GOP senators tangle with Noem during heated hearing on her handling of deportation surge
Department of Homeland Secretary Kristi Noem faced heat from Republican senators during a hearing before the Senate Judiciary Committee Tuesday, including criticism about her leadership during the Trump administration’s deportation surge. One GOP senator compared her past animal killings to decisions she has made as DHS secretary. Outgoing Sen. Thom Tillis, R-N.C., and Sen. John Kennedy, R-La., both got into testy exchanges with Noem Tuesday during a Department of Homeland Security (DHS) oversight hearing with lawmakers. Tillis likened Noem’s decisions as a farmer and dog owner to what he described as Noem’s disastrous leadership amid Trump’s border crackdown. DHS DEFENDS AD BLITZ AMID SENATE SCRUTINY, SAYS CAMPAIGN DROVE 2.2M SELF-DEPORTATIONS AND SAVED TAXPAYERS $39B Kennedy got into a back-and-forth with Noem over her decision to describe Renee Good and Alex Pretti as domestic terrorists in the early days after they were killed and her subsequent reasoning for doing so. “Those are bad decisions made in the heat of the moment. Not unlike what happened up in Minneapolis,” Tillis said, comparing Noem’s time as an animal owner to her leadership as Secretary of DHS. Noem came under fire in the Spring of 2024 when reporting based on an advanced copy of her memoir, “No Going Back,” described an incident of her killing her family dog Cricket and a separate incident during which she killed a goat. Noem explained that the dog had proven itself “untrainable” after several violent attacks and described the decision to eventually shoot the dog. “I hated that dog,” Noem recalled, according to The Guardian and other media reports that covered the pre-released copy of Noem’s book at the time. “[Cricket was] dangerous to anyone she came in contact with. “It was not a pleasant job,” Noem added, “but it had to be done. And after it was over, I realized another unpleasant job needed to be done.” Noem then went on to describe slaughtering the goat that she described as “nasty and mean,” adding it smelled “disgusting, musky, rancid” and complained that it “loved to chase” her children. The reporting on Noem’s memoir prompted a group of lawmakers on Capitol Hill to start a Dog Lovers Caucus, and Noem’s memoir excerpt led to criticism against her from animal rights groups and other critics. “You decided to kill that dog because you would not invest in the appropriate time and training, and then you have the audacity to go into a book and say it’s a leadership lesson about tough choices. It’s in your book. We could play it if we had time,” Thillis said during his heated comments about Noem’s leadership, which also included criticism about her approach to the Federal Emergency Management Administration (FEMA). “And you killed a goat because you said it was behaving badly. You are a farmer. You don’t castrate a goat. They behave badly. You should have probably done that before, but my point is, those are bad decisions made in the heat of the moment. Not unlike what happened up in Minneapolis.” In addition to getting hounded by Tillis, Noem also got into a testy exchange with GOP Sen. Kennedy, who signaled concern over who she was taking direction from during her tenure running DHS. ‘YOU SHOULD BE ASHAMED!’: PROTESTER DRAGGED FROM KRISTI NOEM’S SENATE HEARING “At the time you said [what Renee Good and Alex Pretti engaged in] were acts of domestic terrorism,” Kennedy told Noem, who said that was the initial assessment of what the pair’s actions “appeared” to be. Noem attempted to interject that the assessment came at a time when there was a lot of information circulating about the Trump administration’s deportation efforts in Minneapolis, but Kennedy stood firm and continued with his line of questioning. “As I’ve said previously in this hearing is that …,” Noem began before Kennedy cut her off. “Did you say that? I think it’s been widely reported. Did you say that?” he asked. Noem continued to try and explain the reasoning for the domestic terrorism label,until Kennedy interjected. “I think it’s safe to say you got some pushback on that,” Kennedy said, adding he did not want to make a judgment on the fairness of it but wanted to point it out. “Yes,” Noem agreed, before Kennedy got to the root of his question. “What got my attention was that you blamed those statements on Mr. Stephen Miller at the White House, did you not?” he asked. Noem fervently denied the accusation, arguing the claim was from an anonymous source that could not be trusted. “Where you’re seeing that is in a news article of anonymous sources, and anonymous sources say a lot of things, but I’ve never said that at all,” Noem claimed. Kennedy shot back that she “said on the record” that “everything I’ve done, I’ve done at the direction of the president and Stephen.” Kennedy then provided an exact date on which Noem made the remark. DEMOCRATS ACCUSE ICE OF TARGETING DREAMERS WHILE DHS HIGHLIGHTS GANG MEMBERS, CHILD RAPISTS ARRESTED THIS WEEK “Do you think it was fair to blame Mr. Miller for your words?” Kennedy asked. Noem dismissed the question again and continued to contest the legitimacy of the claim she made such statements, adding she “did not” blame Miller for her decision to call Good and Pretti domestic terrorists. “You’re reading from a newspaper article with anonymous sources,” she said. “Are you denying that you said that?” Kennedy asked. “Sir, I am not going to speak to that situation that is relayed on anonymous sources,” Noem said again. The report in question was a January article from Axios, which wrote that the “episode illustrates the confusion that gripped the administration after the Saturday shooting death of Minnesota protester Alex Pretti. And it shows the influence of Miller, Trump’s close and longest-serving political adviser whose dominion in the White House far exceeds his title.” “They’re quoting you on the record saying it’s Stephen’s fault,” Kennedy replied before the committee chairman gaveled that the senator’s time
Unearthed video shows Dem candidate supporting ‘reallocation’ of police funding to social service programs
A Democrat running for Congress in one of the most competitive seats in the country once said she would combat systematic racism by redirecting law enforcement funding when asked if she would “defund the police” in 2020. “I support the reallocation of funding to programs that would allow people to live their best lives,” JoAnna Mendoza, a Marine veteran, told the Arizona Clean Elections Commission and Arizona Capitol Times at a town hall event. “Such as social service programs. Such as housing, public education, healthcare, ensuring that we are addressing economic stability and environmental safety.” TENNESSEE CANDIDATE REFUSES TO DISAVOW ANTI-POLICE, ANTI-NASHVILLE COMMENTS AHEAD OF TUESDAY ELECTION Mendoza, who is running to represent Arizona’s 6th Congressional District, denied ever supporting defunding the police, according to her campaign. “Jo Mendoza has been on the record for years that police need MORE resources to do their jobs – not less – including body cameras and training. And she has repeatedly stated that she does not support defunding the police,” Mendoza’s campaign said in a statement to Fox News Digital. “Any other assertion is categorically false, a lie and a political smear from D.C. hacks hoping to save Juan Ciscomani from an early retirement,” the campaign said, referring to the GOP incumbent Mendoza is running against. Mendoza did not clarify what she had meant by the 2020 statement. However, her campaign pointed to other comments she made in 2020. “I do not support defunding the police. Police officers are being asked to do too much. They’re being asked to address issues because of the lack of resources in our communities,” Mendoza said in another virtual event that year. The Republican National Committee slammed Mendoza in a statement to Fox News Digital. “There’s no way for JoAnna Mendoza to spin her extreme anti-police views, and Arizonans will know that she sides with dangerous criminals over them,” Nick Poche, a spokesperson for the RNC, told Fox News Digital. The “defund the police” platform, which at the time was championed by several progressive Democrats, has aged poorly, leading Republicans and Democrats to view mere mentions of the phrase as a political liability in 2026. The movement first burst onto the scene through the outrage after the death of George Floyd, a Black Minnesota resident who died after a police arrest in which an officer pinned him to the ground by placing a knee on his neck for an extended period. His death sparked an uproar in cities across the country over racism in law enforcement and whether police in America could do more to avoid violence during arrests. DEMOCRATS WORRY ‘ABOLISH ICE’ SLOGAN WILL BACKFIRE POLITICALLY LIKE ‘DEFUND THE POLICE’ DID Although the outrage over Floyd eventually subsided, many of the calls to divert resources away from police persisted as a Democratic platform, leading some cities like Minneapolis and Austin, Texas, to reduce their police budgets. However, the movement began to draw ire from Democrats who feared the party had taken a stance that could be considered at odds with community safety and worsen their odds at the ballot box. Rep. Jim Clyburn, D-S.C., the House Majority Whip under U.S. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., in 2021, said the phrase was “cutting the throats of the party.” “We keep making that mistake. This foolishness about you got to be this progressive or that progressive,” Clyburn said. TENNESSEE CANDIDATE BLASTS DEM OPPONENT’S ‘UNACCEPTABLE’ TWEETS CALLING TO DISSOLVE NASHVILLE POLICE Other Democratic strategists, such as James Carville, have also condemned the platform. Carville called the slogan “the three stupidest words in the English language” in interviews in 2024 and went as far as suggesting the slogan could have led to the loss of Vice President Kamala Harris in her bid against Donald Trump. “We could never wash off the stench of it,” Carville added. TLAIB-BACKED SENATE CANDIDATE IN THE HOT SEAT AFTER DELETING ‘DEFUND THE POLICE’ SOCIAL MEDIA POSTS Mendoza faces a tough race in Arizona’s 6th Congressional District. Ciscomani, the seat’s current incumbent, narrowly won election in 2024 in a 50%-47.5% victory over Democrat challenger Kirsten Engel. The district is listed among the Cook Political Report’s most competitive races in 2026, earning one of the 18 seats with a “toss-up” designation. Poche believes Mendoza’s previous comments have just made her bid against Ciscomani harder. “If the Democrats think a defund-the-police radical can beat him, they’re just plain stupid,” Poche said.
DHS defends McLaughlin against allegations husband’s company profited millions from ad contracts: ‘Baseless’
EXCLUSIVE: Newly obtained financial statements shed light on claims that former Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Assistant Secretary Tricia McLaughlin’s husband’s company made millions from a DHS advertising campaign. DHS Secretary Kristi Noem faced intense questioning during a Senate Judiciary Committee hearing Tuesday, and Sen. John Kennedy, R-La., specifically called out the agency for contracting a public relations firm headed by McLaughlin’s husband, Benjamin Yoho. “I have personally reviewed the allegations against Ms. McLaughlin, and I find them to be baseless,” DHS General Counsel James Percival told Fox News Digital. “Nothing illegal or unethical occurred with respect to these contracts. Ms. McLaughlin was not involved in selecting any subcontractors. “She is, however, a superstar in the public affairs world, so I am not surprised that she married a successful businessman whose services were attractive to these outside firms.” DHS DEFENDS AD BLITZ AMID SENATE SCRUTINY, SAYS CAMPAIGN DROVE 2.2M SELF-DEPORTATIONS AND SAVED TAXPAYERS $39B Kennedy alleged that Yoho’s firm, The Strategy Group, “got most of the money” out of what the Louisiana Republican senator says was $220 million in “television advertisements that feature [Noem] prominently.” “I’m sorry,” Kennedy said. “Safe America Media was a company formed 11 days before you picked them. And that the Strategy Group got most of the money. And the head of that is married to your former spokesperson.” “It’s just hard for me to believe knowing the president as I do, that you said, ‘Mr. President, here’s some ads I’ve cut, and I’m going to spend $220 million running them,’ that he would have agreed to that,” Kennedy explained. “I don’t think Russ Vought at OMB [Office of Management and Budget] would have agreed to that.” ‘YOU SHOULD BE ASHAMED!’: PROTESTER DRAGGED FROM KRISTI NOEM’S SENATE HEARING The Strategy Group is a conservative advertising agency for which Yoho serves as CEO. Figures obtained by Fox News Digital show a slightly lesser total advertising expenditure of approximately $185 million, with a total of roughly $146.5 million going to a campaign called “Save America.” However, of the total that went to “Save America,” roughly $348,000 went to production costs, while the remaining $142 million went to “media buys.” Sources at DHS say that media buys are the cost of actually buying the ads themselves, whether purchased from social media or for a TV ad. Kennedy also alleged that the bidding process for the contracts never took place and that Safe America Media’s recent founding was a cause for concern and collusion between McLaughlin and her husband’s business. WATCH THE MOST VIRAL MOMENTS AS KRISTI NOEM’S HEARING GOES OFF THE RAILS “Yes they did,” Noem responded during the hearing. “They went out to a competitive bid, and career officials at the department chose who would do those advertising commercials.” The Strategy Group posted to X Tuesday that it never had a contract with the department. While it did receive several hundred thousand dollars for production costs associated with the advertising campaigns, The Strategy Group never made millions. “The Strategy Group has never had a contract with DHS,” the post said. “We had a subcontract with Safe America [Media] for limited production services. Safe America paid us $226,137.17 total for 5 film shoots, 45 produced video advertisements and 6 produced radio advertisements. DHS SPOKESWOMAN TRICIA MCLAUGHLIN TO LEAVE TRUMP ADMIN, SOURCE CONFIRMS “If you’re going to try to question our integrity, bring actual evidence — we did,” the post concluded. Because these ads were purchased using public funds, all contract totals are publicly available. Lauren Bis, who took up the role of assistant secretary once McLaughlin left office, told Fox News Digital Tuesday that scrutiny from Republicans and Democrats over the advertising spending was unjustified because the campaigns resulted in “the most successful ad campaign in U.S. history.” “Sanctuary politicians are attacking this ad campaign because it has been successful in CLOSING our borders and getting more than 2.2 million illegal aliens to LEAVE the U.S.,” Bis said. “The DHS domestic and international ad campaign was the most successful ad campaign in U.S. history. The results speak for themselves: 2.2 million illegal aliens self-deported, and we now have the most secure border in American history.” KRISTI NOEM TO FACE SENATE GRILLING OVER MINNEAPOLIS SHOOTINGS AS DHS SHUTDOWN HITS WEEK 3 Bis also compared the cost of arresting and deporting an illegal migrant to that of the minimal cost of an illegal migrant self-deporting. The department says the advertising campaign played a key role in marketing self-deportation. A spokesperson at DHS also told Fox News Digital that contractors decide who they hire, fulfilling the terms of a contract, not the department itself. “By law, DHS cannot and does not determine, control or weigh in on who contractors hire or use to fulfill the terms of the contract,” a DHS spokesperson told Fox. “Those decisions are made by the contractor alone. We have only become aware of these companies because of this inquiry and did not hire those companies.” The spokesperson also noted that McLaughlin “recused herself” from interactions with subcontractors to avoid “any perceived appearance of impropriety.” “Upon hearing who the subcontractors were for production of the ad, Ms. McLaughlin recused herself from any interaction or engagement with any subcontractors to avoid any perceived appearance of impropriety,” the spokesperson continued. “DHS Office of Public Affairs is the program officer. Ms. McLaughlin oversees the DHS Office of Public Affairs, which is simply the vehicle for this contract.” McLaughlin told Fox News Digital the criticism of her and her family by senators at the hearing is a matter of public manipulation. “This is yet another example of politicians intentionally trying to dupe and manipulate the public to try to manufacture division and anger,” McLaughlin told Fox News Digital. “The ad spend and contracts are a matter of public record, and the process was done by the book. “These politicians would rather smear private citizens and American small businesses than do any basic research.”
FBI spox unleashes on media’s ‘transparent spin job’ that recent firings were ‘devastating’ to Iran work
An FBI spokesman tore into the media on Wednesday for claiming a string of recent firings at the bureau were detrimental to its work on Iran, alleging the reports were poorly sourced and “total BS.” Ben Williamson, FBI assistant director of public affairs, excoriated CBS News and MS Now on social media after their reporting raised alarm about FBI Director Kash Patel’s recent decision to fire about a dozen employees for allegedly violating their ethics and the bureau’s mission. The spokesman accused the media of attempting to stir up worries that the nation’s premier federal law enforcement agency was ill-prepared to combat threats Iran posed to the United States in the wake of President Donald Trump launching a war against the country on Saturday. “I can play the ‘sources’ game too – the difference is mine know what they’re talking about,” Williamson wrote, saying he spoke with several FBI executives and supervisors who confirmed that “only 3” of those fired worked on Iran matters. SUSIE WILES’ LAWYER DENIES APPROVING FBI RECORDING, SAYS HE’D LOSE LICENSE OVER ‘STUNT’ His remark came in response to a CBS News report that a source called the firings “‘devastating’ to the FBI’s Iran program and said that these agents have confidential informants in the U.S.-Iranian community who are not replaceable.” Williamson said that characterization was “total BS,” adding the FBI “surges resources and personnel from all over the country to prepare for these things.” The firings occurred last week after Patel revealed that his and White House chief of staff Susie Wiles’ phone records were subpoenaed as part of the Biden Department of Justice’s sweeping investigations into President Donald Trump and his allies. While the subpoena documents have not been made public, Patel and Wiles were private citizens at the time and known witnesses in the DOJ’s investigation into Trump’s handling of classified documents. The Biden FBI also allegedly recorded a phone call between Wiles and her lawyer in 2023 with her lawyer’s permission, unbeknownst to Wiles, two law enforcement sources said. A lawyer representing Wiles at the time disputed that claim, telling Axios he was unaware of a call with his client being recorded. PATEL DOUBLES DOWN ON FBI ELECTION HUB RAID, SAYS TRUMP CALLED AGENTS DIRECTLY TO THANK THEM FOR OPERATION Most of those Patel fired worked on the classified documents probe and the majority worked in counterintelligence, a source familiar with the firings told Fox News Digital. Williamson wrote on X that ahead of the terminations, the FBI had a “record year” in counterintelligence in 2025, notching 35% more arrests than the prior year and capturing six fugitives on the FBI’s “Ten Most Wanted” list. The spokesman said the operations were “not something run by three people out of one unit” and that the media reports were a “transparent spin job by people mad about firings.” Asked for comment, Williamson pointed to his public remarks. Fox News Digital reached out to MS Now and CBS News for comment on Wednesday but did not immediately receive replies. Patel’s firings have drawn praise from some in Trump’s base who say the Biden DOJ and FBI abused their authority to target Trump while he was running for president and that the terminations represent overdue accountability. The firings, however, have also drawn condemnation from critics, including the FBI Agents Association (FBIAA), which represents thousands of employees and has maintained that agents’ actions are typically the result of following orders within a chain of command. “The FBIAA condemns [the Feb. 25] unlawful termination of FBI Special Agents, which—like other firings by Director Patel—violates the due process rights of those who risk their lives to protect our country,” the FBIAA said. “These actions weaken the Bureau by stripping away critical expertise and destabilizing the workforce, undermining trust in leadership and jeopardizing the Bureau’s ability to meet its recruitment goals—ultimately putting the nation at greater risk.”
Pam Bondi faces bipartisan subpoena over frustration with DOJ’s release of Epstein files
The House Oversight Committee voted along bipartisan lines to subpoena Attorney General Pam Bondi Wednesday in a motion spearheaded by Rep. Nancy Mace, R-S.C., amid continued frustrations with the Department of Justice’s efforts to release the Epstein files. Mace said she introduced the motion to hear from Bondi on “the department’s handling of the investigation into Jeffrey Epstein and his associates and compliance with the Epstein Files Transparency Act.” The vote succeeded 24-19, with five Republicans joining Democrats to advance the subpoena. Besides Mace, the Republicans who voted with Democrats included Lauren Boebert, R-Colo.; Tim Burchett, R-Tenn.; and Scott Perry, R-Pa. NEW DETAILS EXPOSE HOW A FORMER TOP TRUMP OFFICIAL GOT CAUGHT IN EPSTEIN’S WEB OF INFLUENCE Lawmakers like Mace have raised questions about whether Bondi is doing all she can to release its documentation on Epstein in accordance with the Epstein Files Transparency Act. That bill, which became law in November 2025, required the department to release any documents and files related to its investigation on the disgraced financier so long as it didn’t reveal the identities of Epstein’s victims. EPSTEIN VICTIMS USE SUPER BOWL COMMERCIAL TO PRESSURE PAM BONDI OVER WITHHELD FILES But after the deadline came and went, lawmakers like Mace and Rep. Thomas Massie, R-Ky., believe the DOJ has more on the books it hasn’t made public. Epstein, who had an expansive social circle among the rich and powerful, died in 2019 while incarcerated on charges of sex trafficking minors, leaving behind questions of whether he could have used his vast network to facilitate illegal sexual encounters with minors. Years later, public demands for accountability and justice for any potential co-conspirators persist. President Donald Trump promised to deliver on those demands on the campaign trail, but after months without any document releases, lawmakers grew impatient. Bondi attracted frustration early on in Trump’s second term when she told audiences she had a list of Epstein accomplices “sitting on my desk right now.” AG PAM BONDI ANNOUNCES ‘ALL’ EPSTEIN FILES HAVE BEEN RELEASED, LISTING OVER 300 HIGH-PROFILE NAMES Now, with the passage of the Epstein Files Transparency act, questions remain among some lawmakers about Bondi’s good-faith effort to comply with transparency requirements that carry the force of law as she claims that “all” the files have been released. “The American people want answers, and so do we,” Mace said in a post on X. The Department of Justice did not immediately respond to a request for comment. It is unclear when Bondi will be scheduled to appear before the House Oversight Committee.
Walz mocked online after GOP lawmaker floats theory in heated hearing about why Kamala Harris chose him as VP
GOP Rep. Pat Fallon, R-Texas, blasted Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz in a heated fraud hearing Wednesday during an exchange that was quickly amplified by conservatives on social media. “It’s been widely reported that, in 2008, when Barack Obama was choosing his vice presidential candidate, he had three criteria. He wanted to make sure he picked someone that wasn’t as smart as him and had less talent and charisma and couldn’t possibly outshine him, so he picked Joe Biden,” Fallon said in the House Oversight Committee hearing. “And then Joe Biden in 2020 used the exact same criteria,” Fallon continued. “He wanted to make sure he picked somebody that wasn’t as smart as him, had less talent and charisma and wouldn’t outshine him. And he picked Kamala Harris.” Fallon went on to say that, in 2024, “I think it’s very evident why Kamala Harris picked you.” WALZ ACCUSED BY JORDAN OF TRYING TO ‘HIDE BEHIND’ COURT ORDER IN FEEDING OUR FUTURE PAYMENTS Walz appeared to take the criticism in stride, laughing and responding with, “I wouldn’t know, Congressman.” “The talent pool isn’t just shallow, brother. We have hit the shore,” Fallon said before ending his questioning. The clip immediately made waves on social media, particularly from conservatives. REPORT EXPOSES BILLIONS IN UNCOVERED FRAUD, WASTE AS WATCHDOG COALITION OFFERS SUPPORT TO TRUMP’S CRACKDOWN “Tim Walz just got SCORCHED,” conservative commentator Nick Sortor posted on X. Conservative influencer account Libs of TikTok called the exchange “one of the most INCREDIBLE OWNS in American politics.” “Rep. Pat Fallon torches Tim Walz,” Brandon Straka, the founder of the #walkaway campaign, posted on X. Much has been made in media reports and books in recent months about what went into Harris’ decision to name Walz her running mate instead of other candidates, particularly Pennsylvania Gov. Josh Shapiro. Ultimately, according to the book “2024: How Trump Retook the White House and the Democrats Lost America,” Harris “went with her gut” and chose Walz believing he was the “better fit” in a decision her staff was “unanimously behind.”
Fox News Poll: Voters give poor marks to economy, Congress and Trump
With prices still a concern and economic confidence subdued, voter anger toward Washington has reached new highs. Majorities say the economy is struggling, inflation is not under control and the federal government is falling short. A new Fox News survey finds a record 70% disapprove of the job congressional Democrats are doing, up 6 percentage points since December (29% approve). Views of congressional Republicans have mostly held steady, with 36% approving and 64% disapproving. FOX NEWS POLL: BEYOND RED VS. BLUE, FINDING ME + YOU ACROSS THE POLITICAL DIVIDE The gap reflects greater party unity on the right: 77% of Republicans approve of their party’s leaders, while just 62% of Democrats approve of theirs. The sour mood extends beyond Congress. Eight percent are “enthusiastic” about how the federal government is working, and another 26% are “satisfied.” But a majority is “dissatisfied” (33%) or “angry” (32%) with Washington. While these views are similar to the one-year point in Joe Biden’s presidency (February 2022), there are two key differences. First, the 8% enthusiastic and the 32% angry are at record highs. And, second, the partisan intensity has flipped. Republicans were more than four times as likely as Democrats to be angry in 2022, while Democrats are more than five times as likely as Republicans to feel that way now. FOX NEWS POLL: VIEWS ARE DIVIDED ON US ACTION AGAINST IRAN “Political science research indicates anger is a more powerful mobilizing force than hope or fear,” says Republican pollster Daron Shaw, who conducted the survey with Democrat Chris Anderson. “The anger on the left may be one reason Democrats have been doing so well in recent special elections and early 2026 primaries.” Much of that frustration appears rooted in the economy. Only 30% rate it positively, down from 32% earlier in President Trump’s term (July 2025). More than twice as many say economic conditions are only fair or poor. Voters are still feeling cost pressures. Compared to a year ago, most say grocery prices have increased (81%), including more than half who say they are up a lot (56%). Large numbers also say costs have increased for utilities (79%), healthcare (71%), housing (65%) and gas (51%). And while 22% say inflation is completely or mostly under control, the highest going back to 2022, most say it is not. More than half, 57%, rate their personal finances negatively, and those ratings are especially high among independents (61%), Black voters (66%), voters under 30 (66%), women (66%) and households with income below $50,000 (74%). Just 9% say there are a lot of jobs in their community that pay decent wages, while 15% say there are almost none. Reflecting those concerns, half of voters identify the cost of living (50%) as the most important economic issue facing the country, far ahead of government spending (18%), jobs (10%), income inequality (9%), tariffs (8%) and taxes (4%). Currently, 43% approve and 57% disapprove of the job Trump is doing overall. It was 44% and 56% in both January and December. Another 6 in 10 say he is focused on the wrong things. By comparison, 54% said Biden had the wrong focus in November 2021. Virtually all Democrats are unhappy with the job Trump is doing (95% disapprove) and say he is focused on the wrong issues (94%). Republican unity is strong but not absolute: 87% approve and 83% say he has the right focus. There is a fault line within the GOP over support for the MAGA movement. Among Republicans who identify with MAGA, approval of the president climbs to 98% compared to just 63% among non-MAGA Republicans. And there is a similar 38-point gap in whether he is focused on the right issues (95% MAGA vs. 57% non-MAGA). Most independents disapprove of Trump’s job performance (72%) and think he is focused on the wrong issues (78%). Border security is the president’s only positive issue, with 52% of voters approving (48% disapprove). His ratings are underwater by 35 points on the cost of living (32% approve, 67% disapprove), 27 points on tariffs, 23 points on the economy and healthcare, 20 points on foreign policy, 19 points on taxes, 13 points on jobs and 6 points on immigration. Republicans rate Trump far more negatively on the cost of living (33% disapprove) than other measures. On tariffs, 63% of voters disapprove of how Trump is handling them, while another 56% oppose tariffs in general. The top concerns about tariffs are higher consumer costs, the risk of a trade war and reduced product availability. The main reasons for supporting them are preventing unfair trade practices from other countries, protecting U.S. jobs, increasing government revenue and reducing the trade deficit. After the Supreme Court’s Feb. 20 ruling limiting the administration’s tariff authority, 62% say Trump is being treated fairly by the high court, including majorities of Democrats (76%) and independents (58%) and half of Republicans (50%). CLICK HERE FOR CROSSTABS AND TOPLINE Still, the Court’s own ratings have slipped: 57% disapprove, up 7 points since last summer. The higher disapproval is driven largely by a near doubling among Republicans, from 20% disapproving in 2025 to 39% today. Conducted February 28-March 2, 2026, under the direction of Beacon Research (D) and Shaw & Company Research (R), this Fox News survey includes interviews with a sample of 1,004 registered voters randomly selected from a national voter file. Respondents spoke with live interviewers on landlines (104) and cellphones (642) or completed the survey online after receiving a text (258). Results based on the full sample have a margin of sampling error of ±3 percentage points. Sampling error for results among subgroups is higher. In addition to sampling error, question wording and order can influence results. Weights are generally applied to age, race, education and area variables to ensure the demographics are representative of the registered voter population. Sources for developing weight targets include the most recent American Community Survey, Fox News Voter Analysis and voter file data. Fox News’ Victoria Balara contributed to this
Dem known for Trump impeachment disrupts GOP hearing on illegal immigrant truck licenses
A Democratic lawmaker who previously drafted impeachment articles against President Donald Trump disrupted a House Homeland Security subcommittee hearing Wednesday, accusing Republicans of using concerns about illegal immigrants holding commercial driver’s licenses (CDLs) to distract from what he called Trump’s broader failures. “This past weekend a convicted felon with bone spurs illegally attacked Iran, launching a protracted war of regime change,” Rep. Shri Thanedar, D-Mich., said during his opening remarks, arguing Republicans were diverting attention from congressional war powers. The hearing — hosted by the House Homeland Security Subcommittee on Oversight, Investigations and Accountability — focused on whether illegal immigrants are obtaining non-domicile CDLs and whether the Department of Homeland Security has properly coordinated with transportation authorities and ICE to enforce immigration laws tied to commercial trucking. EXCLUSIVE: NOEM BACKS TRUMP’S ‘DALILAH LAW’ AFTER CRASH LEAVES YOUNG GIRL UNABLE TO WALK, TALK Officials from Oklahoma and Florida were invited to testify about illegal immigrants holding non-domicile CDL licenses, which they said has caused deadly crashes on the nation’s highways. St. Lucie County Sheriff Richard del Toro was one of the witnesses, and he investigated a high-profile case in which an illegal immigrant from India with a California CDL allegedly killed a family on Florida’s Turnpike after failing to properly complete an illegal U-turn on the tollway. As Chairman Josh Brecheen, R-Okla., gaveled the hearing in, Thanedar interrupted with a parliamentary inquiry, questioning why the Homeland Security panel — rather than Transportation — was holding the proceeding. “Per Rule X, the Transportation and Infrastructure Committee has jurisdiction over transportation regulatory agencies, and roads and safety thereof,” Thanedar said. “Any bills to improve highway safety would need to be considered and voted on by that committee.” NOEM PREPS TO BATTLE HOUSE DEMS AFTER BIPARTISAN BASHING IN SENATE OVER DOGS, ICE The Detroiter added that he wanted to go on record about his objections to holding the hearing, saying it is really about “scapegoating immigrants” to deflect from issues with Trump’s handling of the economy, “which is running off the road.” Brecheen appeared nonplussed, and reiterated that the committee remains a proper venue, and whether or not the House Transportation Committee could investigate similarly. “While DOT is the primary federal regulator of CDLs, DHS plays a critical role in granting work authorizations and immigration benefits through U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services,” Brecheen said. “ICE partnered with state highway patrol agencies in several states to conduct joint enforcement operations targeting illegal aliens operating commercial motor vehicles, resulting in significant arrests and taking unsafe drivers off the road.” He noted one case in his home state where an illegal immigrant with a New York driver’s license that had a REAL ID endorsement and the name “No Name Given” was discovered and arrested along Interstate 40. He observed the REAL-ID Act itself was signed by former President George W. Bush after 9/11 and that anyone authorized to haul hazardous materials could effectively be driving an 80,000-pound “chemical bomb” if they so chose. DEMOCRATS ACCUSE ICE OF TARGETING DREAMERS WHILE DHS HIGHLIGHTS GANG MEMBERS, CHILD RAPISTS ARRESTED THIS WEEK “This is absolutely under the jurisdiction of this committee,” he said. After Brecheen’s own opening statement, Thanedar followed. In 2025, Thanedar first drafted Articles of Impeachment against Trump, saying he is “unfit to serve” and “represents a clear and present danger to our nation’s Constitution.” Thanedar’s articles include usurpation of appropriations, abuse of trade powers, violation of First Amendment rights, creation of an unlawful office (DOGE), bribery and tyrannical overreach. Thanedar was also the only Democrat to appear for the subcommittee hearing.
House Oversight Committee calls Bill Gates, Leon Black to testify over Jeffrey Epstein ties
A House Oversight Committee has called seven more individuals to testify in Washington, D.C., about their ties to convicted sex trafficker Jeffrey Epstein and his associate Ghislaine Maxwell, including Microsoft co-founder Bill Gates; Leon Black, co-founder of investment firm Apollo Global Management; and Kathryn Ruemmler, former White House counsel to former President Barack Obama. James Comer, R-Ky., the chairman of the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, fired off a new round of letters Tuesday after interviewing former President Bill Clinton and his wife Hillary last week as part of the panel’s expanding probe. Others called to testify include Lesley Groff, a former longtime executive assistant to Epstein; Sarah Kellen, another former Epstein employee; Doug Band, a longtime personal aide and counselor to Clinton; and tech billionaire Ted Waitt, a former boyfriend of Maxwell. Addressing each individual, Comer wrote, “Due to public reporting, documents released by the Department of Justice, and documents obtained by the Committee, the Committee believes you have information that will assist in its investigation.” BILL GATES PULLS OUT OF INDIA AI SUMMIT KEYNOTE ADDRESS AMID EPSTEIN FILES SCRUTINY A spokesperson for Gates told Fox News Digital he will appear before the committee for a transcribed interview scheduled for May 19. “Gates welcomes the opportunity to appear before the committee,” the spokesperson said. “While he never witnessed or participated in any of Epstein’s illegal conduct, he is looking forward to answering all the committee’s questions to support their important work.” According to the roughly 3 million emails the Department of Justice released during the Epstein investigation, Gates reportedly had affairs and sought medication to treat a sexually transmitted infection for himself and his wife at that time, Melinda French Gates, without her knowing. On Feb. 24, Gates reportedly acknowledged having affairs with two Russian women, which Epstein later discovered, but said they did not involve Epstein’s victims. “I did nothing illicit. I saw nothing illicit,” Gates said, according to a town hall recording reviewed by The Wall Street Journal. Gates also admitted he was “foolish” to have spent time with Epstein, the outlet reported. BILLIONAIRE LEON BLACK DETAILS JEFFREY EPSTEIN RELATIONSHIP DURING EARNINGS CALL Billionaire Leon Black, scheduled to testify May 13, has been accused of raping an autistic 16-year-old girl in 2002 at Epstein’s Manhattan townhouse, according to a high-profile lawsuit filed in the summer of 2023. The victim alleged that Epstein and Maxwell groomed her to serve as a living “doll” for the late financier and his wealthy associates. Black, who left Apollo Global Management in 2021, previously hired Epstein for personal tax advice, the firm said last month. BILLIONAIRE LEON BLACK ACCUSED OF RAPING AUTISTIC TEEN IN JEFFREY EPSTEIN’S HOME: LAWSUIT Ruemmler, who resigned as a top attorney at Goldman Sachs over her ties to Epstein, will appear before the committee April 21, her spokesperson said Tuesday. “Ruemmler welcomes the opportunity to appear before the committee,” spokesperson Jennifer Connelly told Reuters. “She has done nothing wrong and had no knowledge of any ongoing criminal activity on his part.” Ruemmler previously served as a White House counsel to Obama and an associate counsel to Clinton. According to DOJ documents, she reportedly received gifts from Epstein and counseled him on managing media questions regarding his criminal activities. Connelly told the outlet she was a practicing criminal defense attorney at the time and had even represented a client in common with Epstein. FOX Business’ Rebecca Rosenberg and Reuters contributed to this report.
Iran’s place in World Cup 2026 in doubt amid conflict, Trump’s dismissal
Among the wide-ranging ramifications of the ongoing conflict in the Middle East, Iran’s participation in the FIFA World Cup 2026 has become a key talking point, with the tournament less than 100 days away. The global sporting event will be co-hosted by Canada, Mexico and the United States from June 11 to July 19, with Iran among the 48 nations expected to travel to North America at least a week prior to the opening game. Recommended Stories list of 3 itemsend of list US President Donald Trump says he doesn’t care if Iran participates in the World Cup or not. “I think Iran is a very badly defeated country. They’re running on fumes,” Trump told the American news site Politico on Tuesday. The US and Israel launched attacks on Iran on Saturday that have killed at least 1,045 people, including its Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei, and sparked a regional conflict that has spread to 12 countries. Tehran responded by launching waves of missiles and drones at Israel and towards several military bases in the Middle East where US forces operate. Following the escalations, Iran’s spot at the World Cup has come under question, and officials from the Iranian football federation and FIFA have been noncommittal on the world’s 20th-ranked football nation’s participation. “After this attack, we cannot be expected to look forward to the World Cup with hope,” Mehdi Taj, president of the Football Federation of the Islamic Republic of Iran (FFIRI), told local sports portal Varzesh3 on Sunday. Iran were the first team to qualify for the FIFA World Cup 2026, but their position in the tournament has been thrown into question amid the ongoing conflict in the Middle East [File: Rula Rouhana/Reuters] Uncharted territory A leading expert on sports and geopolitics believes that Iran’s participation in the tournament is in serious doubt amid an armed conflict between one of the host nations and a participant. Advertisement “Ultimately, the diplomatic solution [will be] that Iran itself just steps aside and withdraws from the tournament,” Simon Chadwick, a professor of Afro-Eurasian sport at the Emlyon Business School in Shanghai, told Al Jazeera. Chadwick said it’s “very difficult” to see the US allowing players, backroom staff and officials to enter the country. “The US will not be keen to admit [Iranian] players, officials or medics – who normally travel alongside teams to tournaments. “Given that they [Iran] are going to have to play their games in the US, I find it unlikely that they will be there.” Despite the logistical quagmire and its unlikely resolution in a timely manner, Chadwick said withdrawal will not be an easy option for Iran, who will think “very long and hard before walking away”. The last time a team pulled out of a FIFA World Cup due to political reasons was in 1950, when Argentina withdrew, citing disagreements with the Brazilian Football Confederation. “We are in uncharted territory here,” Chadwick explained. “We tend to associate boycotts and countries not participating in sport mega-events with the Olympic Games, where mass boycotts were seen in 1980 and 1984 during the Cold War. “Typically, that doesn’t tend to happen in World Cups.” Chadwick, who has written several books on the economy and politics of sport, believes the impact of withdrawal will not just be political, but also financial. “On the one hand, we are living in very complex and sensitive times, and arguably there are reasons for a country either to withdraw or be banned,” he said. “But we’re [also] living in highly commercial times, and the financial consequences of unilaterally walking away from what is arguably the world’s biggest sport mega event is an act of self-harm. We also don’t know how FIFA might react if a nation were to unilaterally walk away from its qualifying spot.” Can sport diplomacy save the World Cup? Despite the tournament being spread across three host nations, all of Iran’s matches are allocated to venues on the US West Coast. This could largely be due to the presence of a sizeable Iranian community, especially in Los Angeles, where Team Melli will play two of their three Group G games. According to Chadwick, had Iran been playing games in Canada or Mexico, the team could have swayed their decision to participate. But the organisers are unlikely to move the games out of the US now. “It would be extremely unusual to take games to another country to accommodate one particular country, particularly when the president of FIFA and the president of the US seem to be very close,” he said, adding, “the relationship between the US and Canada, and the US and Mexico is somewhat complicated, too.” Advertisement While FIFA hasn’t made a clear statement on the issue, its Secretary-General Mattias Grafstrom has said the world football governing body is monitoring the conflict and the situation emerging from it. “We had a meeting today, and it is premature to comment in detail, but we will monitor developments around all issues around the world,” he said last week. With the tournament a little more than three months away, FIFA said it will “continue to communicate with the host governments”. Chadwick believes that FIFA will try to avoid an outcome where Iran is excluded, as it would cause a logistical headache and set the wrong precedent. “What we’re more likely to see is sport diplomacy really kicking in,” he predicted. “The last thing that FIFA will want is for a country to be excluded or simply not turn up because that does set precedent and puts pressure on FIFA.” ‘Sport’s cold war’ With the conflict raging on for the fifth day and spreading further across the Middle East, it is unclear when the Iranian football officials will take a call on sending their team to the US. However, if Iran does opt to withdraw from the World Cup, it could lead to a sporting crisis. Chadwick thinks the consequences could be wide-ranging and long-term. “Politically, it would perhaps take us towards a new