Gabbard blasts Democrat Bennie Thompson for calling National Guard shooting an ‘unfortunate accident’
Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard slammed Rep. Bennie Thompson, D-Miss., Friday for referring to the shooting of two West Virginia National Guard soldiers in Washington, D.C., as an “unfortunate accident” during a hearing this week. Thompson, the top Democrat on the House Homeland Security Committee, made the remarks during a “Worldwide Threats to the Homeland” hearing Thursday on Capitol Hill while speaking to Secretary of Homeland Security Kristi Noem. “It is absolutely infuriating,” Gabbard said on Fox & Friends. “He cannot and refuses to directly identify this attack for what it was, a terrorist attack on our own soil against our National Guard, men and women in this case, who are putting their lives on the line.” On Thanksgiving Eve, two national guard members were shot blocks from the White House, allegedly by an Afghan refugee. Spc. Sarah Beckstrom was killed and Staff Sgt. Andrew Wolfe was critically wounded. TOP HOMELAND SECURITY DEM BLASTED FOR CALLING WV NATIONAL GUARD SHOOTING ‘UNFORTUNATE ACCIDENT’ Thompson said during the hearing, “Madam Secretary, you and the gentleman from NCTC (Joe Kent) reference the unfortunate accident that occurred with the National Guardsman being killed.” Noem responded, “You think that was an unfortunate accident? It was a terrorist attack.” Gabbard said the guard members’ “direct mission was to keep the American people safe,” and that the exchange between Thompson and Noem “points to the egregious and longstanding problem.” SEN TOM COTTON: ALLEGED AFGHAN ATTACK ON GUARDSMEN WAS PREVENTABLE. WE MUST DO BETTER NEXT TIME The director said leaders on both sides of the political aisle “have refused to identify this Islamist terrorist threat for exactly what it is, which is one of the reasons why we find ourselves in the position that we’re in today.” Thompson was asked Friday on “CNN News Central” by co-host Kate Bolduan if he stood by his assertion that the shooting was an “unfortunate accident.” “Oh, absolutely not,” the Democratic representative replied. “And obviously, let me be clear, I was moving toward the discussion that [Kristi Noem] could not blame Joe Biden on the situation because she approved this person’s asylum application and that’s where we were headed and so the issue is…” Bolduan then interrupted Thompson, asking him, “You’re saying you misspoke?” “Oh, absolutely. Absolutely,” he responded. Fox News Digital’s Marc Tamasco contributed to this report.
House GOP unveils healthcare plan ahead of vote next week as cost hike looms for millions
House Republicans have released a 111-page plan for reforming healthcare that they hope to vote on next week. House GOP leadership aides also told reporters on Friday afternoon that they expected a vote on extending enhanced Obamacare subsidies to also happen next week as part of the amendment process to the final bill, called the “Lower Health Care Premiums for All Americans Act.” The subsidies have been the subject of fierce inter-party debate for Republicans. “We expect that there will be an amendment that I believe is being worked on, so the process will allow for that amendment,” aides said. The plan as-is includes provisions to codify association health plans, which allow small businesses and people who are self-employed to band together to purchase healthcare coverage plans, giving them access to greater bargaining power. SENATE DEMS’ OBAMACARE FIX FAILS AS SENATE LOOKS FOR OFF-RAMP FROM HEALTHCARE CLIFF Republicans also plan to appropriate funding for cost-sharing reductions beginning in 2027, which are designed to lower out-of-pocket medical costs in the individual healthcare market. House GOP leadership aides said it would bring down the cost of premiums by 12%. New transparency requirements for pharmacy benefit managers (PBMs) are also in the legislation, aimed at forcing PBMs to be more upfront about costs to employers. GOP UNVEILS PLAN FOR ‘TRUMP HEALTH FREEDOM ACCOUNTS’ TO REPLACE OBAMACARE SUBSIDIES WITH STATE WAIVERS PBMs are third parties that act as intermediaries between pharmaceutical companies and those responsible for insurance coverage, often responsible for administrative tasks and negotiating drug prices. PBMs have also been the subject of bipartisan ire in Congress, with both Republicans and Democrats accusing them of being part of a broken system to inflate health costs. But the most divisive measure for Republicans is likely not yet fleshed out. A majority of House Republicans are against extending the enhanced Obamacare subsidies, which were designed to get affordable health insurance for more Americans during the COVID-19 pandemic. Democrats voted to pass the enhanced subsidies in 2021 and extended them through 2022 when they controlled Congress. A group of moderate House Republicans has joined Democrats now in vehemently pushing for those subsidies to be extended again, as millions of Americans face near-certain healthcare price hikes beginning in January. Two separate bipartisan efforts have been launched to force a vote on extending the subsidies in some form. But any such push would require support from virtually all House Democrats to succeed, and their leaders have not given their blessing to either plan. “We’re going to evaluate every single good faith proposal. But it has to meaningfully provide certainty to the American people who are at risk of having their health care ripped away from them,” House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries, D-N.Y., told reporters on Friday. But conservatives have warned they would not support any such extension unless paired with significant reforms to what they view as a long-broken system that fuels healthcare price inflation. “I think that would be a disastrous plan. I mean, we’ve clearly seen that Obamacare is the Titanic. It’s going down. I think throwing money after it is just going to be wasteful,” House Freedom Caucus member Rep. Eric Burlison, R-Mo., told Fox News’ Chad Pergram on Friday.
Cruz says Rep Ilhan Omar could face jail time, deportation if marriage allegation proves true
A top Senate Republican argued that if allegations against “Squad” member Rep. Ilhan Omar, D-Minn., that she married her brother to enter the U.S. were true, she’d be breaking several laws. Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, joined the long-standing scrutiny against Omar Friday after President Donald Trump revived the allegations during a rally pushing his affordability agenda in Pennsylvania earlier this week. In a post on X responding to a White House social media account that charged, “Yes, [Omar] married her brother,” Cruz listed a trio of federal and state laws the progressive lawmaker may have violated. ILHAN OMAR’S EX APPEARS ON ‘DIRTY DANDY’ SOCIAL ACCOUNT AS TRUMP REVIVES MARRIED SIBLINGS CLAIM “If this is true, then Omar faces criminal liability under three different statutes,” Cruz said. Cruz argued that Omar could have committed federal marriage fraud, which stipulates that it is a felony to knowingly enter into a marriage to evade immigration laws, and could lead to up to five years in prison, a $250,000 fine and deportation. Omar was born in Somalia and came to the U.S. in 1995 after her family was granted asylum. She became a citizen in 2000. Omar, who is Muslim, has been married legally three times, first in a religious marriage to Ahmed Abdisalan Hirsi in 2002, then to Ahmed Nur Said Elmi in 2009 before later divorcing and legally marrying Hirsi. In 2020, she married political aide Tim Mynett. SCOOP: ILHAN OMAR HIT WITH HOUSE ETHICS COMPLAINT OVER RESPONSE TO CHARLIE KIRK ASSASSINATION Cruz noted that Omar could also be breaking Minnesota’s state incest law, a felony in the state punishable by jail time up to 10 years. He also contended that she could be liable for tax fraud, specifically if joint tax returns were filed while she was not legally married. That violation would levy up to a $100,000 fine and up to three years in prison. MINNESOTA HOUSE HOPEFUL CALLS MARRIAGE, FRAUD CLAIMS ‘LIES’ The Senate Republican’s legal analysis of the situation comes after Trump resurrected the unsubstantiated claims that Omar had married her brother for immigration purposes that have dogged the lawmaker since she entered politics nearly a decade ago. She has denied the allegations. Still, Trump charged, “She married her brother to get in, right?” “If I married my sister to get my citizenship, do you think I’d last for about two hours or something less than that? She married her brother to get in,” he said. “Therefore, she’s here illegally. She should get the hell out.” Fox News Digital did not immediately hear back for comment from Omar’s office.
Minnesota judge’s ‘highly unusual’ decision tossing $7.2 million fraud verdict draws mounting scrutiny
Lawmakers and the legal community are raising questions after a Minnesota judge took the uncommon step of overturning a unanimous jury verdict in a massive $7.2 million Medicaid fraud case, a move experts say is rarely seen in white-collar prosecutions. The ruling, handed down late last month by Hennepin County Judge Sarah West, comes as Minnesota is engulfed in a series of major welfare and human services fraud scandals that have drawn national attention and shaken confidence in the state’s oversight systems. West’s decision has triggered broader doubts about Minnesota’s resolve to prosecute white-collar and welfare fraud at a time when billions in public funds could be vulnerable. JaneAnne Murray, a University of Minnesota law professor who studies criminal procedure, said she was surprised by the decision. COMER TARGETS WALZ IN NEW HOUSE INVESTIGATION, CITING NEARLY $1B IN ALLEGED MINNESOTA FRAUD “It is highly unusual for a judge to reject a jury’s verdict in any case, much less a white-collar one, where issues of intent will almost always be circumstantial,” Murray told Fox News Digital. Minnesota’s circumstantial-evidence standard, she noted, is among the strictest in the country and requires prosecutors to “exclude any reasonable hypothesis of innocence.” Legal experts say Minnesota’s unusually stringent rule gives judges broader authority to vacate convictions if prosecutors cannot rule out every reasonable alternative explanation for the defendant’s conduct. The Minnesota Supreme Court is reviewing the decades-old standard, but Murray said West was applying the law as it stands today. “The judge in the Medicaid fraud case was applying the current law,” Murray said. Until now, West had maintained a low profile on the bench with no prior rulings that attracted substantial controversy. But last month’s decision was derided by Republican Minnesota Sen. Michael Holmstrom, who labeled her a “true extremist.” West, a former public defender appointed to the bench in 2018 by Gov. Mark Dayton, previously handled juvenile and child protection cases in Hennepin County. She also held leadership roles in the Hennepin County Bar Foundation, which funds legal aid and community justice programs. She presided over the prosecution of Abdifatah Yusuf, found guilty by a jury of six counts of aiding and abetting theft after he and his wife were accused of stealing $7.2 million from the state’s Medicaid program while running a home healthcare business, according to the Minnesota Attorney General’s Office. ‘SCHEMES STACKED UPON SCHEMES’: $1B HUMAN-SERVICES FRAUD FUELS SCRUTINY OF MINNESOTA’S SOMALI COMMUNITY Prosecutors said the business lacked a real office, operated “for years out of a mailbox” and that Yusuf allegedly used the money to fund a “lavish lifestyle” that included shopping sprees at luxury retailers such as Coach, Canada Goose, Michael Kors, Nike and Nordstrom. But West tossed the conviction, ruling that the state’s case relied heavily on circumstantial evidence and failed to eliminate other reasonable inferences about Yusuf’s personal involvement in the billing scheme. “There is a reasonable, rational inference that Mr. Yusuf was the owner … but that his brother, Mohamed Yusuf, was committing the fraud … without Mr. Yusuf’s knowledge or involvement,” West wrote in her ruling. She said the scale and nature of the fraud was “of great concern” but ruled the state failed to prove Yusuf knowingly participated in it. Andy McCarthy, a former assistant U.S. attorney and Fox News contributor, said the ruling veered far beyond what trial judges are normally permitted to do, underscoring how exceptional the move was. MINNESOTA FRAUD SCHEME UNEARTHS MILLIONS IN LUXURY PROPERTY, CARS: DOJ “It is highly unusual for a judge to overturn a jury verdict in a criminal case,” McCarthy told Fox News Digital, noting that a judge who believes the evidence is legally insufficient is supposed to stop the case before it ever reaches the jury. McCarthy said the reported rationale for vacating the verdict “seems untenable,” arguing circumstantial evidence is routinely strong enough to sustain convictions. “The fact that a case is circumstantial — meaning there is no central witness who saw the crime — is not a reason to overturn it,” he said. “Very often, circumstantial cases are much stronger than cases that rise or fall on the testimony of witnesses of dubious credibility.” He added that judges are required to instruct jurors to view evidence as a whole rather than in isolation. “The judge is only permitted to vacate a guilty verdict if it is obviously irrational and against the full weight of the evidence,” McCarthy said. Because West waited until after deliberations to overturn the verdict, McCarthy said the state may still have the ability to appeal, a procedural opening that does not exist when a judge tosses a case before the jury deliberates. Ben Walfoort, the jury foreperson, told KARE he was “shocked” by West’s decision and said the jury’s conclusion “was not a difficult decision whatsoever.” Minnesota Attorney General Keith Ellison has filed an appeal. The decision has also triggered a political fight, with Holmstrom sending a formal letter to Judge West demanding she unseal key exhibits — and the entire case record — arguing that the public “must know what is happening in their courts and in their welfare programs.” Holmstrom called the ruling “unprecedented” and said locking away documents produced in open court violates Minnesota’s tradition of transparency. Fox News’ Andrew Mark Miller and Adam Sabes contributed to this report.
Pritzker approves physician-assisted suicide law for terminally ill patients despite Catholic opposition
Illinois Gov. JB Pritzker on Friday signed legislation that will allow eligible terminally ill adult patients to obtain life-ending medication in consultation with their doctors, making Illinois the latest state to authorize physician-assisted suicide for people with a prognosis of six months or less. The law, known as the Medical Aid in Dying bill or “Deb’s Law,” will take effect in September 2026 to allow participating healthcare providers and the Illinois Department of Public Health (IDPH) time to implement stringent processes and protections. Deb Robertson, a lifelong Illinois resident with a rare terminal illness who the bill was named after, said in a statement she “know[s] the end for me could be near. But I’m pleased to have been able to play some role in ensuring that terminally ill Illinoisans have access to medical aid in dying.” ‘LOVE YOU FOREVER’ AUTHOR MAY SOON DIE BY ASSISTED SUICIDE, PRO-LIFE GROUPS CALL DECISION ‘HEARTBREAKING’ Pritzker, a Democrat, wrote in a news release the legislation will help terminal patients “avoid unnecessary pain and suffering at the end of their lives,” and will be “thoughtfully implemented so that physicians can consult patients on making deeply personal decisions with authority, autonomy and empathy.” The ACLU of Illinois applauded the new measure, saying terminally ill patients living in Illinois will “no longer have to agonize about spending their remaining days fearful of a painful death.” While Pritzker’s office included a quote from Chicago Episcopalian minister Rev. Judith Doran supporting the law, other groups, including the Catholic Conference of Illinois, released statements opposing any legislation that would legalize assisted suicide. “Proponents argue that this legislation will end suffering at the end-of-life,” the Catholic Bishops of Illinois wrote in a September statement. “Assisted suicide is not the compassionate solution for those who are suffering. Through palliative care, expanded access to mental health care, and stronger family and community support, providers and families are finding better ways to accompany these people compassionately that truly confer the love for, and dignity of, each human life.” ‘UNTOLD DAMAGE’: GLOBAL ASSISTED SUICIDE MOVEMENT TARGETS CHILDREN They added “unintended consequences” of legalized assisted suicide include documented cases of people being denied life-saving medical treatment by insurance companies in lieu of the much cheaper option of life-ending drugs. “The poor and those with disabilities are particularly in jeopardy as they are the most vulnerable to such abuses,” the Catholic Conference of Illinois wrote. “In response, every major national organization that represents people with disabilities is opposed to assisted suicide.” Patients must self-administer the medication, with the legislation making it a felony to coerce anyone to request the medication or forge a request. Patients who qualify and receive medication have the right to withdraw their request at any time or choose not to ingest it, according to the release. The death certificates of those who commit physician-assisted suicide under the bill will list their cause of death as an underlying terminal disease. The Thomas More Society, a national public interest law firm, claimed in a statement Friday that Illinois has “crossed a moral and legal red line.” “This is a dark and sorrowful day for Illinois. When the state signals that some lives are no longer worth living, the most vulnerable pay the price,” Thomas More Society executive vice president Thomas Olp wrote in a statement. “Instead of offering true compassion, support, and care, this law offers a fatal prescription. That is not mercy. It is abandonment.” In addition to its “grave social and moral implications,” the law firm noted the law threatens the conscience rights of physicians opposed to facilitating assisted suicide, as well as the freedom of association of religious medical institutions. While physicians, health care providers and pharmacists are not required to participate, the bill requires physicians who object to assisted suicide on moral or religious grounds to refer patients to providers who will participate in ending their lives. “The State is forcing doctors to become active participants and cooperators in a patient’s suicide—no matter if their faith, ethics, or Hippocratic Oath forbid it,” Olp wote. “This is unconscionable coercion, plain and simple. No doctor should be ordered by the government to participate, directly or indirectly, in a process that deliberately ends a human life.” Beyond the law’s compelled-referral mandate, the law also forces religious hospitals and clinics to retain staff who promote assisted deaths on-site, as long as those staff provide lethal drugs off-site. “This is a Trojan horse designed to violate and undermine the missions of religious healthcare institutions,” Olp wrote. “Gov. Pritzker’s assisted suicide law threatens the integrity of Catholic and Christian medical institutions statewide. . . . State law should never endorse the idea that suffering or sickness makes a life disposable.” If you or someone you know is having thoughts of suicide, contact the Suicide & Crisis Lifeline at 988 or 1-800-273-TALK (8255).
Dem lawmakers cry foul as Hochul guts AI safety bill amid Big Tech pressure
New York State Assemblyman Alex Bores, D-73, who is leading an effort to enact tighter safety regulations in the state for the country’s largest artificial intelligence developers, has attributed pressure from Big Tech to Gov. Kathy Hochul’s decision to rewrite his bill. Just before President Donald Trump signed an executive order aimed at undercutting state-level AI regulations, news broke that Hochul had severely watered down a state-level bill targeting some of the industry’s biggest players, attempting to force them to implement stricter safety measures. Her amendments reportedly mirrored a California measure more favorable to major AI firms. In response to Bores’ work on the bill, the RAISE Act, the progressive state lawmaker who is running for Congress to replace Rep. Jerry Nadler, D-N.Y., says he has been the target of a $100 million ad campaign bankrolled by some of the biggest leaders in the AI industry, such as OpenAI President Greg Brockman and the major AI venture capital firm Andreessen Horowitz. TRUMP SAYS EVERY AI PLANT BEING BUILT IN US WILL BE SELF-SUSTAINING WITH THEIR OWN ELECTRICITY “My reaction was, ‘Oh, this is a message to the governor’ — this is not just about defeating me,” Bores told Rolling Stone after Hochul amended his bill. “They want the governor to be intimidated by the idea they might target her next.” “NY can be a leader on critical AI safety, or we can cave to the pressure of the same Big Tech and VC bullies pushing Trump’s AI safety ban,” New York State Sen. Andrew Gounardes, D-26, the Senate sponsor of the RAISE Act, said on X. “I know which side I’m fighting on.” The RAISE Act, in its original form, sought to compel a select few of the most advanced AI developers to implement specific safety protocols, including requirements to write detailed safety and security protocols that must then be followed, report incidents of serious harm within 72 hours to the New York attorney general and a prohibition on the release of new models that could pose “unreasonable risk.” But Hochul’s rewrite removed the prohibition on new AI models that could pose “unreasonable” risk, extended the reporting threshold to 15 days and weakened penalties against AI companies, among other revisions that scaled back the bill’s restrictions. KYRSTEN SINEMA WARNS US ADVERSARY WILL PROGRAM AI WITH ‘CHINESE VALUES’ IF AMERICA FALLS BEHIND IN TECH RACE “AI oligarchs want to take over our safety, our workforce and our minds for their own personal profit and power,” Bores told Fox News Digital when reached for comment. “They’ve already bought the White House and are trying very aggressively to try to buy statehouses, too. That can’t happen, and I won’t let it.” Some tech experts, including TechNYC’s Julie Samuels, argue that aligning the RAISE Act with California’s standards is actually a wise move because it will “help create a de facto national standard” that does not exist. When reached for comment, Hochul’s office pointed to an “absence of federal leadership on responsible AI” and asserted that New York has been “leading with commonsense laws to protect children, families and consumers.” “Our approach should be a model for the nation,” a Hochul spokesperson said. “Gov. Hochul has been at the forefront of the innovation economy and remains committed to advancing AI responsibly as she reviews the legislation.” On Thursday, not long after news broke of Hochul’s rewrite, Trump signed an executive order aimed at creating a federal regulatory framework that would undercut state regulatory efforts on AI. During the signing ceremony from the White House Thursday evening, Trump said he thinks there will only be “one winner” in the global AI arms race, likely the U.S. or China. Trump said China holds an advantage because of its centralized regulatory structure, while the U.S. “has to get 50 different approvals from 50 different states,” slowing development of new AI centers. “We want to have one central source of approval,” Trump said. According to senior Trump advisor Will Scharf, more than 1,000 bills aimed at regulating artificial intelligence are moving through state legislatures.
Trump-backed military right to repair plan stripped from Congress’ final defense bill
The final legislation governing Pentagon spending dropped a bipartisan provision that would have guaranteed the military the right to repair its own equipment, prompting immediate criticism from its authors, Sens. Elizabeth Warren, D-MA, and Tim Sheehy, R-MT, who accused Congress of siding with defense contractors over service members. Both chambers had passed versions of the reform, and the White House publicly supported the measure, which would have required contractors to provide the Pentagon with the technical data needed to perform repairs in-house — rather than flying out manufacturer technicians at added cost. The final National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) omits that mandate, a move Warren and Sheehy say will leave troops facing the same barriers to fixing equipment whenever contractors assert proprietary rights. “For decades, the Pentagon has relied on a broken acquisition system that is routinely defended by career bureaucrats and corporate interests. Military right to repair reforms are supported by the Trump White House, the Secretary of War, the Secretary of the Army, the Secretary of the Navy, entrepreneurs, small businesses, and our brave servicemembers,” Warren and Sheehy said after the text of the legislation was released. “The only ones against this common-sense reform are those taking advantage of a broken status quo at the expense of our warfighters and taxpayers.” The Government Accountability Office (GAO) repeatedly has warned that the Pentagon’s lack of access to technical data is one of the biggest drivers of soaring sustainment costs, estimating that broader repair rights could save the department “billions” of dollars over the life cycles of major weapons systems. SEN ROGER WICKER: THE PENTAGON NEEDS MAJOR REFORM. NOW IS OUR CHANCE GAO reviews of aircraft, ships and ground vehicles have found that when contractors retain exclusive control over repair information, the military is forced into long-term vendor support arrangements that are far more expensive than in-house maintenance. In several cases, GAO concluded that obtaining necessary data earlier in the acquisition process would have given the Pentagon more flexibility, reduced downtime, and lowered costs for everything from software fixes to depot-level repairs. Sources familiar with the NDAA negotiations claimed that, behind closed doors, lobbyists had persuaded leaders on the House and Senate Armed Services Committee to drop the more aggressive right to repair language. “This is a textbook case of the swamp prevailing at the expense of our warfighters and government efficiency,” one source said. “Does (War Secretary Pete) Hegseth realize that Boeing just knocked the legs out from our warriors?” A spokesperson for the House Armed Services Committee said: “The Committee is committed to addressing the right to repair issue in a manner that ensures our warfighters have the data they need to effectuate repairs while preserving the intellectual property of private industry.” “The FY26 NDAA requires the Department to audit its contracts to determine where they are missing data rights they need and determine whether any missing data rights is the result of a defective law or a defective contract. If the law is defective, the department needs to make recommendations to Congress on how to fix it.” Watchdogs also questioned the weaker compromise. “The provisions are nowhere near strong enough,” said Greg Williams of the Project on Government Oversight. “They help catalog the problem, but they don’t really do anything to solve it.” Williams added that the original proposals “acknowledged the cost and committed to paying fair, reasonable prices to vendors for that intellectual property,” countering industry arguments that the bill would have seized or devalued contractors’ data. CONGRESS UNVEILS $900B DEFENSE BILL TARGETING CHINA WITH TECH BANS, INVESTMENT CRACKDOWN, US TROOP PAY RAISE Industry groups defended their opposition. “This debate is not about ensuring equipment and technology can be repaired in contested environments; commanders already have broad authority to keep mission-critical systems operational,” said Marta Hernandez, spokesperson for the Aerospace Industries Association. “Our concern with the Senate proposal is its sweeping mandate for government takeover of IP — without regard to necessity or cost. ‘One size fits all’ doesn’t work for our troops or for the industry that equips them.” But military officials and watchdogs say that while commanders can authorize emergency fixes, that authority does not give units the technical data, software access, or parts needed to actually perform repairs. They argue that crews remain dependent on contractors even when they have the skills to fix the equipment themselves. Instead of requiring contractors to provide repair data, the final NDAA directs the Pentagon to create a database cataloging what technical information it currently has and to “request options” from contractors when data is missing. Critics say the language has no enforcement mechanism and leaves manufacturers free to refuse, preserving the contractor-controlled repair model the reform sought to change. The Trump administration had backed the reform, with Statements of Administration Policy supporting both the House and Senate versions earlier in the fall. Service secretaries also endorsed the effort, and War Secretary Pete Hegseth issued new acquisition guidance in November instructing the military to plan for “organic depot-level maintenance and repair” in major systems. US COULD LOSE NEXT MAJOR WAR DUE TO PENTAGON’S ‘BROKEN’ ACQUISITION SYSTEM In May 2025, Army Secretary Daniel Driscoll publicly pledged that the Army would ensure right-to-repair provisions were included in future Army contracts — aligning the service with the broader congressional push for greater access to technical data. But advocates said a service-by-service approach wasn’t enough and pushed to codify and expand right to repair across all branches to prevent contractors from controlling critical maintenance information. The F-35 program offers one of the clearest examples of how restricted repair rights drive up costs. GAO has found that the Pentagon still lacks key technical data needed to perform many F-35 repairs organically, forcing the services to rely on Lockheed Martin and its subcontractors for everything from software maintenance to component overhauls. That dependence has helped push sustainment costs so high that the Pentagon warns it cannot afford to operate the planned fleet without major changes. GAO reported that greater access to repair
Newsom says Trump is one of the ‘most destructive’ president of his lifetime: ‘This guy is reckless’
California Gov. Gavin Newsom, a Democrat, argued that President Donald Trump is one of the “most destructive” presidents in his lifetime and that the country is becoming “unrecognizable.” The governor made the comments on Wednesday during an appearance on New York Times columnist Ezra Klein’s podcast. “I think Trump is one of the most destructive presidents and human beings in my lifetime,” Newsom said. “I think this republic is at real risk, this country being unrecognizable. And I have no patience for people that want to indulge it.” GAVIN NEWSOM WINNING EARLY ENTHUSIASM FROM LIBERAL HOLLYWOOD DONORS AHEAD OF 2028: REPORT Newsom also criticized financial, educational and political entities for “bending the knee to this president.” “I can’t stand the crony capitalism,” the California Democrat continued. “I can’t stand the universities have done that, the law firms that have done that, individual corporate leaders that have done that, other governors, maybe Democrats and Republicans, that have been complicit at this moment.” Several elite universities, banking companies and law firms amended policies this year in the face of threats from the Trump administration, including potential loss of federal funding for the educational institutions. Newsom, who has been floated as a potential top Democrat candidate for the 2028 presidential election, has been a vocal critic of Trump dating back to his first term in the White House. He said he had “softened” on the threat of Trump ignoring constitutional restrictions and attempting to run for a third term. “This guy is reckless,” Newsom said. “We’ll not have a fair and free election if we don’t continue to fight. I’m the future ex-governor. Who the hell knows what happens the rest of my life? Except one thing I know that matters in the rest of my life is I have to look at my kids in the goddamn eye. I mean that seriously.” The governor’s critique of Trump this year has included social media rants mimicking the president’s writing style, such as using all capital letters and nicknames. Newsom has also mocked Trump with AI-generated videos, including one depicting the president, Pentagon chief Pete Hegseth and White House deputy chief of staff Stephen Miller in handcuffs crying. NEWSOM HAS STRONG FEAR THAT ‘SON OF A B—-’ TRUMP WILL SUSPEND 2028 PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION The jabs at Trump are just one side of the back and forth between the two politicians, as the president has also repeatedly attacked Newsom, including blaming him for the wildfires that swept through Southern California in January and supporting White House border czar Toman Homan’s threat to arrest the governor amid federal immigration raids in Los Angeles over the summer.
Black Lives Matter OKC leader charged with wire fraud, money laundering in alleged $3.15M embezzlement scheme
The executive director of Black Lives Matter (BLM) Oklahoma City (OKC) has been charged with wire fraud and money laundering after federal prosecutors say she diverted more than $3.15 million in returned bail checks into her personal bank accounts over a five-year period, according to an indictment unsealed Thursday. Tashella Sheri Amore Dickerson, 52, of Oklahoma City, is accused of routing money intended for the group’s bail fund and social justice programs into accounts she controlled between June 2020 and October 2025. The indictment says Dickerson used the money “for her personal benefit,” including travel to Jamaica and the Dominican Republic, “tens of thousands of dollars in retail shopping,” more than $50,000 in food deliveries, a vehicle and six real properties. According to a Department of Justice (DOJ) press release covering the indictment, BLM OKC raised more than $5.6 million beginning in 2020, including major grants from the Community Justice Exchange, the Massachusetts Bail Fund and the Minnesota Freedom Fund. BLACK LIVES MATTER’S $6M CALIFORNIA HOUSE DRAWS SCRUTINY Those organizations routed most of the money through the Alliance for Global Justice (AFGJ), which served as BLM OKC’s fiscal sponsor and required that all funds be used for tax-exempt purposes permitted under Section 501(c)(3). AFGJ also prohibited real estate purchases without its approval and required BLM OKC to fully account for expenditures upon request. Prosecutors say Dickerson instead deposited at least $3.15 million in returned bail checks into her personal accounts “rather than into BLMOKC’s accounts” and used interstate wires to submit two annual reports to AFGJ that “did not disclose” her personal use of funds. Those reports said the organization’s money had been used only for tax-exempt purposes. Dickerson served as the group’s executive director beginning in at least 2016 and had access to BLM OKC’s bank, PayPal and CashApp accounts, according to the indictment. FLORIDA DESIGNATES MUSLIM BROTHERHOOD AND CAIR AS FOREIGN TERRORIST ORGANIZATIONS, DESANTIS SAYS Prosecutors allege the misconduct began during the period when national bail funds allowed BLM OKC to retain portions of returned bail money to build a revolving bail fund or support its stated mission. In 2022, Black Lives Matter Global Network Foundation, a separate national organization not affiliated with BLM OKC, came under scrutiny after New York Magazine reported that it had purchased a $6 million California property using donor funds. Internal memos showed senior leaders discussing how to manage questions about the house, which the group said was intended to serve as creative and community space. The reporting ignited debate at the time over financial transparency and oversight within national BLM-associated organizations. When contacted about Dickerson’s charges, a Black Lives Matter Global Network Foundation spokesperson said BLM practices a “model of decentralized leadership.” “The Black Lives Matter Global Network Foundation operates independently from local chapters, and the local chapters operate independently of the Foundation. The Foundation remains committed to transparency and integrity, and disrupting what philanthropy looks like in service of Black people,” the spokesperson said. A federal grand jury returned a 25-count indictment Dec. 3 charging Dickerson with 20 counts of wire fraud and five counts of money laundering. She faces up to 20 years in federal prison for each wire fraud count and up to 10 years for each money-laundering count, along with potential fines of up to $250,000 per charge. All charges are merely allegations and Dickerson is presumed innocent unless proven guilty. The case was investigated by the FBI’s Oklahoma City Field Office and IRS Criminal Investigation. Fox News Digital has reached out to Black Lives Matter OKC and the Alliance for Global Justice for comment. Fox News correspondent David Spunt and Fox News Digital’s Ronn Blitzer contributed to this report.
Trump announces pardon for Colorado clerk: ‘Simply wanted to make sure that our elections were fair’
A former Colorado clerk convicted of attempting to breach voting systems in hopes of proving President Donald Trump’s claims of election malfeasance in 2020 will receive a pardon. Trump announced his pardon for Tina Peters on Truth Social, saying she has been sitting in prison for the “crime” of demanding honest elections. “Democrats have been relentless in their targeting of TINA PETERS, a Patriot who simply wanted to make sure that our elections were fair and honest,” he wrote. “Today I am granting Tina a full pardon for her attempts to expose voter fraud in the rigged 2020 presidential election!” TRUMP ISSUES SWEEPING PARDONS FOR 2020 ELECTION ALLIES — WHAT THE MOVE REALLY MEANS The president doesn’t have the power to pardon someone for state crimes. “We’re not surprised by President Trump shouting into the wind and issuing a meaningless pardon for his friend and fellow election denier Tina Peters,” Colorado Democratic Party Chair Shad Murib told Fox News Digital. “The President has no legal authority to demand her release. Murib noted that Peters was convicted by a Colorado jury, not a federal court. “She was convicted by a jury of her peers on state charges and she should remain in state custody,” Murib said. “For a president who obviously doesn’t respect the rule of law, this is not surprising. Nobody is above the law, not even the president’s friends.” Brita Horn, chairman of the Republican Party of Colorado, urged the state to follow Trump’s lead. “We trust the President has done his due diligence in this matter in the name of justice,” Horn told Fox News Digital. “We call upon Colorado to follow the direction of President Trump and this pardon.” Earlier this week, a federal judge refused to release Peters, 70, from prison. She has been serving a nine-year sentence after a state jury convicted her of participating in a scheme to breach the Mesa County voting systems. She filed a lawsuit seeking her release earlier this year, arguing that her free speech rights had been violated, but Judge Scott Varholak rejected the motion Monday. TRUMP ISSUES FRESH PARDONS FOR JAN 6 DEFENDANTS, INCLUDING WOMAN ACCUSED OF THREATENING FBI ON SOCIAL MEDIA “Ms. Peters raises important constitutional questions concerning whether the trial court improperly punished her more severely because of her protected First Amendment speech,” Varholak wrote. “But because this question remains pending before Colorado courts, this Court must abstain from answering that question until after the Colorado courts have decided the issue.” Peter Ticktin, Peters’ attorney, said he was formally notified of the pardon Thursday. “Tina Peters deserves justice,” he wrote on X. “I have formally notified President Trump urging a presidential pardon and outlining why Tina is a necessary witness in exposing election misconduct. What happened to her was a travesty, and it’s time to set it right.” In a Dec. 7 letter to Trump, Ticktin said Peters’ trial was a “travesty” where she was not permitted to raise her defense. Trump said Peters was languishing in prison despite Democrats pushing soft-on-crime policies that allowed criminals to walk free, saying they had been “relentless” in targeting her. “For years, Democrats ignored violent and vicious crime of all shapes, sizes, colors, and types. Violent criminals who should have been locked up were allowed to attack again,” he wrote. “Democrats were also far too happy to let in the worst from the worst countries so they could rip off American taxpayers. Democrats only think there is one crime – not voting for them! “Instead of protecting Americans and their tax dollars, Democrats chose instead to prosecute anyone they can find who wanted safe and secure elections.” Colorado Gov. Jared Polis previously vowed not to pardon Peters as part of any deal with Trump, saying she needed to be held accountable. “Tina Peters was convicted by a jury of her peers, prosecuted by a Republican District Attorney, and found guilty of violating Colorado state laws, including criminal impersonation,” Polis wrote on X. “No President has jurisdiction over state law nor the power to pardon a person for state convictions. This is a matter for the courts to decide, and we will abide by court orders.” Colorado Secretary of State Jena Griswold later released a statement, saying: “Tina Peters was convicted by a jury of her peers for state crimes in a state Court. Trump has no constitutional authority to pardon her. His assault is not just on our democracy, but on states’ rights and the American constitution.”