jump-start the stalled chamber. It took several weeks, numerous conversations and reconstructing broken trust between Senate Republicans and Democrats to pull off what would become a bipartisan package to reopen the government. HOW CLOSED-DOOR NEGOTIATIONS AND A GUARANTEE ENDED LONGEST GOVERNMENT SHUTDOWN ON RECORD  And it was something that Britt, in an interview with Fox News Digital, contended she was uniquely positioned to do. She was chief of staff for former Sen. Richard Shelby, R-Ala., and knew how the sausage was made in the upper chamber. She also had longstanding relationships with some of the key Democratic negotiators, like Sen. Jeanne Shaheen, D-N.H., who ultimately joined most Republicans to reopen the government. For Britt, who chairs the Homeland Security Appropriations Committee, the key to reopening the government was funding the government through spending bills. “I’m very grateful for those on the other side of the aisle that had the courage to step forward and say, you know, we’re not going to allow everyday Americans to suffer as a result of keeping this government closed,” she said. “I do think what we saw was a lot of people that were listening to their political consultants instead of the actual constituency that they serve.” “Because clearly, I think a lot of people had lost sight of the fact that we were in this place because we hadn’t passed appropriations bills,” Britt continued. SENATE REACHES TEMPORARY TRUCE TO END RECORD SHUTDOWN, BUT JANUARY BATTLE LOOMS During the last session of Congress, the chambers were split. Republicans held a tenuous grip on the House while Schumer and Senate Democrats controlled the Senate. Many of the spending bills produced by the House were often partisan, while the bipartisan bills crafted in the Senate never made it to the floor. “If you look back over Senator Schumer’s tenure as leader and over the last two years, he didn’t even put one bill on the floor last year, which is what led us to this posture of a CR to start with,” she said. Britt believed that at least moving a trio of spending bills could perhaps unstick the gears in the Senate and get lawmakers closer to ending the shutdown. Whether that package of bills could end up attached to legislation to reopen the government, however, remained elusive. While she lauded both Senate Appropriations Chair Susan Collins, R-Maine, and Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D., for their roles in ensuring the funding process actually worked, her role as de facto arbiter began roughly three weeks before the shutdown ended. One of the main issues before and throughout the shutdown was a lack of trust that Senate Democrats had in Republicans, an issue that was reaffirmed when the GOP voted to claw back billions in congressionally approved funding earlier in the year. That trust issue was further solidified due to a lack of commitments from Republicans to prevent the Trump administration from continuing to carve away at federal funding with impoundments and rescissions. And the key moment that saw the wheels begin to move in the direction of reopening came when Senate Democrats blocked the Defense appropriations bill, which would have paid service members among a plethora of other things. SENATE DEMOCRATS CAVE, OPEN PATH TO REOPENING GOVERNMENT “The question that I had for each of them, you know, why? This came out of committee in a bipartisan way, and it was clear, they wanted greater conversation around how we were planning on moving these things forward,” she said. It was from those informal talks that she leaned into speaking with more Democratic lawmakers to try and assuage their concerns about what would happen during and after the spending bills were passed. Those conversations brought her all the way to Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., on whether he would approve of the appropriations process moving forward. “Taking a cue from that is why I really leaned into conversations, both with people that I believed were gettable in finding a pathway forward on reopening the government and those who were not,” she said. “You know, just saying, like, ‘Look, guys, here’s what we’re going to do. We’re going to work to fund these three bills. And if we do that, you know, here will be the ultimate result of it.’” But, as with any successful legislation, there’s always a numbers game. Not every Senate Republican was in favor of reopening the government, or at least the vehicle to do so, a point Britt reiterated often. Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky., had consistently voted against the House-passed bill until that point. So that meant she needed to find the numbers elsewhere across the aisle. Shaheen, who was leading negotiations for Senate Democrats, largely had her numbers in check, but there was one more that needed an extra nudge: Sen. Tim Kaine, D-Va. Over the course of 48 hours, the weekend of the penultimate vote to seal the deal in the Senate, Kaine went from being against the package to supporting it. Britt acted as a liaison to the White House, bringing Kaine’s demands that the administration roll back firings carried out during the shutdown and provide protections to federal workers, which the administration ultimately agreed to. But ending the shutdown was the first hurdle. Lawmakers now have until Jan. 30, 2026, to fund the government. Britt said she would keep doing what she’s been doing: talking to the other side. “I am hopeful that people will remember what we’re supposed to be doing, and that is working to pass these bills,” she said. “And I am sure that there will be challenges in front of us, but you know, having dialogue and

Dems fine firing troops over Biden’s vax order but furious over Trump ‘treason’ talk, GOP vet says

Dems fine firing troops over Biden’s vax order but furious over Trump ‘treason’ talk, GOP vet says

Democratic veterans in Congress who released a video telling servicemembers they can refuse unlawful orders were ripped by Republicans, including by an Air Force veteran who pointed out how former President Joe Biden’s Pentagon discharged 8,700 servicemembers for refusing vaccine mandates. Sens. Mark Kelly of Arizona and Elissa Slotkin of Michigan, along with Reps. Chrissy Houlahan and Chris Deluzio of Pennsylvania, Jason Crow of Colorado and Maggie Goodlander of New Hampshire appeared in a video that informed servicemembers they could refuse unlawful orders, ostensibly from President Donald Trump. Jennifer-Ruth Green, an Iraq War Air Force veteran and former Indiana state official running in her second attempt to oust Rep. Frank Mrvan, D-Ind., slammed her fellow veterans in the video as highly hypocritical. Green is a Republican.  “I just want to point out that the thousands of service members who refused the ‘illegal order’ from Joe Biden that forced them to get the COVID vaccine were fired without their benefits and Democrats were perfectly okay with it,” Ruth-Green said on X. GRAHAM DEMANDS DEMOCRATS EXPLAIN ‘REFUSE ILLEGAL ORDERS’ MESSAGE TO TROOPS She followed up by singling-out Kelly – a retired astronaut and Navy combat pilot – after he appeared with former Rep. Joe Scarborough, R-Fla., longtime host of “Morning Joe” on MS-NOW. “First, Senator Kelly instructed our military to refuse the president’s orders. Now, he says they should contact their officers if they ‘feel’ an order is illegal,” Green said. “Stop playing political games with our service members. An order is not illegal just because a politician doesn’t like it.” TROOPS RISK COURT-MARTIAL IF THEY FOLLOW DEMOCRATS’ ‘ILLEGAL ORDERS’ ADVICE, FORMER MILITARY LAWYERS WARN After Scarborough had said servicemembers would be “violating their oath” if they followed illegal orders, Kelly replied that they always have the ability to speak with their commanding officer about an order in question. Kelly said concerned servicemembers can also confer with the Judge Advocate General (JAG) corps; lawyers within the military; on the legality of orders and similar concerns. About 8,700 servicemembers were affected by then-Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin’s order, according to UPI, which reported that Pentagon spokesman Sean Parnell said in April those discharged would be invited to return to duty. DEM VETERANS BREAK SILENCE AFTER VIRAL VIDEO CAUSES BACKLASH ON SOCIAL MEDIA: ‘FRUSTRATED’ In 2002, Green engineered the closest race for Republicans in the district – covering Democrat-heavy Gary and East Chicago, Ind. — in several decades; losing by six points. The Kansas Republican Party echoed Green’s sentiments, saying in a statement that “Democrats ‘reminding’ servicemembers members they are allowed to disobey illegal orders with a wink and a nod had no problem forcing those same service members to take the COVID shot and follow orders that supposedly came from a president already exhibiting symptoms of dementia.” Rep. Byron Donalds, R-Fla., was similarly critical of Democrats’ later response to President Donald Trump’s warning of treason that had led to what Slotkin and others said were threats against them in the aftermath. SIX DEMOCRATS URGE MILITARY MEMBERS TO ‘REFUSE ILLEGAL ORDERS’ IN VIRAL VIDEO; HEGSETH RESPONDS “They have engaged in seditious behavior,” Donalds said. “That mess you heard over there about not being intimidated? No, the seditious behavior came from them when they launched their stupid video that nobody asked for.” “Mister Crow and Senator Slotkin [are] not the commander-in-chief,” he later added. DANGEROUS WAR GAMES: TELLING SERVICEMEMBERS TO RESIST TRUMP INVITES PURE CHAOS Deluzio said that after Trump “called for the arrest and death of me and several of my colleagues” he was “not going to be intimidated” and would continue serving the Allegheny Valley. When Trump adviser Stephen Miller fired back at Democrats’ statements, Kelly responded directly, saying he had been shot at in combat and was at the Capitol when “your boss sent a violent mob.” “I know the difference between defending our Constitution and an insurrection, even if you don’t.” Crow said on social media that it was “telling” to see Trump believe “restat[ing] the law” is “punishable by death.” On Monday, the Pentagon announced it was investigating “Capt. Mark Kelly” for allegations of serious misconduct. Fox News Digital reached out to Kelly, Slotkin and Houlahan for additional comment.