NationalWatch

EXCLUSIVE: Sen. Ted Cruz has three New Year’s resolutions — and he’s making it his 2026 mission to stick to them.

In an exclusive interview with Fox News Digital, Cruz, R-Texas, laid out his 2026 promises.

PRESIDENT DONALD TRUMP SHARES HIS NEW YEAR’S RESOLUTION

“The first is one that a lot of people make in the New Year, which is hard to deliver on — to lose some weight,” Cruz said. “In particular, to drop 30 pounds this year.”

Cruz told Fox News Digital he weighed in at 236 pounds Jan. 1, 2026.

“My goal by January of next year is to be 206,” he said.

“When I graduated from college I was 135 — skinny as a rail,” Cruz continued, joking that some say he is “twice the man I used to be.”

“Dropping 30 pounds is something that would be good to do, so I’m going to work on diet and exercise,” Cruz said.

Cruz told Fox News Digital he is focusing on a ketogenic diet to start.

“I’m cutting out carbs and focusing on eating meat and cheese and vegetables,” he said. “Keto can be tough to do, but it can produce real effects.” 

Cruz’s second New Year’s resolution is to stick to “dry January,” meaning no alcoholic beverages for the month of January.

“I’ve long enjoyed red wine with dinner, and you can have fun at dinners and laugh a lot, but at the same time, wine is filled with calories, and if you’re trying to drop 30 pounds, pouring grape juice into your midsection is not exactly conducive to that objective.” 

Cruz said he’s replaced that red wine with sparkling water with lime, vitamin water and more.

“You know, drinks that taste good and that I enjoy,” he said. 

“I’ve been amazed at how many friends of mine are doing dry January,” Cruz said. “We had good friends who came to the house. They brought a six-pack of nonalcoholic beer, and we had that beer and cheese and meat charcuterie board. It was just a good chance hanging out with friends, but I didn’t know they were doing that, but it turns out, we all were.” 

And finally, Cruz’s third resolution for 2026 is to read the Bible every day.

SEN. TED CRUZ BREAKS DOWN THE HIGH-STAKES STRATEGIC FIGHT FOR GREENLAND

“This is something I’ve done during different times of my life. With all the demands of work and family and kids, it is easy to get pulled in different directions and lose that discipline,” Cruz said.

Cruz recalled that he and his wife, Heidi, would do an “evening devolution” when his daughters, now 17 years old and 15 years old, were younger, but told Fox News Digital that as they have gotten older, it has been more difficult to stick to.

“I want to read the word and reflect on it and have your spirit open to listen — listen to the Holy Spirit. Let the words of Jesus impact your daily life,” Cruz said. “It is something I’ve always wanted to do, and in fact, after I made my resolutions, my pastor texted me and suggested we’d spend a Sunday afternoon a month and spend some time together in prayer and in Bible study together.”

Cruz said faith and Bible study has “been a part of my life since I was a kid.”

“There are different times in life where you have more or less discipline and consistency,” he said.

“Every day, we should start with Jesus first, and that has remained true in my prayer life, but at times, the demands of the moment have distracted me from reading the word consistently every day and I’m going to return to that.” 

It’s been 21 days into 2026 and Cruz says he is going strong.

“Its going well,” he said.

SUCCEEDING TRUMP IN 2028: SIX REPUBLICANS TO KEEP YOUR EYES ON

As for the diet, he said he has been “keeping to it,” and is going to be working more exercise into his routine.

“I already play basketball twice a week,” he said. “I’m going to be working in daily pushups.”

As for other priorities for the new year, Cruz said he and his wife are focused on their daughters.

“Our girls are 15 and 17 — one is a senior in high school and one is a freshman. They are teenagers getting ready to go off to school,” he said. “You reflect on the limited number of days they’re going to be home much longer.”

He added: “When they leave for school, I’ll go into their bedrooms and just cry. I love my girls.”

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

“The days that the girls are home and not out in the world are rapidly dwindling, and that makes you want to make sure you’re carving out time right now,” he said. “Because the time right now, today, will never be back tomorrow.” 

As for a potential 2028 presidential run, Cruz told Fox News Digital that his “focus right now is representing 31 million Texans, and it is an incredible privilege to serve them and represent the great state of Texas in the U.S. Senate.” 

“That is my priority right now and my sole focus,” Cruz said. 

The Supreme Court appeared poised to give President Donald Trump one of his biggest legal setbacks in office, offering strong support Wednesday for Federal Reserve Governor Lisa Cook remaining in her leadership position — at least for now.

The justices debated in their packed courtroom whether Trump has broad unilateral executive authority to fire someone from the central bank, despite its special status as a stand-alone federal agency.

During nearly two hours of oral arguments, a majority seemed to agree the Fed’s unique public-private hybrid structure limited removal without clear “cause,” and that Trump did not meet his legal obligations when seeking Cook’s dismissal for alleged private mortgage fraud.

REPUBLICAN SENATOR VOWS TO BLOCK TRUMP FED NOMINEE OVER POWELL INVESTIGATION

The case comes before the Supreme Court on an emergency basis — with the government seeking to dismiss Cook now, for as long as the courts decide the matter, a process that could last months.

The justices could decide the larger constitutional questions now or give the lower federal courts a chance for a full examination of the facts, with some guidance from the high court on the standards of “for cause” removal.

In arguments, most on the court seemed skeptical of Trump’s actions.   

“That’s your position that there’s no judicial review, no process required, no remedy available?” Justice Brett Kavanaugh asked Solicitor General D. John Sauer. “Very low bar for cause that the president alone determines. And that would weaken, if not shatter, the independence of the Federal Reserve.”

“Let’s talk about the real-world downstream effects of this. Because if this were set as a precedent, it seems to me just thinking big picture, what goes around, comes around,” added Kavanaugh, who has typically been an ardent defender of executive power. “All the current president’s appointees would likely be removed for cause on January 20th, 2029 — if there’s a Democratic president or January 20th, 2033. And then, we’re really at, at will removal.”

Others on the bench raised questions of “public confidence” if the president could fire Fed governors without fully explaining or justifying the reasons.

“We have amicus briefs from economists who tell us that if Governor Cook is” fired, asked Justice Amy Coney Barrett, “that it can trigger a recession. How should we think about the public interest in a case like this?”

The Competing Arguments

Cook’s lawyer told the nine-member bench court the Federal Reserve System was created by Congress in 1913 as a wholly independent entity, to insulate it from political influence, and from any one president “stacking the deck” with their own nominees.

The first Black female Fed governor claims to be a political pawn in Trump’s very public efforts to dictate the board’s interest rate policies and by exploiting what she calls “manufactured charges” of wrongdoing.

GOP SENATOR SUGGESTS FED CHAIR POWELL RESIGN NOW TO DODGE POTENTIAL CRIMINAL INDICTMENT

With Cook in the audience as a show of support was Fed Chairman Jerome Powell, whom Trump has also sought to remove in a broader, ongoing feud with the agency over the pace of lowering benchmark interest rates to spur the domestic economy.

But the Trump Justice Department said he had executive authority to seek Cook’s removal, free from judicial review.

Independent Agency Review   

The conservative court has allowed much of Trump’s challenged executive actions to be enforced at least temporarily — including upholding firings of members of the National Labor Relations Board, the Merit Systems Protection Board, the Consumer Product Safety Commission, and the Federal Trade Commission, despite federal laws protecting them against removal without good cause.

The justices last month heard arguments in a separate case, on Trump’s efforts to remove Democrat-appointed Rebecca Slaughter from the Federal Trade Commission (FTC), which, like the Fed, is a congressionally-created independent, multi-member regulatory agency.

The 6-3 conservative majority in that petition appeared ready to rule for the president when it involves semi-autonomous agencies like the FTC.

But in the Federal Reserve dispute, the high court clearly indicated this institution was different.

In the Cook case, lower courts ruled she did not receive due process when the president tried to fire her.

The current posture of the case is whether Trump can remove Cook — at least temporarily — while the dispute continues to play out on the merits.

The “for cause” removal restriction’s constitutionality is not directly before the justices, but nevertheless played a key role in the oral argument session.

The Supreme Court could go ahead and settle the competing issues now — which seems unlikely — or leave it to the lower courts to continue hearing the appeal, with guidance on how to proceed.

Focus on the Fed

Though its leaders are appointed by the president and confirmed by the Senate, the seven-member board is considered an independent government agency, since its monetary policy decisions do not need presidential or legislative approval. But the agency does provide Congress with regular reports on its work.

It also does not receive any federal funding, and the terms of the members of the board of governors span multiple presidential and congressional terms.

Under law, the Federal Reserve’s leadership has a three-fold mandate: “maximum employment, stable prices, and moderate long-term interest rates.”

The 12 Federal Reserve Banks are not part of the federal government, but set up like private corporations, and regionally located across the country.

In arguments, most justices agreed Cook deserved some chance to make her case that a dismissal would be improper.

SUPREME COURT PREPARES FOR MAJOR TEST OF PRESIDENTIAL POWER IN TRUMP EFFORTS TO FIRE FEDERAL RESERVE GOVERNOR

“Why are you afraid of a hearing?” asked Justice Amy Coney Barrett, at one point.

Justice Neil Gorsuch asked: “Let’s, just suppose with me, hypothetically, for the moment, that the court read the act to require notice and a hearing … What would that hearing look like?”

Gorsuch asked if the president could just call Cook into the White House Roosevelt Room. “So just a meeting across a conference table, finish with ‘you’re fired?'”

But Chief Justice John Roberts repeatedly said a hearing on the allegations would serve little use if her only defense is she made an “inadvertent error” on her mortgage application.

The public session also focused extensively on the standards of “cause” that would permit Cook’s dismissal. Several justices suggested the mortgage fraud claims against Cook were not serious enough to trigger emergency action requested by the government to remove her at least temporarily.

Existing statutory removal protections include the so-called “INM standard” — “inefficiency, neglect of malfeasance.”

“The question becomes, is it grossly negligent to make a mistake on a mortgage application?” said Justice Sonia Sotomayor.

Justice Samuel Alito also asked why the case was handled “in such a hurried manner,” suggesting concern the allegations against Cook have not been properly adjudicated, either by the courts or by the president himself.

In a statement after the hearing ended, Cook said her case is “about whether the Federal Reserve will set key interest rates guided by evidence and independent judgment or will succumb to political pressure.”

The Impact

The Federal Reserve Act (FRA) says the president can only remove members of the Fed board and FOMC “for cause.” The exact parameters of that standard were not spelled out in the original law, and never fully tested in the courts.

Cook — appointed for a 14-year term by former President Joe Biden in 2023 — will remain on the job at least until the court decides the current legal questions.

SUPREME COURT TEMPORARILY GREENLIGHTS FIRING OF BIDEN-APPOINTED FTC COMMISSIONER

No president has fired a sitting Fed governor in the law’s 112-year history.

She strongly denies accusations of falsely claiming two homes in Georgia and Michigan as her primary residence to secure better mortgage terms. She has not been charged with any crime.

Cook sued the administration last August in a bid to keep her job.

Just after the court arguments ended, Cook released a statement saying her case is “about whether the Federal Reserve will set key interest rates guided by evidence and independent judgment or will succumb to political pressure.”

The next Federal Open Market Committee (FOMC) meeting is scheduled for January 27 and 28, with an expected interest rate decision. Both Powell and Cook are each set to participate.

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

Financial markets, private banks, businesses, and investors will be closely watching what the Supreme Court does in the Federal Reserve dispute, and a separate pending appeal over Trump’s sweeping reciprocal global tariffs.

A written ruling in that import tax case, which was argued by the justices in November, could come at any time.

The Fed case is Trump v. Cook (25a312). A decision there could come relatively quickly within weeks, or potentially as late as June or early July.

Former Chicago Mayor Rahm Emanuel, a potential White House hopeful for 2028, said on Wednesday that he wants a mandatory retirement age of 75 for the president and people holding office in other branches of government.

“You’re 75 years old: done,” Emanuel, a Democrat, said at a Center for American Progress event. “And that would be in the legislative branch, it’d be in the executive branch — including the Cabinet — and it’d also be in the Supreme Court, and all the federal courts.”

Emanuel, 66, acknowledged that he would be affected by this proposal if he happens to be elected president in 2028 and seeks re-election, as he would be 73 at the start of a potential second term.

WHITE HOUSE RACE UNDERWAY: WITH 2026 LOOMING, BOTH PARTIES ARE ALREADY PLAYING FOR 2028

“I know where I am in my age. Of course it would apply to me,” Emanuel told Politico. “You can’t say ‘here’s what I want to do to change Washington, one of the things I want to do’ — but I get an exemption because I bought it beforehand.”

The proposal would make President Donald Trump, 79, ineligible to continue serving and would have prevented former President Joe Biden, now 83, from serving his term in the White House.

In Congress, 17 senators and 45 House members are currently 75 or older and would be impacted by the standard.

Supreme Court Justices Clarence Thomas, 77, and Samuel Alito, 75, would also be barred from continuing to serve on the bench, while Justices Sonia Sotomayor, 71, and John Roberts, 70, are nearing Emanuel’s mandatory retirement age.

“You can’t serve in the armed forces, you can’t serve in private sector jobs,” Emanuel told reporters on Wednesday. “Go work on your golf swing, it’s not that good to begin with.”

Emanuel, who served as ambassador to Japan under Biden and chief of staff under former President Barack Obama, is reigniting a topic that was hot during the last presidential election.

Biden, then 81, and Trump, then 78, were both campaigning for a second term ahead of the 2024 election while facing questions surrounding repeated gaffes. Biden ultimately dropped out of the race amid pressure to end his campaign over his mental and physical fitness.

Former U.S. Ambassador to the U.N. Nikki Haley, who ran in the GOP primary in the last presidential election, proposed mandatory mental competency tests for politicians over the age of 75 during her campaign.

AS CONGRESS GROWS OLDER, DEBATE HEATS UP OVER WHEN TO STEP ASIDE

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

Emanuel, also a former House member, said he would push for legislation to set the limit instead of attempting a constitutional amendment. It is unclear whether that proposed legislation would be constitutional, and could be difficult to receive support in a Congress where the median age for senators is 64.

He said the age limit would be part of a broader demand for “comprehensive ethics, lobbying [and] anti-corruption reform” across the federal government that he said would include a crackdown on lawmakers and judges accepting and stock trading. He wants the Democratic Party to push that proposal as part of a midterms message that also includes raising the minimum wage.

“You have a president of the United States, in my view, that has expanded, deepened the swamp. Our job is to drain the swamp as Democrats,” Emanuel said. “There’s not a day that goes by that you don’t read a story about either his family, [Commerce Secretary Howard] Lutnick’s family or [Special Envoy Steve] Witkoff’s family making money.”

A judge ruled Wednesday that the configuration of New York City’s lone congressional district represented by a Republican is unconstitutional, ordering the state to redraw the district by next month.

State Supreme Court Justice Jeffrey Pearlman ruled that the composition of New York’s 11th Congressional District — which covers all of Staten Island and parts of southern Brooklyn — unconstitutionally diluted the votes of Black and Hispanic residents. He ordered the Independent Redistricting Commission to complete a new map by Feb. 6.

The district is held by Rep. Nicole Malliotakis, R-N.Y., who won her seat in 2020. She slammed the ruling in a statement Wednesday, calling it “a frivolous attempt by Washington Democrats to steal this congressional seat from the people and we are very confident that we will prevail at the end of the day.”

The district has trended Republican in recent elections, voting for President Donald Trump in 2016, 2020 and 2024 and backing GOP Senate candidates in 2022 and 2024 after previously supporting Democratic incumbents.

FEDERAL COURT CLEARS CALIFORNIA’S NEW HOUSE MAP BOOSTING DEMOCRATS AHEAD OF 2026 MIDTERMS

The lawsuit, filed by Democratic attorney Marc Elias’ law firm, argued that the existing district dilutes the voting power of Staten Island’s growing Black and Latino populations, violating minority protections under the New York Voting Rights Act.

“We are pleased that the court correctly recognized that the current district lines have systematically diluted the votes of Black and Latino Staten Islanders, despite decades of demographic growth in those communities,” Elias Law Group Partner Aria Branch said.

Branch added that the ruling reaffirms that New York’s Constitution “provides robust protections against racial vote dilution, and we are proud to have stood with our clients to vindicate those rights.”

VIRGINIA DEMOCRATS MOVE TO SEIZE REDISTRICTING POWER, OPENING DOOR TO 4 NEW LEFT-LEANING SEATS

The judge said in the ruling that there was strong evidence of a “racially polarized voting bloc,” as well as “a history of discrimination that impacts current day political participation and representation,” and “that racial appeals are still made in political campaigns today.”

Republicans are expected to appeal the ruling, escalating the national battle over congressional maps as both parties move to reshape districts ahead of the 2026 midterm elections.

Ed Cox, chairman of the New York State Republican Committee, criticized the ruling as partisan, arguing that Gov. Kathy Hochul and state Democrats had a chance to alter the district in 2024.

“This entire exercise is a cynical attempt to enact an illegal partisan gerrymander under the guise of a voting rights case,” Cox said in a statement. “It is shocking that the Governor and Attorney General did not defend the law that the legislature passed and the Governor signed in 2024 – they are clearly colluding with the plaintiffs in this case.”

REDISTRICTING BATTLES BREWING ACROSS THE COUNTRY AS PARTIES COMPETE FOR POWER AHEAD OF 2026 MIDTERMS

New York was forced to redraw its congressional districts after the 2020 census, sparking a legal battle over maps used in the 2022 midterms. Democrats’ initial map was struck down as unconstitutional gerrymandering, leading a court to order an independent redraw that dramatically reshaped districts. While those maps were used in 2022, they were later thrown out and redrawn again ahead of the 2024 election.

Hochul welcomed the ruling, saying the state Constitution guarantees fair representation.

“The court’s decision underscores the importance of these constitutional principles and directs the congressional map be redrawn by the New York Independent Redistricting Commission so impacted communities are fully represented and have a voice in our democracy,” she said in a statement.

Staten Island Republican Party Chairman Michael Tannousis reacted to the ruling, calling the decision “a complete sham.”

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

“They are trying to fracture our community because they don’t like how we vote,” he said in a statement. “It’s rigged. It’s transparently partisan, and it’s wrong.”

Fox News Digital’s Elizabeth Elkind and The Associated Press contributed to this report.

The House Oversight Committee voted to refer former President Bill Clinton and former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton for chamber-wide votes on criminal contempt of Congress charges with the help of multiple Democrats, including two members of the far-left Squad, for defying subpoenas related to the panel’s Jeffrey Epstein probe.

Lawmakers voted to advance a pair of contempt resolutions against the Clintons on Wednesday after they did not appear for scheduled depositions earlier this month.

The committee voted 34-9 to advance one contempt recommendation against Bill Clinton, with two members voting present, and another on Hillary Clinton in a 28-15 vote, with one member voting present. Nine Democrats voted with Republicans to advance contempt recommendations against Bill Clinton and three Democrats joined Republicans in the vote against Hillary Clinton.

The Democrats who voted to advance Bill Clinton’s resolution were: Reps. Maxwell Frost, D-Fla., Raja Krishnamoorthi, D-Ill., Summer Lee, D-Pa., Stephen Lynch, D-Mass. Ayanna Pressley, D-Mass., Emily Randall, D-Wash., Lateefah Simon, D-Calif., Melanie Stansbury, D-N.M., and Rashida Tlaib, D-Mich.

The Democrats who voted to advance Hillary Clinton’s resolution were Stansbury and “Squad” members Lee and Tlaib.

“The committee does not take this action lightly. Subpoenas are not mere suggestions,” Oversight Committee Chairman James Comer, R-Ky., said of the Clintons’ no-show. “[Subpoenas] carry the force of law and require compliance. Former President Clinton and Secretary Clinton were legally required to appear for depositions before this committee.”

HILLARY CLINTON EXPECTED TO DEFY EPSTEIN PROBE SUBPOENA, RISKING CRIMINAL CHARGES

“They refused,” he added.

If the House votes to refer the Clintons for contempt, it would be up to the Department of Justice (DOJ) whether to prosecute. A contempt-of-Congress conviction can carry up to a $100,000 fine and a year behind bars.

Republicans on the committee contend that by not appearing before lawmakers, the Clintons impeded congressional investigations into Epstein and his activities. Bill and Hillary Clinton originally received subpoenas to appear before lawmakers on Oct. 14 and Oct. 9, 2025, respectively, to answer questions on Epstein’s dealings, but even after working with the committee to reschedule, they did not appear for questioning.

COMER RIPS ‘PAID DISRUPTOR’ AS BRIEFING ON CLINTON CONTEMPT PUSH DEVOLVES INTO CHAOS

An attorney for the Clintons wrote to the committee, calling the subpoenas “invalid and legally unenforceable” and claiming they lacked a connection to a legislative purpose.

Instead, the Clintons offered Comer the opportunity to travel to New York to conduct an interview by himself without an official transcript.

Comer rejected the offer, calling it “insulting.”

“The Clintons’ latest demands make clear they believe their last name entitles them to special treatment,” Comer said in a statement. “The House Oversight Committee rejects the Clintons’ unreasonable demands and will move forward with contempt resolutions.”

Epstein, a former financier, killed himself while incarcerated on charges of sex trafficking minors in 2019, cutting short a prosecution of his crimes.

Epstein was known to have rubbed shoulders with some of the world’s most powerful and wealthy figures, including Prince Andrew, Bill Gates, now-President Donald Trump and the Clintons.

Recent disclosures from the DOJ in compliance with the Epstein Files Transparency Act revealed new images and details of Clinton’s relationship with Epstein.

HOUSE OVERSIGHT COMMITTEE TO SUBPOENA LES WEXNER, 2 OTHERS IN EPSTEIN INVESTIGATION

While none of them bear any proof of wrongdoing on their own, they have raised new questions among Republicans about what the former president may have known about Epstein’s crimes.

Rep. Jim Jordan, R-Ohio, a member of the committee, said he believes the Oversight contempt effort will ensure future compliance.

“In order for Congress to do investigations, Congress has got to be able to bring people in to ask them questions and get answers so that they can do the work to fulfill our oversight function,” Jordan told Fox News Digital on Wednesday morning.

Democrats at the markup called Republican efforts a partisan attack meant to target the political adversaries of President Donald Trump.

Rep. Emily Randall, D-Wash., said she would not defend the Clintons but framed the contempt recommendations as an extension of Trump’s political objectives.

“I do not feel it is my responsibility to defend the former President of the United States as a member of Congress, in a separate and co-equal branch of government — just like it is not your responsibility, Mr. Chair, to carry out the political retribution of the current president,” Randall said.

‘THE VIEW’ HOSTS CALL ON CLINTONS TO COMPLY WITH SUBPOENA, TESTIFY ON EPSTEIN

Rep. Dave Min, D-Calif., said he feared the committee’s efforts would continue to weaponize Congress’ investigation powers.

“I’m very troubled by this criminal contempt motion,” Min said. “I have deep concerns that this looks like a political witch hunt against Trump’s critics, that it will be referred to the Department of Justice.”

The Clintons were two of 10 people subpoenaed by the Oversight Committee but are the only two facing contempt threats so far for not appearing.

Despite his concerns, Min added that he also believed the Clintons should have complied with the congressional orders.

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

“No one should be above the law, including presidents and former presidents, and congressional subpoenas are an important part of that rule of law. And I think the Clintons should be here. I think it’s very shameful that they’re not,” Min said.

With the committee having voted to suggest House-wide contempt resolutions against the Clintons, the chamber will likely consider them sometime in February, according to statements Comer made to Fox News Digital last week.

After President Donald Trump took to the World Economic Forum stage in Davos to declare that Western civilization must defend itself from an existential attack, Somali-born activist and author Ayaan Hirsi Ali said “Trump is right.”

Trump shocked other politicians and leaders gathered in Switzerland Tuesday night by declaring, “The West cannot mass import foreign cultures.”

“The situation in Minnesota reminds us that the West cannot mass import foreign cultures which have failed to ever build a successful society of their own,” he said. “We’re taking people from Somalia, and Somalia is a failed [state]. It’s not a nation, got no government, got no police, got no military, got no nothing.

“The explosion of prosperity, in conclusion, and progress that built the West did not come from our tax cuts. It ultimately came from our very special culture. This is the precious inheritance that America and Europe have in common. 

TRUMP CITES MINNESOTA FRAUD CASES TO WARN AGAINST MIGRATION FROM ‘FAILED’ SOCIETIES

“We share it, we share it. But we have to keep it strong. We have to become stronger, more successful and more prosperous than ever. We have to defend that culture and rediscover the spirit that lifted the West from the depths of the Dark Ages to the pinnacle of human achievement.”

In response, Hirsi Ali told Fox News Digital Trump is communicating a critical truth.

“I don’t think it’s an important thing. I think it is the most important thing,” she said. “Trump is right … and I can’t think of a better and more powerful platform than that of the president of the United States to say, ‘Hey, you guys wake up.’”

As a child in Somalia, Hirsi Ali was subjected to a severe form of female genital mutilation. Later in life, she fled the country to escape a forced marriage and served as a Dutch lawmaker. She is now based in the U.S. and uses her platform to advocate for women’s rights, critique Islam and voice support for Western greatness. 

“I think every American and every European should know that what the president is trying to say is that what made America and Europe great is there’s this unique culture. If we don’t understand that culture and if we do not defend it, we risk losing it,” she said.

“The economy is very important. Military is very important. All these other aspects of government are extremely important, but more important than all of that is our value system. And it’s our heritage. And it is our national identity.”

Regarding Trump’s critique of the Somali immigrant population’s involvement in the massive Minnesota fraud scheme, Hirsi Ali said, “I wholeheartedly agree with the president.”

TRUMP SAYS MEDIA FOCUSES TOO MUCH ON MINNESOTA ICE COVERAGE, NOT ENOUGH ON CORRUPTION ALLEGATIONS

“The president is right when he says Somalia hasn’t even made it into a nation,” she said. “Every attempt at building something, making something out of Somalia has always failed because of the clan code, because of Islam, because of Marxism. We’ve had all the bad ideologies, and, as Somalis, we’ve run away with them.”

Further, Hirsi Ali said the situation in Minnesota exposes a “subversive agenda in the United States to transform it and to Islamize it using American institutions and the American vocabulary of civil rights.”

“You see that the Somalis exploit and extract the benefit system,” she said. “They tell everyone, ‘If you expose this, investigate it, object to it, stop it, you’re racist. You’re an Islamophobe. You are a bigot.

“If we keep on doing what we are doing, getting huge numbers of people from the Third World to come and establish themselves in the United States and European countries and depend on welfare benefits, that is to take and take and never contribute, then we’re setting ourselves up not only for failure. We’re committing a cultural and national and political suicide.”

To combat this, Hirsi Ali said European nations must follow the Trump administration’s example in sealing their borders. She said the U.S. and Europe must also address their broad welfare systems, which she said are “just too expensive.”

In Minnesota, Hirsi Ali advocated a hardline stance on the Somali immigrant population to assimilate into American culture.

TRUMP UNLOADS ON BIDEN POLICIES FROM DAVOS, WARNS EUROPE TO DROP THE OLD PLAYBOOK

“We’ve got to force them either to assimilate, or we’ve got to give them that choice and say, ‘If you don’t want to assimilate into American society, then you will be denaturalized,’” she said.

“This isn’t just like, ‘Oh yeah, it’s another day in politics. It’s existential.'”

Hirsi Ali called Trump’s Davos speech a “breakthrough” in getting European leaders to understand that defending Western civilization must be “priority No. 1.”

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

“JD Vance put it this way: [It’s] not what are we fighting against, but what are we fighting for? What are we fighting to preserve? If you can’t answer that question, then I think you are lost. And the European leaders are lost. And I think he’s trying to help them find their way,” she said.

After President Donald Trump announced a new Greenland “framework” had been agreed upon with North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) Secretary General Mark Rhutte, the NATO chief told Fox News’ “Special Report with Bret Baier” that U.S. forcibly taking control of Greenland, away from Denmark, was not discussed during meetings between him and President Donald Trump in Switzerland during the World Economic Forum.

“That issue did not come up anymore in my conversations with Mr. President. He’s very much focused on what we need to do to make sure that that huge Arctic region, where change is taking place at the moment, where the Chinese and Russians are more and more active, how we can protect that” Rhutte said when pressed on the details of the reported “framework” that has been agreed upon, and that Trump said has resulted in his decision not to impose certain tariffs scheduled to go into effect Feb. 1. 

“That was really the focus of our discussions,” Rhutte insisted.

TRUMP’S ‘SMALL ASK’ FOR GREENLAND WOULD BE THE REAL ESTATE DEAL OF A LIFETIME

Trump announced the new “framework” pertaining to Greenland in a post on his social media site Truth Social Wednesday afternoon while at the World Economic Forum this week. 

“Based upon a very productive meeting that I have had with the Secretary General of NATO, Mark Rutte, we have formed the framework of a future deal with respect to Greenland and, in fact, the entire Arctic Region,” the president wrote. “Based upon this understanding, I will not be imposing the Tariffs that were scheduled to go into effect on February 1st. Additional discussions are being held concerning The Golden Dome as it pertains to Greenland. Further information will be made available as discussions progress.”

Trump noted that Vice President JD Vance, Secretary of State Marco Rubio and Special Envoy Steve Witkoff will lead “the negotiations” and report directly back to him.

TRUMP TELLS DAVOS US ALONE CAN SECURE GREENLAND, INSISTS HE WON’T ‘USE FORCE’

“We probably won’t get anything unless I decide to use excessive strength and force where we would be, frankly, unstoppable. But I won’t do that,” Trump said earlier in the morning at the World Economic Forum. “Now everyone’s saying, ‘Oh, good.’ That’s probably the biggest statement I made, because people thought I would use force. I don’t have to use force. I don’t want to use force. I won’t use force.”

During the exclusive interview with Fox News, Rhutte called Trump “totally right” about needing to shore up security in the Arctic region, noting that the chance of Russia or China becoming a threat in that region is increasing every day. The NATO Secretary General also praised Trump’s leadership in getting other NATO countries to pay more money to the alliance’s defenses.

“I would argue tonight with you on this program, he was the one who brought a whole of Europe and Canada up to this famous 5%,” Rhutte insisted. “Which is crucial for us to equalize our spending, but also protect ourselves. And this is the framework which you see in his post that we will work on.”

Rhutte also noted that increased volatility between NATO-aligned countries, Russia and China underscored the need to shore up security in the Arctic region, during his interview with Fox News Wednesday evening.

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

Meanwhile, the NATO chief was asked whether he thought other countries were dealing with the Russians and the Chinese differently than they have in the past.

“It’s not up to me to comment on what individual allies are doing in terms of their relationship with China,” Rhutte responded. “I think collectively, as NATO, we have a position. The position is that we should not be naive. I can tell you’ll regret these huge investments the Chinese are making in the military. They are not there to organize parades in Beijing, and the military in Russia are not there to organize parades in Moscow. They are there to be used.”

A federal appeals court on Wednesday temporarily lifted restrictions on Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents’ use of force against protesters in Minnesota, handing a short-term win to President Donald Trump’s administration as it challenges a lower-court ruling.

The 8th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals issued an unsigned order placing an administrative stay on limits imposed by a district judge after protesters filed suit. The move pauses those restrictions while the appeals court considers the government’s request to block the injunction during the appeal.

The ruling comes as federal immigration enforcement tactics face growing legal scrutiny nationwide.

Attorney General Pam Bondi praised the court’s decision, calling it a “victory.”

FEDERAL PROSECUTORS OPEN INVESTIGATION INTO WALZ, FREY OVER ALLEGED IMPEDING OF LAW ENFORCEMENT

“A liberal judge in Minnesota tried to handcuff ICE agents who are enforcing the Nation’s immigration laws and responding to obstructive and violent interference from agitators,” Bondi said on X. “The 8th Circuit just granted an administrative stay HALTING these restrictions, which were designed to undermine federal law enforcement.”

“This DOJ will protect federal law enforcement agents from criminals in the streets AND activist judges in the courtroom,” she added.

The Associated Press reported that ICE is operating under an internal memo asserting broader authority to use force during arrests, including entering homes with administrative warrants rather than warrants signed by a judge.

DOJ LAUNCHES CIVIL RIGHTS INVESTIGATION AFTER MINNESOTA AGITATORS STORM CHURCH

In a Jan. 16 ruling, U.S. District Judge Kate Menendez issued the preliminary injunction at the center of the appeal, siding with protesters and legal observers who sued the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and ICE over their treatment during immigration enforcement operations.

ACTING ICE DIRECTOR DEFENDS AGENCY’S FOCUS ON TARGETING CRIMINAL ILLEGAL ALIENS, DETAILS THREAT TO AGENTS

Menendez found that plaintiffs were likely to succeed on claims that federal agents violated their First and Fourth Amendment rights during protests and observation of ICE activity tied to Operation Metro Surge in the Twin Cities.

The judge cited a pattern of confrontations in which ICE agents allegedly used pepper spray, pointed weapons, made arrests and conducted traffic stops against individuals who were peacefully observing or protesting immigration enforcement.

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

Menendez’s ruling temporarily barred agents from using force or making arrests against peaceful protesters and observers absent probable cause, prompting the Trump administration to seek emergency relief from the 8th Circuit. The decision on Wednesday put a pause on those restrictions as the appeal moves forward.

The Associated Press contributed to this report.

Only one House Democrat joined Republicans on Wednesday in a vote to repeal a Biden-era regulation on public lands in Minnesota.

The bill, sponsored by Rep. Pete Stauber, R-Minn., passed in a 214-208 vote.

Rep. Jarred Golden, D-Maine, voted in favor of the legislation while one Republican, Don Bacon, R-Neb., voted against it.

The public lands bill is the most recent in a string of regulations Republicans have undone in the 119th Congress — accounting for at least 10 such measures in 2025.

ZELDIN OVERHAULS BIDEN-ERA WATER RULE TO END ‘WEAPONIZATION’ THAT LED ‘PUDDLES’ TO TRIGGER PRICY PERMITS

In this case, lawmakers voted to reopen the door to mineral development on federal lands in the North Star State.

“The resolution before us today does not mandate projects, mining sites, firms, or schedules — it simply reverses the Biden administration’s unilateral short-circuiting of the normal permitting process,” House Natural Resource Committee Chairman Bruce Westerman, R-Ark., said on the House floor.

“It’s a step towards the mineral abundance that the American people deserve and that Washington, [D.C.] has denied them for too long,” Westerman added.

Stauber, the sponsor, framed access to Minnesota’s deposits as a part of larger national interests.

“America’s national security depends on securing our own critical minerals — not just relying on imports from adversaries,” Stauber said in a post to X.

“We must unleash domestic production, including in Minnesota’s Iron Range, to power our military, energy grid and future [technology.]”

TRUMP ADMIN IMPLODES LITERAL BIDEN ROADBLOCK WITH POTENTIAL TO UNLEASH MAJOR MINING WINDFALL

According to the Minnesota government website, the state has rich deposits of gold, silver, zinc, copper, nickel, titanium and other precious metals.

Democrats opposed to the measure argued that it would open up Minnesota’s land to development, casting aside safeguards for environmental protections.

That was the position of Rep. Jared Huffman, D-Calif., the top Democrat on the House Natural Resources Committee.

“The Boundary Waters have been under threat for years,” Huffman said, referring to the area near the northern tip of the state. “They draw more visitors than any other wilderness in the country. Millions of Americans have paddled, fished, swum and found pristine solace in [its] forests. It supports a billion-dollar outdoor economy.”

In addition to pollution concerns, Huffman noted that the bill would allow mining access to groups with longstanding interests in the area — some of which, he warned, might not be aligned with national interests.

“Twin Metals, a mining company with close ties to China, has been lobbying for years to set up a mine just outside the wilderness area,” Huffman said.

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

“There’s no guarantee that the precious minerals produced from this mine would stay in the U.S. at all.”

Having passed the House, the measure now heads to the Senate for the upper chamber’s consideration.​

A woman who said she was violently attacked by her ex-boyfriend last year told a London court that her friend Barron Trump unexpectedly saved her life after she managed to call him during the assault, United Kingdom media outlet Metro reported Wednesday.

After answering the FaceTime call and witnessing the alleged assault, the 19-year-old son of President Donald Trump reportedly contacted emergency operators, prompting UK police to respond to the scene on Jan. 18, 2025, shortly after 2 a.m. local time.

The woman, who cannot be named, reportedly claimed that her former Russian partner, 22-year-old Matvei Rumianstev, of east London, was jealous of her friendship with Trump. 

She added that she was raped on the day she called Trump and alleged that her ex-boyfriend, who first became violent six months into their relationship, had a history of assaulting her, including stranglings, Metro said, citing hearings at Snaresbrook Crown Court.

BARRON TRUMP SPOTTED ON NYU CAMPUS FOR FIRST TIME SINCE INAUGURATION

According to bodycam footage from the day of the alleged attack, Trump was heard over the phone telling officials, “I just saw a ceiling and could hear screaming. I could see a guy’s head on the phone, and then the camera turns to her crying and getting hit.”

Trump, who reportedly attempted to call his friend for a casual conversation before finally receiving a callback, said the call lasted only 10 to 15 seconds, after which he contacted the authorities.

According to the 999 emergency call played in court, Trump reportedly said, “I just got a call from a girl I know. She’s getting beaten up.”

After giving them her address, he emphasized that, “It’s really an emergency, please. I got a call from her with a guy beating her up.”

When police arrived, the woman identified their anonymous caller as Trump, explaining, “I am friends with Barron Trump, Donald Trump’s son.”

An officer was later heard on bodycam footage telling a colleague, “So apparently, this informant from America is likely to be Donald Trump’s son,” he said. “This female is friends with Donald Trump’s son. She was on a Facetime with him when this assault happened, and he’s called us.”

‘CLASS ACT’: BARRON TRUMP SETS SOCIAL MEDIA ABLAZE FOR SHAKING HANDS WITH BIDEN AT DAD’S INAUGURATION

To confirm to the police, the woman called Trump again, asking, “Hello, Barron, did you call the police or anything?”  

“I had someone call the police,” Trump said. “I called you guys, that was the best thing I could do. I wasn’t going to call back and threaten things to him because that would just make the situation worse.”

During her testimony, the woman said Trump “helped save my life. That call was like a sign from God at that moment.”

BARRON TRUMP, CELEBRATING 19TH BIRTHDAY, PRAISED AS ‘SMART GUY’ BY HIS FATHER

The trial between Trump’s friend and Rumianstev remains ongoing. 

While Rumianstev has denied the allegations, the woman said she has been repeatedly attacked and sexually abused, including being raped in November 2024 and on January 18. She also alleged that Rumianstev has been pressuring her to withdraw her complaints.

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

The Russian defendant, of New Providence Wharf, east London, has denied assault, actual bodily harm, two counts of rape, intentional strangulation and perverting the course of justice.

Fox News Digital reached out to the White House for more information.

Federal Reserve Governor Lisa Cook doubled down on the legitimacy of her role on the nation’s central bank Wednesday, stressing what she said was the importance of keeping the bank insulated against political pressures — in direct response to President Donald Trump and his months-long effort to fire her.

“Research and experience show that Federal Reserve independence is essential to fulfilling the congressional mandate of price stability and maximum employment,” Cook said Wednesday following nearly two hours of Supreme Court oral arguments, centered on Trump’s attempt to fire her — and more narrowly, whether Cook can remain in her post pending review of her case on its merits.

“That is why Congress chose to insulate the Federal Reserve from political threats, while holding it accountable for delivering on that mandate,” Cook said in a statement. 

“For as long as I serve at the Federal Reserve, I will uphold the principle of political independence in service to the American people,” she added.

 SCOTUS SIGNALS SKEPTICISM IN ALLOWING TRUMP’S FED FIRING TO PROCEED

Cook’s statement, released shortly after arguments concluded, capped a day in which justices weighed the unprecedented question of whether a president can fire a sitting Federal Reserve governor “for cause” and what process, if any, must accompany such a move.

The case is the first attempt by a president to fire a sitting Fed governor in the 112-year history of the nation’s central bank.

Justices on the high court did not seem inclined to side with Trump’s request to immediately remove Cook from her post as arguments wrapped. 

They cited concerns not only about a lack of process and the precedent that could be created by her firing, including the notion of at-will removal, but also on the importance of protecting the independence of the Fed.

Justice Amy Coney Barrett cited issues with “public confidence,” should Trump be cleared to fire a sitting Fed governor without fully explaining or justifying the reasons. 

LAWYERS FOR COOK, DOJ TRADE BLOWS AT HIGH-STAKES CLASH OVER FED FIRING

“We have amicus briefs from economists who tell us that, if [Cook]” is fired, then it “can trigger a recession,” Barrett said. “How should we think about the public interest in a case like this?”

The Federal Reserve System was created by Congress in 1913 as a wholly independent entity, to insulate it from political influence, and from presidents “stacking the deck” with their own nominees.

Justices pressed the Trump administration’s lawyer over what process it believes Cook should be provided to challenge her removal, and cited concerns about the downstream effects of allowing Cook to be fired. 

Justice Brett Kavanaugh, meanwhile, stressed the importance of balancing Cook’s conduct and the independence of the Fed. “It’s less important that the president have full faith in every single governor, and it’s more important that the markets and the public have faith in the independence of the Fed from the president and from Congress,” he said.

SCOTUS POISED TO SIDE WITH TRUMP ON FTC FIRING — A SHOWDOWN THAT COULD TOPPLE 90-YEAR PRECEDENT

Though Trump administration officials have framed the case as narrowly focused on Cook’s removal, the oral arguments were widely expected to be closely watched by major players in financial markets, as several justices noted.

The short-term ripple effects could be felt sooner than later. The next Federal Open Market Committee meeting is slated for later this month, and Cook, barring any eleventh-hour intervention from the high court, will otherwise participate in the meeting as normal.

The fight over Cook’s status is part of a bigger clash looming between Trump and the Fed. 

It comes as Trump has repeatedly assailed Fed Chair Jerome Powell and other members of the central bank, criticizing its reluctance to lower benchmark interest rates as aggressively as he would like, deepening the fast-growing fault lines that have routinely pitted Trump against Fed leaders. 

CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP 

Powell said the agency was subpoenaed by the Justice Department last week over allegations that he lied to Congress about the costs of a massive renovation of its headquarters. 

Powell also attended Wednesday’s hearing in a show of support for Cook. 

President Donald Trump blasted his predecessor’s policies from the dais in Davos, Switzerland, at the World Economic Forum in a warning to foreign leaders to buck old political playbooks and rally around the U.S., citing that “when America booms, the entire world booms.”

“Under the Biden administration, America was plagued by the nightmare of stagflation, meaning low growth and high inflation. A recipe for misery, failure and decline,” Trump said Wednesday in his speech before the forum. “But now, after just one year of my policies, we are witnessing the exact opposite. Virtually no inflation and extraordinarily high economic growth. Growth like I believe you’ll see very shortly. Our country has never seen before. Perhaps no country has ever seen before.”

Trump is in Switzerland Wednesday and Tuesday for the annual World Economic Forum, which attracts government leaders and business leaders from across the world to discuss the world’s economic outlook. Trump’s trip to Europe comes as he threatens to impose tariffs on a handful of European nations in an effort for the U.S. to acquire Greenland, heightening tensions at the forum. 

Trump mentioned former President Joe Biden by name at least a dozen times during his speech, highlighting how his administration overturned Biden’s left-wing policies as they relate to energy and the economy and immigration to strengthen the U.S. 

US TRADE REP SHRUGS OFF WORLD LEADERS’ SWIPES AT TRUMP AMID DAVOS BACKLASH

“Since my inauguration, we’ve lifted more than 1.2 million people off of food stamps,” Trump continued. “And after four years, in which Biden secured less than $1 trillion of new investment in our country, think of that $1 trillion. Substantially less than that in four years. We’ve secured commitments for a record breaking $18 trillion. And we think when the final numbers come out, they’ll be closer to $20 trillion of investment.”

He also revealed his “biggest surprise” since returning to the Oval Office a year ago as of Tuesday. 

AMERICAN FLAGS TORCHED, RIOT POLICE CLASH WITH PROTESTERS AHEAD OF TRUMP DAVOS ARRIVAL

“The USA is the economic engine on the planet. And when America booms, the entire world booms. It’s been the history. When it goes bad, it goes bad. … You all follow us down and you follow us up. … I never thought we could do it this quickly. My biggest surprise is I thought it would take more than a year, maybe like a year and one month. But it’s happened very quickly,” he said. 

Trump joined the White House press briefing in Washington, D.C., Tuesday, which marked his one year back in the Oval Office. Trump delivered a lengthy recap of his administration’s wins during the briefing, rehashing many of his points in Davos to the crowd of foreign leaders. 

NEWSOM WARNS ‘PATHETIC’ FOREIGN LEADERS TO GROW A BACKBONE IN BIZARRE TAKEDOWN LIKENING TRUMP TO A T.REX

“It became conventional wisdom in Washington and European capitals that the only way to grow a modern Western economy was through ever-increasing government spending, unchecked mass migration, and endless foreign imports,” Trump said. “The consensus was that so-called dirty jobs and heavy industries should be sent elsewhere, that affordable energy should be replaced by the Green New scam, and that countries could be propped up by importing new and entirely different populations from faraway lands.”

“This was the path that Sleepy Joe Biden’s administration and many other Western governments very foolishly followed, turning their backs on everything that makes nations rich and powerful and strong,” he added. 

Trump also scolded European leaders for transforming the continent into one he no longer recognizes, calling on them to set itself on the “right direction.”

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

“I don’t recognize it. And that’s not in a positive way. That’s in a very negative way. And I love Europe and I want to see Europe go good, but it’s not heading in the right direction,” he said.

Fox News Digital reached out to Biden’s office Wednesday morning for comment on the criticisms but did not immediately receive a reply. 

Two officers who were pushed out of the military during President Donald Trump’s first year back in the White House have launched new missions this week, running for Congress as Democrats.

A retired U.S. Space Force colonel who was forced out of the military under the Trump administration’s ban on transgender service members announced a run for Congress in Northern Virginia. 

And a senior Navy official removed from her post last year by War Secretary Pete Hegseth launched a congressional bid in South Carolina.

Their candidacies highlight a growing political backlash to Trump-era military policies, as former officers removed from service look to reenter public life through Congress.

PENTAGON SCORES COURT VICTORY IN TRANSGENDER BAN LEGAL FIGHT

Bree Fram, whose military career abruptly ended in December, pledged, “I’m not going to run away from my oath to the Constitution.”

“I served 23 years wearing the flag on my shoulder, reaching the rank of colonel. But then Donald Trump fired me, not because of my performance but because of who I am,” Fram noted Tuesday in a campaign launch video.

Fram said she’s running for Congress “because too many Americans are afraid of what the federal government will do to them instead of being confident of what it can do for them.”

Virginia is likely to redraw its congressional map ahead of November’s midterm elections as part of the high-stakes redistricting battle between Trump and Republicans against Democrats. And Fram plans to run in whichever district she lives in once the new congressional lines are finalized.

Fram’s hometown of Reston, Virginia, is in the state’s 11th Congressional District, which is represented by Democratic Rep. James Walkinshaw, who last year won a special election in a landslide to succeed the late Rep. Gerry Connolly, who died of cancer in May. Walkinshaw was a former Connolly chief of staff.

In South Carolina, former three-star admiral Nancy Lacore on Tuesday jumped into the race for an open seat in the state’s 1st Congressional District.

Lacore, a 35-year military veteran who served as a Navy helicopter pilot and later as chief of the Navy Reserve, a 60,000-person force, was removed last August as part of a high-profile leadership purge headed by Hegseth.

“After decades of service to our country, a career that started as a Navy pilot and finished as a three-star admiral, I was removed from my position without cause,” Lacore claimed in her campaign launch video.

HEGSETH FIRES TOP PENTAGON OFFICERS

“I still have more to give, more to fight for, more work to do. And I am not done serving.”

The War Department did not immediately respond to a request for comment when asked about Lacore’s claim.

Lacore joins a crowded field of Democrats and Republicans running to succeed three-term GOP Rep. Nancy Mace, who is running for South Carolina governor.

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

Democrats are aiming to flip the right-leaning coastal congressional district in the state’s Lowcountry.

“The South Carolina 1st isn’t a District that Democrats can concede if we’re going to build a lasting and winning coalition, and Nancy is the only candidate in a position to win,” said Matt Corridoni, a spokesperson for The Bench, a Democrat-aligned group that highlights that it is “building the next generation of Democratic leaders by recruiting and supporting great candidates in tough districts.”

A federal judge on Wednesday ruled that he lacks jurisdiction to appoint an outside expert to ensure the Justice Department complies with a law to make all files pertaining to the prosecution of Jeffrey Epstein available for public view.

The seven-page ruling by U.S. District Judge Paul Engelmayer halts an effort by Reps. Ro Khanna, D-Calif., and Thomas Massie, R-Ky., to participate in the Ghislaine Maxwell case. 

The pair wanted to participate as amici curia, or “friends of the court” in an effort to have the judge appoint a special master to oversee the release of files related to Epstein under the Epstein Files Transparency Act (EFTA).

CLINTON TEAM DEMANDS TRUMP DOJ RELEASE ‘ANY REMAINING’ DOCS RELATED TO FORMER PRESIDENT, EPSTEIN

Khanna and Massie believe that without oversight, the Justice Department will not produce all the files required by the EFTA, the ruling states. 

Engelmayer said that he can’t grant the congressmen’s request because they are not parties to the case that led to Maxwell’s December 2021 sex trafficking conviction, for which she was handed down a 20-year prison sentence for recruiting girls for the deceased financier. 

READ THE DECISION – APP USERS, CLICK HERE:

“The only parties to the case are Maxwell and the United States, the latter represented, as is always the case, by DOJ,” the judge wrote. “The Indictment against Maxwell brought charges under six federal criminal statutes. Those were not brought under the EFTA, which did not exist at the time and is not a criminal statute. And this case is now effectively closed.”

Fox News Digital has reached out to the DOJ. 

“We appreciate the judge’s thoughtful consideration of our letter and we remain determined to force the DOJ to follow our law using other avenues available to us and the survivors,” Massie said in a statement to Fox News Digital. 

Khanna told Fox News Digital that the pair will continue their effort to force the government to release all files related to Epstein. 

“We appreciate Judge Engelmayer’s timely response and attention to our request, and we respect his decision,” he said. “He said that we raised ‘legitimate concerns’ about whether DOJ is complying with the law. We will continue to use every legal option to ensure the files are released and the survivors see justice.”

MORE THAN 2M EPSTEIN FILES STILL UNPUBLISHED, DOJ CONFIRMS

Khanna and Massie spearheaded the EFTA, which was signed into law by President Donald Trump last year. It required the Justice Department to release all evidence gathered during decades of investigations into Epstein by Dec. 19. 

However, weeks after the deadline, a fraction of the files have been released, prompting criticism from officials on both sides of the aisle. 

The Justice Department has said the files’ release was slowed by redactions required to protect the identities of abuse victims.

“We are informing the Court of serious misconduct by the Department of Justice that requires a remedy, one we believe this Court has the authority to provide, and which victims themselves have requested,” Khanna said in a statement to The Associated Press about a letter U.S. Attorney Jay Clayton wrote to Engelmayer last week. 

“Our purpose is to ensure that DOJ complies with its representations to the Court and with its legal obligations under our law,” he added.

In their letter, Khanna and Massie wrote that the DOJ’s release of only 12,000 documents out of more than 2 million documents being reviewed was a “flagrant violation” of the law’s requirements.

CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP

“Put simply, the DOJ cannot be trusted with making mandatory disclosures under the Act,” he said. 

Engelmayer acknowledged that Khanna and Massie raised “legitimate concerns,” but that his hands were tied. 

“The Representatives do not seek to opine on any live issue before the Court,” he wrote. “The appointment of a neutral to supervise DOJ’s compliance with the EFTA is far afield from any matter pending before the Court. It is thus not a permitted form of amicus participation.”

The Associated Press contributed to this report. 

FIRST ON FOX: A “limited number” of U.S. personnel are operating in Caracas as Washington looks to resume diplomatic relations with Venezuela after the historic capture of Nicolás Maduro, Fox News has learned.

A senior State Department official told Fox News that the Trump administration plan to resume official diplomacy with Venezuela is under way. This is the first time a State Department official has commented on reporting about the diplomatic team on the ground.

“A limited number of U.S. diplomatic and technical personnel are in Caracas conducting initial assessments for a potential phased resumption of operations,” the official said.

The official did not specify exactly what “a limited number” meant, and it is not immediately clear exactly how many people are on the ground. The phased resumption of operations would include the re-opening of the U.S. embassy and consulate offices in Venezuela.

POST TRUMP MEETING, VENEZUELAN OPPOSITION LEADER SAYS COUNTRY WILL HOLD ‘FREE AND FAIR’ ELECTIONS ‘EVENTUALLY’

Since Maduro was captured, the Trump administration has been cautious in its approach to Venezuela. President Donald Trump initially said that the U.S. would “run” the country for an undetermined period of time. 

Since then, Trump has met with Venezuelan opposition leader María Corina Machado, who he said he doubts has the support necessary to take over the country.

After her meeting with Trump, Machado spoke at a news conference hosted by the conservative think tank, the Heritage Foundation, in Washington, D.C. She said that Venezuela would hold “free and fair” elections “eventually.” However, she did not offer a timeline for how long the current interim government would be allowed to rule, only that elections would happen “as soon as possible.”

RUBIO LAYS OUT THREE-PHASE PLAN FOR VENEZUELA AFTER MADURO: ‘NOT JUST WINGING IT’

Machado also attempted to downplay the appearance of competition between herself and Maduro’s successor, interim Venezuelan President Delcy Rodriguez, for Trump’s support.

“This has nothing to do with a tension or decision between Delcy Rodríguez and myself,” Machado said when asked about Trump’s openness to working with the interim government. “This is about a criminal structure that is a regime and the mandate of the Venezuelan people.”

On Jan. 15, Rodriguez, who was sworn-in as Venezuela’s interim president following the capture of Maduro, met with CIA Director John Ratcliffe. A U.S. official told CBS News that the purpose of the meeting was to “deliver the message that the United States looks forward to an improved working relationship.”

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

Rodriguez’s meeting with Ratcliffe took place one day after she had a phone call with Trump, who said the conversation was “very good.”

“We are making tremendous progress, as we help Venezuela stabilize and recover. Many topics were discussed, including oil, minerals, trade and, of course, national security,” Trump wrote on Truth Social. “This partnership between the United States of America and Venezuela will be a spectacular one FOR ALL. Venezuela will soon be great and prosperous again, perhaps more so than ever before!”

Fox News Digital’s Morgan Phillips contributed to this report.

Both conservatives and progressives are venting frustrations with a Department of Homeland Security (DHS) funding bill expected to get a vote this week, potentially throwing Congress’ goal to avert a government shutdown by Jan. 30 into question.

The bill is part of a bundle of four spending bills the GOP hopes to pass before the end of the week, which also includes funding for the departments of War, Education, Labor and Health and Human Services, among others.

Where progressive Democrats believe the package should include far stronger measures to prevent future confrontations between Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and protesters, some Republicans believe the bill doesn’t go far enough to ensure DHS can carry out President Donald Trump’s immigration goals.

Tim Burchett, R-Tenn., one of the most vocal fiscal and border hawks in the House, said he’s still weighing whether he can support the measure.

CONGRESS UNVEILS $1.2T SPENDING BILL AS PROGRESSIVE REVOLT BREWS OVER ICE FUNDING

“Everything’s up in the air. If it’s full of garbage, I won’t vote for it,” Burchett said when asked about the full package.

The DHS bill is a product of bipartisan negotiation and includes a handful of safeguards that Democrats argue are necessary after Renee Nicole Good was fatally shot in a deadly encounter with ICE agents in Minnesota earlier this month.

In its current form, the bill requires DHS to equip ICE officers with body cameras, implements new training requirements for how agents should interact with the public, largely keeps last year’s funding flat and even reduces some funding for ICE’s removal operations.

“If it’s going to be a Republican product, it can be improved,” Rep. Scott Perry, R-Pa., said, though he declined to say if he planned to vote for the bill.

House Freedom Caucus Chairman Andy Harris, R-Md., took issue with language that prevents government agencies from exchanging data on unaccompanied minors.

“Data sharing has to occur,” the top conservative said. “It makes no sense to prohibit data sharing between departments.”

HOUSE DEM BACKS THE IDEA OF REINING IN DHS FUNDING IN WAKE OF ICE-INVOLVED SHOOTING IN MINNESOTA

Harris explained that under current law, the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) oversees the status of unaccompanied children who cross the border — contrasting with the vast majority of illegal aliens who are tracked by DHS. He wants the bill to enable DHS and HHS to share information on children.

“We have to protect these children from human traffickers, sex traffickers, abuse — and I’m not sure with that provision in there that we can effectively protect them,” Harris said.

Rep. Ralph Norman, R-S.C., told reporters on Wednesday morning he plans to introduce four amendments that he believes will address some Republican concerns. He declined to describe them but said they would suggest both funding and policy changes.

With the sudden death of Rep. Doug LaMalfa, R-Calif., and the resignation of Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene, R-Ga., earlier this month, Republicans can afford to lose just two votes on any party-line consideration.

While it’s unclear if the DHS bill will draw any Democratic support, the Congressional Progressive Caucus, a group of more than 70 lawmakers, made it clear last week they would oppose legislation that didn’t come with meaningful guardrails and reforms on ICE.

Democratic lawmakers like Rep. Maxine Dexter, D-Ore., said the current bill falls well short of what she wanted to see.

“I think what we’re seeing right now is a clear lack of leadership and legal barriers or guardrails for the actions of ICE,” Dexter said.

“I will not vote to fund ICE further.”

When asked if she shared concerns voiced by other Democrats that tanking the DHS bill might punish other government operations beyond just ICE, Dexter said she believed lawmakers could consider those areas separately.

REPORTER’S NOTEBOOK: PROGRESSIVES EYE SHUTDOWN LEVERAGE TO REIN IN ICE, VENEZUELA OPERATIONS

“Obviously, FEMA and TSA and other parts of DHS’ budget would need to be made whole in some regard,” Dexter said, referring to the government’s disaster relief and transportation security operations. “But we have to be realistic about the impact that ICE’s operations are having across this country.”

Democratic Caucus Chair Pete Aguilar, D-Calif., the No. 3 Democrat in the House and a member of the Congressional Progressive Caucus, said individual members would have to make their own determinations on the bill.

For his part, Aguilar questioned whether the administration would comply with the new requirements even if they were passed.

“All the guardrails in the world don’t make sense if the administration isn’t going to follow the law and the language that we pass. Members have to take that into account,” Aguilar said. “Ultimately, members are going to vote [for] what’s in the best interest of their districts.”

Rep. Ilhan Omar, D-Minn., the deputy chair of the Congressional Progressive Caucus, announced last week the group would reject spending that didn’t also include substantial guardrails for ICE.

“This week, the House votes on DHS funding. I will not vote to give ICE a single cent. No more blank checks for a rogue agency that operates above the law, escalates violence and erodes our most basic freedoms,” she wrote on X.

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

She declined to expand on her concerns when asked by Fox News Digital, stating, “I’ve already said what I have to say about this.”

The House is scheduled to consider the DHS funding bill on Thursday.

Europe should be happy President Donald Trump was elected — despite his threats to take Greenland — because without him, it would never have stepped up for its own defense, according to NATO Secretary-General Mark Rutte. 

“I’m not popular with you now because I’m defending Donald Trump, but I really believe you can be happy that he is there because he has forced us in Europe to step up, to face the consequences that we have to take care of more of our own defense,” Rutte said Wednesday in remarks at Davos, Switzerland.

“No way, without Donald Trump, this would never have happened. They’re all on 2% now,” he went on during a panel at the World Economic Forum. 

US TRADE REP SHRUGS OFF WORLD LEADERS’ SWIPES AT TRUMP AMID DAVOS BACKLASH

In 2014, NATO allies agreed to spend 2% of GDP on defense, but many fell short until recent years. With the Russian invasion of Ukraine and Trump’s threats not to defend NATO countries, most allies are meeting or exceeding the benchmark. 

They’ve now agreed to spend 5% GDP on defense and national security infrastructure.

“I’m absolutely convinced without Donald Trump you would not have taken those decisions, and they are crucial, particularly for the European and the Canadian side of NATO to really grow up in the post-Cold War world.”

U.S. lawmakers previously criticized Rutte for his own country’s underspending on defense. Rutte was prime minister of the Netherlands from 2010 to 2024. 

Rutte argued the U.S. is still committed to Europe’s defense, and the nuclear umbrella is the ultimate defense guarantee.

“The Americans still have over 80,000 soldiers in Europe … including in Poland and Germany, and so they are still heavily invested in European defense. And yes, they have to pivot more towards Asia. So it is only logical for them to expect us, Europe, to step up over time,

He also added Greenland is not the “main issue” and Europe should not let it distract from Ukraine’s defense. 

“The risk here is that we focus, of course, on Greenland, because we have to make sure that issue gets solved in an amicable way,” he said. “But the main issue is not Greenland. Now, the main issue is Ukraine. I’m also a little bit worried that we might drop the ball focusing so much on these other issues.”

“This focus on Ukraine should be our top priority,” he said. “Ukraine has to come first because it is crucial to our European and American security.’

Rutte repeatedly has praised Trump, in June calling him “daddy” of the NATO alliance. 

“Daddy has to sometimes use strong language to get them to stop,” he said in reference to fighting between Israel and Iran.

TOP EU OFFICIAL WARNS TRUMP’S TARIFF THREAT OVER GREENLAND PUSHBACK IS ‘A MISTAKE’

Other European leaders have expressed more concern about Trump’s Greenland ambitions. On Wednesday Trump, for the first time, ruled out taking Greenland by force. 

Danish Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen has said a U.S. takeover of Greenland would mean the “end of NATO,” the nearly 80-year-old defense alliance. 

Trump spoke at the Davos, Switzerland, conference Wednesday after threatening Europe with tariffs over the Greenland dispute.

This week the president told Norwegian Prime Minister Jonas Gahr Støre in a text message he “no longer thinks purely of peace” in his desire to own Greenland.

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

Trump wrote: “Dear Jonas: Considering your Country decided not to give me the Nobel Peace Prize for having stopped 8 Wars PLUS, I no longer feel an obligation to think purely of Peace, although it will always be predominant, but can now think about what is good and proper for the United States of America.”

“I have done more for NATO than any other person since its founding, and now, NATO should do something for the United States,” Trump wrote. “The World is not secure unless we have Complete and Total Control of Greenland.”

President Donald Trump declared from Davos, Switzerland, Wednesday that the U.S. is the only nation that is in the position to control and secure Greenland. 

“All the United States is asking for is a place called Greenland,” Trump said Wednesday from his speech at the World Economic Forum. “Where we’ve already had it as a trustee, but respectfully returned it back to Denmark not long ago after we defeated the Germans, the Japanese, the Italians and others in World War II, we gave it back to them.”

Trump added that he does not want to use force as he pressures NATO allies on Greenland. 

“We never asked for anything,” Trump said of the U.S. working with NATO. “And we never got anything. We probably won’t get anything unless I decide to use excessive strength and force where we would be, frankly, unstoppable. But I won’t do that. Okay, now everyone say, ‘oh good.’ That’s probably the biggest statement I made because people thought I would use force. I don’t have to use force. I don’t want to use force. I won’t use force.”

DAVOS BRACES FOR TRUMP AMID TENSIONS OVER NATO, GREENLAND AND GLOBAL DEFENSE

Greenland — the world’s largest island — sits in the Arctic and governs its own domestic affairs while remaining within the Kingdom of Denmark.

The president said he has “tremendous respect for both the people of Greenland and the people of Denmark,” but that the U.S. must control the island from a national security standpoint. 

“And the fact is, no nation or group of nations is in any position to be able to secure Greenland other than the United States, with a great power much greater than people even understand,” he said.

The White House has reiterated that Trump views Greenland as a national security priority, and officials have not ruled out the use of the U.S. military as the administration weighs options for acquiring the territory.

Trump was asked Tuesday, the one-year anniversary of his inauguration, how far he would go to Greenland, responding with a terse “you’ll find out” response. 

The president described Greenland as a vast, almost entirely uninhabited and undeveloped territory that’s sitting undefended in a key strategic location between the United States, Russia and China. He pushed back that the U.S. is not seeking to acquire Greenland for its rare earths, but due to its location from a national security standpoint. 

“This enormous unsecured island is actually part of North America on the northern frontier of the Western Hemisphere,” he said. “That’s our territory. It is, therefore, a core national security interest of the United States of America.” 

Trump said securing Greenland would only strengthen NATO. 

“This would not be a threat to NATO,” he said. “This would greatly enhance the security of the entire alliance. The NATO alliance. The United States is treated very unfairly by NATO. I want to tell you that. And when you think about it, nobody can dispute it. We give so much, and we get so little in return. And I’ve been a critic of NATO for many years, and yet I’ve done more to help NATO than any other president by far, than any other person. You wouldn’t have NATO if I didn’t get involved.” 

NEWSOM WARNS ‘PATHETIC’ FOREIGN LEADERS TO GROW A BACKBONE IN BIZARRE TAKEDOWN LIKENING TRUMP TO A T.REX 

The president argued that U.S. control of Greenland would strengthen security for both the United States and Europe, framing the territory as a strategic necessity rather than a real-estate acquisition. “The European Union needs us to have it, and they know that,” he said, before pivoting to other topics.

Greenland has long carried outsized military importance in the Arctic. During the Cold War, the island sat along the shortest air and missile routes between North America and the Soviet Union. The U.S. expanded operations at the air base now known as Pituffik Space Base, using the site for early-warning radar and surveillance designed to detect incoming bombers and missiles.

“Now our country and the world face much greater risks than it did ever before. Because of missiles, because of nuclear, because of weapons, of warfare that I can’t even talk about,” Trump continued of Greenland. 

In more recent years, renewed U.S. interest has been tied to intensifying great-power competition in the Arctic. Officials and analysts have pointed to China’s effort to widen its regional footprint.

Trump underscored that the U.S. is “stronger” than ever and is in the position to finalize a Greenland deal following “two centuries” of previous presidents reportedly trying to do the same. 

“For two centuries they’ve been trying to do it. They should have kept it after World War II, but they had a different president. That’s all right. People think differently. Much more necessary now than it was at that time. However, in 2019, Denmark said that they would spend over $200 million to strengthen Greenland’s defenses. But as you know, they spent less than 1% of that amount. 1% is no sign of Denmark there,” the president continued. 

FORMER REP. MTG DUMPS COLD WATER ON TRUMP’S GREENLAND ACQUISITION AMBITIONS: ‘WE’VE HEARD THAT ONE BEFORE’

Trump first publicly raised the idea of acquiring Greenland in 2019. The Arctic’s geography makes it a key corridor for long-range threats from major adversaries, elevating Greenland’s value as a location for sensors and tracking systems intended to protect North America.

Trump put European allies on notice to reach a deal on the island by Feb. 1 or face consequences. Goods from Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, the Netherlands, Norway, Sweden and the United Kingdom will face a 10% tariff if no deal is reached by February, with the taxes increasing to 25% by June 1 if there is no deal. 

European leaders at Davos largely treated Trump’s Greenland-linked tariff threats as economic coercion. European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen, for example, said Greenland is “non-negotiable” and that the EU would show “full solidarity” with Greenland. 

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

“In politics as in business: a deal is a deal. And when friends shake hands, it must mean something,” von der Leyen added, referring to a trade deal the U.S. inked with the EU over the summer. 

The California Republican Party is aiming to get the U.S. Supreme Court to block the Golden State from using a new congressional map.

“If left uncorrected, this pernicious and unconstitutional use of race will irreparably harm Applicants and the public. Applicants therefore respectfully request an injunction pending appeal precluding California from conducting any congressional election under the map enacted through Proposition 50 (‘Proposition 50 Map’) and requiring it to use the prior map adopted in 2021 by the independent Citizens Redistricting Commission,” the emergency application declares.

In November, California voters approved Proposition 50 to temporarily adopt the new congressional map.

FEDERAL COURT CLEARS CALIFORNIA’S NEW HOUSE MAP BOOSTING DEMOCRATS AHEAD OF 2026 MIDTERMS

Those redrawn districts would apply during this year’s midterms.

If California elections are allowed to proceed according to the new map, Democrats would likely see an advantage during the 2026 contests as they seek to win the House majority.

FEDERAL JUDGE SCORCHES DEMS FOR PANDERING TO LATINOS WITH CALIFORNIA MAP IN FIERY DISSENT

“California cannot create districts by race, and the state should not be allowed to lock in districts that break federal law,” California Republican Party Chairwoman Corrin Rankin said, according to a post on X by the California Republican Party.

NEWSOM WARNS ‘PATHETIC’ FOREIGN LEADERS TO GROW A BACKBONE IN BIZARRE TAKEDOWN LIKENING TRUMP TO A T.REX

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

“Our emergency application asks the Supreme Court to put the brakes on Prop. 50 now, before the Democrats try to run out the clock and force candidates and voters to live with unconstitutional congressional districts,” Rankin said. “Californians deserve fair districts and clean elections, not a backroom redraw that picks winners and losers based on race.”

Mexico transferred 37 cartel members to the United States on Tuesday as the Trump administration intensifies pressure on foreign governments to dismantle drug trafficking networks.

Mexican Security Minister Omar García Harfuch said the detainees were “high-impact criminals” who posed “a real threat to the country’s security.” With this latest transfer, Mexico has now sent 92 cartel figures to the U.S., he said.

Video released by Mexican authorities showed handcuffed prisoners surrounded by heavily armed, masked officers as they were loaded onto a military jet near Mexico City.

The group includes members of several major criminal organizations, including the Sinaloa cartel, Jalisco New Generation cartel, Beltrán-Leyva cartel, the Northeast cartel and remnants of the Zetas based in Tamaulipas along the Texas border. Mexican officials said all had pending cases in U.S. courts.

VENEZUELAN PRESIDENT NICOLAS MADURO’S NARCO CASE ECHOES US HISTORY OF TARGETING ALLEGED FOREIGN DRUG KINGPINS

Among those transferred was María del Rosario Navarro Sánchez, the first Mexican national charged in the U.S. with providing material support to a terrorist organization after allegedly conspiring with a cartel.

“This is Mexico resorting to extraordinary measures as pressure from the White House increases,” David Mora, a Mexico analyst with the International Crisis Group, told The Associated Press.

The move comes as President Donald Trump has sharpened his rhetoric against drug cartels, even floating the possibility of U.S. military action, following a recent U.S. operation in Venezuela that removed former President Nicolás Maduro.

“We’ve knocked out 97% of the drugs coming in by water, and we are going to start now hitting land with regard to the cartels,” Trump told Fox News’ Sean Hannity this month. “The cartels are running Mexico—it’s very, very sad to watch, and see what’s happened to that country.”

MADURO-BACKED TdA GANG’S EXPANSION INTO US CITIES EMERGES AS KEY FOCUS OF SWEEPING DOJ INDICTMENT

Mexican President Claudia Sheinbaum spoke with Trump last week, saying U.S. intervention in Mexico was “not necessary,” while emphasizing continued cooperation between the two countries.

Mexico first sent 29 cartel figures to the U.S. last February, including notorious drug lord Rafael Caro Quintero, wanted for the 1985 killing of a U.S. DEA agent. A second transfer in August included 26 cartel members from multiple organizations.

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

García Harfuch said the transfers were driven by public safety concerns, arguing that cartel leaders were continuing to run criminal operations from inside Mexican prisons.

The Associated Press contributed to this report.