New House GOP resolution eviscerates Comey over ’86 47′ Instagram post
FIRST ON FOX: House GOP allies of President Donald Trump are moving to use the power of Congress to punish former FBI Director James Comey for his now-deleted “86 47” Instagram post. Rep. August Pfluger, R-Texas, chairman of the 189-member-strong Republican Study Committee (RSC), is introducing a resolution alongside Rep. Laurel Lee, R-Fla., to condemn Comey for “incitement of violence against President Donald J. Trump.” Pfluger and Lee’s three-page resolution calls the post “disturbing” and “urges the relevant authorities to take every relevant action to ensure that Mr. Comey is never again permitted to serve as an employee of the federal government.” ANTI-ABORTION PROVIDER MEASURE IN TRUMP’S ‘BIG, BEAUTIFUL BILL’ COULD SPARK HOUSE GOP REBELLION It also asked the Department of Justice (DOJ) to not only investigate the matter, but also make the findings of its investigation known to both the relevant House committee and the American public. Comey posted a photo of seashells forming the numbers “86 47” on the beach on Thursday. It ignited a social media firestorm, with Trump allies and other Republicans immediately accusing the former FBI director of calling for Trump to be killed. Comey later deleted the post and followed it with a statement that he opposed all violence. “I posted earlier a picture of some shells I saw today on a beach walk, which I assumed were a political message. I didn’t realize some folks associate those numbers with violence,” Comey said. “It never occurred to me but I oppose violence of any kind so I took the post down.” Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem told the Associated Press that Comey is now under investigation by the Trump administration. Pfluger and Lee’s resolution noted that Comey had made the post while Trump was on a diplomatic visit to the Middle East, which they argue ran the risk of “jeopardizing the President’s security and invigorating our nation’s enemies abroad.” They also pointed out that there had been two known attempts on Trump’s life last year during the 2024 election – including the Butler, Pennsylvania, rally, where the president was shot in the ear. Lee, notably, was on the House task force investigating the Butler rally shooting. “Having failed in his attempts to take down President Trump as one of the main architects of the Russia collusion hoax, Comey has now resorted to the unthinkable: calling for violence against our Commander-in-Chief,” the RSC chairman told Fox News Digital. MEET THE TRUMP-PICKED LAWMAKERS GIVING SPEAKER JOHNSON A FULL HOUSE GOP CONFERENCE “That someone who once held one of our nation’s most sacred positions of law enforcement would incite such dangerous rhetoric is not just alarming—it’s disqualifying and un-American. This resolution demands the accountability and transparency the American people deserve, ensuring Comey never again holds a position of public trust.” Fox News Digital made multiple attempts to reach Comey and his representatives but did not hear back by press time.
Republican says Biden started controversial negotiations for backup Air Force One
Sen. Markwayne Mullin, R-Okla., recently claimed that widely-criticized negotiations with Qatar over a $400 million Air Force One temporary replacement gift began under the Biden administration – not after President Donald Trump took office. “What no one is talking about is [that] this same 747 has been in negotiations for a year,” Mullin said on CNN Wednesday. “The Biden administration is the one that started these conversations. It didn’t start underneath the Trump administration – why? Because we need a back-up for Air Force One.” Mullin said there is no current backup plane for Air Force One, which is about 40 years old. A recent backup was retired from service due to “structural issues,” the senator said. HOUSE DEMOCRAT CALLS FOR ‘IMMEDIATE’ ETHICS PROBE OF QATARI PLANE GIFT TO TRUMP “The fact is, this conversation started with Qatar with Biden a year ago,” he said. Mullin had been privy to a recent conversation with the Qataris when the information about the Biden administration’s reported role was gleaned, according to a spokesperson. Mullin said he would give the media “a pass” for not knowing about the reported Biden-era negotiations with the Doha government. Qatari Prime Minister Mohammed bin Abdulrahman al-Thani dismissed the controversy in an interview with Fox News’ “Special Report,” noting that his country had originally purchased the plane from “an American company”—Boeing. “I don’t see a point out of this [debate],” al-Thani said, adding it is a “really unfair accusation that Qatar is trying to buy influence.” For his part, Trump has pushed back on claims of corrupt intent in potentially accepting the gift from Doha on behalf of the U.S. He rejected allegations from Democrats like Rep. Ritchie Torres of New York, who complained to the Government Accountability office that the deal is a “flying grift” and violates the Constitution’s Emoluments Clause prohibiting public officers from accepting presents or titles from royalty or foreign governments. TRUMP TEASES ‘VERY, VERY BIG ANNOUNCEMENT’ AHEAD OF MIDDLE EAST TRIP, CARNEY SAYS HE’S ‘ON EDGE OF MY SEAT’ “The Boeing 747 is being given to the United States Air Force/Department of Defense, NOT TO ME!” Trump wrote on his Truth Social platform. “It is a gift from a nation, Qatar, that we have successfully defended for many years. It will be used by our government as a temporary Air Force One, until such time as our new Boeings, which are very late on delivery, arrive.” Trump also said it would be foolish not to acknowledge the U.S.’ cost savings in the interim. Trump said the plane would be given to the Pentagon, not himself – while Mullin and other defenders argued there was no such kerfuffle when the U.S. accepted the Statue of Liberty as a gift from the French government in the 1870s. In the Mullin interview, CNN host Jake Tapper said Congress had authorized that particular gift. After the Sept. 11, 2001, terror attacks, Russian President Vladimir Putin also gave the U.S. a large teardrop-shaped sculpture memorializing the murdered Americans. CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP It currently sits at the Cape Liberty cruise port in New Jersey – in sight of Ground Zero – but Putin’s name was scrubbed from it by Bayonne officials after he invaded Ukraine. Fox News Digital reached out to a representative for Biden for comment.
Trump-appointed federal judge rules against Biden-era sex-based employment discrimination guidance
A Trump-appointed federal judge slapped down portions of Biden-era Equal Employment Opportunity Commission guidance that claims Title VII protections against sex-based employment discrimination include the concepts of sexual orientation and gender identity. The ruling, signed by Judge Matthew J. Kacsmaryk of the U.S. District Court for the Northwestern District of Texas, declares that language in the guidance that defines “sex” in Title VII as encompassing sexual orientation and gender identity is “contrary to law.” The ruling declares the same regarding “all language defining ‘sexual orientation’ and ‘gender identity’ as a protected class.” “Sex-based discrimination under Title VII includes employment discrimination based on sexual orientation or gender identity,” part of the EEOC’s Enforcement Guidance on Harassment in the Workplace reads. “Accordingly, sex-based harassment includes harassment based on sexual orientation or gender identity, including how that identity is expressed.” US JUDGE RULES THAT BIDEN TEAM’S LGBTQ PROPOSAL WRONGLY INTERPRETED OBAMACARE PROVISION The guidance notes that, “The contents of this document do not have the force and effect of law, are not meant to bind the public in any way, and do not obviate the need for the EEOC and its staff to consider the facts of each case and applicable legal principles when exercising their enforcement discretion.” The ruling comes in a legal challenge lodged by the Heritage Foundation — a conservative D.C. think tank — and the state of Texas. “The Biden EEOC tried to compel businesses – and the American people – to deny basic biological truth,” Dr. Kevin Roberts, president of the Heritage Foundation and Heritage Action for America, said in a statement, noting that “thanks to the great state of Texas and the work of my Heritage colleagues, a federal judge said: not so fast. READ THE JUDGE’S ORDER – APP USERS, CLICK HERE: “This ruling is more than a legal victory. It’s a cultural one,” he added. “It says no – you don’t have to surrender common sense at the altar of leftist ideology. You don’t have to pretend men are women. And you don’t have to lie to keep your job. Heritage is doing exactly what the conservative movement needs to do: stop apologizing, start suing, and take back institutions.” The White House called it a “major win for women and commonsense.” The judge “confirmed what the Trump Administration consistently maintains: government-imposed DEI policies requiring bathroom, dress, and pronoun accommodations are illegal,” White House spokesman Harrison Fields told Fox News Digital. On Inauguration Day earlier this year, President Donald Trump issued an executive order declaring it U.S. policy “to recognize two sexes, male and female.” That order called for rescinding guidance documents, or portions of documents, that clash with the order. The EEOC’s Enforcement Guidance on Harassment in the Workplace was specifically mentioned in the order. CLINTON-APPOINTED FEDERAL JUDGE BLOCKS TRUMP ADMIN FROM PULLING FOREIGN SERVICE WORKERS’ BARGAINING RIGHTS However, after Trump issued the order, EEOC Commissioners Charlotte Burrows, Jocelyn Samuels and Kalpana Kotagal said in a joint statement that “like all workers, LGBTQI+ workers — including transgender workers — are protected by federal law and entitled to the full measure of America’s promise of equal opportunity in the workplace.” Samuels and Burrows later said in January they had been informed by the White House that Trump was removing them from their roles as EEOC commissioners. The EEOC notes on its website that it needs a quorum to vote on rescinding guidance documents. “As of January 28, 2025, the EEOC no longer has a quorum of its bipartisan leadership panel of Commissioners, following the departures of two Commissioners. The Commission panel currently is comprised of Republican Acting Chair Andrea Lucas (designated as Acting Chair by President Trump on January 20, 2025) and Democrat Commissioner Kalpana Kotagal,” the website explains. NEW HOUSE BILL WOULD MAKE TRUMP BAN ON TRANSGENDER TROOPS PERMANENT The Texas attorney general’s office and the EEOC did not immediately respond to requests for comment from Fox News Digital on Friday.
Trump appointee Barrett challenges administration on nationwide injunctions, surprises and delights liberals
Supreme Court Justice Amy Coney Barrett sparred with U.S. Solicitor General John Sauer Thursday, pressing him on whether the Trump administration would follow federal court precedent. The exchange quickly became one of the day’s most talked-about moments and could reignite criticism of Barrett from Trump allies. The back-and-forth took place Thursday during oral arguments in a case related to President Donald Trump’s effort to end birthright citizenship with a specific focus on whether lower courts should be able to block executive actions from taking effect nationwide. Justice Barrett, a Trump appointee, grilled Sauer about the administration’s stance toward lower court rulings, which followed similar lines of inquiry from her colleagues on the bench. “I want to ask you about a potential tension,” she began, before stopping to correct herself. “Well, no, not a potential tension, an actual tension that I see in answers that you gave to Justice Kavanaugh and Justice Kagan.” JUSTICE KAGAN SNAPS AT TRUMP LAWYER IN MAJOR CASE: ‘EVERY COURT HAS RULED AGAINST YOU’ Barrett then asked Sauer if the Trump administration “wanted to reserve its right to maybe not follow a Second Circuit precedent, say, in New York, because you might disagree with its opinion?” “You resisted Justice Kagan when she asked you whether the government would obey” such a precedent, she said. Sauer responded, “Our general practice is to respect those precedents. But there are circumstances when it is not a categorical practice, and that is not …” Barrett interrupted, asking if that is the Trump administration’s practice or “the long-standing practice of the federal government?” Sauer replied that it is “the long-standing policy of the Department of Justice.” “Really?” she asked. SUPREME COURT TAKES ON BIRTHRIGHT CITIZENSHIP: JUSTICES SEEMINGLY SPLIT ON LOWER COURT POWERS “Yes, as it was phrased to me, we generally respect circuit precedent, but not necessarily in every case,” Sauer said. “Some examples might be a situation where we are litigating to get that circuit precedent overruled and so on,” he added later. “That’s not what I’m talking about. I’m talking about this week,” Barrett stressed, pointing to the Second Circuit Court of Appeals’ ruling that Trump’s birthright citizenship order is unconstitutional. “And what do you do the next day, or the next week?” she asked. “Generally, we follow this,” Sauer said, which provoked a somewhat incredulous response from the justice. “So, you’re still saying generally?” she asked him. “And you still think that it’s generally the long-standing policy of the federal government to take that approach?” The remarks sparked divided political reactions on social media, with Democratic strategist Max Burns noting, “Trump Solicitor General D. John Sauer tells Justice Amy Coney Barrett that Trump ‘generally’ tries to respect federal court decisions but he has the ‘right’ to disregard legal opinions he personally disagrees with. Coney Barrett seems to be in disbelief.” “John Sauer just said the quiet part out loud: unless the Supreme Court tells them directly, Trump’s team might ignore lower court rulings,” said Seth Taylor, a 2024 DNC delegate. “That’s not governance – that’s constitutional brinksmanship.” “Amy Coney Barrett (ACB) is proving once again she may the the worst SCOTUS pick ever by a Republican,” conservative commentator and podcast host Cash Loren said on social media. “She has a lifetime appointment to the Supreme Court. … Yet you can hear her disdain for the Trump administration.” 100 DAYS OF INJUNCTIONS, TRIALS AND ‘TEFLON DON’: TRUMP SECOND TERM MEETS ITS BIGGEST TESTS IN COURT Earlier this year, Barrett sided with three of the Supreme Court’s liberal justices and Chief Justice John Roberts in rejecting, 5-4, the Trump administration’s request to block billions in USAID money for previously completed projects. The decision sparked fierce criticism from Trump supporters, who have attempted to label Justice Barrett an “activist” justice and someone who has been insufficiently loyal to the president who tapped her for the high court. Others have pointed out her track record as a reliably conservative voter and the fact the court has lifetime appointments to allow justices to ostensibly act without undue political interference. Trump later said he had no knowledge of the attacks against her, telling reporters, “She’s a very good woman.” “She’s very smart, and I don’t know about people attacking her. I really don’t know.” Trump added. The court ruling could come in a matter of days or weeks. But it will likely hinge closely on the votes of two Trump appointees, Justice Neil Gorsuch and Justice Barrett, George Washington University law professor Jonathan Turley told Fox News Friday. Overall, he said of the hearing, “it got pretty sporty in there.” “There were some lively moments, at least lively for the Supreme Court,” he said, before noting the justices to watch are Gorsuch and Barrett. “Justice Barrett is probably the greatest concern right now for the Trump administration,” Turley said.
Senators sound off as Supreme Court hears case on nationwide injunctions
With the Supreme Court hearing its first case Thursday relating to nationwide injunctions – federal district court judges issuing rulings that affect the entire country – several proponents of a plan to end the practice are speaking out. Senate Judiciary Committee member John Kennedy, R-La., said it appears to be a case of the “tail wag[ging] the dog,” in that it is the judiciary’s job to adjudicate the law, not create it. “When Congress makes a law, the federal judges are supposed to follow it. When the president exercises his power under Article II, judges are supposed to follow it, so long as it’s lawful,” Kennedy said. “They can’t just overturn it because they don’t agree with it, and that’s what a lot of these federal judges are doing.” SEN JOHN KENNEDY: WHY SCOTUS SHOULD SEIZE OPPORTUNITY TO ELIMINATE UNIVERSAL INJUNCTIONS In a Fox News Opinion piece this week, Kennedy noted “universal injunctions” have been around since the 1960s, when judges began enjoining the government from enforcing certain policies against “anyone, anywhere” – adding they let a judge say “sayonara” to laws, regulations or even whims of a president they don’t like. Kennedy noted that there have only been 27 such injunctions from JFK through Y2K. A review showed none was lodged against Presidents George H.W. Bush or Bill Clinton – but began to creep in during the George W. Bush and Barack Obama administrations. With nearly 100 rulings against President Donald Trump in his one-and-an-eighth terms, Kennedy said some judges seem to want to “rewrite the Constitution every other Thursday, to advance some social or economic agenda that they can’t get by the voters: But the law is the law.” “And a universal injunction was created out of whole cloth. There’s no statutory basis for a universal injunction,” the Louisianan said, echoing the analysis in his op-ed. Given his penchant for often colorful and probing questions of judiciary appointees, Kennedy was also asked how an unfavorable ruling from the Supreme Court could affect nominee choices and further politicize the process. “All the nominees in front of us are going to be asked about universal injunctions, I can tell you. And if they try to dodge and bob and weave and run like a hound on the treeline, when it’s my turn to question them I’m not going to let them. I’m not asking how they would rule in a particular case, but I want to know what they think the legal basis is for a universal injunction, because there is none: I want to hear what they had to say.” Sen. Tommy Tuberville – who joined Kennedy and others in supporting Iowa Sen. Charles Grassley’s Judicial Relief Clarification Act (JCRA) to end the practice – said such “woke” judges should consider retiring their robes. SENATOR WARNS OF ‘UNCONSTITUTIONAL OVERREACH’ AHEAD OF SCOTUS SHOWDOWN “President Trump campaigned on a promise to deport dangerous criminals and won in a landslide. In just four months, he has already delivered the most secure border in American history,” Tuberville told Fox News Digital. “Unfortunately, we have radical left judges who are allowing their personal beliefs to supersede the will of 77 million Americans who voted for President Trump and his agenda,” the former Auburn football legend added. “If a judge wants to make political decisions, they should run for office. Otherwise, they should focus on upholding the Constitution and enforcing the law.” Sen. John Cornyn, R-Texas, also said he supports the JCRA, calling nationwide injunctions “a real problem.” “[A] single federal judge can essentially stop a popularly elected president dead in his tracks by a temporary restraining order, which doesn’t just deal with the parties in front of the judge, but literally the whole nation.” “If the Supreme Court doesn’t do it in the context of this birthright citizenship case, then Congress needs to continue to pursue this via Senator Grassley’s bill and other means.” CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP While the case argued Thursday involves an injunction with regard to the interpretation of birthright citizenship in the law, Cornyn said that the court will determine the scope of that particular order, but that the idea of nationwide injunctions is being abused. For his part, Grassley previously told Fox News Digital that such injunctions “are an unconstitutional abuse of judicial power.”
Kennedy Center seeks to expand ‘family-friendly’ programming, starts with free Christian film screening
The Kennedy Center is seeking to revamp its family-focused programming, including through offering more faith-based content that has often been left off the center’s agenda. To kick off the new focus, the Kennedy Center will be holding a free family screening of the new Angel Studios animated movie “The King of Kings,” which journeys through the life of Jesus from the viewpoint of a young boy who, throughout the movie, discovers the transformative power of faith. The “King of Kings” screening, which will be held on Sunday, June 1, also marks a shift to providing more pro-Christian content at the Kennedy Center. According to the center, the only recent modern production that could be considered “Christian” was a 2022 showing of “Jesus Christ Superstar,” a musical from the early 1970s that some critics (at least initially, such as the late Rev. Billy Graham) considered sacrilegious. DAVID MARCUS: AS SPRINGSTEEN AND DE NIRO TRASH AMERICA ABROAD, KENNEDY CENTER THRIVES “When I saw the advertising campaign for ‘King of Kings,’ I immediately knew we needed to have it come to the Kennedy Center,” Ambassador Richard Grenell, President of The Kennedy Center, said. “And then coincidentally, I was asked to be on a panel with the CEO of Angel Studios, so I cornered him. This is family-friendly programming that we will be doing more of in the future.” The special screening of “King of Kings” will mark the center’s first Jesus-centric show since “Jesus Christ Superstar,” the Kennedy Center indicated. The venue has hosted gospel singers and classical performances by composers such as Mozart and Beethoven, some of which were originally commissioned for church music. SCOOP: DOLLY PARTON SYMPHONY CONCERT HEADS TO DC’S KENNEDY CENTER IN EVENT ‘NO ONE WILL WANT TO MISS’ “The King of Kings has become the most successful theatrically released faith-based animated film in history,” said David Fischer, Head of Acquisitions & Business Affairs at Angel Studios. “But its greatest achievement is in the hearts it’s moved—and its screening at the Kennedy Center is a symbol of just how far truth and light can travel.” The film, which came out last month, saw a strong box office performance, earning $19.3 million during its first weekend in theaters. It is produced by Angel Studios, which is a crowd-funded streaming service and film studio that produces a lot of pro-Christian content and aims to help boost independent creators.
Kennedy Center promotes first explicitly pro-Christian feature in years as part of new ‘family-friendly’ focus
The Kennedy Center is seeking to revamp its family-focused programming, including through offering more explicitly faith-based content that has often been left off the center’s agenda. To kick off the new focus, the Kennedy Center will be holding a free family screening of the new Angel Studios animated movie “The King of Kings,” which journeys through the life of Jesus from the viewpoint of a young boy who, throughout the movie, discovers the transformative power of faith. It is the first Jesus-centric show there since 2022. The “King of Kings” screening, which will be held on Sunday, June 1, marks a shift to providing more pro-Christian content at the Kennedy Center. According to the center, the only recent modern production that could be considered “Christian” was a 2022 showing of “Jesus Christ Superstar,” a musical from the early 1970s that some critics (at least initially, such as the late Rev. Billy Graham) considered sacrilegious. DAVID MARCUS: AS SPRINGSTEEN AND DE NIRO TRASH AMERICA ABROAD, KENNEDY CENTER THRIVES “When I saw the advertising campaign for ‘King of Kings,’ I immediately knew we needed to have it come to the Kennedy Center,” Ambassador Richard Grenell, President of The Kennedy Center, said. “And then coincidentally, I was asked to be on a panel with the CEO of Angel Studios, so I cornered him. This is family-friendly programming that we will be doing more of in the future.” The special screening of “King of Kings” will mark the center’s first Jesus-centric show since “Jesus Christ Superstar,” the Kennedy Center indicated. The venue has hosted gospel singers and classical performances by composers such as Mozart and Beethoven, some of which were originally commissioned for church music. SCOOP: DOLLY PARTON SYMPHONY CONCERT HEADS TO DC’S KENNEDY CENTER IN EVENT ‘NO ONE WILL WANT TO MISS’ “The King of Kings has become the most successful theatrically released faith-based animated film in history,” said David Fischer, Head of Acquisitions & Business Affairs at Angel Studios. “But its greatest achievement is in the hearts it’s moved—and its screening at the Kennedy Center is a symbol of just how far truth and light can travel.” The film, which came out last month, saw a strong box office performance, earning $19.3 million during its first weekend in theaters. It is produced by Angel Studios, which is a crowd-funded streaming service and film studio that produces a lot of pro-Christian content and aims to help boost independent creators.
Trump’s ‘big, beautiful bill’ suffers massive defeat in key hurdle before House-wide vote
President Donald Trump’s “big, beautiful bill” failed to pass the House Budget Committee on Friday, in what appears to be a massive blow to House GOP leaders’ plans to hold a House-wide vote next week. Reps. Chip Roy, R-Texas, Josh Brecheen, R-Okla., Andrew Clyde, R-Ga., and Ralph Norman, R-S.C., and Lloyd Smucker, R-Pa., all voted against the legislation. The committee met on Friday to mark up and debate the bill, a massive piece of legislation that’s a product of 11 different House committees’ individual efforts to craft policy under their jurisdictions. The result is a wide-ranging bill that advances Trump’s priorities on the border, immigration, taxes, energy, defense and raising the debt limit. Emotions ran high in the hallway outside the House Budget Committee’s meeting room from the outset, however, giving the media little indication of how events would transpire. Rep. Brandon Gill, R-Texas, who had been at home with his wife and newborn baby, surprised reporters when he arrived at the Cannon House Office Building after he was initially expected to miss the committee meeting. His appearance gave House GOP leaders some added wiggle room, allowing the committee to lose two Republican votes and still pass the bill, rather than just one. Shortly before the meeting was expected to begin, Roy, Norman, Clyde and Brecheen abruptly left the room while saying little to reporters on the way out. Each came back a short while later and criticized the legislation in their opening remarks. At one point, Norman came out of the room and called for the committee to recess in order to work through the fiscal hawks’ concerns. “If they call for a vote now, it’s not going to end well,” he said, adding he was still waiting on commitments from House GOP leaders. Minutes later, House Majority Leader Steve Scalise, R-La., who is not a member of the committee but had been meeting with holdouts, told reporters he wanted the legislation to advance through the Budget panel “as soon as possible.” When asked about Norman’s comments, he said, “I just walked out of the meeting with him a few minutes ago as well, we’re working on some questions that Ralph and others have, and we’re going to be getting them answers as soon as we get them back from the Trump administration. His questions were the same as Chips and a few others, and they’re very specific questions, valid questions we’re working on getting those answers right now.”
Afghans for Trump group feels abandoned after administration revokes refugee protections
A group that once campaigned to put Donald Trump in the White House now says they feel abandoned by his administration’s decision to revoke legal protections for thousands of Afghan refugees living in the U.S. under Temporary Protected Status (TPS). Zoubair Sangi, the leader of the “Afghans for Trump” movement, formed after the chaotic 2021 U.S. withdrawal from Afghanistan, said his community turned to Trump after the Biden administration’s exit left their homeland in turmoil. Now, he is urging the president to reconsider. “The reality is that Afghanistan is not safe,” Sangi told Fox News. “Over the last three years, since the return of the Taliban, the country has been as dangerous as ever.” He said the Department of Homeland Security’s claim of an “improved security situation” fails to reflect the reality on the ground. TRUMP PUSHES TO RECOVER ‘BILLIONS OF DOLLARS’ OF MILITARY EQUIPMENT LEFT BEHIND IN AFGHANISTAN WITHDRAWAL “The Taliban, at the end of the day, are a terrorist group,” he said. “They target anyone who disagrees with them – anyone who worked with the U.S. government or allied forces. Their lives are in grave danger.” Sangi added that women face especially grim conditions in Taliban-controlled Afghanistan, where they are banned from education and public life without a male escort. “They view women as subservient. They treat them worse than cattle,” he said. “There is no freedom for ordinary Afghans. It’s a prison. People are essentially under house arrest, and they can’t escape.” Despite his frustration, Sangi said he has not withdrawn his support for Trump – but he is pleading with him to rethink the decision. “We do have hope that any kind of mistake that is made specifically in regards to Afghanistan will be corrected.” He praised Trump for refusing to recognize the Taliban and ending foreign aid to Afghanistan that fell into their hands, and he urged him not to strike any deals. “The Taliban mock America, reject your demands for the return of our $7 billion in military equipment, and harbor terrorists who threaten our homeland,” said Sangi. “Engaging with them isn’t America First.” AFGHANS FOR TRUMP GROUP LOOKING TO MAKE FOREIGN POLICY — AND 2021 WITHDRAWAL — FRONT AND CENTER IN ELECTION On Monday, the Department of Homeland Security officially ended TPS for Afghan nationals, potentially forcing more than 9,000 individuals to return to Taliban-ruled Afghanistan. DHS Secretary Kristi Noem cited an “improved security situation” and a stabilizing economy as justification. “This administration is returning TPS to its original, temporary intent,” Noem said. “We’ve reviewed the conditions in Afghanistan with our interagency partners, and they do not meet the requirements for a TPS designation.” Afghans’ protected status is set to expire on May 20, with the program formally ending on July 12. Noem added that terminating the designation aligns with the administration’s broader goal of rooting out fraud and national security threats in the immigration system. TPS allows foreign nationals from countries facing armed conflict, natural disasters or other emergencies to live and work legally in the U.S. Then-President Joe Biden had originally designated Afghanistan for TPS following the Taliban’s takeover in 2021. While many Afghans who assisted the U.S. military during the two-decade war arrived under the Special Immigrant Visa (SIV) program, others – including former Afghan government workers and those tied to U.S. missions – entered under TPS amid the post-withdrawal chaos. These individuals now face potential deportation. CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP Former Foreign Affairs Committee Chairman Mike McCaul argued against the assertion that the security situation had improved, and urged the administration against moving to revoke the immigration status of Afghans here on SIVs or P1 and P2 visas. The Taliban, he said, “have made their thirst for retribution against those who help the United States clear. Until they demonstrate substantial behavorial changes, I urge the administration to continue prioritizing the safety of the Afghan men and women who risked their lives to help our troops.” Fox News Digital has reached out to the White House and DHS with requests for comment.
Democratic presidential hopefuls grapple with Biden’s legacy as 2028 race begins
It was the first question thrown at potential 2028 Democratic presidential contender Pete Buttigieg as he briefly met with reporters following a town hall with veterans and military families in Iowa this week: “Did President Joe Biden experience cognitive decline while in office?” Buttigieg was asked. “Every time I needed something from him from the West Wing, I got it,” answered Buttigieg, a 2020 Democratic presidential candidate who served four years as Secretary of Transportation in the Biden administration. After a second reporter followed up, asking: “Would the party have been better off if he had just not run for re-election?” Buttigieg answered: “Maybe. Right now, with the benefit of hindsight, I think most people would agree that that’s the case.” NEW BOOK PLACES BLAME ON BIDEN FOR HARRIS 2024 LOSS TO TRUMP Welcome to the 2028 White House race pre-season, where Democrats mulling a presidential run are starting to take the earliest of steps. And as they do, they’re facing an initial gauntlet – questions about former President Joe Biden’s mental acuity during his final years in office and whether Democrats should have been more strident earlier in the 2024 election cycle in calling on Biden to abandon his bid for a second term in the White House. “I think that is one of the top things that they do want to know about,” longtime New Hampshire-based radio host Chris Ryan told Fox News, as he pointed to his listeners on his popular morning news/talk program. “The Democratic voters are still trying to sort through what happened and why,” said Ryan, who has interviewed scores of White House hopefuls over the years. BIDEN AIDES ‘SCRIPTED’ EVERYTHING, ALLOWED HIS FACULTIES TO ‘ATROPHY,’ NEW BOOK CLAIMS How the presidential hopefuls answer these questions will be an early test of their truthfulness in the eyes of voters who had serious concerns over whether Biden was mentally and physically up for another four years handling the world’s most grueling job. But Ryan noted that “it’s different for each potential candidate based on their level of proximity to President Biden.” The grilling of potential 2028 contenders and other Democrats comes as Biden’s condition is once again making headlines, courtesy of excerpts from a new book, “Original Sin: President Biden’s Decline, Its Cover-up, and His Disastrous Choice to Run Again,” which offers claims of a White House cover-up of the then-president’s alleged cognitive decline. Biden dropped out of the White House race last July, one month after a disastrous debate performance with now-President Donald Trump that sparked a chorus of calls from fellow Democrats for the then-81-year-old president to end his re-election bid. He was replaced at the top of the ticket by then-Vice President Kamala Harris, who ended up losing November’s presidential election to Trump. Democrats also suffered down ballot, losing control of the Senate and failing to win back the House majority from the Republicans. During an appearance on ABC’s “The View” last week, Biden pushed back against accusations that he had suffered significant cognitive decline during the final year of his presidency. Rep. Ro Khanna of California was a leading supporter and surrogate on the campaign trail for Biden during the 2024 election cycle. After last June’s debate, as a trickle of Democrats urging Biden to step aside turned into a steady stream, Khanna likened the embattled president to Rocky Balboa—the underdog boxer of big-screen legend. TARGETED BY TRUMP, THIS WELL KNOWN DEMOCRAT SPARKS 2028 SPECULATION “To rebuild trust, Democrats must be honest. In light of the facts that have come out, Joe Biden should not have run for reelection, and we should have had an open primary,” Khanna wrote in a social media post. Khanna, in a statement, said, “I have always admired Biden’s resilience and the grit he has shown after the loss of his son — and often compared that strength to Rocky. I was a surrogate for the president of my own party whose policies I backed.” “But obviously we did not have the full picture, and in hindsight it is painfully obvious that President Biden should have made the patriotic decision not to run,” Khanna said. Sen. Chris Murphy of Connecticut, another Democratic lawmaker who vouched for Biden last year, said that “there’s no doubt about it” when asked by Politico whether Biden had experienced cognitive decline. “The debate is whether it was enough that it compromised his ability to act as chief executive.” Murphy, who is viewed as a potential 2028 contender, said that Biden staying in the 2024 race as long as he did was detrimental to the Democrats. “I mean, isn’t that self-evident? We lost,” he said. “Obviously, in retrospect, we should have done something different.” LESS THAN FOUR MONTHS INTO TRUMP’S SECOND TERM, DEMOCRATS ALREADY EYEING 2028 PRESIDENTIAL RACE But Michigan Gov. Gretchen Whitmer, another possible White House candidate who was a top 2024 surrogate for Biden, said in a CNN interview this week when asked about Biden’s cognitive abilities: “As a governor in a state halfway across the country who was working her tail off, 160 stops on a bus tour that I had lined through swing states, I was busy working. I was busy doing the voter connection and registration, and so can’t speak to that directly.” “I didn’t see the president frequently.” But she added that “it does make me question a lot of the things I thought I knew over the course of the last year and a half.” While the potential contenders are answering questions concerning Biden in different ways, there is one consensus. “We’re not in a position to wallow in hindsight. We’ve got to get ready for some fundamental tests of the future of this country and this party,” Buttigieg noted.