Trump’s Iran gamble pays off as WWIII doomsayers now praise Israel-Hamas ceasefire
When U.S. forces launched strikes against Iranian military targets in June, critics warned it could ignite a regional inferno — even the start of World War III. Four months later, the Middle East is quieter than at any point in years. Iranian proxies have scaled back attacks, Gulf tensions have cooled, and Washington has shifted attention toward the Western Hemisphere. The unexpected calm is raising a new question: Did decisive U.S. action restore deterrence — or has Washington simply been lucky? Those who favor a more forceful U.S. foreign policy counted Iran’s lack of a response as a win for their frame of mind — and a loss for restrainers. They now credit the strikes with bringing about a period of relative peace that culminated in a fragile ceasefire between Israel and Hamas this week. Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene, R-Ga., publicly broke from her longtime support of President Donald Trump after the strikes. ISRAEL’S STRIKE IN QATAR TRIGGERS RARE US REBUKE, TESTS TRUMP’S GULF DIPLOMACY “Six months in and here we are turning back on the campaign promises, and we bombed Iran on behalf of Israel,” she said on Newsmax at the time. “We’re entering a nuclear war, World War Three, because the entire world is going to erupt. And you know what, the people that are cheering it on right now, their tune is going to drastically change the minute we start seeing flag-draped coffins on the nightly news.” On Monday, she praised Trump for brokering the peace deal between Israel and Hamas. “Blessed are the peacemakers! May healing begin for all.” “You’ve put every U.S. troop and embassy in the region at risk and squandered America’s diplomatic leverage — though you’ll likely think you’ve strengthened it,” said Adam Weinstein, deputy director of the Middle East Program at the Quincy Institute, at the time. IRAN PRESIDENT ACCUSES US OF ‘GRAVE BETRAYAL’ WITH NUCLEAR STRIKES IN UNGA SPEECH Sen. Chris Murphy, D-Conn., claimed the strike “put the United States on a path to a war in the Middle East that the country does not want, the law does not allow, and our security does not demand.” Rep. Thomas Massie, R-Ky., was even more blunt. “It was a good week for the neocons in the military-industrial complex who want war all the time,” he said on CBS’ Face the Nation. Four months later, those who once warned of a spiral toward World War III are facing an uncomfortable reality: the region is largely quiet. “Those who warned of World War III before the U.S. and Israeli strikes on Iran fundamentally misunderstood both the nature of deterrence and the regime in Tehran,” said Mark Dubowitz, CEO of the Foundation for Defense of Democracies. “Strength and resolve don’t invite escalation — they prevent it. What we’ve seen in recent months is a return to deterrence through escalation dominance: Iran, Hezbollah, Hamas, and other American enemies are recalibrating precisely because the United States finally imposed real costs on the Islamic Republic.” Dubowitz said years of Western restraint emboldened Iran. “For years, Western policymakers indulged in a fantasy that restraint would produce stability,” he said. “It did the opposite. Tehran read our de-escalation as weakness and kept pushing.” “Everybody who said that a strike on Iran would be a disaster was wrong,” said Matthew Kroenig, vice president of the Atlantic Council’s Scowcroft Center and a former Pentagon strategist. “These fears about Iranian retaliation and region-wide war were exaggerated. Iran doesn’t want a major war with the United States, the greatest superpower on earth that could end its regime. Instead, Iran engaged in some kind of token retaliation, and the whole thing died down.” Trump’s authorization of the strikes was not a departure from his “America First” principles, as Greene suggested, but a continuation of them. “When it comes to hitting an adversary hard, Trump has always been open to that kind of short, sharp, decisive use of force to achieve a clear objective,” Kroenig said. TRUMP’S IRAN ULTIMATUM STARTED A 60-DAY CLOCK TICKING FOR DECISIVE JUNE STRIKES, BOMBER COMMANDER REVEALS Those in the restraint camp say they don’t count Trump’s decision as a total loss for their viewpoint. They argue that predictions of a wider war were based on a different scenario — one that Trump ultimately avoided. “The prediction that this could lead to a wider war was for the scenario in which the U.S. would join Israel in a larger military campaign against Iran with the intent of regime change,” said Trita Parsi, co-founder of the Quincy Institute. “This is not what Trump opted for. He clearly signaled to Tehran before the strikes where he would strike to ensure that the locations would be vacated and that there would be no casualties. He also signaled his intent to only strike these sites and be done with it. This significantly reduced the risk of a larger escalation.” Rosemary Kelanic of Defense Priorities acknowledged that the strikes were “not a win for restraint” in principle, and though the U.S. felt few repercussions, it was still a gamble. “I think it’s really easy to learn the wrong lesson from this, which is, all we have to do is go in and bomb for 45 minutes and then everyone will back down,” she said. “Most of the time, U.S. military force doesn’t actually produce the outcomes that we want.” Adam Weinstein said the operation came at the cost of diplomacy, noting that the strikes took place in the midst of ongoing negotiations with Tehran over its nuclear program. “The strikes were a setback on diplomacy with Iran,” he said. “They negatively affected the world’s ability to ensure that Iran doesn’t develop a nuclear capability. It essentially destroyed trust between Iran and the international community.”
Ramaswamy: 2025 GOP wins in New Jersey, Virginia, would ‘set the table for…more decisive victories’ in 2026
EXCLUSIVE – SADDLE BROOK, N.J. – GOP gubernatorial candidate Vivek Ramaswamy of Ohio was a long way from home on Wednesday night, as he briefly left his own race to help another Republican running for governor. But Ramaswamy’s campaign trail stop in New Jersey’s competitive and combustible gubernatorial election, where he teamed up with GOP nominee Jack Ciattarelli at a packed diner full of supporters, could pay dividends next year in his own race back home. New Jersey and Virginia are the only two states to hold gubernatorial showdowns in the year after a presidential election, and the contests traditionally grab outsized attention and are viewed as political barometers ahead of the following year’s midterm elections. And this year, they’re being viewed to a large degree as ballot box referendums on President Donald Trump’s unprecedented second-term agenda. CIATTARELLI WELCOMES TRUMP’S HELP IN BATTLE FOR NEW JERSEY GOVERNOR Pointing to New Jersey and Virginia, Ramaswamy said in an exclusive interview with Fox News Digital that GOP victories in both elections would “set the table for even bigger and more decisive victories, hopefully in places like Ohio next year.” Ramaswamy arrived in New Jersey hours after the latest poll in the governor’s race indicated Ciattarelli narrowing the gap with Rep. Mikie Sherrill, the Democratic Party nominee in the race to succeed term-limited Democratic Gov. Phil Murphy. The MAGA world rock star’s stop in New Jersey could help Ciattarelli energize many in the party’s base – low propensity voters who often skip casting ballots in non-presidential election years. NATION’S ONLY TWO 2025 RACES FOR GOVERNOR ROCKED WITH THREE WEEKS UNTIL ELECTION DAY “If you want to bring down costs in this state, back Jack,” Ramaswamy told the boisterous crowd. “If you want to make New Jersey great again, back Jack. We are ready, Jack, for change. This state is hungry for it.” And Ramaswamy, the multimillionaire biotech entrepreneur and conservative commentator who pushed an “America First 2.0” platform as he ran for the 2024 Republican presidential nomination before ending his bid and becoming one of Trump’s top supporters and surrogates, told Ciattarelli, “We’re going in Ohio next year, but you’ve got to pave the path this year. We’re counting on you.” Ramaswamy, who’s been endorsed by Trump, is the only major Republican candidate right now in the 2026 race to succeed term-limited GOP Gov. Mike DeWine. Former Democratic Rep. Tim Ryan, who spent two decades representing a large swath of northeastern Ohio, including Akron and Youngstown, is likely to launch a gubernatorial campaign in the coming days. Ryan, his party’s Senate nominee in Ohio’s 2022 election, would become the second major Democrat in the 2026 gubernatorial race, joining former state Health Director Amy Acton. FINAL FACEOFF: CIATTARELLI, SHERRILL, CLASH ON DEBATE STAGE “It doesn’t matter who we’re running against,” Ramaswamy said when asked what a Ryan candidacy would mean to him. “The beauty of our side of this election in Ohio is we’re more united than we’ve ever been as a Republican Party. I’m running unopposed in the Republican primary. But even more importantly, we have widespread labor support in Ohio. This is unprecedented.” Ramaswamy, as he spoke at the Ciattarelli event in New Jersey, which included an overflow crowd of a couple of hundred people outside the diner, received encouragement to make another White House run down the road. “I’m 100% focused on Ohio,” Ramaswamy told Fox News Digital. “You can’t make long-run plans. Life never goes according to your plan.” But he added, “We’re gonna do our part in Ohio, and that’s my next step for how we save the country.” HEAD HERE FOR THE LATEST FOX NEWS REPORTING ON THE 2025 ELECTIONS Ramaswamy’s stop in New Jersey, with less than three weeks until Election Day, came hours after multiple sources confirmed to Fox News that Trump will hold tele-rallies with Ciattarelli. In what’s expected to be a low-turnout election, Trump’s backing could prove crucial for Ciattarelli, who’s making his third run for governor after narrowly losing to Murphy four years ago. “There’s obviously a whole lot of people across the state of New Jersey that are pleased with the job the president’s doing,” Ciattarelli said earlier Wednesday in an exclusive Fox News Digital interview. Pointing to the president’s push to temporarily halt wind farms off the Jersey Shore, his vow to kill New York’s congestion pricing, tax cuts, deductions, and credits in the GOP’s massive domestic policy measure, and his efforts to secure the nation’s southern border, Ciattarelli said that people “are very pleased with the president, what he’s done for New Jersey.” Trump endorsed Ciattarelli earlier this year in the GOP gubernatorial nomination race. And the president headlined a tele-rally for Ciattarelli ahead of the June primary. While Trump isn’t on the ballot, he’s loomed large over the New Jersey gubernatorial election. At last week’s second and final debate, Sherrill charged that her GOP rival had “shown zero signs of standing up to this president. In fact, the president himself called Jack 100% MAGA, and he’s shown every sign of being that.” Asked whether he considered himself part of the MAGA movement, Ciattarelli said he was “part of a New Jersey movement.” When asked to grade the president’s performance so far during his second term, Ciattarelli said, “I’d certainly give the president an A. I think he’s right about everything that he’s doing.” “I think that tells us all we need to know about who Jack Ciattarelli’s supporting. I give him an F right now,” Sherrill responded, as she pointed to New Jersey’s high cost of living. While Democrats have long dominated federal and state legislative elections in blue-leaning New Jersey, Republicans are very competitive in gubernatorial contests, winning five out of the past 10 elections. And Trump made major gains in New Jersey in last year’s presidential election, losing the state by only six percentage points, a major improvement over his 16-point deficit four years earlier. Ciattarelli said in a Fox News Digital interview last month that
Republicans push to pay troops, reopen government as Democrats balk
Senate Democrats wanted an equal say in crafting spending bills before the shutdown and are about to get a chance to do so, but they’re unlikely to support Republicans’ latest effort to jump-start the government funding process. The Senate on Thursday is set to move through a procedural hurdle on the annual defense spending bill, which, among other things, would ensure that military service members would get their paychecks. Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D., teed up the bill earlier this week as the shutdown raged on to pressure Senate Democrats to make good on their desire to fund the government in a bipartisan manner, and in the hopes of getting the appropriations process moving again. TRUMP MOVE SPARES TROOPS’ PAY, BUT REPUBLICANS WARN SHUTDOWN RISKS REMAIN “We can actually get the appropriations process going forward,” Thune said. “So that’s in the works.” And in the Senate, given the 60-vote filibuster threshold, spending bills are prime examples of the many pieces of legislation that have to be bipartisan to pass. But Senate Democrats seemed unwilling to go all in on supporting the defense bill, and like the Republicans’ plan to reopen the government, appear ready to block Thune’s effort. They want to know exactly what Republicans plan to put on the floor later on, despite the vote on Thursday afternoon being designed to give lawmakers the chance to move forward with at least one of several spending bills that must be passed to fund the government. “We have to see what they’re going to put on the floor,” Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., said. “They haven’t told us yet.” Republicans are also eyeing at least three other spending bills to attach to the defense appropriations bill, including legislation that would fund the departments of Labor, Commerce, Transportation, Health and Human Services, and Housing and Urban Development. REPUBLICANS FUME AS DEMOCRATS BLOCK 9TH GOP BID TO REOPEN GOVERNMENT Sen. Mike Rounds, R-S.D., is a member of the Senate Appropriations Committee and appears ready for the reality that Democrats would block the defense bill and broader spending package. “You have to start with the defense, and then you can add the other ones to it, but once again, it takes agreement by our Dem colleagues that want to move that forward,” he said. “I’m not sure that we’ve got the votes to do that yet.” There is a trust deficit between Senate Democrats and Republicans from earlier this year when the GOP passed President Donald Trump’s request to claw back billions in funding for foreign aid and NPR and PBS, in addition to continued actions by Office of Management and Budget Director Russ Vought to withhold or cancel funding for Democratic priorities. Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse, D-R.I., told Fox News Digital after Senate Democrats met behind closed doors on Wednesday that there had been no indication from Republicans there would be “bipartisan cooperation or any willingness to put any guardrails around what they plan to do.” “I think the stage we’re at is that we’ve been shown nothing,” he said. “So there’s no reason to vote for it yet.” “I think what was needed is a larger agreement about how the appropriations process is moving forward, so it’s clear that our priorities are respected,” he continued. However, pairing the defense bill could grease the wheels for some in the Democratic caucus. “No, not unless it’s paired with [the Labor and HHS bill],” Sen. Angus King, I-Maine, said. REPUBLICANS EYE FRESH FUNDING FIGHT AS SHUTDOWN STANDOFF DRAGS ON Thune’s move to reignite the appropriations process, an exercise that played out in the Senate in early August when lawmakers advanced a trio of funding bills ahead of the shutdown deadline, is part of Republicans’ broader desire to fund the government the old-fashioned way, rather than through a colossal omnibus spending package. It’s an exercise, however, that hasn’t been fully completed since the 1990s. Sen. Eric Schmitt, R-Mo., noted to Fox News Digital that a major part of selecting a new leader for the Senate GOP was returning to what’s known as regular order, or passing spending to fund the government. CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP He argued that when Schumer ran the Senate as majority leader, the upper chamber was often resigned to passing “these omnibus bills that were developed in the, you know, middle of the night with four people.” “We’re not interested in that. So we want to get bills on the floor, and they’ve got to move in a bipartisan way, right? So I think this is something that I would hope Democrats would support, too,” he said. “But if their mentality is at this point, you know, just oppose everything Republicans want to do, it’s pathological, and I don’t have any advice for them except seek help.” Republicans are still trying to reopen the government and plan to put the House-passed continuing resolution (CR) on the floor again Thursday for a 10th time. And just like many times before, it is expected to fail. When asked if he believed that the shutdown could transform into lawmakers passing spending bills one-by-one to reopen the government, Thune said, “I certainly hope not.”
Obama endorses Spanberger, attacks Republicans in Virginia governor’s race ads
Former President Barack Obama endorsed former Democratic Rep. Abigail Spanberger in Virginia’s governor race, releasing a pair of ads attacking Republicans. The contest between Spanberger, a former CIA officer, and Virginia Lt. Gov. Winsome Earle-Sears is one of only two governor races in the U.S. this November. The contests are viewed as political bellwethers ahead of the 2026 midterm elections. “Virginia’s elections are some of the most important in the country this year. We know Republicans will keep attacking abortion rights and the rights of women. That’s why having the right governor matters, and I’m proud to endorse Abigail Spanberger,” Obama said in one of the ads, titled “Protect Our Rights.” “In Congress, Abigail held Republicans accountable and fought to protect voting rights and abortion rights,” Obama said. “But it won’t happen without you. Every vote counts, so turn out. Virginia, Abigail Spanberger is the best choice for governor.” TOP GOP GROUP DROPS BIG MONEY INTO VIRGINIA SHOWDOWN AFTER DEM AG NOMINEE’S VIOLENT TEXTS GO VIRAL Earle-Sears’ press secretary Peyton Vogel told Fox News Digital in reaction to the ads that, “Abigail Spanberger is scared, and it shows.” “After losing support across Virginia, she’s leaning on liberal elites to try and save her collapsing campaign. This is a desperate play from a candidate who’s run out of support, out of ideas, and out of time. Voters see through it, and that’s why Winsome Earle-Sears is surging,” Vogel added. In the other ad, Obama said, “Republican policies are raising costs on working families so [that] billionaires can get massive tax cuts.” “As governor, Abigail will stand up for Virginia families,” Obama said. “She’ll work to build an economy that works for everyone, not just big corporations and the wealthy.” WINSOME EARLE-SEARS RELEASES ‘TWO BULLETS’ AD SCATHING OPPONENT FOR FAILING TO DEMAND JAY JONES’ OUSTER Earle-Sears most recently criticized Spanberger on her X account Wednesday night for her reaction to the texting scandal surrounding Democratic Virginia attorney general candidate Jay Jones. The scandal involving Jones came to light earlier this month when the National Review published text message exchanges between Jones and his former state legislative colleague, Republican House Delegate Carrie Coyner. In the exchanges, Jones appears to call for violence against then-Virginia House of Delegates Speaker Todd Gilbert, his wife, Jennifer, and their children. “Jay Jones expressed his desire to murder a dad and his two young boys — and to see police officers get shot,” Earle-Sears said. “Abigail Spanberger still supports him.” Fox News Digital reported this week that Spanberger’s campaign store continues to sell merchandise co-branded with the rest of the statewide Democratic ticket — which includes Jones. Fox News’ Paul Steinhauser, Rachel Wolf and Charles Creitz contributed to this report.
Fetterman says he knows and loves Trump voters: ‘I’m the only Democrat in my family’
Democratic Sen. John Fetterman of Pennsylvania said that he knows and loves individuals who voted for President Donald Trump, noting that “they are not fascists” or “Nazis.” “I’m the only Democrat in my family. I grew up in a conservative part of Pennsylvania,” he noted during a NewsNation Town Hall while wearing a hoodie. “I would never compare anybody, anybody to Hitler, and those things,” Fetterman declared. FETTERMAN REJECTS ‘NAZI,’ ‘FASCIST’ LABELS FOR OPPONENTS WHILE AFFIRMING PARTY LOYALTY Such “extreme rhetoric” will make it “more likely” that there will be “extreme … outcomes and political violence,” he suggested. Pointing to the assassination of conservative activist Charlie Kirk, Fetterman said, “let people grieve, give people the space. I’m not gonna use that terrible thing … to make my argument and try to put out my views. It’s like, my God, you know, he’s a father that had his neck blown out by a bullet.” FETTERMAN URGES DEMS TO STOP CALLING TRUMP ‘HITLER’ AND ‘AUTOCRAT’ AFTER KIRK ASSASSINATION The senator also pointed to the near-assassination of Trump in Pennsylvania last year. “We really gotta turn the temperature down,” he said. Trump has floated the prospect of potentially supplying Tomahawk missiles to Ukraine, and Fetterman indicated he would strongly support such a move. FETTERMAN MARKS RELEASE OF LAST LIVING HOSTAGES: ‘THE NIGHTMARE FINALLY ENDS’ CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP “I enthusiastically support this. President Trump could help end this war and bring peace to Ukraine. Ending two awful wars is what the Nobel Peace Prize was designed for,” the senator noted in a post on X, which also included the Ukrainian and Israeli flag emojis.
Virginia parents crush fundraising goal for trans locker room fight after judge ordered massive bond
FIRST ON FOX: Parents from Northern Virginia late Wednesday night surpassed the massive $125,000 bond that a judge ordered them to pay in order to stay in court and defend their sons, who were suspended and found responsible for sexual harassment after objecting to a transgender classmate using their male-only locker room. The parents, who are suing the Loudoun County Public Schools district, raised over $125,000 ahead of the Friday deadline and even met the original Wednesday deadline before it was granted an extension. They were originally ordered by a federal judge last Friday to come up with the funds by the end of the day on Wednesday if they wanted to keep fighting for their sons in court. The $125,000 “bond” was ordered by the judge in the case, Leonie Brinkema, who said the money is meant to ensure that the parents would be able to pay for the school district’s attorney fees if they end up losing. “We have serious doubts that such a bond can be legally required, and this requirement that the plaintiffs put up the money to pay the government’s attorneys fees is certainly very unusual and unexpected, especially when the government acknowledged in court that its insurance policy is covering legal costs,” Josh Hetzler, co-counsel for the parents, said in a statement to Fox News Digital. PARENTS: VIRGINIA BOYS SUSPENDED AFTER QUESTIONING TRANSGENDER LOCKER ROOM POLICY WERE IGNORED BY SCHOOL Before taking the case to federal court, Hetzler, Wolfe and Smith sought other avenues to ensure the two boys were not suspended or marked as sexual harassers on their permanent record. They sought to appeal the Loudoun County Public Schools Title IX sexual harassment investigation finding, which came after the boys were videotaped by a biological female who identified as transgender inside the boys’ locker room. The video caught them outwardly complaining to each other about the fact that there was a girl using their facilities, which resulted in the boys’ suspension and the district’s harassment finding against them. However, the appeal was ultimately denied by the district, so the decision was made to take the matter to federal court with the help of Trump-aligned law group America First Legal (AFL). Meanwhile, on Friday, Judge Brinkema, for the Eastern District of Virginia, extended a temporary halt to the boys’ suspension so that they could continue attending class as the case is adjudicated. But, simultaneously, Brinkema also expressed “significant weaknesses in aspects of the plaintiffs’ allegations” in another ruling that same day, which ultimately required Wolfe and Smith to drum up $125,000 over the next three business days if they wanted to keep fighting the matter in court. FEDERAL JUDGE RULES IN FAVOR OF ALLOWING SCOTUS CASE OVER TRANS ATHLETES TO PROCEED AFTER ATTEMPT TO DISMISS “Fortunately, we have an extension until Friday,” Ian Prior, AFL’s attorney assisting on the case, said as the Wednesday bond deadline approached, and it appeared they would not have the funds. According to Prior, it is not entirely “atypical” for the prevailing party in a preliminary injunction to have to put up a bond. However, Prior noted, in public interest cases such as this one, bond requirements are often set very low, sometimes even at $0. Prior also said he was not aware of bonds being required to cover attorneys’ fees. “In most cases, it is done where a company is enjoined from doing something, like selling a certain kind of widget for example, and the injunction will cost them something,” Prior told Fox News Digital. “The bond helps assure that if the prevailing party does not ultimately succeed, the other party is made whole from the impact the injunction had. We are not aware of bonds being required to cover attorneys’ fees however.” In Brinkema’s order, she explicitly indicated the bond was to ensure “that if the defendant prevails on dispositive pre-trial motions, it can recover from that bond its attorney’s fees.” Wolfe and Smith, following the bond order, set up an online fundraiser to help them raise the funds. As of Wednesday morning, the online fundraiser had collected around $50,000, but before the end of the day, a single donation of $50,000, from Michael Dearing, who appears to be an angel investor, pushed the parents within $25,000 of their $125,000 goal. When asked about what their plans would be if they were unable to raise the full amount, Prior indicated that there were “a multitude of options” that could be taken. “The more that the students raise, the easier it will be to post bond, even if they do not get to the full $125k,” Prior told Fox News Digital. “To be clear, the case does not get dismissed without posting the bond – rather, we would lose the preliminary injunction and the suspensions would take place immediately and the findings would be put into the students’ records at a time when they would likely be applying for higher education.”
Trump instructs Pentagon to ensure troops are paid despite government shutdown
President Donald Trump on Wednesday signed a directive ordering the Department of War to keep paying U.S. troops despite the ongoing government shutdown, bypassing Congress after lawmakers failed to reach a funding deal for weeks. The White House said the move is necessary to protect “military readiness” as the budget standoff stretched into its third week. The order, issued as National Security Presidential Memorandum-8 (NSPM-8), directs the department to use available fiscal year 2026 funds to cover military pay and allowances. “The current appropriations lapse presents a serious and unacceptable threat to military readiness and the ability of our Armed Forces to protect and defend our Nation,” the memo states. Trump cited his Article II powers as commander-in-chief in issuing the order, which covers active-duty troops and reservists on service orders. The directive instructs officials to use only funds that are legally tied to military pay, in coordination with the Office of Management and Budget (OMB). TRUMP MOVE SPARES TROOPS’ PAY, BUT REPUBLICANS WARN SHUTDOWN RISKS REMAIN More than one million service members were expected to miss paychecks starting this week if Congress didn’t act. Trump’s move marks a break from past administrations, which often waited for bipartisan deals instead of intervening directly. Rep. Nick LaLota, R-N.Y., told Fox News Digital that “Trump’s mid-month action was welcome news to the military community. But now that same community is anxious about what happens at the end of the month, where mortgages and rents and car payments all become due.” “Democrats were wrong to try to use troop pay as leverage to accomplish their political goals. And it would be wrong, it would be just as wrong, for a Republican to hope that that lack of pay would be a catalyst to get Democrats to acquiesce,” LaLota said. “[Trump is] protecting the troops when Congress won’t.” WHITE HOUSE MAY ‘RUN OUT’ OF FUNDS TO PAY MILITARY IF SHUTDOWN CONTINUES, JOHNSON WARNS The Pentagon has not said which specific accounts will be used. Reports from Roll Call and Reuters indicate the administration has identified roughly $8 billion in unobligated defense funds as potential options. Critics warn the move could face legal challenges under the Antideficiency Act, which bars spending money not appropriated by Congress. But White House officials argue the law permits spending that has a “reasonable, logical relationship” to the purpose of the original funds: in this case, keeping troops paid. Fox News has reached out to the White House, OMB and Department of War for further comment. None have responded. CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP The directive follows Trump’s Oct. 11 order to keep troop payments flowing during the shutdown. The White House’s latest move Wednesday with Congress still in gridlock could shape government shutdowns for generations to come. Fox News Digital’s Elizabeth Elkind contributed to this report.
Judge blocks part of Texas law that limits campus protests after dark: ‘1st Amendment does not have a bedtime’
A federal judge has temporarily blocked key parts of Texas’ new law limiting expression on campuses after dark, preventing the University of Texas System from enforcing a ban on overnight expression as well as restrictions on inviting outside speakers and using amplified sounds during the last two weeks of a semester. U.S. District Judge David A. Ezra said on Tuesday that the student groups who brought the lawsuit are likely to succeed in their claims that the law violates their First Amendment rights to free speech. “The First Amendment does not have a bedtime of 10:00 p.m.,” the court held. “The burden is on the government to prove that its actions are narrowly tailored to achieve a compelling governmental interest. It has not done so.” The judge wrote that the clause lawmakers added to the bill directing universities to uphold the First Amendment “does not change the fact that the statute then requires universities to adopt policies that violate those very constitutional protections.” FEDERAL JUDGE LAUNCHES SCATHING BROADSIDE OF TRUMP’S EFFORTS TO DEPORT PRO-PALESTINIAN PROTESTERS “The Court cannot trust the universities to enforce their policies in a constitutional way while Plaintiffs are left in a state of uncertainty, chilling their speech for fear that their expressive conduct may violate the law or university policies,” Ezra continued. The Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression (FIRE) filed the lawsuit last month against the University of Texas System to block the legislation, which creates rules for campus protests and gives university systems’ governing boards the authority to limit where they can be held. FIRE attorneys said that the law violates the First and 14th Amendments because it bans protected speech on campuses from 10 p.m. to 8 a.m. Tuesday’s ruling “is a victory not only for our plaintiffs, but all of those who express themselves on college campuses across Texas,” FIRE senior supervising attorney JT Morris said in a statement. “The First Amendment protects their freedom of speech on campus, every hour of the day, every week of the year.” University of Texas System spokesperson Ben Wright said in a statement that the system cannot comment on the lawsuit but that it “complies with the law and court orders.” SB 2972, authored by former GOP state Sen. Brandon Creighton creates new limits on how people can protest on campus and establishes bans on expressive activity during overnight hours. The law, which took effect Sept. 1, essentially walks back a previous state law passed in 2019 that required all outdoor spaces at state universities be available as open forums for speech. On top of the overnight speech restrictions, the law bars demonstrators from using microphones or other devices to amplify sound while protesting during class hours or if doing so intimidates others or interferes with campus operations, university employees or peace officers doing their job. Protesters would also be prohibited from building encampments, removing an institution’s U.S. flag to put up one from another country or organization and wearing coverings to avoid being identified or to intimidate others. University employees and students participating in a campus protest would also be required to provide proof of their identity and status with the school if a university official inquires. “Texas’ law is so overbroad that any public university student chatting in the dorms past 10 p.m. would have been in violation,” FIRE senior attorney Adam Steinbaugh said. “We’re thankful that the court stepped in and halted a speech ban that inevitably would’ve been weaponized to censor speech that administrators disagreed with.” FEDERAL JUDGE BLOCKS TEXAS PUBLIC SCHOOLS FROM DISPLAYING TEN COMMANDMENTS IN CLASSROOMS Republican lawmakers pushed for SB 2972 in response to the pro-Palestinian protests held last year on campuses across the country. Creighton, who resigned from the Texas Senate earlier this month to become Texas Tech University System’s chancellor, claimed that his legislation strengthens free speech protections on college campuses by promoting openness while also protecting students, faculty and campus property from disruption by outside groups. “The ruling represents only a temporary stay by one judge, and I’m confident the law will ultimately be upheld,” Creighton said in a statement. The Associated Press contributed to this report.
WATCH: Trump reveals two key reasons why he is authorizing CIA activity in Venezuela
President Donald Trump confirmed he would be authorizing Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) activity in Venezuela amid his efforts to combat Latin American drug traffickers with force. Trump indicated during a press conference alongside FBI Director Kash Patel on Wednesday that his administration was next looking “at land” in Latin America after the U.S. military conducted at least five fatal strikes against alleged drug boats in the Caribbean since last month. The president also confirmed at the Wednesday press conference that he was authorizing intelligence activity by the CIA in Venezuela to help continue the administration’s offensive against Latin American drug traffickers. Trump told reporters there were “two reasons” why he was authorizing the CIA to conduct such work. TRUMP NEXT EYES ‘LAND’ IN DRUG WAR, WARNS CARTEL BOATS ARE ‘NOT FASTER THAN MISSILES’ “Number one, they have emptied their prisons into the United States of America. They came in through the border. They came in because we had an open border policy. And as soon as I heard that, ‘I said a lot of these countries’ – they’re not the only country, but they’re the worst abuser, and they’ve allowed thousands and thousands of prisoners, people from mental institutions, insane asylums – emptied out into the United States,” Trump told reporters Wednesday after they asked why he took the move to authorize CIA activity in Venezuela. “We’re bringing them back… they did it at a level that probably –—many, many countries have done it also, but not like Venezuela — they were down and dirty,” Trump continued. “And the other thing is drugs. We have a lot of drugs coming in from Venezuela.” TRUMP PRAISED AFTER PUTTING ‘NARCO TERRORIST’ MADURO ON NOTICE Following Trump’s comments about why he was authorizing CIA activity in Venezuela, the president was pressed by a reporter on whether the intelligence agency would have the authority to take out Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro, who Trump and his administration have accused of leading a “narco-dictatorship.” However, the president didn’t bite on that question, telling reporters he thought it was a “ridiculous question” for him to answer during the press conference. “I don’t want to answer a question like that,” Trump shot back. Trump’s comments about authorizing unspecified actions by the CIA in Venezuela came after the New York Times reported earlier in the day that the president had authorized the spy agency to carry out lethal, covert actions in Venezuela. “I think Venezuela is feeling heat. But I think a lot of other countries are feeling heat too,” Trump said Wednesday. “We’re not going to let this country, our country, be ruined because other people want to drop, as you say, ‘their worst’ — they have given us their worst. They’ve loaded up our country with prisoners, with mentally ill people that are seriously ill, criminally ill, and we’re not going to take it,” the president continued. “And I can tell you we’ve taken care of the sea. There’s nobody. And we’re watching, we’re watching. And if we see it, we’ll save it.”
Trump administration withholds $40M from California over trucker English proficiency rules
The Trump administration plans to withhold $40 million from California over its refusal to enforce English language requirements for truckers, Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy said Wednesday. The move came weeks after an investigation found that an illegal immigrant truck driver, Harjinder Singh, killed three people after making an illegal U-turn on a Florida road in August. California had issued the driver a commercial license, but these English rules predate the crash. Duffy cited failures by California to enforce English proficiency rules following one of President Donald Trump’s executive orders. DUFFY RESPONDS WITH ‘CROCODILE TEARS’ COMMENT ON BANNED CALIFORNIA TRUCK DRIVER CASE “California is the only state in the nation that refuses to ensure big rig drivers can read our road signs and communicate with law enforcement. This is a fundamental safety issue that impacts you and your family on America’s roads,” Duffy said. “The Golden State thinks it’s OK to ignore @USDOT English language requirements for truckers. You can play all the games you want, but not at the expense of American lives,” Duffy wrote on X. Duffy said the truck driver in the Florida crash should not have been given a commercial license because of his immigration status. Diana Crofts-Pelayo, a spokesperson for California Gov. Gavin Newsom, told Fox News Digital that California commercial truck drivers have a lower crash rate than the national average. “It seems the Secretary of Transportation needs a lesson about the laws of his own roads,” Crofts-Pelayo said. “The reality is simple: Commercial driver’s license holders in California had a fatal accident rate nearly 40% LOWER than the national average. Texas, the only state with more commercial driver’s license holders, has a rate nearly 50% higher than California’s.” “The facts don’t lie, although for the Trump Administration, they seem optional,” she added. GOP REP TARGETS TRUCKER’S ENGLISH SKILLS AFTER ILLEGAL MIGRANT CHARGED IN DEADLY FLORIDA CRASH Singh, an Indian citizen, is being held without bond after being charged with three state counts of vehicular homicide and immigration violations. Investigators said he failed an English proficiency test but was still issued a license to drive trucks. Duffy and Florida officials have blamed California as well as Washington state for issuing him a commercial driver’s license. However, California officials said Singh had a valid work permit at the time. Authorities said he entered the United States illegally from Mexico in 2018. To have the funding reinstated, California must enforce the English rules and ensure that state inspectors test truck drivers’ English skills during roadside inspections and remove anyone from the road who fails. The Associated Press contributed to this report.