Climate deadlines collide with politics as Dem-led states chase Big Oil in court but spare local refiners
Several Democrat-led states are facing conflicting forces in their efforts to transition to 100% green power, as leaders try to shore up the power grid while other officials sue fossil fuel companies in the same light activists did to tobacco firms in the 1990s. In that decade, dozens of states sued tobacco giants Philip Morris and R.J. Reynolds, alleging they knowingly endangered public health and misled consumers about nicotine’s addictiveness. The cases culminated in a $200 billion “master settlement” in 1998 that banned billboard advertising and reshaped corporate liability in the industry. Today, several jurisdictions in Colorado are suing ExxonMobil and Suncor in a similar fashion, accusing them of knowing their product harms the environment and public health. Boulder, Colorado, along with Boulder County and San Miguel County received the blessing of the Colorado Supreme Court in May to move forward with their suit, and officials claimed the energy companies “greatly contributed to an altered climate.” SUPREME COURT MUST FREEZE THE CLIMATE EXTORTION OF OUR ENERGY INDUSTRY “This case seeks to hold these companies responsible for knowingly contributing to climate change while concealing the dangers of their products,” Boulder city officials said in a statement. According to a release from Boulder City, Coloradans could face hundreds of millions of dollars in added costs needed to “adapt” to a climate changed by continued reliance on such companies. ExxonMobil countered that federal law preempts Colorado’s authority to apply state law to the alleged injuries. “We’ve maintained from the beginning this case is meritless and has no place before a state court,” the company said in an emailed statement to Climate in the Courts. NEWSOM PUSHES CLIMATE RECORD ABROAD AS CALIFORNIANS SHOULDER AMERICA’S HIGHEST GAS COSTS Meanwhile, Colorado Gov. Jared Polis set a 2040 goal for moving the Centennial State away from fossil fuels, but was questioned by critics for trying to maintain fossil fuel infrastructure at the same time. Rep. Jeff Hurd, R-Colo., previously asked the Trump administration to force Colorado to keep the Comanche power plant online to avoid an “energy emergency,” according to Colorado Public Radio (CPR). Last week, the Polis administration joined with Xcel Energy to petition state regulators to keep Comanche Unit 2 online for at least another year. The coal plant was supposed to close Dec. 31. Reached for comment, Polis spokesperson Eric Maruyama told Fox News Digital that a separate Comanche coal-fired unit is broken and that the state will benefit from keeping Unit 2 operational. NEWSOM VOWS TO BLOCK TRUMP’S REPORTED ENERGY PLAN IN CALIFORNIA, EXPERTS PUSH BACK “Colorado is well on its way to achieving 100% clean energy and reducing emissions while saving people money and ensuring energy reliability,” Maruyama said. “Renewable energy remains the least expensive form of energy, and thanks to Governor Polis’ leadership, in 2024, 43% of Colorado’s total electricity was produced by wind, solar or other renewable sources while maintaining among the lowest energy costs in the country.” Reports show Coloradans have the third-lowest electricity costs in the nation relative to income. Hawaii also sued oil firms in 2024, alleging they violated the state constitution’s “public trust doctrine,” claiming companies deceived the public regarding fossil fuels’ alleged harm done to the state’s resources. Back on the mainland, California is dealing with its own complex energy production situation, according to critics, who point to Democratic governors over the past decade-plus who have worked to set strict deadlines for moving the Golden State away from oil and gas. Former Gov. Jerry Brown and Gov. Gavin Newsom set a 2045 deadline for achieving carbon-free energy under SB-100. In July, the California Energy Commission under the Newsom administration held talks with “market players” to discuss the planned closure of two major oil companies’ refineries by 2026, according to Politico. BIDEN’S GREEN ENERGY FIASCO, NOT TRUMP’S REFORMS, IS JACKING UP YOUR ELECTRIC BILL Phillips 66 and Valero both are considering or have started the process of shutting down their operations, and a source familiar with the situation said that oil companies must regularly analyze whether costly maintenance cycles that occur on average every five years are worth funding. Chevron already moved out, shifting its headquarters from Contra Costa County to Houston, Texas – but it continues to support some California operations. With the state positioned against fossil fuels for the long term, these companies have to think seriously about investing in such maintenance cycles to keep their operations running smoothly, the source said. Valero told California officials earlier this year it plans to seriously consider idling or ending production by April, according to Politico. Meanwhile, a spokesperson for the state energy commission told the outlet it has been “actively supporting conversations with a variety of market players to discuss pathways to address the impacts of the closure intent announcements of the Phillips 66 refinery in Wilmington and Valero refinery in Benicia.” NEWSOM CLAIMS TRUMP IS ‘HANDING THE FUTURE TO CHINA’ AT BRAZILIAN CLIMATE CONFAB THAT WH SKIPPED The outlet described the dynamic as an “about-face after the past two years” of “Newsom focused on preventing gasoline price spikes by increasing regulations on refiners.” Over the summer, his administration proposed loosening permitting requirements for new oil wells in the Bakersfield area. California Senate Minority Leader Brian Jones, R-San Diego, criticized Newsom’s approach. “Social engineering and market manipulation on the part of government never end well,” he said. “We’re seeing that now in California and everyday citizens are the ones paying the price for Gavin Newsom’s political experiments: Gasoline prices are through the roof and rising, and the average family can’t afford to survive, much less thrive, here in the Golden State.” Jones said the affordability crisis in his state is “real” and is only exacerbated by recent and looming refinery closures. “We need a major course correction that puts working families over ideology. Absent that, I’m not sure this ends well.” Fox News Digital reached out to Newsom’s office for comment for purposes of this story.
Dem lawmaker sets litmus test for party with 5th Trump impeachment effort
Rep. Al Green, D-Texas, announced that he would submit articles of impeachment against President Donald Trump on Thursday morning, framing the vote as a sort of litmus test for his party on its opposition to the administration. “There will be articles of impeachment filed before the Christmas break. This, I pledge,” Green said. “We have to participate. This is a participatory democracy. The impeachment requires the hands and the guidance of all of us.” ANTI-TRUMP NETWORK BEHIND MASS PROTESTS CRACKS OPEN WAR CHEST AGAINST DEMS WHO BACKED REOPENING GOVERNMENT He confirmed he would introduce the motion as privileged, a status that forces its consideration within two legislative days. The motion can be tabled before the impeachment itself comes to a vote. Green also said he and other advocates would hold a peaceful protest at the Lincoln Memorial on Saturday. The announcement of Green’s impeachment effort — his fifth set of filed articles — comes as the Democrat base in Congress has wrestled with how to effectively fight Trump. Some in the more progressive wing of the party have spoken out against figures like Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., over Senate Democrats’ failing to secure concessions out of a 43-day government shutdown. Even before the shutdown, other figures in the party, like Maine Senate candidate Graham Platner, had called for new party leadership in Congress to more effectively put up resistance to Republican momentum in Congress. REPUBLICANS TORCH ANTI-TRUMP ‘NO KINGS’ PROTESTS, SAY DEMS FEAR ANGERING LEFTISTS IN SHUTDOWN FIGHT Dave Mytych, outreach lead at For Liberation and Resistance Everywhere (FLARE), called out congressional Democrat leadership by name on Thursday. He joined Green at the press conference. “This is what the American people want. They want fighters that hold the line. Democrats, are you listening? Leader Schumer, are you listening? Leader Jeffries, are you listening?” Mytych said. The House of Representatives has impeached Trump twice before — once in 2019 over abuse of power charges and again in 2021 for inciting an insurrection. In both cases, the U.S. Senate voted to dismiss the charges. When asked if he believed this most recent impeachment attempt would reflect poorly on Jeffries and Schumer if they failed to support the measure, Green dodged the question. He said that as many as 80 members have supported his efforts in the past. MIKE JOHNSON, INFURIATED BY DEMS, SAYS PARTY ‘PLAYING POLITICS’ WITH AMERICANS’ LIVES AS SHUTDOWN CONTINUES “Here’s my perspective. I believe in the Constitution,” Green answered. “People who vote to table the articles are voting against impeachment.” Green did not expound on what specific counts of impeachment he would file.
Zeldin, McCain hammer Crockett on Epstein donations claim
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Lee Zeldin — who clapped back after House Democratic Rep. Jasmine Crockett said that he and others had taken money from someone by the name of Jeffrey Epstein — took to social media again after Crockett defended her comments and claimed that she was not seeking to “mislead” anyone. Zeldin began his Wednesday post on X with an exploding head emoji and then declared, “When you find yourself in a hole, it’s best to stop digging.” “The public FEC report Crockett referenced on the House floor very clearly states that the Jeffrey Epstein who donated to my past campaign was a physician, and the donation date was well AFTER the [drum emoji] other [drum emoji] Jeffrey [drum emoji] Epstein [drum emoji] WAS [drum emoji] ALREADY [drum emoji] DEAD!!!” he exclaimed. TRUMP OFFICIAL FIRES BACK AT DEM’S EPSTEIN DONOR CLAIM: ‘TOTALLY DIFFERENT PERSON’ The dust-up originated because Crockett, during remarks on Tuesday, listed figures and entities she said had taken money from “somebody” with the name Jeffrey Epstein. Noting that she had her “team dig in very quickly,” she ran through the following list: “Mitt Romney, the NRCC, Lee Zeldin, George Bush, WinRed, McCain-Palin, Rick Lazio.” Zeldin fired back on X, pointing out that the donation was not from the notorious Jeffrey Epstein, but from a completely different individual. “Yes Crockett, a physician named Dr. Jeffrey Epstein (who is a totally different person than the other Jeffrey Epstein) donated to a prior campaign of mine,” Zeldin wrote. “NO [clap emoji] FREAKIN [clap emoji] RELATION [clap emoji] YOU [clap emoji] GENIUS!!!” Meghan McCain, who is the daughter of the late Republican senator and 2008 Republican presidential nominee John McCain, also fired back at Crockett. SOCIAL MEDIA ERUPTS AFTER FAR-LEFT FIREBRAND BOTCHES EPSTEIN CLAIMS: ‘INSANE ACCUSATION’ “My Dad has been dead 7 years @RepJasmine. He never met Jeffrey Epstein, let alone took money from him. The Jeffrey Epstein you are referencing is an entirely different human being. Do you have mashed potatoes for brains, you absolute joke?!” she wrote in a Wednesday post on X. When CNN’s Kaitlan Collins confronted Crockett on Wednesday about Zeldin’s Tuesday post that pushed back against the notion that he had accepted a donation from the late convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein, the Texas Democrat said that she “never said that it was that Jeffrey Epstein.” FAR-LEFT FIREBRAND SPENDS EYE-POPPING AMOUNT OF CAMPAIGN CASH ON LUXURY HOTELS, ‘TOP-TIER’ LIMO SERVICES CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP “Unlike Republicans, I at least don’t go out and just tell lies,” she later said. “So, number one, I made sure that I was clear that it was a Jeffrey Epstein, but I never said that it was specifically that Jeffrey Epstein,” Crockett said later during the interview.
Trump’s trillion-dollar Saudi deal could reshape markets — if the money ever materializes
President Donald Trump loves a deal and few partners have proven more willing or more powerful than Saudi Arabia. This week, Saudi Arabia’s Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman pledged to channel $1 trillion in investments from the oil-rich kingdom into the U.S. Trump embraced the announcement as validation of his close ties with Riyadh and proof that international money is eager to flow back into the U.S. economy. Yet beneath the impressive headline figure lies a familiar reality: much of the promised investment exists only on paper, and experts caution that the actual cash flow could take years to materialize. “The term investment implies long-term capital, but in this case it really means purchases like aircraft, tanks, even computer chips,” said Simon Henderson, a senior fellow at The Washington Institute for Near East Policy. “And those figures, $600 billion, a trillion, who really knows how accurate they are, or over what time frame?” SAUDI ARABIA IS ALREADY AMERICA’S TOP ARMS BUYER AND NOW TRUMP WANTS TO ADD F-35S “Perhaps the real story is that Saudi finances are in bad shape,” added Henderson, who specializes in the Gulf region and energy policy. “Oil prices are too low, they need about $100 a barrel, and extravagant spending on prestige projects like The Line and NEOM are being scaled back.” The Line is a proposed 105-mile car-free city and NEOM is a $500 billion futuristic mega-development on the Red Sea. Both are part of the crown prince’s “Vision 2030” plan to diversify the kingdom’s economy beyond oil. Others note that Saudi Arabia’s short-term fiscal strains don’t necessarily preclude large-scale investments over time. “It’s perfectly within the realm of possibilities that Saudi Arabia could make a $1 trillion investment into the United States over many years,” explained E.J. Antoni, chief economist at the Heritage Foundation, citing the kingdom’s vast oil wealth and long-term economic ambitions. Antoni noted that much depends on how such an investment ultimately takes shape. For now, the White House has offered few details about what exactly the Saudi funds would be directed toward or when they might arrive. “What does it look like in practice? It could take a whole host of different forms,” he said. “We don’t know yet if this is going to look like an investment in infrastructure and even if it is, in what industry?” He pointed to petrochemicals as one possible fit but said other sectors could also attract Saudi money. “In terms of beneficiaries, clearly you have the American taxpayer, who’s going to benefit from a larger economy,” Antoni continued. “That broadens the tax base and reduces the overall tax burden on each individual. So that’s very, very positive.” SAUDI ARABIA’S 40-YEAR-OLD DISRUPTOR: HOW MBS REWIRED THE KINGDOM IN 10 SHORT YEARS He added that while such deals can stimulate confidence and markets in the short term, their most meaningful returns often unfold over years, well beyond a single presidential term. “Most of what President Donald Trump has done is to accrue benefits that will not appear until after he has already left office,” Antoni told Fox News Digital. “That’s not to say there are no initial gains, there clearly are. Every time another company announces more investment in the United States, it helps buoy the stock market, because equity prices are ultimately based on future earnings and those earnings rise when there’s additional investment coming.” For now, the pledge bolsters Trump’s economic narrative but also sets up a long-term test of U.S.–Saudi relations, one whose true impact may not be clear for years.
Survey says: Issue that helped Trump and Republicans in 2024 hurts them now
It was the issue that boosted President Donald Trump and Republicans in the 2024 elections, as they won back the White House and Senate majority and kept control of the House. But a year later, the economy, and everyday expenses in particular, are working against the president and his party. Democrats, with an across-the-board focus on affordability, outperformed at the polls as they enjoyed sweeping success at the ballot box in the 2025 elections earlier this month. And a new Fox News national poll released on Wednesday evening is another warning sign for Trump and the GOP. FOX NEWS POLL: VOTERS SAY WHITE HOUSE IS DOING MORE HARM THAN GOOD ON ECONOMY Three-quarters of voters questioned in the survey, which was conducted Friday through Monday, viewed the economy negatively, and large numbers of respondents, including Republicans, said their costs for groceries, utilities, healthcare and housing have gone up this year. The poll indicated that voters blame the president, with nearly twice as many pointing fingers at Trump than former President Joe Biden, when asked who is responsible for the current economy. Only 38% of those questioned gave the president a thumbs-up on how he’s handling the economy. And Trump’s overall approval rating, at 41%, is the lowest of his second term in office in Fox News polling. SETTING THE STAGE: WHAT THE 2025 ELECTIONS SIGNAL FOR NEXT YEAR’S MIDTERM SHOWDOWNS “The situation isn’t complicated,” says Republican pollster Daron Shaw, who helps run the Fox News Poll with Democrat Chris Anderson. “People are struggling to afford necessities and blaming those in charge. What’s interesting is watching Democrats gain politically from a problem they arguably caused — and that crushed them in 2024. But that’s politics.” Trump enjoyed some positive economic news on Thursday, with the release of a stronger-than-expected jobs report after several months of weakness. U.S. employers added 119,000 jobs in September, according to federal government data delayed for weeks due to the government shutdown. But the report also indicated the unemployment rate ticked up to 4.4%. The Fox News survey is the latest national poll to point to political anxiety over the economy. Jack Heath, the host of a popular statewide news-talk morning radio program in swing state New Hampshire, told Fox News Digital when he interviews congressional candidates and asks them what’s on the minds of voters they meet on the campaign trail, they tell him voters are “talking about how they can’t afford anything. It’s affordability. It’s cost of living.” “I think there’s a very short window to the midterms where the president needs to . . . get back to the blue-collar people who are working. They feel optimistic, but they’re growing more pessimistic that ‘I’m not keeping as much money as I want to and I’m working hard,’” Heath said, as he referred to next year’s midterm elections, when the GOP will defend its congressional majorities. ELECTION REFLECTION: ‘DEMOCRATS FLIPPED THE SCRIPT’ ON AFFORDABILITY IN BALLOT BOX SHOWDOWNS Pointing to the 2025 election’s double-digit gubernatorial wins for Democrats in New Jersey and Virginia, as well as ballot box showdowns in battlegrounds Georgia and Pennsylvania and left-tilting New York City and California, Democratic National Committee Chair Ken Martin said his party’s candidates “are meeting voters at the kitchen table. . . . From New Jersey and Virginia and New York, to Georgia and beyond, Democrats ran campaigns relentlessly focused on costs and affordability.” Trump, in his first post-2025 election interview, told Fox News’ Bret Baier earlier this month that, on inflation, “We’ve done so much. . . . Energy is way down. . . . We’re going to have $2 gasoline. I did that. That brings everything else down. Groceries are way down, other than beef. Now, beef is going to come down . . . . The fact is, we have prices way down.” And the president argued in his “Special Report” interview that it’s more of a messaging problem for the GOP. “As Republicans, you have to talk about it.” But Trump and his team have turned the spotlight since the elections this month on battling high prices. “We’re making incredible strides to make America affordable again,” Trump said Wednesday. But the polls suggest Americans aren’t buying the message from the White House. “Voters are remarkably consistent in their priorities: the economy, the economy, the economy,” noted Wayne Lesperance, a veteran political scientist and president of New England College. “When you win an election, voters expect you are going to do something to address those concerns and the reality is that the questions of affordability remain unchanged in their importance to the everyday voter,” Lesperance emphasized.
Reagan-appointed judge torches colleagues in Texas map fight, calls ruling ‘fiction,’ ‘judicial activism’
A federal judge in Texas responded to the court’s decision to scrap the state’s redrawn map with a jaw-dropping dissent on Wednesday in which he lobbed dozens of insults at his colleague and repeatedly invoked Democratic mega-donor George Soros. “This is the most blatant exercise of judicial activism that I have ever witnessed,” Judge Jerry Smith, a Reagan-appointee on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit, wrote of the 2-1 decision to toss out the map. In the turbulent 104-page tirade, he named the majority opinion’s author, U.S. District Judge Jeffrey Brown, a Trump appointee, hundreds of times, accusing him of “pernicious judicial misbehavior.” The majority opinion would be a “prime candidate” for a “Nobel Prize for Fiction,” Smith said. “The main winners from Judge Brown’s opinion are George Soros and Gavin Newsom,” Smith said. “The obvious losers are the People of Texas and the Rule of Law.” REPUBLICANS PUSH BACK OVER ‘FALSE ACCUSATIONS OF RACISM’ IN BLOCKBUSTER REDISTRICTING FIGHT Smith, a Yale Law School graduate, wrote that “if this were a law school exam, the opinion would deserve an ‘F.’” Smith’s dissent came as part of a three-judge panel’s decision in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Texas to temporarily block the state from using its map in the 2026 midterms. The map had created five new Republican-leaning districts, which the majority said was a product of unconstitutional racial gerrymandering. Republican Gov. Greg Abbott has already turned to the Supreme Court for relief. Just as striking as the dissent itself, which Smith conceded was “disjointed,” was that the two judges in the majority did not wait for it, issuing their decision on Tuesday and leaving Smith’s dissent to land on the docket a day later. “Any pretense of judicial restraint, good faith, or trust by these two judges is gone,” Smith wrote. “If these judges were so sure of their result, they would not have been so unfairly eager to issue the opinion sans my dissent, or they could have waited for the dissent in order to join issue with it. What indeed are they afraid of?” Brown was joined in the 2-1 opinion by U.S. District Judge David Guaderrama, an Obama appointee. Smith’s broadside focused on Brown, saying that, “true to form,” he preferred to “live in a fantasyland” and had engaged in “judicial tinkering.” The Supreme Court is now under pressure to act quickly on what has become a pivotal election issue that could shape the outcome of next year’s midterms. Texas requires candidates to declare their candidacy by Dec. 8. The high court is already considering a similar Voting Rights Act case that originated in Louisiana. The justices heard oral arguments in the case last month and are expected to address the race provision of the law, which is relevant in the Texas case, on a normal timeline during this term. Brown’s majority opinion in Texas had opened with a quote from Chief Justice John Roberts, who said in an unrelated case, “The way to stop discrimination on the basis of race is to stop discriminating on the basis of race.” FEDERAL JUDGES BLOCK TEXAS FROM USING REDRAWN CONGRESSIONAL MAP “Substantial evidence shows that Texas racially gerrymandered the 2025 Map,” Brown wrote. Brown said Department of Justice Civil Rights Division head Harmeet Dhillon’s warning to Texas this year to address four districts with non-White majorities because they were “coalition” districts was a race-based directive as evidenced by Dhillon ignoring all other Democrat-leaning districts that had White majorities. Abbott had responded to Dhillon by adding redistricting to the legislative agenda in a rush, leading to a stunning protest involving Democratic state lawmakers fleeing the state earlier this year. “The Governor explicitly directed the Legislature to redistrict based on race,” Brown found.
Graham demands Democrats explain ‘refuse illegal orders’ message to troops
FIRST ON FOX: Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., is demanding specifics from a group of congressional Democrats who urged military service members to “refuse illegal orders.” Graham sent letters to a cohort of congressional Democrats, all with backgrounds in the military or intelligence community, featured in a now-viral video where they urge service members to refuse illegal orders. The six lawmakers featured in the video were Sens. Elissa Slotkin, D-Mich., and Mark Kelly, D-Ariz., along with Reps. Maggie Goodlander, D-N.H.; Jason Crow, D-Colo.; Chris Deluzio, D-Pa.; and Chrissy Houlahan, D-Pa. SIX DEMOCRATS URGE MILITARY MEMBERS TO ‘REFUSE ILLEGAL ORDERS’ IN VIRAL VIDEO; HEGSETH RESPONDS They reiterated the lines, “You can refuse illegal orders,” or “You must refuse illegal orders,” as they went on to charge that service members do not have to carry out orders from higher-ups that they believe violate the Constitution. Notably, none of the lawmakers dove into which orders they believed were illegal in the video. Graham, who served three decades in the Air Force and worked as an Air Force Judge Advocate General (JAG), wrote in six letters to each of the lawmakers that he took “the issue of unlawful orders very seriously.” “I cannot find a single example of an illegal order during this administration, but as a Member of Congress, I believe you owe it to the country to be specific as to which orders you believe are unlawful,” Graham said. SEN BLACKBURN FIRES BACK AT DEMOCRATS OVER ‘DISTURBING’ VIDEO URGING TROOPS TO DEFY ‘ILLEGAL’ ORDERS “However, to say that I am disturbed by your video encouraging service members and Intelligence Community professionals to refuse ‘unlawful orders’ is an understatement,” he continued. “In that regard, could you please provide clarity on what orders, issued by President Trump or those in his chain of command, you consider illegal?” The video, and Graham’s letters, come on the heels of rising questions among lawmakers about the legality of President Donald Trump’s authorization of strikes on alleged drug boats in the Caribbean, and in the wake of the administration’s deployment of the National Guard to blue cities across the country. DEPUTY AG BLASTS DEMOCRATS’ ‘ABHORRENT’ VIDEO URGING TROOPS TO ‘REFUSE ILLEGAL ORDERS’ Members of the military have an obligation to follow lawful orders from their superiors, but they can ignore orders deemed illegal, according to the Uniform Code of Military Justice — the standardized military justice system enacted in 1951. When asked to get into specifics, Slotkin’s office pointed Fox News Digital to an interview the senator had with TMZ, where she explained that the video was made in response to service members “reaching out to us saying, ‘I don’t know what to do if the commander in chief orders me to do something that is illegal.’” Slotkin, who was a CIA officer, said service members aren’t “trained in police techniques. They’re not trained in arresting, detaining American citizens, crowd control, raids on homes, and they were worried that they could be asked to do those things, that protests could get bad in a place like Chicago, and they could be asked to do these things.” Fox News Digital reached out for comment from Kelly, Crow, Houlahan, Goodlander and Deluzio but did not immediately hear back.
NYC Mayor-elect Mamdani says he’ll work with Trump ‘to make life more affordable’ despite policy clashes
New York City Mayor-elect Zohran Mamdani said he has “many disagreements” with President Donald Trump but is willing to set those differences aside for the sake of his city. “I intend to make it clear to President Trump that I will work with him on any agenda that benefits New Yorkers. If an agenda hurts New Yorkers, I will also be the first to say something,” Mamdani said Thursday at a press conference. “I know that for tens of thousands of New Yorkers, this meeting is between two very different candidates who they voted for, for the same reason,” he added. “They wanted a leader who would take on the cost of living crisis that makes it impossible for working people to afford living in this city.” The mayor-elect is scheduled to meet with Trump at the White House on Friday. MAMDANI VOWS TO DEFY TRUMP IN FIERY FINAL MARCH FROM BROOKLYN BRIDGE TO CITY HALL AHEAD OF ELECTION DAY Trump has repeatedly called out Mamdani for his political views, including labeling him a “Communist Lunatic” after his victory on Election Day. In the weeks leading up to the mayoral election, the president threatened to pull federal funding to New York City if Mamdani won. Afterward, Trump said of the city that he would “help them a little bit.” FLASHBACK: WILDEST MOMENTS MAMDANI OVERCAME ON THE CAMPAIGN TRAIL TO BECOME NYC’S NEXT MAYOR Mamdani, a self-proclaimed democratic socialist, said at Thursday’s press conference at City Hall Park in Lower Manhattan that a key part of the meeting was to talk about the issue of affordability. “When we speak about an affordability crisis, we’re speaking about 1 in 4 New Yorkers living in poverty, 1 in 5 struggling to afford $2.90 to ride the bus. New Yorkers, for whom the daily acts of life are becoming increasingly harder to afford,” Mamdani told reporters.
Shapiro responds to illegal immigrant trucker fiasco – says driver was in fed database first
Pennsylvania Gov. Josh Shapiro responded to backlash over the arrest of an Uzbek illegal immigrant with suspected terror ties who was captured by federal authorities while holding a Pennsylvania commercial driver’s license. Akhror Bozorov was nabbed by ICE while driving a big rig in Kansas and holding a Pennsylvania CDL with a Somerton, Philadelphia address. He was wanted in Tashkent, Uzbekistan, on suspicion of ties to terrorist groups among other allegations, according to DHS. Shapiro said Bozorov still remained in the federal database PennDOT uses to vet noncitizens for licensure validity as of Wednesday – and administration officials penned a scathing letter to lawmakers about the incident, disputing that it was ever possible he was registered to vote, as some critics have questioned. In a letter to House and Senate leaders obtained by Fox News Digital, PennDOT Secretary Mike Carroll, a Democrat, and Secretary of the Commonwealth Al Schmidt, a Republican, pushed back on “misstatements and ill-informed speculation” from critical officials, including allegations illegal immigrants are permitted under the Shapiro administration to obtain state driver’s licenses. ICE ARRESTS ILLEGAL-IMMIGRANT TRUCKER FROM UZBEKISTAN OVER ALLEGED TERROR TIES “All non-citizens who apply for driver’s licenses… must provide PennDOT with proof of identity and must have their legal presence in this country verified through the federal Systematic Alien Verification for Entitlements (SAVE) database,” Carroll and Schmidt wrote. “The SAVE database is maintained by the United States Department of Homeland Security. In the instance the letter references, PennDOT followed the established federal process for confirming that the applicant was lawfully present using the SAVE database,” they said. Carroll said PennDOT communicated with DHS on the matter Tuesday and found the database did not flag any issues in the time since Bozorov’s license was issued in July. LAWMAKERS WARNED PENNDOT OF ILLEGAL IMMIGRANT-CDL CRISIS BEFORE BUST; GOP DEMANDS ANSWERS FROM SHAPIRO Schmidt’s office handles voter registration and state elections, and the letter went on to say that noncitizens who are lawfully issued licenses are marked with “special indicators” that prevent them from utilizing any “motor voter” registration processes. “We checked the federal database months ago, when this individual received his CDL, and he was authorized to get it by the federal database,” Shapiro said Wednesday. “Ironically, we went and checked the database yesterday — he’s still qualified to get a CDL.” Shapiro said DHS was “clearly not minding the shop” and “got to get better — because every single state in the country relies on this database when making a determination as to who qualifies for a CDL. We relied on the feds before issuing this one.” DHS pushed back on Shapiro’s claims, saying that federal work authorization “does not confer any legal status in this country” and that data limitations stem from prior administrations. “Just because the Biden administration granted Bozorov — a wanted terrorist — work authorization and sanctuary politician Gov. Shapiro allowed him to get a CDL in Pennsylvania, does not mean he should be on America’s roads operating an 18-wheeler and potentially transporting hazardous materials,” a DHS spokesperson said Thursday.
Trump labels 6 Democrats who told troops to refuse unlawful orders ‘traitors’ who should be arrested
President Donald Trump slammed the six Democrats who appeared in a video telling troops to defy “illegal” orders. “It’s called SEDITIOUS BEHAVIOR AT THE HIGHEST LEVEL. Each one of these traitors to our country should be ARRESTED AND PUT ON TRIAL,” Trump wrote on Truth Social on Thursday. “Their words cannot be allowed to stand — We won’t have a Country anymore!!! An example MUST BE SET.” In a second post, Trump wrote, “This is really bad, and dangerous to our country. Their words cannot be allowed to stand. SEDITIOUS BEHAVIOR FROM TRAITORS!!! LOCK THEM UP???” Trump added later Thursday that the actions were “punishable by death.” SIX DEMOCRATS URGE MILITARY MEMBERS TO ‘REFUSE ILLEGAL ORDERS’ IN VIRAL VIDEO; HEGSETH RESPONDS The video, which was posted on Tuesday by Sen. Elissa Slotkin, D-Mich., has drawn the ire of Republicans and the Trump administration. The Democrats in the video include Slotkin, Sen. Mark Kelly, D-Ariz., Reps. Chris Deluzio, D-Pa., Maggie Goodlander, D-N.H., Chrissy Houlahan, D-Pa., and Jason Crow, D-Colo. All the lawmakers in the video highlighted their former service in the military and intelligence community. Slotkin and her colleagues have spent recent weeks introducing legislation to limit Trump’s ability to deploy National Guard members domestically or launch military action against suspected narcoterrorists without congressional approval. None of that context appears in the video, titled “Don’t Give Up the Ship,” which instead frames the appeal as a warning to military members to “stand up for our laws” and “refuse unlawful orders.” SEN BLACKBURN FIRES BACK AT DEMOCRATS OVER ‘DISTURBING’ VIDEO URGING TROOPS TO DEFY ‘ILLEGAL’ ORDERS War Secretary Pete Hegseth responded to the video on X, writing, “Stage 4 TDS.” Sen. Marsha Blackburn, R-Tenn., echoed the sentiment during an appearance on “The Faulkner Focus.” “They have stage four Trump Derangement Syndrome,” Blackburn told Fox News’ Harris Faulkner. “It is inconceivable that you would have elected officials that are saying to uniform members of the military who have taken an oath to protect and defend, that they would defy the orders that they have been given to execute their mission,” she added. Slotkin’s “No Troops in Our Streets Act,” detailed in a Nov. 13 release, would give Congress the power to block National Guard deployments inside American cities. Trump has expanded National Guard operations to Los Angeles, Portland and Chicago amid violent crime. There are also reports that troops will be deployed to Louisiana. Fox News Digital’s Madison Colombo contributed to this report.