Donald Trump Poll News

Janeese Lewis George, a democratic socialist member of the Washington, D.C. City Council described as “D.C.’s version of [New York City Mayor] Zohran Mamdani,” is set to become mayor of the nation’s capital after her opponent conceded the race Thursday morning. 

In a city that leans overwhelmingly left and with no real challengers on the ballot, Lewis George will likely win November’s general election for mayor. Her main opponent was former City Council member-at-large Kenyan McDuffie, who conceded the race two days after the primary election, and five other candidates who polled very low: Rini Sampath, Gary Goodweather, Ernest Johnson, Hope Solomon and Vincent Orange.

Lewis George is poised to replace current Democrat Mayor Muriel Bowser, who on occasion worked with President Donald Trump over the last two years but ultimately opted not to pursue a fourth term at the city’s helm.

With a more adversarial approach to the current administration, Lewis George’s victory tees up a potential showdown with Trump as the president made cleaning up D.C. during his second term a main goal, maintains a deployment of the National Guard to the nation’s capital and has threatened repeatedly to end home rule for the district.

Opposing Trump’s deployment of the National Guard to D.C. was a central tenet of Lewis George’s platform on the council and during her campaign.

DSA-LINKED DC COUNCILMEMBER MOUNTS MAYORAL BID TO SUCCEED BOWSER

“Like many of you, I am shocked and outraged that President Trump has announced he is weaponizing the Home Rule Act by deploying the National Guard and exercising authority over the Metropolitan Police Department. This is a direct attack on the 700,000 residents of DC and we will not stand for it,” she said in a statement when Trump announced the move last August.

While Bowser offered cooperation with the Trump administration on the crime crackdown, which has been focused heavily on juvenile incidents, Lewis George insisted that “federal troops” and “masked ICE agents” were the real threat to the city’s youth.

MAMDANI-STYLE DC MAYORAL HOPEFUL DRAGGED OVER ‘EXACTLY BACKWARDS’ RESPONSE TO VIOLENT TEEN MOBS

“Right now, using the curfew as a tool for our young people is dangerous,” she said during a primary debate. “It is dangerous because we have federal troops who are in our city, masked ICE agents who are in our city, and these are the people enforcing this law and our young people.”

“And these are not individuals who are trained in de-escalation, they are not accountable to D.C. residents.”

“As mayor,” she continued, “I think it’s important that we use the right tools, and we don’t put the risk of our youth being harmed or killed without the real oversight that’s necessary.”

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

Instead, Lewis George plans to offer even more “youth programming” to keep young people out of trouble.

She has touted a plan to expand universal access to childcare in D.C., “so that no family is spending more than 7% of their income on childcare.”

As a self-described democratic socialist, Lewis George is expected to take the district even further left as Trump and Republicans call for a crackdown on left-leaning policies that they say are ruining the nation’s capital.

The candidate has supported the defund police movement and was endorsed by progressive groups like Black Lives Matter, the Working Families Party and the Metro D.C. chapter of the Democratic Socialists of America.

Trump has suggested that he’d order another federal takeover of Washington D.C. if the “crazy socialist” mayoral candidate was elected.

“I wouldn’t like it — and maybe we take back Washington, run it on the federal basis,” Trump said when asked by reporters how he’d respond if a self-described Democratic socialist D.C. council member were to win her bid.

“We won’t put up with it. We’re not going to lose our businesses,” Trump said last week during a press briefing from the White House.

Fox News Digital’s Peter Pinedo contributed to this report.

The memorandum of understanding (MOU) with Iran was released Wednesday detailing the terms of the deal hashed out by the Trump administration.

President Donald Trump signed the deal after the G7 wrapped up at the Palace of Versailles on Wednesday with a formal signing ceremony set for Friday. His signature put the 60-day ceasefire and negotiation framework into effect. 

Read the full text below. 

TRUMP ANNOUNCES PEACE DEAL WITH IRAN, DECLARES STRAIT OF HORMUZ WILL REOPEN: ‘LET THE OIL FLOW!’

1. The United States of America and the Islamic Republic of Iran and their allies in the current war by signing this MOU declare the immediate and permanent termination of military operations on all fronts, including in Lebanon, and undertake from now on not to initiate any war or any military operation against each other and to refrain from the threat or use of force against each other and ensuring the territorial integrity and sovereignty of Lebanon. The final deal will confirm the permanent termination of the war on all fronts including in Lebanon and other provisions of this paragraph.

2. The United States of America and the Islamic Republic of Iran undertake to respect each other’s sovereignty and territorial integrity and to refrain from interfering in each other’s internal affairs.

3. The United States of America and the Islamic Republic of Iran commit to negotiating and achieving the final deal in maximum 60 days extendable with mutual consent.

VANCE SAYS TRUMP ADMINISTRATION’S KEY OBJECTIVES HAVE BEEN REACHED IN US-IRAN DEAL

4. Immediately upon the signing of this MOU, the United States of America will begin the removal of its naval blockade and any disturbances or impediments against the Islamic Republic of Iran and will fully end the naval blockade within 30 days. During this period, the traffic of vessels will be in proportion to the numbers of prewar traffic being restored by the Islamic Republic of Iran. The United States of America further undertakes to remove its forces from the proximity of the Islamic Republic of Iran within 30 days after the final deal.

5. Upon the signing of this MOU, the Islamic Republic of Iran will make arrangements using its best efforts for the safe passage of commercial vessels with no charge for 60 days only from the Persian Gulf to the Sea of Oman and vice versa. The traffic of commercial vessels will immediately start and, considering the needs for removing the technical and military obstacles and demining by the Islamic Republic of Iran, will be instated within 30 days. The Islamic Republic of Iran will conduct dialogue with the Sultanate of Oman to define the future administration and maritime services in the Strait of Hormuz in discussion with other Persian Gulf littoral states in line with the applicable international law and the sovereign rights of coastal states of the Strait of Hormuz.

6. The United States of America undertakes with regional partners to develop a definitive mutually agreed plan with at least USD 300 billion for the reconstruction and economic development of the Islamic Republic of Iran. The mechanism for the implementation of this plan will be finalized as part of a final deal within 60 days. All required licenses, waivers and permissions needed for the relevant financial transactions will be granted by the United States of America.

TRUMP MAY HAVE WON A STRATEGIC PAUSE IN IRAN. NOW COMES THE HARD PART

7. The United States of America undertakes to terminate all types of sanctions against the Islamic Republic of Iran, including the United Nations Security Council resolutions, IAEA Board of Governors resolutions and all unilateral U.S. sanctions, primary and secondary, in an agreed upon schedule as part of the final deal. The Islamic Republic of Iran and the United States of America acknowledge the critical importance of the sanctions termination issue above mentioned and express their intentions to immediately address these issues in the negotiations in order to achieve mutual agreement on them.

8. The Islamic Republic of Iran reaffirms that it shall not procure or develop nuclear weapons. United States of America and the Islamic Republic of Iran have agreed to resolve the disposition of stockpile enriched material pursuant to a mechanism that will be mutually agreed upon in accordance with the schedule mentioned in Paragraph 7 with the minimum methodology to be downblending on site under the supervision of the IAEA. The two parties also agreed to discuss the issue of enrichment and other mutually agreed matters related to the Islamic Republic of Iran’s nuclear needs, based on a satisfactory framework being agreed upon in the final deal. The final deal will confirm the provisions of this paragraph. The United States of America and the Islamic Republic of Iran acknowledge the critical importance of the nuclear issues above mentioned and express their intention to immediately address these issues in the negotiations in order to achieve mutual agreement on them.

9. Pending the final deal, the United States of America and the Islamic Republic of Iran agree to maintain the status quo. The Islamic Republic will maintain the current status quo of its nuclear program and the United States of America will not impose any new sanctions and will not deploy additional forces in the region.

JD VANCE REVEALS DETAILS OF US-IRAN DEAL, ADDRESSES WHETHER TAXPAYER MONEY WILL GO TO TEHRAN

10. The United States of America undertakes that immediately upon the signing of this MOU and until the termination of sanctions the U.S. Department of Treasury will issue waivers for the export of Iranian crude oil, petroleum products and derivatives and all associated services including banking transactions, insurances, transportation, etc.

11. The United States of America undertakes to make fully available for use the frozen or restricted funds and assets of the Islamic Republic of Iran upon the implementation of this MOU. The United States of America and the Islamic Republic of Iran will mutually agree on the procedures related to the release of these funds during the negotiations. Such funds, whether retained in the original account or transferred shall be made fully usable for payment to any ultimate beneficiary designated by the Central Bank of the Islamic Republic of Iran. The United States of America undertakes to issue all necessary licenses and authorizations accordingly.

12. The United States of America and the Islamic Republic of Iran agree that an executive mechanism will be established to monitor the successful implementation of this MOU and the future compliance of the final deal.

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

13. After signing this MOU and subject to the beginning of the implementation of paragraphs 1, 4, 5, 10 and 11 of this MOU, and the continuing implementation of these measures, the United States of America and the Islamic Republic of Iran will start negotiations regarding the final deal exclusively on the other paragraphs.

14. The final deal will be endorsed by binding UNSC resolution.

The Associated Press contributed to this report.

Two high-stakes Supreme Court battles over President Donald Trump’s authority to remove federal officials could reshape the balance of power in Washington, but legal experts say the justices may draw a sharp line between the cases.

At the center of the debate are Slaughter v. Trump, involving the firing of Federal Trade Commission Commissioner Rebecca Kelly Slaughter, and Trump v. Cook, involving Federal Reserve Governor Lisa Cook. While both cases touch on presidential removal power, legal scholars say the disputes present fundamentally different legal questions.

In Slaughter, the administration is directly challenging statutory restrictions on the president’s ability to remove FTC commissioners, arguing that limits on the president’s authority to fire commissioners violate his Article II executive powers. But in Cook, the central question is whether Trump met the Federal Reserve Act’s “for cause” removal requirement. Trump has argued that Cook’s alleged misconduct involving mortgage disclosure documents justified her removal for cause.

Catholic University of America law professor Joel Alicea said Solicitor General John Sauer’s approach during oral arguments in Slaughter differed significantly from his strategy in Cook. The Trump administration argued in Slaughter that the FTC Act’s removal limit — which allows the president to fire commissioners only for reasons such as inefficiency, neglect of duty or misconduct — unconstitutionally restricts the president’s Article II authority.

“In the Slaughter case, they are making the explicit constitutional argument that it doesn’t matter what the statute says, the president gets to fire the FTC commissioners at will,” Alicea said.

SCOTUS TAKES UP TRUMP’S BID TO FIRE FTC COMMISSIONER AT WILL — A SHOWDOWN THAT COULD TOPPLE 90-YEAR PRECEDENT

The administration was far more cautious in Trump v. Cook.

“The president’s team chose not to raise the constitutional argument in Cook,” Alicea explained, suggesting the Court has already indicated that the Federal Reserve presents a distinct set of constitutional issues rooted in historical precedents involving the nation’s early banking system.

In its recent emergency ruling in Trump v. Wilcox, the Supreme Court allowed removals involving NLRB and Merit Systems Protection Board officials to take effect while the litigation continued. 

But the Court rejected the argument that its decision would necessarily call into question the Federal Reserve Board’s tenure protections, stating, “we disagree,” and explaining that the Federal Reserve is a “uniquely structured, quasi-private entity” with a distinct historical tradition dating back to the First and Second Banks of the United States.

SUPREME COURT APPEARS READY TO KEEP LISA COOK ON FEDERAL RESERVE BOARD DESPITE TRUMP EFFORTS TO FIRE HER

Many legal experts, including Erin Hawley, chair of Lex Politica’s Supreme Court and Appellate Practice, expect the Court to be more receptive to the administration’s argument in Slaughter than in Cook, where the Fed’s longstanding independence may weigh heavily.

“The Supreme Court has signaled that it believes the core function of the Fed — setting monetary policy — be unique in that it has a historical analogue in the First Bank,” Hawley told Fox News Digital. “Based on history, that core function may well satisfy constitutional separation of powers.”

While Hawley noted that the Federal Reserve also engages in rulemaking and other activities that could be characterized as exercises of executive power, the Court is not being asked in Trump v. Cook to decide the broad constitutional validity of the Fed’s removal protections in the same way it is being asked to evaluate the FTC’s protections in Slaughter.

The Cook dispute has also drawn opposition from a bipartisan group of former Federal Reserve chairs, former Treasury secretaries and economists, who warned that allowing presidents greater control over Federal Reserve governors could undermine central-bank independence and create economic instability. 

“There is broad consensus among economists, based on decades of macroeconomic research, that a more independent central bank will lead to lower and more stable inflation without creating higher unemployment,” a brief filed by a bipartisan group to the Court stated.

SUPREME COURT SETS DATE TO HEAR FTC SLAUGHTER CASE IN TEST OF TRUMP’S FIRING POWERS

Slaughter v. Trump, meanwhile, has become a major test of the unitary executive theory, the view that Article II gives the president control over officials who exercise executive power. The justices have agreed to consider whether to overrule or narrow the 1935 precedent Humphrey’s Executor v. United States, which upheld statutory limits on the president’s ability to remove FTC commissioners.

“This isn’t about Trump’s power so much as it is about the power of the president generally — the same authority over the executive branch in this case is going to apply to the next president as well,” said Carrie Severino, president of the Judicial Crisis Network.

“Indeed, President Biden was very aggressive in using the firing power, and maybe if he had a second term, he would have gotten down to firing this level of officers as well,” Severino continued.

Another issue emerging from Slaughter concerns the remedies available to courts when an agency head is allegedly removed unlawfully.

“The idea that the federal courts get to order the president to reinstate an executive officer he has fired? That’s actually a novel question,” Alicea said. “It’s not something that has been adjudicated before when you’re dealing with an agency head.”

The Court could therefore face not only whether Trump had authority to remove officials but also whether judges possess the power to compel their reinstatement.

Critics of expanding presidential removal authority warn that a ruling for Trump in Slaughter could weaken the independence of agencies Congress intentionally insulated from political pressure.

CONGRESS EXPANDED THE EXECUTIVE—ONLY FOR TRUMP TO QUASH MUCH OF THE ADMINISTRATIVE STATE

Constitutional law expert Robert McWhirter argued that supporters of broader presidential power should consider how that authority might be used by future administrations.

“The underlying policy issues to be considered is let’s say that you’re all pro-Donald Trump and you think he should have that power,” McWhirter said. “Well, do you really want to make sure that any president has that power?”

McWhirter also defended independent boards as valuable safeguards that remove certain decisions from day-to-day partisan politics. He argued that many executive powers ultimately derive from congressional delegations, giving Congress significant authority to structure agencies as independent entities.

“So, if you think about anything, Trump’s immigration enforcement policies, he only has that power because Congress passed the Immigration Nationality Act,” McWhirter said. “He acts under acts of Congress, delegation of power from Congress, and he has a duty to faithfully execute.”

Supporters of broader presidential removal power see the issue differently, arguing that the president should have the power to remove heads of independent agencies because they cannot be thrown out by voters in elections.

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

“A ruling for the president in the Slaughter case would be very significant. It would ensure that the president is able to direct and control independent agencies, even those with multi-member heads,” Hawley said. “Were the rule otherwise, that would mean that unelected bureaucrats would be calling the shots.”

“Such a result is not only anti-democratic but inconsistent with the Constitution’s allocation of power.”

War Secretary Pete Hegseth had harsh words for NATO allies during an address to his European counterparts on Thursday, announcing a six-month review of U.S. force deployment on the continent.

Hegseth said the review’s outcome will depend on how quickly European nations act to support themselves militarily.

“This will be a real review. It will be designed to ensure that NATO is moving fast and irreversibly toward Europe leading, stepping up to take primary responsibility for the defense of Europe,” he told NATO officials in Brussels.

Hegseth also lashed out at European countries for refusing to assist U.S. forces in the war against Iran, particularly those that withheld use of military bases.

TRUMP PRESSES NATO PARTNERS ON SUPPORT AS HEGSETH BLASTS HESITATION

“These allies, they put America’s sons and daughters, our sons and daughters, at risk by denying them the predictable access, basing and overflight that never should have been in question at all,” he said.

Hegseth then launched a more general critique of European policy, referencing migration and an emphasis on social policy over defense.

“Instead of tanks and fighters and air defenses, the focus has been on gender equity and climate change and defense austerity. Europe’s borders flew wide open, welfare states expanded, defense budgets cratered. Along with Europe’s belief in itself and its civilization,” Hegseth said.

GERMANY PLEDGES TO BUILD EUROPE’S STRONGEST ARMY AS NATO ALLIES ANSWER TRUMP PRESSURE

The wake-up call comes just days after Germany pledged to become a more powerful military force inside NATO, with Berlin’s ambassador to Washington telling Fox News Digital that the country is ready to assume greater responsibility for European security after decades in which the United States carried much of the alliance’s military burden.

“Germany is stepping up — we heard the call!” German Ambassador to the United States Jens Hanefeld told Fox News Digital in an exclusive interview.

Chancellor Friedrich Merz has said Germany’s armed forces should become the strongest conventional army in Europe, a goal Hanefeld said is now backed by Berlin’s new military strategy.

“Russia’s illegal war of aggression has shaken old certainties in Europe and Germany as the international rules we have relied on are being challenged,” Hanefeld said. “This changes the strategic environment we operate in.”

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

“Today, Germany is Ukraine’s largest supporter,” Hanefeld said. “Germany’s decision to become Europe’s strongest conventional army, well anchored in the NATO alliance, is an ongoing commitment.”

Fox News’ Efrat Lachter and the Associated Press contributed to this report.

FIRST ON FOX: Abraham Alvarez, identified in federal documents as the alleged “ringleader” of a plot to carry out a mass casualty event at the UFC White House event on June 14, is an illegal immigrant from Mexico who overstayed his visa, according to Homeland Security information first obtained by Fox News Digital.

Alvarez came to the United States as a child and was granted by the Obama administration in 2014 deportation relief through the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program after he failed to leave the country when his B2 visa expired in 2001.

Five co-conspirators were arrested so far this month for allegedly planning with others to use drones equipped with explosives to force an evacuation from the White House event on Sunday and, in the ensuing chaos, a team of snipers was allegedly set to open fire on the crowds. Federal investigators claim Alvarez was responsible for planning, organizing, and directing the planned attack.

Court records ousted Alvarez as a foreign national considering he consented to a consular notification after his arrest this weekend, though the documents provided no information on his specific immigration status nor his country of origin. 

U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) lodged a detainer for Alvarez following the FBI’s arrest.

Alvarez was arrested by the FBI on the day of the fight in Omaha, Nebraska.

The White House and FBI declined to comment when asked by Fox News Digital about the whereabouts of the other individuals involved in the group chat, with the former directing the inquiry to a DOJ press release.

“This illegal alien from Mexico should never have been allowed in our country,” DHS Acting Assistant Secretary Lauren Bis said in a statement to Fox News Digital on the attack. “He was the ringleader of a failed terror attack targeting UFC Freedom 250 at the White House.”

“He will face justice and swiftly be removed from our country,” she added of Alvarez.

If convicted of conspiracy to commit murder, each plotter faces a maximum penalty of life in prison and a $250,000 fine. Planning to carry out violence on White House grounds carries an additional maximum penalty of five years in prison.  

DAN BONGINO REVEALS HOW THE FBI STOPPED AN ALLEGED TERROR PLOT BUILT FOR ‘UNIMAGINABLE’ CASUALTIES

After plans for the initial attack on Sunday, federal authorities claim the plotters planned a “second wave” where they would storm the White House gate. The co-conspirators purportedly sought to jump-start a revolution in the U.S. with the violence, citing grievances such as government corruption, the handling of the Epstein files, data centers using water and the influence of Israel over domestic politics. 

Alvarez allegedly used the name “Shepherd” in a group chat dedicated to planning the attack. He was “responsible for planning, organizing, and directing the planned attack,” according to a DOJ press release. 

“As many and as deadly as we can get,” Alvarez allegedly responded when asked by a fellow plotter when asked about making drones with explosives. Authorities say that he claimed to have had a working drone. 

Investigators have identified 23 individuals who were part of the alleged terror planning network, however; as of publishing, only five arrests have been announced in connection with the plot. It is unclear why the UFC event proceeded with many of those involved in the plot still seemingly at large. 

Abraham Hermosillo Alvarez, a Mexican illegal alien, was arrested by the FBI on the day of the fight in Omaha, Nebraska.

The White House and FBI declined to comment when asked by Fox News Digital about the whereabouts of the other individuals involved in the group chat, with the former directing the inquiry to a DOJ press release.

The State Department did not respond to an inquiry from Fox News Digital regarding whether or not it would revoke Alvarez’s DACA immigration status if he is found guilty of involvement in the plot.

“This illegal alien from Mexico should never have been allowed in our country,” DHS Acting Assistant Secretary Lauren Bis said in a statement to Fox News Digital on the attack. “He was the ringleader of a failed terror attack targeting UFC Freedom 250 at the White House.”

“He will face justice and swiftly be removed from our country,” she added of Alvarez.

If convicted of conspiracy to commit murder, each plotter faces a maximum penalty of life in prison and a $250,000 fine. Planning to carry out violence on White House grounds carries an additional maximum penalty of five years in prison.  

VANCE WARNS LEFT-WING POLITICAL RHETORIC FUELING VIOLENCE AFTER FBI FOILS ALLEGED WHITE HOUSE UFC TERROR PLOT  

Vice President JD Vance said on Tuesday that the alleged plans to attack the White House event were “not that advanced,” noting that the plot was relatively undeveloped when it was caught and that none of the suspects “weren’t in town” during the event.

“The FBI, our law enforcement partners and our U.S. Attorneys did what they do every day to make America Safe through quick response and vigilance in investigating, disrupting and dismantling this alleged plan before it could be carried out,” Acting Attorney General Todd was quoted as saying in a DOJ press release “We will take immediate and aggressive action to identify and prosecute those who incite and plan acts of violence.”

FROM RALLY GUNFIRE TO WHITE HOUSE SHOOTING, THREATS AGAINST PRESIDENT TRUMP CONTINUE TO MOUNT

UFC CEO Dana White claimed that multiple threats were made against the White House event, noting that “these are the kind of events that bring the nuts out, this is normal stuff,”

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

President Donald Trump has faced a string of security threats since he was wounded in an attempted assassination during a July 2024 campaign rally in Butler, Pennsylvania. 

These have included  a second assassination attempt at his Florida golf club two months later, an alleged Iran-linked murder-for-hire plot, am armed man rushing the White House Correspondents Dinner and a flood of threats made against his life from disgruntled citizens — all of which underscore the persistent threat environment surrounding Trump’s public appearances.

Maine Democratic Senate candidate Graham Platner’s scandal-plagued rise is causing rifts within the Democratic Party, and several Democratic strategists who spoke to Fox News Digital warned of the long-term implications of the party embracing him.

“Anyone paying attention to the intersection of culture and politics knows that my party pushed #MeToo well beyond the bounds of common sense long before Graham Platner’s rise,” Michael LaRosa, former press secretary to first lady Jill Biden, said about whether the #MeToo movement rings hollow within the party now that top Democrats have rallied behind Platner.

“But the reflexive partisan instinct to circle the wagons around him is the political equivalent of pulling the plug on whatever credibility Democrats had left as the self-appointed champions of women.”

“If the standards disappear the moment they’re politically inconvenient, they were never standards at all.”

JONATHAN TURLEY: WHEN JOURNALISTS WHINE ABOUT #METOO, THEY DON’T MEAN PLATNER, TOO

Former adviser to President Bill Clinton and Democratic strategist Doug Schoen argued that Democrats are choosing power and Senate control over serious concerns about Platner’s past, and that could hurt them in 2028.

“In the short term, for some Democrats, those on the progressive left, it’s the right decision, a practical decision,” Schoen said. “To me, it’s a very sad one and certainly undermines the moral legitimacy of the Democratic Party as a whole.”

“Certainly, I think they’ve left themselves vulnerable vis-à-vis Platner’s extreme left-wing positions, his toxicity as a person, the issues with relationships, arguably lying about his Nazi tattoo,” Schoen said. “I certainly think this creates issues for the Democrats where none needed to exist.”

Platner has denied allegations from former girlfriends who told The New York Times that he discussed rape fantasies, drank heavily and had violent episodes, while also facing mounting criticism over sexually explicit messages allegedly sent to women shortly after getting married, a Nazi-linked tattoo and online comments mocking a Purple Heart veteran.

Despite new controversies emerging days before Maine’s Democratic Senate primary, Graham Platner won with more primary votes than any Democrat in state history. 

Democratic strategist Mally Smith told Fox News Digital he doesn’t believe that the Platner campaign is necessarily the “death” of the #MeToo movement, but that Democrats who have “more fully embraced” his campaign are “going to have some trouble when it comes to making the case on the Epstein files or any general claims of believe all women.”

“So maybe Democrats don’t have the advantage on the issue anymore, but I would say that it’s not like Republicans have an advantage either,” Smith added. “I think voters are just gonna say, well, both parties are willing to live with the baggage of their candidates.”

Looking ahead to 2028, LaRosa said that Democrats could be haunted by their ties to Platner for years.

“If he wins, you’ll still have to explain why you stood with him,” LaRosa said. “If he loses, you’ll have nothing to show for it except the association. Either way, he’s someone you’ll be answering for.”

Smith explained Platner’s rise by citing voters that are “unhappy with the status quo” to the point where there’s an “element, whether it’s Republican voters supporting President Donald Trump or Democratic voters supporting Graham Platner in Maine, where they say these elites attacking him is actually evidence that he’s on the right track.”

For others, the controversies are still too big for voters to ignore. LaRosa said that voters “reward guts, not willful blindness” when judging a candidate with Nazi imagery tattooed on his chest, adding that the Democratic leaders are lacking that same “courage.”

DEMOCRATS BREAK WITH SCANDAL-PLAGUED GRAHAM PLATNER, WARN OF ‘CIVIL WAR’ IN PARTY

“We look pretty vapid, unprincipled and hypocritical to look the other way when it comes to any candidate accused of any level of violence against women just because it is politically inconvenient,” LaRosa said. “Never again should voters trust us or take our moral arguments seriously. Principles only mean something when they’re applied across the board, even when it’s politically uncomfortable.”

For over a decade, Democrats have used the “Nazi” attack line against President Donald Trump, but have nevertheless mostly rallied around Platner, despite the Nazi imagery tattooed on his body for 18 years.

“They’re seeing all of these lunatics, like the guy in Maine…for ten years they’ve been calling me a ‘Nazi,’ and now they have a Nazi running. He’s got a tattoo on him,” President Trump said during a Thursday news conference.

Schoen argued Democrats have now weakened their case against Republican scandals, pointing to Texas Attorney General and Senate candidate Ken Paxton.

“For every criticism that they level at Ken Paxton in Texas, they will be greeted by criticism of Graham Platner in Maine, which to me makes their job more difficult,” Schoen said.

Smith made a similar point, saying both parties are dealing with candidates causing “their own version of heartburn” that can be used against them politically.

Trump-backed Paxton prevailed in the primary against incumbent Sen. John Cornyn, R-Texas, after he was impeached by the Texas House, a federal investigation into allegations that he abused his office to aid a donor and cheating allegations.

LaRosa said the “uncomfortable truth” is that Democrats have reduced Platner to a simple political equation, viewing him as “just another number, another vote, another seat, another data point on a spreadsheet” instead of focusing on whether he is the right person for the job.

PLATNER CONTROVERSIES FUEL SPECULATION ABOUT LITTLE-KNOWN MAINE BALLOT REPLACEMENT PROVISION

November may provide a clearer test, Schoen said. He said Platner’s victory does not mean he shed his political baggage, adding Platner has left the party to grapple with problems “where none needed to exist.”

“With Graham Platner, there are literally immediate, multiple sources of concern that are ongoing, and it isn’t clear to me that he will necessarily survive and succeed,” Schoen said.

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

Ultimately, Smith said that Maine voters will be focused on the economy and that concerns about Platner will likely only be a major issue within the state rather than nationwide.

“Voters are unhappy with the economy, and I think most people are going to be voting on whether they believe the economy is better than when Trump was inaugurated, and the answer to that is a resounding no,” Smith said. “So I think as much as news stations like to talk about Graham Platner and what this means for Democrats overall, or vice versa, Ken Paxton and Republicans overall, most voters are not going to think about Graham Platner’s Nazi tattoo outside of Maine. So I think this is more of a localized Maine problem.”

Fox News Digital reached out to the Platner campaign for comment.

The Trump administration on Tuesday publicly outlined the contents of its new memorandum of understanding with Iran, revealing plans for immediate waivers on Iranian oil exports, a framework for at least $300 billion in reconstruction and economic development, and a 60-day negotiation period aimed at securing a final agreement on Iran’s nuclear program.

During a call with reporters, senior U.S. officials read portions of the agreement and defended controversial provisions that would allow Iranian crude oil exports to resume immediately while broader negotiations continue.

“The U.S. Department of Treasury will issue waivers for the export of Iranian crude oil, petroleum products and derivatives and all associated services including banking transactions, insurances, transportation, etc,” the agreement states, according to officials. 

Officials declined to provide the written text of the agreement. 

SCOTT BESSENT CALLS OUT ‘TERRIBLE FRAMING’ DURING CLASH WITH NBC NEWS HOST ON IRANIAN OIL

An official emphasized the oil waivers are the only major benefit Iran will receive before a final agreement is reached, arguing the move would increase transparency into Iranian oil sales while helping reduce global energy prices.

But the administration’s willingness to grant immediate oil export waivers comes despite officials’ own skepticism about Iran’s intentions. 

While defending the agreement, one senior U.S. official said negotiators entered talks with “the full expectation that they will lie and they will cheat,” arguing that any final agreement would require extensive monitoring and enforcement mechanisms.

Officials said on Monday that Trump, Vice President JD Vance and Iranian Parliamentary Speaker Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf signed the agreement digitally Sunday, but a formal signing ceremony is planned for Friday. Negotiations over a final agreement will begin over the weekend after the memorandum deal is signed Friday. 

In negotiations aimed at a final agreement, the memorandum also calls for the U.S. and regional partners to develop a plan worth at least $300 billion for the reconstruction and economic development of Iran. Officials stressed the provision does not commit the U.S. to providing the funds, arguing instead that it would permit outside investment if a final deal is reached and Iran complies with its obligations.

While the agreement guarantees toll-free commercial transit through the Strait of Hormuz during the 60-day negotiating period, it leaves longer-term arrangements to future talks between Iran, Oman and other Gulf states. 

A senior U.S. official maintained that regional partners would not support any framework that allowed Iran to charge tolls for passage along the waterway. 

During the 60-day negotiation period, the U.S. will not impose any new sanctions or deploy any new troops, per the agreement. 

“The United States of America further undertakes to remove its forces from the proximity of the Islamic Republic of Iran within 30 days after the final deal,” the document reads, according to officials. 

VANCE REVEALS TRUMP LESSON GUIDING IRAN DEAL STRATEGY AS TEHRAN FACES 60-DAY DEADLINE

The agreement stops short of resolving the central dispute over Iran’s nuclear program. Instead, it commits both sides to negotiate the fate of Iran’s enriched uranium stockpile and future enrichment activities as part of a final agreement. 

Officials said the minimum outcome would involve down-blending enriched material under International Atomic Energy Agency supervision but acknowledged that key details remain unresolved.

Administration officials described the provision both as a significant concession that Iran offered to dilute its stockpile of nearly 900 pounds of near weapons-grade 60% enriched uranium and as a “flaw” that the nuclear specifics of the deal are not yet resolved.

“Of course that’s a flaw, and we will push for more than that. But the fact that they’re conceding to that is a major, major win for the United States of America. They’re saying we will destroy the enriched stockpile, and this is how we’re going to do it at a minimum,” one senior U.S. official said.

The memorandum also envisions the eventual termination of United Nations sanctions, primary U.S. sanctions and secondary sanctions as part of a final agreement. Officials argued that broader sanctions relief remains contingent on Iranian compliance with future nuclear commitments, pushing back on criticism that Tehran would receive major economic benefits without making concessions.

Despite defending the framework agreement, administration officials repeatedly emphasized that they remain skeptical of Iran’s intentions and said any final deal would require extensive verification and enforcement measures.

Later in the call, another official said the administration would quickly abandon negotiations if it concluded Iran was “just dragging us along and kind of bulls**ting us.”

Officials said the provision meant that American forces would return to their posture levels prior to Operation Epic Fury. 

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

Despite the agreement being announced Sunday, officials waited until Wednesday to reveal the text at Iran’s request, according to officials. 

“We were trying to accommodate their domestic messaging and their domestic politics,” an official said. 

Asked whether Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu had been provided the agreement, the official said Netanyahu “has not asked us for a copy of it,” while maintaining that Israeli officials had been repeatedly briefed on the substance of the negotiations.

President Donald Trump suggested he may be able to get back the equipment the U.S. military left behind during Joe Biden’s withdrawal from Afghanistan in 2021.

Trump made these comments at the G7 Summit while taking questions from reporters about the forthcoming agreement with Iran to end the war and open the Strait of Hormuz.

In response to a question about how the deal will address Iran’s nuclear program, Trump repeatedly said he would “bomb them” if they do not comply with proposed restrictions.

He then transitioned into criticizing Biden’s foreign policy record, spotlighting the Democratic former president’s decision to withdraw from Afghanistan and abandon dozens of military aircraft, thousands of ground vehicles and more than 300,000 weapons, according to the House Budget Committee.

TRUMP PUSHES TO RECOVER ‘BILLIONS OF DOLLARS’ OF MILITARY EQUIPMENT LEFT BEHIND IN AFGHANISTAN WITHDRAWAL

“Our country has become the most respected country in the world,” he said. “Look at what happened in so many different locations. Afghanistan, that horrible retreat that these people made. Leaving equipment behind. They weren’t under any pressure. Take your time.”

“I was going to get out,” he continued. “We were going to get out with dignity and pride. Take 100% of the equipment. I was even taking the tents down. But then [Biden] got in and they just left. They left all the equipment. I may get all that equipment back. Now, here’s the thing. It’s more symbolic because it’s a little old now, but we may get it all back. Afghanistan is kissing our a–.”

In June 2022, the Department of Defense estimated that $7.12 billion worth of military equipment ended up in the hands of the Taliban, which quickly seized control of the country after American troops departed.

TRUMP: ‘WE DON’T RUN FROM ANYBODY’ IN BLASTING BIDEN OVER AFGHANISTAN WITHDRAWAL

Trump and his allies have long been critical of what they view as Biden’s hasty decision to end the war in Afghanistan, which lasted for nearly 20 years.

Biden officials at the time defended the withdrawal by pointing out that the equipment seized by the Taliban was in the hands of the U.S.-aligned government in Afghanistan that ended up surrendering.

Biden himself said he believed that the Afghan fighters supported by the U.S. were going to do a better job at holding the country.

“The assumption was that more than 300,000 Afghan National Security Forces that we had trained over the past two decades and equipped would be a strong adversary in their civil wars with the Taliban,” he said on Aug. 31, 2021. “That assumption — that the Afghan government would be able to hold on for a period of time beyond military drawdown — turned out not to be accurate.”

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

Under Taliban rule, women and girls remain repressed. More than 1 million girls have been banned from secondary school and university. An April UNICEF report claimed that Afghanistan risks losing more than 25,000 teachers and healthcare workers due to the new government’s restrictions on female employment.

The country is also dealing with a hunger crisis, with roughly 17.4 million Afghans at risk for severe food insecurity this year, according to the World Food Programme.

Voters in Alabama knew the outcomes of their Tuesday night elections hours before officials in D.C. began releasing results despite both jurisdictions officially closing their polls at the same time.

Both D.C. and Alabama were scheduled to officially close their polling stations at 8:00 p.m. Eastern Time on Tuesday night. Alabama counted the vast majority of its votes within about an hour, with the Associated Press calling them at 8:40 p.m. and 9:31 p.m., respectively.

Officials in D.C., meanwhile, only began counting votes at 10:47 p.m., around the time the Associated Press declared Rep. Barry Moore the winner of Alabama’s GOP primary – the most hotly contested race in the state. 

Democratic-led jurisdictions including California and Washington, D.C., have faced criticism from Republicans and election-integrity advocates who argue that prolonged ballot counting undermines public confidence and leaves major races unresolved for days or even weeks after Election Day. Election officials in those jurisdictions have defended the timelines, pointing to mail-in ballot rules, postmark deadlines and verification requirements they say are necessary to ensure every lawful vote is counted.

CALIFORNIA’S SLUGGISH VOTE COUNTING RIPPED ACROSS THE POLITICAL SPECTRUM: ‘EXTREMELY EMBARRASSING’

D.C.’s first results were delayed after long lines kept some polling places open past the scheduled 8 p.m. close. Long lines at some D.C. polling stations forced the district to wait almost three hours after polls officially closed to start the counting process.

Further delaying the count was the large number of mail ballots and the district’s move to ranked-choice voting, an election method that can require multiple rounds of counting. 

NYC POLLS ARE CLOSED BUT RACE FAR FROM OVER DUE TO RANKED-CHOICE VOTING

“When you get [20,000 to] 30,000 ballots on election night through the mail, it is not possible to process that number on election night,” D.C. Board of Elections executive director Monica Evans told a local media outlet on June 9.

As of publishing, less than 70% of ballots have been counted in D.C. more than a day after voting began. Roughly 400,000 people voted in Alabama’s Tuesday elections, compared to only around 100,000 ballots cast in D.C. that same night.

DEMS PICK POTENTIAL SUCCESSOR TO DC’S CONGRESSIONAL DELEGATE AFTER DECADES-LONG INCUMBENCY

D.C.’s pace of vote counting drew criticism on social media.

“It’s now 10:30 pm, polls were supposed to close 2.5 hours ago, this is an absolute disaster from DCBOE,” DMV New Liberals, a local group of centrist Democrats, wrote to X on Tuesday night in response to news that the city hadn’t begun counting votes yet.

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

“In the District of Columbia, just 64% of votes from yesterday’s election have been counted. And there aren’t even that many of them,” conservative pundit Byron York wrote at 11:19 a.m. on Wednesday. 

The D.C. Board of Elections did not respond to a request for comment when reached by Fox News Digital on Wednesday.

The men accused of plotting a mass-casualty attack at the UFC event held on White House grounds allegedly met through a TikTok group before moving their discussions into encrypted messaging apps, where prosecutors say they allegedly developed plans to kill government officials and other attendees, according to court records reviewed by Fox News Digital. 

Federal authorities have arrested five men accused of plotting a mass-casualty attack targeting UFC Freedom 250, the Sunday event held on White House grounds that was attended by President Donald Trump and other senior government officials.

According to federal court records, members of the group first connected around March through a TikTok community called “Vanguard of the Old,” where participants allegedly vetted one another through identification documents, workout videos and tactical content before moving into private Signal chats. The filings do not further describe whether Vanguard of the Old was a formal organization or simply an online chat community.

The filings identify five arrested participants in Ohio, California, Missouri and Nebraska and describe a network that prosecutors say evolved from online discussions into operational planning for an attack targeting UFC Freedom 250. Investigators allege members discussed using explosive-laden drones to trigger an evacuation before opening fire on politicians and other targets as crowds fled the area. 

JUSTIN GAETHJE TARGETS ILIA TOPURIA’S DIVORCE, IGNITING FEUD BEFORE WHITE HOUSE SHOWDOWN

While prosecutors allege the group had developed operational plans, some officials, like Vice President JD Vance, have suggested the conspiracy never advanced to the point of becoming an imminent threat.

“There was a lot of security there,” Vance said during an appearance on Fox News’ “The Five.” “And it turns out the plot was like, not that advanced. They weren’t in town.” 

Court documents identify an Omaha, Nebraska, man known online as “Shepherd” as the group’s alleged leader. Prosecutors say Shepherd helped build the organization’s tiered structure, directed planning discussions and coordinated members across multiple states through encrypted communications.  

Once inside those encrypted chats, prosecutors say members organized themselves into a tiered structure that assigned participants to specific functions. Court records describe Tier 1 members as frontline operators expected to carry out missions and acquire firearms and body armor, while other tiers included drone operators, getaway drivers, recruiters, logistics personnel, technical support and social media advocates. 

Court records repeatedly reference military-style training and organization. 

Tycen Proper, the 19-year-old Ohio defendant whose phone helped investigators identify other members of the alleged network, told investigators he believed many participants had prior military experience, according to court documents, while his mother said some members represented themselves online as former military personnel. The filings, however, do not identify any defendant as having verified military service. 

According to investigators, members also split into smaller chat groups based on operational assignments and locations.

Investigators say the network extended well beyond the five men charged. According to court records, Proper’s phone contained a primary Signal chat with approximately 19 participants, along with smaller operational chat groups organized by role and location.

Tensions boiled over between federal agencies over the decision to make the case public. Two senior U.S. officials told Fox News that Secret Service leadership wanted to delay disclosing the investigation until additional arrests could be made, fearing that publicizing the probe could alert other subjects and complicate the ongoing investigation.

The disagreement surfaced publicly Tuesday when Deputy Secret Service Director Matthew Quinn, responding to questions about the case at an unrelated event, emphasized that the Secret Service had “led that investigation from the beginning” and suggested investigators intentionally avoided public disclosure while the case remained active. 

“In order to maintain the integrity of the investigation and the security plan we chose not to leak it,” Quinn said. 

DANA WHITE DENIES AMERICA 250 UFC FIGHT AT WHITE HOUSE WILL BE ‘POLITICAL,’ ‘NOT AT ALL’ ABOUT POLITICS

“I’ll tell you a phrase I learned early in my career in the New York field office and that’s don’t choke on your own smoke,” he said. 

The investigation began June 10 when Proper’s mother contacted local authorities after becoming concerned about his recent behavior, according to court records.

Proper’s father told investigators his son had allegedly recently met people online, was planning “recons” with them and intended to travel that weekend to meet members of the group. Family members also reported that Proper allegedly had purchased firearms, body armor, ammunition and tactical gear and had quit his job in preparation for what he described as “missions” and “recons.”

After investigators obtained a warrant for Proper’s phone, they allege they discovered Signal chats containing maps of Washington, D.C., proposed sniper positions, drone launch sites and discussions about escape routes. 

Prosecutors say members allegedly discussed potential congressional targets, power infrastructure and other political figures before focusing on UFC Freedom 250.

Proper’s mother told investigators members of the group allegedly expressed anger about government corruption and the Epstein files. 

According to court records, members of the group allegedly believed the United States was headed in the wrong direction and needed to be “torn down” and rebuilt. Some participants allegedly argued that people connected to Jeffrey Epstein should not govern the country.

Prosecutors also allege that discussions increasingly focused on U.S. support for Israel and lawmakers viewed by group members as aligned with pro-Israel interests.

According to the filings, members discussed targeting politicians they believed were tied to pro-Israel lobbying organizations, while other conversations referenced billionaires and what participants described as “capitalist elites.”

Bryan Omar Roa and Michael Alan Thomas, both of California, allegedly met up for a training session in late May, according to messages obtained by law enforcement and shared in court records. 

“Noble and I trained on vehicle dismount, cover vs concealment, bounding, and basic marksmanship today,” Thomas wrote to the group on May 25, according to court records. 

By early June, according to court records, discussions inside the group’s encrypted chats had shifted toward operational planning surrounding UFC Freedom 250, which took place last Sunday.  

Court records show members discussing a rendezvous point in Fredericksburg, Virginia, where participants from multiple states were allegedly expected to meet before traveling to Washington.

Investigators also say members allegedly exchanged information about safe houses, fallback locations and escape routes that included traveling south along the Potomac River.

According to court records, the group’s alleged plan centered on creating chaos inside the White House event before targeting government officials and other attendees as they fled.

Prosecutors say members discussed using drones carrying explosive devices over the north side of the UFC venue, triggering panic and forcing crowds to evacuate. Investigators allege members of the group planned to position shooters and snipers along anticipated evacuation routes south of the venue, where politicians and other targets would be vulnerable.

According to court records, a participant interviewed by the FBI in West Virginia said members of the group allegedly had canceled the operation by Friday, two days before the event. The reported cancellation came after authorities had already begun investigating the group following a June 10 call from Proper’s mother.

Authorities arrested suspects in Ohio, California, Missouri and Nebraska Saturday and Sunday after executing a series of search warrants tied to the investigation. 

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

“They had not really done that much planning,” Vance said. “And so, I get why people are so fascinated by it. I do think the political violence and rhetoric in this country is out of control. But thank God we have good law enforcement. We’ve got good FBI because it didn’t even get close to the point of execution.” 

Fox News’ David Spunt contributed to this report.

The two candidates seeking to unseat Massachusetts Sen. Ed Markey sparred during a fiery debate Tuesday night, exchanging sharp attacks on a range of issues.

Democratic Rep. Seth Moulton and Republican attorney John Deaton clashed over President Donald Trump, sanctuary policies, Israel and Markey himself, who did not attend the event.

During the debate, Moulton heavily sought to tie Deaton to President Donald Trump —  who remains deeply unpopular in the blue state of Massachusetts — despite the Republican candidate’s insistence that he has never voted for the president.

“You may say you’re independent, you may say you haven’t voted for him, but you’re just going to enable his agenda,” Moulton said, arguing that sending a Republican to Washington would be a mistake for Massachusetts voters.

SETH MOULTON CLOSING GAP ON PROGRESSIVE DEMOCRAT ED MARKEY IN MASSACHUSETTS SENATE PRIMARY

In response, Deaton said Massachusetts needs someone like him to “stand up for America and working people.”

“‘F’ the Republican Party. ‘F’ the Democrat Party — they all suck.” Deaton said.  

The Republican candidate also slammed Markey for skipping Tuesday’s debate, calling him “too much of a coward to be here tonight.”

Moulton defended Markey, while still urging a “new generation of leadership.”

“He’s not a coward — he’s a lifelong public servant,” Moulton said. “We should honor that service.”

DEM SENATOR, 79, DRAWS PRIMARY CHALLENGE FROM REP. SETH MOULTON

Markey, who was first elected to the U.S. House in 1976, remains popular with the state’s most progressive voters.

Moulton trails Markey in Democratic primary polling, while Deaton is widely viewed as the clear underdog in the race. The Republican previously lost to Sen. Elizabeth Warren two years ago in a Senate bid. 

On immigration, the candidates offered starkly different positions during the debate. 

Moulton advocated for the prosecution of ICE officials who carried out Trump’s mass deportation agenda, while Deaton said the U.S. should expand legal immigration but maintain “zero tolerance” for illegal immigration.

Deaton also rejected calls to abolish ICE, dismissing them as an election-year “slogan” akin to the push to “defund the police” in 2020.

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

On foreign aid, Deaton took a hardline stance, saying he would not support sending additional funding to Israel, Ukraine or other countries unless it is clearly “proven” to serve the interests of Americans and Massachusetts residents.

He also criticized Moulton, alleging the Democrat sought an endorsement from the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) before later distancing himself after not receiving it.

Moulton, meanwhile, backed conditional aid to Israel, saying the U.S. should not blindly support Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. He also said he returned donations from AIPAC, arguing the organization’s positions have shifted in recent years.

Voters doubt a peace deal will keep Iran from developing nuclear weapons, according to the latest Fox News poll.

Sixty-four percent say it’s unlikely a peace agreement with the U.S. will stop Iran from pursuing nukes, including more than half of Republicans (53%), independents (69%), and Democrats (73%). Today’s views match those in 2015, when the Obama administration made a deal with Iran, as 63% of voters at that time also said it was unlikely an agreement would stop Iran from building a nuclear program. 

FOX NEWS POLL: ‘RESILIENT DISCONTENT’ DEFINES THE US MOOD AT 250TH ANNIVERSARY

Most of the survey was completed before the Trump administration announced Monday the U.S. had signed a memorandum of understanding with Iran which included a reopening of the Strait of Hormuz and a 60-day ceasefire. 

Meanwhile, 58% think the U.S. made the wrong decision in taking military action against Iran in February, while 41% believe it was the right call. More Democrats say it was the wrong decision (84%) than Republicans believe it was the right one (75%).

Voters who think the U.S. made the right decision in taking military action are twice as likely as those who say it was wrong to think a peace deal will stop Iran (50% vs. 25%). 

Seventy-six percent of voters think it is important to end Iran’s nuclear program, while a larger 87% says it’s important to avoid a long-term conflict. On both measures, importance is up 7 percentage points since earlier this year. Nearly 9 in 10 Democrats, Republicans, and independents say it is important to avoid a prolonged conflict.

FOX NEWS POLL: VOTERS SEE AI REGULATION AS URGENT, RANK SAFEGUARDS AHEAD OF INNOVATION

Concern about tensions with Iran turning into a long-term U.S. military commitment is also widespread, with 70% saying they are extremely or very worried, including large numbers of Democrats (82%) and independents (74%), as well as more than half of Republicans (56%). 

Sixty-four percent of voters disapprove of the job President Donald Trump is doing handling Iran, steady since March.  Republicans largely approve (70%), while most independents (78%) and an overwhelming majority of Democrats disapprove (92%).

“We know from past data and research that voters’ attitudes on foreign policy matters are shaped by what their partisan elites tell them,” says Republican pollster Daron Shaw, who conducts the Fox News Poll with Democratic counterpart Chris Anderson. “But we also know support for any engagement declines over time, as treasure and blood are expended.  There’s pressure on the president to finish in Iran before GOP solidarity breaks down.”

Beyond Iran, voters favor the United States continuing to provide financial aid to Ukraine in its fight against Russia, even as fewer believe the war matters to life in the U.S.

Overall, 59% support the U.S. continuing to help Ukraine with funding, mostly unchanged for the past two years. And 67% think what happens in the Russia-Ukraine conflict makes a difference to things here at home, down from a high of 85% back in early 2022 when the war first started. 

By a 13-point margin, more Democrats (75%) than Republicans (62%) think Ukraine matters to the U.S., and by a 22-point spread, more Democrats (72%) than Republicans (50%) favor U.S. continuing aid for the Ukrainian fight against Russia. 

Voters overall are divided on who is currently winning the war: 48% say Ukraine and 48% Russia. More Democrats (56%) think Ukraine is winning, while more Republicans (53%) and independents (55%) say Russia.

In the Middle East, a small majority continues to side more with the Israelis (54%) than the Palestinians (42%). The number supporting the Israelis remains largely unchanged since 2025, but down from a high of 68% in late 2023. Currently, 77% of Republicans side with the Israelis, while 62% of Democrats side with the Palestinians and independents split (48% Israelis, 45% Palestinians).

Most voters continue to view developments in the Middle East as relevant to life in the U.S. Three quarters, 77%, say events in the region matter, down from 81% a year ago. 

CLICK HERE FOR CROSSTABS AND TOPLINE

The survey also finds voters have mixed views on the use of military force against suspected drug trafficking boats (52% favor, 48% oppose), while a majority opposes using the U.S. military to bring about regime change in Cuba (35% favor, 64% oppose).

Conducted June 12-15, 2026, under the direction of Beacon Research (D) and Shaw & Company Research (R), this Fox News survey includes interviews with a sample of 1,002 registered voters randomly selected from a national voter file. Respondents spoke with live interviewers on landlines (101) and cellphones (644) or completed the survey online after receiving a text (257). Results based on the full sample have a margin of sampling error of ±3 percentage points. Sampling error for results among subgroups is higher. In addition to sampling error, question wording and order can influence results. Weights are generally applied to age, race, education, and area variables to ensure the demographics are representative of the registered voter population. Sources for developing weight targets include the most recent American Community Survey, Fox News Voter Analysis, and voter file data.

Fox News’ Victoria Balara contributed to this report.

It’s less than five months until the midterm elections and voters are not happy with what’s in their wallets.

Only 12% say they are getting ahead financially, most think the economy is in bad shape, more than half think President Donald Trump’s policies benefit people who have money, and their outlook on the economy is negative. 

That’s according to a new Fox News poll that finds the president’s numbers have declined since last year. 

Some 59% of voters feel pessimistic about the economy, worse by 4 points compared to last June (55%). That’s a stark contrast from the bullish views during Trump’s first term, when 57% felt optimistic (June 2019). 

FOX NEWS POLL: VOTERS SEE AI REGULATION AS URGENT, RANK SAFEGUARDS AHEAD OF INNOVATION

Forty-four percent say they’re falling behind financially. That’s more than felt that way last year by 8 points (36% falling behind) and by 3 points compared to June 2024 (41%).

One in four, 26%, rates the economy positively, better by 3 points since last month and generally in line with views this year — but still below last June’s 31% positive marks. Around three-quarters consistently rate the economy negatively (73%).

FOX NEWS POLL: ‘RESILIENT DISCONTENT’ DEFINES THE US MOOD AT 250TH ANNIVERSARY

Big picture, 37% are satisfied with the direction of the country. That’s mostly unchanged since March, but down from 44% last July. Even with the 7-point decline since last summer, satisfaction is higher today than what it was for most of former President Joe Biden’s term.

Those satisfaction ratings closely match Trump‘s job performance, as his approval stands at 39%. That’s unchanged since last month, but down 7 points compared to 46% approval last June. His lowest approval for either term is 38% in October 2017. 

Twenty percent think Trump’s economic policies benefit everyone, while a 54% majority says they help people with more money than they have, and 15% say they help “no one.” The share saying the president’s policies help everyone is down from 31% in 2019 (Trump), 27% in 2023 (Biden), and 23% in 2015 (Obama).

Opinions on the economy are largely based on party identification. Among Republicans, the biggest share says Trump’s policies help everyone (42%), half say they’re holding steady financially (49%), half rate economic conditions positively (50%), and two-thirds feel optimistic (66%). 

It’s the opposite among Democrats: 81% feel pessimistic about the economy, 91% rate it negatively, more than half say they’re falling behind (55%), and 71% think the president’s policies help people with more money.

Approval of the president is near record lows among some of his key constituencies, sitting a single point above his all-time floor among men (43%), White voters (44%), White evangelical Christians (61%), and Republicans (81%). His support among White men without a college degree stands at 50%, only 2 points ahead of his low-water mark.

The 23% approving of Trump’s handling of gas prices marks a rare moment of consensus — voters across the board are unhappy with the president — as majorities of Democrats (95%), independents (88%), and Republicans (53%) disapprove.

On the economy overall, 31% approve of the job Trump is doing, up from a record low 29% in May. A year ago, 40% approved. While a majority of Republicans approve, most Democrats and independents disapprove.

On immigration, 43% approve, the lowest of Trump’s second term, but still his best issue. 

These ratings are driven, at least in part, by 51% thinking his immigration enforcement has gone too far. 

In addition, views on the immigration role of local governments have flipped. Currently, 53% say local governments should control immigration enforcement in their communities, while 46% believe cooperation with ICE should be required. Last year, it was the reverse: 51% favored requiring ICE cooperation and 45% preferred local control.

Poll-pourri

Trust in the federal government stands at a low of 25%. That’s down from 32% in both 2025 and 2024. The previous low was 31% in 2023. Trust stood at a high of 54% in 2002, but hasn’t hit 40% since 2012. 

During the last year of the Biden administration, 44% of Democrats distrusted the government (2024), and that increased to 73% in 2025 and 83% this year. 

Among Republicans, more than 6 in 10 (63%) don’t trust the government, up 15 points compared to last summer (48%), but down from 85% two years ago. Currently, 57% of MAGA Republicans and 73% of non-MAGA Republicans lack faith in Uncle Sam. 

CLICK HERE FOR CROSSTABS AND TOPLINE

Distrust has held fairly steady among independents recently: 80% today vs. 80% in 2025 and 72% in 2024. 

Six in 10 voters believe the government spends too little time combating fraud in federal programs, and another 66% say recent efforts have been ineffective. 

While Democrats (55%) and Republicans (63%) agree the government isn’t doing enough to stop fraud, they disagree on recent performance: a majority of Republicans (56%) say efforts to prevent fraud have been effective, while most Democrats say the reverse (83% ineffective). Views among independents are the most critical, as they think the government isn’t doing enough (67%) and what it has done has been ineffective (78%).

Conducted June 12-15, 2026, under the direction of Beacon Research (D) and Shaw & Company Research (R), this Fox News survey includes interviews with a sample of 1,002 registered voters randomly selected from a national voter file. Respondents spoke with live interviewers on landlines (101) and cellphones (644) or completed the survey online after receiving a text (257). Results based on the full sample have a margin of sampling error of ±3 percentage points. Sampling error for results among subgroups is higher. In addition to sampling error, question wording and order can influence results. Weights are generally applied to age, race, education, and area variables to ensure the demographics are representative of the registered voter population. Sources for developing weight targets include the most recent American Community Survey, Fox News Voter Analysis, and voter file data.

Fox News’ Victoria Balara contributed to this report.

Vice President JD Vance is pushing back on comparisons between the emerging Trump-Vance Iran pact and claims that the agreement, released Wednesday, bears too much resemblance to President Barack Obama’s nuclear deal.

Critics pointed to Vance’s defense of the memorandum of understanding to reopen the Strait of Hormuz — the details of which were released by the administration — under which Iran would receive economic benefits only after complying with nuclear restrictions. They argue that dynamic mirrors how Obama promoted the 2015 Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, or JCPOA, which Trump and Vance have long reviled.

Vance, however, suggested to Fox News that the comparison stems from a misconception because the proverbial carrot-and-stick positions from the Obama deal have been reversed.

“You’ve got Iranian propagandists out there saying, well, ‘we get all these things’, and they leave out the fact that they only get those things if they fundamentally transform themselves as a country,” he said, adding that the deal could open the door to economic cooperation for Tehran throughout the Mideast if it complies.

VANCE EN ROUTE TO PAKISTAN FOR HIGH-STAKES IRAN TALKS AS ‘FRAGILE’ CEASEFIRE TEETERS

“So the United States wins either way. As the president said, either they get nothing, we destroy their nuclear program and the Strait of Hormuz [is] open, or they fundamentally transformed themselves. And that’s a big one too. It’s really up to them,” he said on “The Five.”

Host Jesse Watters agreed that the deal is the “exact opposite” of what Obama and former Sen. John Kerry, D-Mass., forged a decade ago.

VANCE TOUTS DESTRUCTION OF IRANIAN NUCLEAR PROGRAM AS TRUMP ANNOUNCES ISRAEL-IRAN CEASEFIRE

“If they fund the proxies they don’t get the economic benefits, and the missiles are covered because 85% of them have been destroyed and 90% of their industrial base has been destroyed.”

“They’ve been disarmed. They can’t re-arm because they can manufacture more weapons and now they can really project power outside of their borders because they have no Air Force and they have no Navy and they don’t pose an imminent threat to the United States anymore,” Watters said, further arguing that the Iranians cannot enrich uranium because the only force capable of recovering the uranium “dust” is the U.S.

In a July 2015 statement defending the JCPOA, Obama used language similar to that now being used by Trump administration officials. 

“[W]e give nothing up by testing whether or not this problem can be solved peacefully. If, in a worst-case scenario, Iran violates the deal, the same options that are available to me today will be available to any U.S. president in the future. And I have no doubt that 10 or 15 years from now, the person who holds this office will be in a far stronger position,” a White House statement read. 

Obama also argued a future president would be “in a far stronger position” if Iran violated the agreement years later because inspections and transparency measures would allow the U.S. to monitor Tehran’s nuclear stockpiles.

Vance, however, noted there are few such stockpiles left after the Trump administration ordered strikes months ago.

Like the current administration, Obama sought to blunt criticism, warning in an August 2015 speech that ads will run and “accompanying commentary” will try to undermine the deal.

“Iran has powerful incentives to keep its commitments,” he said in a line similar to arguments Vance has made in Fox News interviews.

“Before getting sanctions relief, Iran has to take significant, concrete steps like removing centrifuges and getting rid of its stockpiles. If Iran violates the agreement over the next decade, all of the sanctions can snap back into place,” Obama said. 

“On the other hand, if Iran abides by the deal and its economy begins to reintegrate with the world, the incentive to avoid snapback will only grow,” Obama said in another line that echoed arguments now being made by administration officials.

Some critics, however, remained skeptical as of Wednesday, noting that Trump spent years attacking the JCPOA, arguing it provided economic relief in exchange for insufficient concessions.

TRUMP AGAIN SAYS DEAL IS CLOSE, THEN CONFIRMS A LAST-MINUTE AGREEMENT WITH IRAN, BUT DETAILS STILL SECRET

Sen. Mark Kelly, D-Ariz., a Trump critic and former astronaut, suggested the deal resembled something candidate Trump would have lambasted.

“I did read what was reported on those 14 points [of the agreement] and I got to say, I mean, if this was something that President Obama or Biden had put forward, I don’t think Donald Trump would have been too supportive of it, right?” Kelly said.

“I mean, it gives everything: It’s basically everything that the Iranians would want,” he warned.

IRANIAN REGIME CRITIC WARNS TRUMP DEAL COULD BE ‘LIFELINE’ FOR REGIME, CLAIMS PEOPLE ARE ‘NERVOUS’

Iranian security expert Behnam Ben Taleblu told Fox News Digital in an exclusive interview Wednesday that some, however, will take pause at the Trump-Vance deal

“The administration is focusing very much on this not being American money, whether one is looking at the reconstruction or the ability of the regime to later on generate revenue through oil sales. But worryingly, any deal with the Islamic Republic is a deal with the devil,” said Taleblu, who leads the Iran program at the Foundation for the Defense of Democracies — a nonpartisan national security and foreign policy research institute in Washington.

“When Trump left the Iran deal in 2018, he didn’t leave it because of violation, he left it because that which the U.S. got was not worth that which the U.S. gave — meaning the nuclear concessions the U.S. got was not worth the sanctions relief the U.S. gave,” Taleblu said.

4TH ROUND OF US-IRAN TALKS ENDS AS TRUMP SET TO EMBARK ON HISTORIC MIDDLE EAST TOUR

The best way for the administration to secure a narrative “win,” according to Taleblu, would be to fully release the text of the deal to present a true comparison with both the JCPOA and the less-remembered 2013 JPA, which was also forged by Obama.

Taleblu said the JPA is a better comparison to reports about the Trump deal. That pact was smaller in scope and set the stage for Obama and Kerry to negotiate the larger 2015 deal. In the current deal, Taleblu said, there is a similar 60-day window for Iran to comply.

“They have to show that that which they got is worth more than that which they gave. And based on leaks of the [pending deal] in Bloomberg and CNN and Al-Arabiya, it’s not looking good,” he said.

Another headwind facing the administration is the American public’s limited tolerance for economic repercussions, such as rising gas and commodity prices or occasional downturns in the Nasdaq.

“This is not just political it’s cultural and social which means the administration has to do a better job bringing the public along,” he said.

Taleblu said Iran has been warring with the U.S. since 1979 and that there needs to be more effective “political communications” about that fact to secure public buy-in.

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

He also warned that while the effects of a war with Iran on the U.S. may strain the public, they would be dwarfed by the economic fallout from a future conflict with a more complicated adversary: China.

The memorandum of understanding lays out immediate waivers for Iranian oil exports, as well as a framework for $300 billion in economic development.

An official, however, emphasized to Fox News Digital that oil waivers were the only major benefit Tehran would realize before any final agreement is reached after a 60-day window.

In a reporter call, officials underlined that negotiations would promptly end if it was discovered Iran was “just dragging us along and kind of bull——- us,” and that they remained skeptical of Iran’s intentions.

Fox News Digital reached out to the vice president’s office for additional comment.

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

Trump-endorsed Republican congressional candidate Anthony Constantino says he will donate $174,000 — the equivalent of one year’s congressional salary — to the family of Sgt. Eddie Ryan, a wounded Iraq War veteran, regardless of whether he wins his race in New York’s 21st Congressional District.

Constantino, the CEO of Sticker Mule, made the surprise pledge on June 10 at a campaign event in Queensbury, New York, handing Ryan’s family a handwritten note promising the donation, according to local news outlet The Daily Gazette.

“I planned to give away my entire congressional salary from day one,” Constantino told Fox News Digital. “My team presented a few options and I immediately thought of Sgt. Eddie Ryan because he inspired me to fight harder early in this race.” 

BLUE STATE CEO WHO PUT UP 100-FOOT PRO-TRUMP SIGN TO SPEND $2.6 MILLION ON CAMPAIGN FOR CONGRESS

Constantino added, “I want this to become a symbolic gesture that encourages more Americans to fight, fight, fight for a better future while simultaneously inspiring other people of means to support our great Veterans.”

Ryan, a former U.S. Marine Corps sniper, was severely wounded by friendly fire in Iraq in 2005. He was shot twice in the head, suffered a traumatic brain injury and now faces lasting mobility and speech challenges, The Daily Gazette reported.

Constantino said he first met Ryan and his family earlier this year outside a Warren County Republican Committee meeting. The exchange lasted less than a minute, but he said it left a lasting impression.

“Sgt. Ryan is a role model for loving America and staying positive in the face of adversity. He was severely wounded in combat and proudly says he would do it again with a big smile,” Constantino said.

RACE TO SUCCEED REP. ELISE STEFANIK IN UPDATE NEW YORK HEATS UP WITH NEW CHALLENGER

Ryan said he was stunned by the announcement. 

“I’m still floored,” Ryan said after the pledge was revealed, according to The Daily Gazette.

Constantino is running against state Assembly Member Robert Smullen in the June 23 Republican primary to succeed Rep. Elise Stefanik in New York’s 21st Congressional District. 

He has spent millions of dollars of his own money on the campaign and has cast the race as a fight against the political establishment.

“It’s an opportunity to move the country in a positive direction in a big way,” Constantino said. “Once I saw first hand how bad the swamp that President Trump talks about so much really is, I felt I had no choice but to use my resources to fight it to create a better future for America.”

BRIAN MAST: I’M A WOUNDED WARRIOR. I’VE SEEN DONALD TRUMP CARE FOR VETERANS. THAT’S WHY I’M VOTING FOR HIM

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

Earlier this year, President Donald Trump endorsed Constantino — who previously fought local officials to keep a massive pro-Trump sign on his factory — in the race to fill Stefanik’s seat.

“It is my Great Honor to endorse America First Patriot, Anthony Constantino, who is running to represent the fantastic people of New York’s 21st Congressional District,” Trump wrote on Truth Social in April.

Fox News Digital’s Louis Casiano contributed to this report.

President Donald Trump withdrew his endorsement of Oklahoma GOP congressional candidate Jackson Lahmeyer on Wednesday, and threw his support behind Republican rival Mark Tedford, a dramatic reversal that came shortly before Lahmeyer publicly announced he was suspending his campaign.

Lahmeyer told Fox News Digital, however, that he made the decision to end his campaign the night before and informed his wife and campaign team before Trump’s endorsement switch.

“I made my decision to drop out of the race last night,” Lahmeyer told Fox News Digital. “I decided to choose my wife over my ambition. I informed my wife about my decision late last night and then my campaign team early this morning. My decision did not take place because of the decision of POTUS this afternoon.”

AP results showed Tedford finishing first with 32.2% and Lahmeyer second with 25.9%, advancing both Republicans to a runoff election to succeed Rep. Kevin Hern, who is running for the U.S. Senate.

TRUMP DROPS MARJORIE TAYLOR GREENE ENDORSEMENT, CALLS HER A ‘RANTING LUNATIC,’ HINTS AT BACKING PRIMARY RIVAL

Trump had previously endorsed Lahmeyer as a “MAGA Warrior” and longtime ally, making Wednesday’s endorsement switch one of the more notable reversals of the 2026 midterm cycle.

At approximately 2:23 p.m., Trump announced on Truth Social that he was backing Tedford.

“I greatly appreciate Jackson Lahmeyer’s hard work under difficult circumstances — He has always been with me, and I will always be with him,” Trump wrote. “But, when it comes to the current Congressional race for Oklahoma’s 1st Congressional District, I will be supporting America First Patriot, Mark Tedford.”

SNUBBED BY TRUMP, GOP CANDIDATES FIGHTING FOR RE-ELECTION ACT LIKE THEY HAVE HIS BACKING ANYWAY

The president described Tedford as “Pro Trump and MAGA all the way” and said the state lawmaker had his “Complete and Total Endorsement.”

At approximately 2:32 p.m., Lahmeyer announced on X that he was suspending his campaign.

“After prayerful consideration with my wife, Kendra, and my team over the last twenty four hours, I’ve made the difficult decision to suspend my campaign for Congress,” Lahmeyer said.

“I do not want to be a distraction to my family, my church, and the great people of Oklahoma’s 1st Congressional District, who deserve a strong conservative voice representing them in Washington.”

Fox News Digital reached out to Lahmeyer, Tedford and the White House for comment. A White House official referred Fox News Digital to Trump’s Truth Social statement and did not provide additional comment.

INSIDE STEFANIK’S EXIT AND HOW THE TRUMP ENDORSEMENT THAT NEVER CAME WAS ‘BIGGEST PIECE’ OF THE ‘PUZZLE’

Trump’s decision marked a sharp turn from his earlier endorsement of Lahmeyer, whom he praised before Oklahoma’s June 16 primary.

The endorsement reversal came after a turbulent stretch for Lahmeyer’s campaign. The Daily Mail published reports regarding Lahmeyer’s communications with former Miss Oklahoma USA Caitlin Simmons Key. 

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

Lahmeyer later acknowledged that he had crossed “a boundary line through text messaging” while disputing what he described as a misleading characterization of the situation.

Neither president Trump nor the White House publicly explained the reason for the endorsement change. Tedford is now positioned as the likely Republican nominee in the strongly GOP district.

The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) and four Republican-led states sued the World Professional Association for Transgender Health (WPATH) on Wednesday, alleging the influential medical organization misled parents and doctors about the safety, effectiveness and necessity of transgender medical treatments for minors.

The lawsuit alleges WPATH, whose standards of care are widely used by physicians treating patients with gender dysphoria, made deceptive claims about puberty blockers, cross-sex hormones and sex change surgeries while failing to adequately disclose potential risks and side effects.

“Parents have a right to make informed decisions about their children’s health,” FTC Chairman Andrew Ferguson wrote on X. “The FTC will not allow parents and children to be deceived by medical organizations and providers who are prioritizing profit over children’s health and safety.”

‘TRANSGENDER MADNESS’ UNDER FIRE AFTER CONGRESS LETS TAXPAYER FUNDING BAN LAPSE

According to the complaint, WPATH removed age-based recommendations for certain transgender procedures from its Standards of Care. The FTC also alleges the organization promoted treatments that were not adequately supported by evidence regarding their safety and effectiveness.

The lawsuit, filed alongside Alaska, Iowa, Nebraska and Texas, marks the latest effort by President Donald Trump’s administration to scrutinize medical interventions for transgender minors.

WPATH previously sued to block an FTC investigation into the organization, arguing the agency violated its First Amendment rights. A federal judge in May temporarily blocked the probe.

SEN HAWLEY WARNS IT WOULD BE ‘UNCONSCIONABLE’ IF BILLIONS OF TAXPAYER FUNDS FLOW TO TRANS KIDS’ SEX CHANGES

WPATH rejected the allegations and said its standards are intended to support individualized patient care. In a statement provided to The Associated Press, the organization said its guidelines are based on individualized treatment rather than a “one-size-fits-all” approach.

Fox News Digital reached out to WPATH for additional comment but did not immediately receive a response.

“WPATH is in a strong position to prove that the FTC is acting out of pure retaliation as part of the federal government’s relentless and targeted campaign to undermine gender-affirming care by attacking the First Amendment rights and the independence of professional medical organizations,” the group said in a statement to the AP.

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

The lawsuit comes amid a broader national debate over puberty blockers, hormone therapies and sex change surgeries for minors.

Supporters argue the treatments can be medically necessary for some patients, while critics contend the long-term risks are not fully understood and that children may be unable to provide informed consent.

President Donald Trump’s proposed Iran agreement is drawing sharp criticism from some of his strongest supporters, who argue the deal rewards Tehran before it has agreed to fully dismantle its nuclear program.

The 14-point framework agreement, unveiled on Wednesday, establishes an immediate ceasefire between the United States and Iran, with key provisions including the reopening of the Strait of Hormuz, the removal of the U.S. naval blockade, temporary waivers allowing Iranian oil exports, access to frozen Iranian assets and a commitment to negotiate a final agreement within 60 days. The framework also outlines a proposed economic reconstruction package reportedly worth at least $300 billion and includes Iran’s renewed pledge not to pursue nuclear weapons.

However, critics note that the agreement does not require the immediate dismantlement of Iran’s nuclear infrastructure, the removal of enriched uranium stockpiles, restrictions on Tehran’s ballistic missile program or the disbandment of Iranian-backed proxy groups such as Hezbollah.

Despite the administration portraying the agreement as a breakthrough, critics have argued that the concessions offered to Iran far outweigh the commitments secured in return.

IRAN’S REGIME SPINS NUCLEAR AND STRAIT OF HORMUZ DEAL WITH TRUMP AS VICTORY OVER US, ISRAEL

“The deal is absolutely terrible, there’s no getting around it,” Will Chamberlain, senior counsel at the Article III Project and vice president of external affairs at the Edmund Burke Foundation, wrote on X. “The text gives Iranians huge, immediate financial benefits and protection for Hezbollah in exchange for opening the Strait – and nothing else. President Trump should renege.”

Conservative talk radio host Mark Levin praised President Trump’s decision to use military force against Iran but sharply criticized the proposed MOU, arguing that it abandons U.S. leverage before Tehran has made meaningful concessions.

“From day one, I have underscored that no deal will be honored by the Iranian regime,” Levin wrote on X, adding, “Why would we agree to immediately drop the most important leverage we have over the regime in advance of it complying with MOU requirements?”

AG Hamilton, the pseudonym of a licensed attorney and conservative commentator with a large following on X, sharply criticized the preliminary U.S.-Iran memorandum of understanding.

“So they get to keep the nuclear program, the ballistic missile program, and funding for terror proxies. But they will pinky promise not to build a full nuke while getting billions of financial relief to fund all of that. Great deal. Should have had Kamala Harris negotiate it,” AG wrote.

Miles Taylor, a former Department of Homeland Security official who served during President Donald Trump’s first term and is a known critic of the president, called the memorandum of understanding “pathetic.”

“I was involved in Iran issues in the first Trump administration,” Taylor wrote on X. “The Trump ‘deal’ could be the most humiliating in U.S. diplomatic history. Hundred of billions in exchange for a ‘promise’ we already had.”

JD VANCE REVEALS DETAILS OF US-IRAN DEAL, ADDRESSES WHETHER TAXPAYER MONEY WILL GO TO TEHRAN

Atlanta-based conservative talk radio host Erick Erickson called it “American surrender.”

The deal came as little surprise to many observers, as versions of the alleged memorandum had been circulating for days.

“So the MOU is the same one that’s been out for days (as many of us have known the whole time, because we’ve been doing this for a while). And it’s as awful today as it was all week,” conservative commentator David Reaboi wrote on X.

Former Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene also delivered a lengthy and highly critical response, mocking the administration’s handling of the conflict and questioning the rationale behind a proposed reconstruction fund for Iran. Greene argued that American taxpayers would ultimately bear the financial burden while the Iranian regime remained in power.

TRUMP UNLEASHES ON OBAMA’S ‘DISASTER’ IRAN NUCLEAR DEAL, SAYS HE WAS ‘HONORED’ TO RIP IT APART

Trump’s former vice president and 2024 rival Mike Pence said the ceasefire agreement was almost identical to the Obama and Biden administration’s approach to the Iranians.

“The reported MOU with Iran smacks of the kind of appeasement that we saw during the Obama years, the kind of appeasement that Joe Biden tried to accomplish and was ignored by the Iranians, and the kind of appeasement we categorically rejected during the first Trump administration,” Pence wrote on X.

And former United Nations ambassador Nikki Haley, another 2024 Republican candidate for president defeated by Trump, called the agreement a “huge mistake.”

TRUMP BROKERS IRAN CEASEFIRE AS EXPERTS SAY REGIME’S ARSENAL IS SHATTERED BUT THREAT REMAINS

“Hitting Iran’s nuclear and missile sites was the right move. This regime chants death to America, murders our troops, and attempts to assassinate Americans on U.S. soil. They believe they have an obligation to destroy us,” Haley wrote on X.

“Now, we plan to unlock billions of dollars and lift sanctions, with the promise of even more money. They will use that money the way they always do— to further their nuclear ambitions and on terrorist proxies against us. It’s a huge mistake to pay to rebuild the threat we just destroyed.”

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

Others, however, welcomed the move away from further military escalation. Broadcaster Piers Morgan said he was pleased to see Trump seeking an exit from the conflict, even while criticizing the circumstances that led to it.

“This Iran deal is about as far removed from ‘unconditional surrender’ as any deal in the history of Planet Earth,” Morgan wrote on X. “I’m glad President Trump is getting out of this fiasco, but I bet if he had his time again, he’d have never got into it or believed Netanyahu’s bullsh*t.”

Fox News Digital reached out to the White House for comment.

President Donald Trump’s preliminary agreement with Iran is making its way through the media, but it still hasn’t made its way into the hands of lawmakers on Capitol Hill. 

Those who have read the reports are split on the memorandum of understanding (MOU) that the administration intends to finalize in a ceremonial signing on Friday. 

Some say it’s a worse outcome than former President Barack Obama’s Iranian nuclear agreement, known as the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), which Trump ripped up in his first term. 

TRUMP ADMINISTRATION UNVEILS SWEEPING TERMS OF PROPOSED IRAN AGREEMENT

“Everything I’ve seen is, like, what’s being reported by Bloomberg or the read-out on this thing is, we are giving a lot more to get a lot less than we got in the JCPOA,” Sen. Tim Kaine, D-Va., said. 

“Now, I can’t say that with an exclamation point on it until I actually see the memorandum, but every bit of reporting, thus far, says, we’re giving a lot more to get a lot less than what we had before Donald Trump,” he continued.

The schism on the MOU doesn’t follow party lines, either. 

TRUMP’S IRAN DEAL SPARKS GOP DEMANDS FOR VOTE AS CONGRESS REMAINS IN THE DARK

“Reagan is rolling over in his grave,” Sen. Bill Cassidy, R-La., said on X. “Iran’s nuclear ambitions were not curbed, and they have learned that threatening the Strait of Hormuz works and will undoubtedly leverage it in the future. Now, Iran gets to build brand-new infrastructure under this deal.”

Administration officials revealed the plan to reporters on Wednesday and detailed plans for immediate waivers on Iranian oil exports, a framework for at least $300 billion in reconstruction and economic development, and a 60-day negotiation period aimed at securing a final agreement on Iran’s nuclear program.

But the agreement, in its current form, falls short of dealing with the central issue that started the war in the first place: Iran’s nuclear program. 

REPUBLICANS BAT DOWN BID TO HANDCUFF TRUMP’S WAR POWERS AS PEACE DEAL NEARS

Instead, it commits both sides to negotiate the fate of Iran’s enriched uranium stockpile and future enrichment activities as part of a final agreement. 

Kaine, who pushed the Iran Nuclear Agreement Review Act (INARA) during the Obama administration that requires congressional review of any nuclear deal with Iran, said that from what he’s seen, the memorandum “probably touches enough on the nuclear program that it would have to be submitted to Congress.”

Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., who was previously skeptical of the burgeoning deal earlier in the week, now appears to support it. When asked about Cassidy’s take on the MOU, Graham said, “I like Bill, but I don’t think he quite understands what’s going on here.” 

“I don’t think the MOU is a deal, it’s a framework of how to get a deal,” Graham said. “There are parts of it I don’t like. The way I look at it, is if you can find a diplomatic solution to the Iranian nuclear ambitions, go for it. And the MOU puts it in place.”

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

When asked if he was OK with sanctions being lifted on Iranian oil exports, Graham said he was fine with the idea in the short-term and the money that would flow in, “Because if the deal doesn’t work, all that stops.” 

“What I’m worried about is not taking an opportunity here to find a diplomatic solution,” he said. “Because if you fail, then what is left is war.”

CHICAGO — The Obama Presidential Center was billed as a lasting legacy to former President Barack Obama, and its construction was touted as an ambitious model built with aggressive goals for minority-owned and local businesses.

But now, some of the very subcontractors who helped build the 19.3-acre campus on Chicago’s South Side say they are facing financial ruin as they race to recover millions of dollars they claim remain unpaid ahead of the center’s grand opening Friday. Overall construction costs were reported to be $830 million in 2021, and have likely climbed past the $1 billion mark.

A Fox News Digital investigation identified multiple construction firms claiming losses ranging from hundreds of thousands of dollars to tens of millions. The allegations cut against one of the Center’s defining goals: helping minority-owned businesses and local contractors grow through one of Chicago’s highest-profile construction projects. Several of the complaints reviewed by Fox News Digital come from firms that were supposed to benefit from that mission.

Among them is Adamson Plumbing, whose owner Mike Owen says is nearly $4 million in the red after years of work on the project.

“That is a hole that no subcontractor, small business can survive,” Owen said.

OBAMA PRESIDENTIAL CENTER’S $470M SAFETY NET UNDER SCRUTINY AS SUBCONTRACTORS SAY THEY’RE OWED MILLIONS

Subcontractor owners interviewed by Fox News Digital described what they characterized as a chaotic work environment marked by repeated design changes, rework, scheduling disruptions, extensive oversight and years-long compensation disputes that still remain unresolved.

Several also described what they viewed as a wall of silence surrounding the project, with some declining to speak publicly or requesting anonymity because of confidentiality agreements or fears of professional retaliation.

The allegations emerge days after a Fox News Digital investigation reported that the Obama Foundation’s reserve fund — originally promoted as a $470 million financial safeguard intended to help protect taxpayers if the project encountered financial trouble — remains funded at roughly $1 million.

Nearly $4 million in the red

Standing outside the center on a gloomy Friday afternoon, Owen flipped through spreadsheets and financial records that he said documented millions of dollars in losses tied to the project.

Owen said the project stretched on for years longer than anticipated, forcing his company to absorb millions of dollars in labor and overhead costs as work demands changed and expanded.

He said the losses have drained the company’s reserves, created uncertainty for employees and could ultimately force layoffs. Owen also said the years-long effort to recover what he believes is money owed has taken a significant toll on his mental health.

“I haven’t had eight hours or six hours sleep in over a year,” Owen said. “I’m cooked emotionally. I feel like an aluminum can that’s been thrown in front of a steamroller. We’re crushed. And I have to fight for my company and for my people.”

OBAMA PRESIDENTIAL CENTER JOB LISTINGS PUSH ‘ANTI-RACISM’ PLEDGE AHEAD OF OPENING

As the center prepares for a star-studded pre-opening celebration on Thursday featuring performers including Bruce Springsteen, Stevie Wonder and John Legend, Owen said it has been difficult to watch the buildup and soft-opening events take shape over the past few weeks while his company struggles financially.

“It was kind of hard seeing some local and national celebrities high-fiving and back-slapping here about the work that’s been done,” Owen said. “The backdrop of a coming celebration is kind of hard to swallow for me and for some of my peers at the moment.”

Owen, whose company is not minority-owned, said he decided to speak publicly only after months of failed efforts to recover losses he attributes to the project.

“As for me and my company, I’m at the end of my rope and I see no other choice than to have to tell my story,” Owen said. “This is not to embarrass anybody, but this is just to make sure that the truth gets told out here of what has happened to the companies that poured their heart and soul into getting this job complete and operational.”

He said unnecessary rework, delays and more than 100 change-order requests left his company absorbing millions of dollars in additional costs.

OBAMA PRESIDENTIAL CENTER SLAMMED FOR PROMOTING ‘FAR-LEFT’ AGENDA ON PUBLIC LAND

The Obama Foundation, Obama’s private nonprofit organization that oversees the construction, told Fox News Digital that it paid Lakeside Alliance as the project’s construction manager and that Lakeside was responsible for hiring, managing and paying subcontractors working on the center.

The Obama Foundation also said it has no outstanding disputed charges with Lakeside Alliance — a joint venture involving multiple construction companies — and no contractural relationship with Lakeside’s subcontractors.

Lakeside Alliance said projects of this scale are inherently complex and that outstanding project matters often continue long after construction ends. The alliance said approximately 475 contractors worked on the project, generating significant opportunities for local tradespeople and businesses, and that it remains committed to working through outstanding matters to successfully close out the project.

Neither Lakeside Alliance nor the Obama Foundation directly disputed allegations from some subcontractors that they incurred losses while working on the project.

Fears of speaking out

Advocates for Black subcontractor firms say those companies have been muzzled by a non-disclosure agreement and a reluctance to speak publicly because of the prestige surrounding the project in Obama’s adopted hometown, a Democratic stronghold, as well as concerns that speaking out could jeopardize payments.

“They are scared to death about talking about it,” Omar Shareef, the president of the African American Contractors Association, told Fox News Digital outside the center on a recent Saturday. The group advocates for Black-owned construction businesses and was founded by Shareef in 1989.

“I’ve never seen this happen since I’ve been in business,” Shareef said. “The building does look nice, but the fact doesn’t matter that they’re not paying our damn contractors.”

Fox News Digital independently interviewed several contractors who described similar concerns.

Shareef said several Black subcontractor owners began privately approaching him about six months ago, claiming significant losses tied directly to the project. The concerns are particularly notable, he said, because the project was publicly promoted as an opportunity for minority-owned businesses and local workers.

“The promise was that this project was going to uplift minority contractors and uplift the community,” Shareef said. “What sense is celebrating Juneteenth if our Black contractors are not getting their money?”

“Some of the people have put their mortgages up, they’re going to lose their bonding… they are going to lose their relationship with their supplier as well as their banker.”

Shareef said that being in the red not only puts them at financial risk, but it also makes it harder for them to secure future projects. Shareef said his group plans on staging a protest outside the center on Thursday at 10 a.m. CT.

“That’s a bad signal to put out the fact that seven to eight to maybe 10 of our contractors in our community are going to be eliminated from doing business because of the debt that they incurred on this particular project,” he said. “If they would have known it was a Trojan horse or a Pandora’s box, I don’t know if they would have raced as much as they did to be a part of it.”

Fox News Digital has not independently corroborated the claim that these subcontractors will be forced out of business as a result of their work on the Obama Presidential Center project.

WATCH: Black subcontractors at Obama Presidential Center still seeking payment as Juneteenth opening nears, advocate says

Local companies on the brink

One minority-owned subcontractor owner told Fox News Digital his company was up to $2.5 million in the red but declined to speak publicly, citing non-disclosure agreements and ongoing efforts to resolve disputes. The owner said the contract for the job was originally expected to last 24 months but ultimately stretched to about five years.

Fox News Digital was unable to independently verify the company’s claimed losses. Shareef said the owner told him the same story but the owner wouldn’t provide Shareef with documents due to the NDA.

The largest publicly known dispute tied to the project involved II in One Concrete, a Black-owned firm that was part of the Concrete Collective — a joint venture that also included Trice Construction and W.E. O’Neil Construction — that was responsible for major structural concrete work across the campus.

The Concrete Collective filed claims exceeding $40 million, alleging it incurred substantial additional costs while working on the Center. The dispute later became entangled with a widely publicized racial racial discrimination lawsuit that brought national attention to diversity, equity and inclusion issues surrounding the project.

McGee alleged the project’s structural engineer unfairly blamed his company for delays and cost overruns and that the criticism contributed to the rejection of Concrete Collective’s compensation claims.

Defendants denied wrongdoing and disputed the allegations, arguing that portions of the concrete work had to be repaired or replaced because of cracking and other deficiencies. The owner of II in One Concrete declined to comment for this story. The case docket reflects that the case remains pending.

BUREAUCRATS HIDE TRUE PRICE OF OBAMA PRESIDENTIAL CENTER AS TAXPAYERS HIT WITH INFRASTRUCTURE BILL

Court records also show that at least two minority-owned subcontractors that worked on the project later sought Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection, according to documents viewed by Fox News Digital. The filings do not establish that the Obama Presidential Center caused those financial difficulties.

Glass Management Services, which supplied glass for the project, filed for Chapter 11 protection in 2024 and later told the bankruptcy court it was preparing litigation related to the Obama Presidential Center that it said could yield millions of dollars in damages. Fox News Digital is not aware that such litigation has been filed and the allegations have not been tested in court. Its owner declined to speak.

Vision Painting & Decorating Services, another subcontractor that worked on the project, also filed for Chapter 11 protection in 2024 while listing the Obama Presidential Center contract in its bankruptcy schedules. Court filings reviewed by Fox News Digital do not state whether the company viewed the project as contributing to its financial difficulties. Fox News Digital was unable to get in touch with its owner.

Another subcontractor owner who worked on the project, told Fox News Digital that the job caused significant financial strain on his company too and he described the experience as a “nightmare” and one of the most difficult projects he had encountered.

He filed a mechanic’s lien for around $145,000, documents show, which was eventually paid to him, but he said his company was still down $200,000 for the project. A mechanic’s lien is a legal tool that companies file when they say they are owed money for construction work they completed.

“Literally, I’ve been doing this for 35 years, and it was the worst-run job I’ve ever been on,” the subcontractor owner said.

He described repeated delays, extensive oversight and what he considered unnecessary construction requirements that forced contractors to spend additional time and money completing work.

“The stuff that they made everybody do was so over-the-top ridiculous,” the owner said.

That view was echoed by Owen, who said his company was forced to redo portions of the Center’s stormwater system at a cost of nearly $900,000, expenses he believes should have been reimbursed. Owen said the work was unnecessary and pointed to correspondence reviewed by Fox News Digital in which Chicago’s chief plumbing inspector later wrote that Adamson’s original method complied with city code requirements.

Owen also provided records showing his firm submitted more than 100 change-order requests — requests for additional compensation for work performed beyond the original scope of the project — during construction. He said the unusually high number reflected constant revisions, rework and delays.

Owen said the company has been trying to recover money it says it is owed from parties involved and has not filed a lawsuit. Fox News Digital reviewed correspondence showing that Adamson’s attorney wrote to project representatives regarding the dispute.

Meanwhile, two additional companies filed mechanics’ liens for around $400,000 and $75,000 respectively. Fox News Digital was unable to contact company officials and it is not known if the liens have been paid.

Promise vs. reality

The concerns are particularly notable because the Obama Presidential Center was built around one of the most ambitious efforts to increase participation by minority-owned businesses and workers from historically underserved communities.

The Obama Foundation committed to awarding 50% of subcontracting packages to diverse vendors — nearly double Chicago’s goals for minority- and women-owned businesses — while requiring 35% of workforce hours to come from targeted South and West Side communities. Foundation officials said the effort was intended to serve as a model for future development projects and help create a pipeline of workers and contractors for projects across Chicago.

The Obama Foundation estimated the Center would generate as many as 5,000 direct, indirect and induced jobs during and after construction.

To deliver the project, the foundation hired Lakeside Alliance — a consortium led by Turner Construction and four Black-owned firms: UJAMAA Construction, Powers & Sons Construction, Brown & Momen and Safeway Construction. The partnership was frequently highlighted by the Foundation as evidence of the project’s commitment to minority-owned businesses and local economic opportunity.

Beneath that alliance sat dozens of subcontractors responsible for carrying out the actual work, from plumbing and HVAC systems to painting, insulation, glass installation and concrete construction. Many of the complaints reviewed by Fox News Digital came from firms operating at that subcontractor level.

The foundation said many subcontractors used the project to grow their businesses and noted that it implemented accelerated payment schedules, advance payments and a 15-day payment cycle to help support smaller firms. The foundation also said it worked with Lakeside Alliance to identify subcontractors in need of financial assistance and, when appropriate, provide additional support.

A landmark project

Whatever the outcome of those disputes, the center itself is nearing completion and preparing to open its doors to the public.

For many Chicago residents, the project remains a source of pride and a long-awaited investment in the city’s South Side. For some of the subcontractors who helped build it, however, the approaching opening date represents a shrinking window to resolve payment disputes they say have lingered for years.

The subcontractor tension was largely absent from the excitement surrounding the center over a recent weekend, when local residents touring the campus told Fox News Digital they were impressed by the sprawling development and its 220-foot-tall granite-clad museum tower.

Many posed with a statue of the former president and first lady and stopped to read slogans displayed on the perimeter fence, including “Bring Change Home” and “A Home For Action.” Several described the project as a fitting tribute to Obama, who first rose to prominence as a community organizer before becoming the nation’s first Black president.

The center sits in historic Jackson Park, one of Chicago’s most iconic public parks. The Obama Foundation secured the site through a 99-year lease with the city for a one-time fee of just $10.

Once open, the campus will serve as the headquarters of the Obama Foundation and host leadership programs, community initiatives and public events.

It will feature a branch of the Chicago Public Library, a digitized presidential library — though it will not be a traditional presidential library with physical papers — an auditorium, an indoor sports facility, a playground and expansive green outdoor spaces.

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

Despite the financial losses, Owen said he still takes pride in the finished product.

“I’ve heard the criticisms of the design out here and maybe from an outsider’s perspective, it might not be your cup of tea, but I can tell you the interior of this presidential center is quite beautiful and it’s something to be proud of,” Owen said.

“And we are still proud to have been part of this job. We just wish it would have gone a different way financially.”