DAN GAINOR: One child, one ICE photo — and a media meltdown built on distortion

A picture is worth a thousand words, as the old saying goes. There’s just no guarantee those words are truthful. In the case of a photo of a 5-year-old boy in Minnesota, the major media embraced shock and “awwww” instead of the truth.

The boy, named Liam Ramos, and his father, Adrian Alexander Conejo Arias, were approached by ICE agents. The father reportedly ran, leaving the boy alone with authorities. The father was quickly captured, but a photo of an officer with his hand resting lightly on the boy’s backpack sent the media into a predictable nationwide panic.

The press dug deep to find words of alarm — “upsetting,” “firestorm,” “controversy,” “outrage,” “haunting.” Each network tried to outdo the other with one goal in mind, and it wasn’t journalism. The goal was to help Democrats succeed in shaping the illegal immigration narrative, holding on to the millions of potential new voters they let into the country under Biden and keeping ICE from sending them back. No one is more on board with that agenda than so-called neutral journalists.

MEDIA RUNS WILD WITH ‘EGREGIOUS LIE’ ICE TARGETED 5-YEAR-OLD IN MINNESOTA, DHS SAYS CHILD WAS ABANDONED

Here’s what we really know. The father “is an Ecuadorean citizen who was in the United States illegally and was released into the country by the Biden administration,” as reported by Fox News. DHS officials say they approached the father and he ran, leaving them with the boy. 

They quickly captured the father, who asked that they not be separated. Police reportedly even bought the boy a meal. Father and son are together in a facility in Dilley, Texas. Hardly the crisis of 2026. But there’s the photo of the boy standing there with a winter hat and wearing a Spider-Man backpack.

Major news outlets ran with the claim that the agents used the child as “bait” to capture his dad.

CBS — the network the left claims is pro-Trump — went with “bait.” So did AP, The Washington Post and PBS. (The Post later added a correction.) All of these are allegedly objective news outlets. They went with “bait,” citing a quote from a school official who clearly opposes ICE.

WHITE HOUSE, DHS PUSH BACK ON CLAIMS ICE TARGETED 5-YEAR-OLD IN MINNESOTA, SAY CHILD WAS ‘ABANDONED’

ABC anchor David Muir called the incident a “growing outrage.” Reporter Matt Rivers followed that up by referring to “the haunting images sparking a firestorm.” “CBS Mornings” co-host Gayle King focused her hyperbole on the child. “Now to the newest controversy over the immigration crackdown in Minneapolis. It involves a 5-year-old boy. His name is Liam Ramos. Look at his face.” That’s not journalism. That’s activism.

She added while speaking on set, “Nicole, I was watching this story yesterday. It’s very upsetting. Both sides are very, very disturbing.” That could also be said about King, a Democrat donor and supporter who is rumored to be on her way out at CBS.

The other major media were almost as extreme. The New York Times claimed to speak for an entire city with this headline: “Detention of 5-Year-Old by Federal Agents Incenses Minneapolis.” The paper claimed, “The image prompted outrage in the Twin Cities area.” Leftists don’t want immigration enforcement. They are already at 10 billion on the outrage dial. This didn’t upset them — it was just an excuse.

DHS RELEASES IMAGE OF ILLEGAL IMMIGRANT ACCUSED OF ABANDONING HIS 5-YEAR-OLD SON WHILE FLEEING ICE

The Post was just as bad, if not worse, running this piece: “The Abhorrent Power of the Photograph of a 5-Year-Old Held by ICE.” The paper grasped that this is what journalism does best now — find an iconic photo and use it to push an agenda. The link to the story on X repeats the “bait” claim.

The Post’s art and architecture critic, Philip Kennicott, understood the potential the photo has to aid the left’s agenda. “This is an image of universal moral urgency, akin to a small number of photographs that once upon a time had the power to change our behavior, away from cruelty or indifference and in the direction of basic decency.” He cited the 1972 “Napalm Girl” photo as a comparison — an absurd and offensive stretch.

PBS, which is still around (for now), quoted the family’s lawyer, Marc Prokosch, being honest about the left’s motivation: “We’re looking at our legal options to see if we can free them either through some legal mechanisms or moral pressure.” The left doesn’t care about the law. They want to override it with manufactured moral outrage.

WASHINGTON POST CALLS MN CHURCH PROTEST AN ‘ASSAULT ON RELIGIOUS LIBERTY,’ DON LEMON AN ‘INTERNET PROVOCATEUR’

If you read the PBS article, it’s interrupted by a begging pop-up ad urging its mostly left-leaning readers to donate: “Your generous monthly contribution — or whatever you can give — will help secure our future.”

Then came the equally ridiculous left-wing outlets like MS Now (formerly MSNBC) and Mother Jones. MS Now went with: “The photo of 5-year-old Liam Ramos being detained by ICE is a shameful look for America.” You can picture the outlet’s fans shouting “Shame! Shame!” like a scene from

Mother Jones went fully off the deep end: “They Want to Tell You a Kid With a Spider-Man Backpack Is Evil.” Literally, no one said that — except Mother Jones.

CLICK HERE FOR MORE FOX NEWS OPINION

The whole controversy makes one wonder if journalists ever watch cop shows. If a parent gets arrested, officers can’t just abandon a child on the street. You think there’s outrage now? Imagine if they had. As Vice President JD Vance said, “Are they supposed to let a 5-year-old child freeze to death?”

Nearly every one of these immigration stories is one-sided, like nearly every major media controversy today. Nowhere do journalists interview former Biden administration officials about their open-border policies that brought these illegal immigrants into the U.S. and resulted in numerous American deaths. Every story is spun to depict Trump officials and ICE as evil for daring to enforce laws that Democrats and the press oppose — the same laws Democrats once enforced themselves.

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

White House spokeswoman Abigail Jackson said the press is working “hand in glove with Democrats to spread malicious lies about ICE operations.” You’ve got that right. But as the editor says in “The Man Who Shot Liberty Valance,” “When the legend becomes fact, print the legend.”

That might as well be the motto of today’s news media.

CLICK HERE FOR MORE FROM DAN GAINOR

DAVID MARCUS: Anti-ICE agitators adopt Palestinian tactics, including martyrdom

The highly organized groups of agitators in Minneapolis, coordinated online to harass federal immigration agents (or anyone in an SUV it seems), have begun to employ tactics that any Israeli would recognize from decades of terrorism in their country.

The basic idea employed by both the Minnesota leftists and Hamas, is to be as menacing as possible to authorities, including through acts of violence, and then, when the authorities strike back, to claim victimhood and martyrdom.

The tragic and needless death of Alex Pretti on Friday morning, was a terrible example of this phenomenon, one that, sadly and unconscionably, is being not just tolerated by Minnesota officials, but shamelessly encouraged.

The video of the shooting is vague, and it will take time and testimony to piece together the chain of events that led to Pretti’s death. But there are a few facts that seem clear, and they all point to an organized effort to antagonize and provoke law enforcement.

TODD BLANCHE WARNS AMERICANS ‘SHOULD BE WORRIED’ ABOUT MINNESOTA PROTESTS AFTER CHURCH DISRUPTION

Pretti left home Friday with a gun and extra ammunition and a plan to impede federal agents, which is exactly what he seemed to be doing when he allegedly intervened in the arrest of a suspect.

It is reasonable to assume that Pretti brought the gun and extra clips in anticipation of a potential confrontation with law enforcement. Can we know that for sure? No. Is it more likely than not? Absolutely.

The key point here is that no matter how much one may cherish the Second Amendment, nobody has a right to carry a gun while committing a felony, because to do so obviously puts everyone involved in harm’s way.

TRUMP URGES DHS, ICE TO PUBLICIZE ARRESTS, SAYS CRACKDOWN IS ‘SAVING MANY INNOCENT LIVES’

Pretti’s defenders are disingenuously arguing that he was merely enjoying his rights as a gun owner while protesting, which would be perfectly fine, except there was no protest. Instead, he was involved in direct, illegal action to interfere with the feds.

This is why reports, from all sides, say that the crowd of hundreds did not gather until the shooting, which is exactly what happened in the case of Renee Good, who was also breaking the law with a deadly weapon, in that case, her SUV.

The tactic here is clear as day: organize hordes of people to harass federal agents all day, then cross the line into breaking the law in order to create a flash point, even if that means people have to die.

NOEM SAYS MINNEAPOLIS SUSPECT COMMITTED ‘DOMESTIC TERRORISM,’ ACCUSES WALZ, FREY OF INCITING VIOLENCE

This is straight out of the Palestinian playbook: cause just enough harm to provoke a reaction, then claim the reaction is disproportionate and evil, as in, “We just sent a suicide bomber, you used missiles, no fair!”

Let’s be clear, if you choose to fight with federal agents while they attempt to arrest a criminal and you bring a gun to that fight, you stand a very, very good chance of getting shot. 

But this was more than just a bad decision by Pretti. These types of actions have been cynically sanctioned by local elected officials such as Minneapolis Mayor Jacob Frey, Gov. Tim Walz, and state Attorney General Keith Ellison.

MINNESOTA AGITATORS STALK, PELT BORDER PATROL AGENTS WITH FOOD AND SPIT AT GAS STATIONS, DHS SAYS

To date, none of them have firmly told citizens to stop organizing to impede federal agents. It’s hard not to come to the conclusion that the deaths are good politics for them in their one battle after another against President Donald Trump.

Frey, and Walz and Democrats in general will hide behind the well-worn phrase, “peaceful protest,” but will never say exactly what peaceful protest includes.

Does peaceful protest include storming churches? Does it include using your car to hinder investigations? Does it include carrying a gun while committing a felony? They won’t address any of this, and the only reason why, not that makes any sense, is that they like the results.

MOB VIOLENCE IN MINNESOTA ISN’T FREE SPEECH — IT’S GROUNDS FOR THE INSURRECTION ACT

After the death of Good, conservatives pleaded with Democrats to tell their followers to stand down from illegally impeding agents. We warned, very specifically, that it would cause more death. But Frey and Walz just didn’t care.

CLICK HERE FOR MORE FOX NEWS OPINION

Sadly, we were right. 

One lesson that Israel has learned in fighting an enemy that wants to or is willing to die, is that the reaction to Israelis defending themselves is widespread moral outrage and condemnation. The other lesson is that they have to do it anyway.

This is the conundrum that the Trump administration finds itself in today. They could throw in the towel and leave the Twin Cities to their own devices, but doing so would be the end of federal law.

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

No, the administration must hold firm, in the face of public outrage, in the face of midterm worries, and in the face of the shameless harassment of their agents.

It is up to Minnesotans if they wish to create more martyrs to their cause, and sadly, given the support for lawlessness seen from Frey and Walz, we can expect more, sooner rather than later.

CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM DAVID MARCUS

TEVI TROY: Shapiro’s revenge once again reveals Kamala Harris’ incompetence

When Kamala Harris wrote in her memoir “107 Days” that Pennsylvania governor – and fellow Democrat – Josh Shapiro insisted on being “in the room for every decision” if he were to become vice president, an angry Shapiro characterized her account as “bullsh–” and “blatant lies.” But Shapiro’s own forthcoming memoir demonstrates that he is not done getting back at Harris. His book includes the explosive and damaging tale that in the Harris team’s hostile vice-presidential vetting process, Shapiro was asked if he had ever been an Israeli agent, bringing to mind the ugly association of Jews and dual loyalty.

The story is harmful to Harris in a number of ways. It reinforces the existing impression that she and her team were clumsy, but also adds the dimension that they may have been antisemitic. Indeed, even Joe Biden’s former envoys on antisemitism have denounced the Harris team’s questioning as “horrifying.” Shapiro’s devastating tale is a reminder of Harris’ failure to understand a basic rule of life in the political big leagues: Don’t dish it out in your memoirs and get caught unawares when your targets respond.

In the modern, staff memoir-writing era, there have been numerous instances of aggrieved officials hitting back hard against memoirs that attacked people ostensibly on the same political team. A great example of this kind of revenge happened in the wake of Arthur Schlesinger’s Pulitzer Prize-winning memoir of his time in the Kennedy administration, “A Thousand Days.” Some in the Kennedy camp were annoyed with Schlesinger’s account, including former first lady Jackie Kennedy, who told Schlesinger that he had gotten “too personal” with some of his revelations. Even more irked was Kennedy’s secretary of state, Dean Rusk. Schlesinger wrote that Kennedy had been thinking of firing Rusk and that the “Buddha-like” Rusk would say little in White House meetings. Rusk, who was still the secretary of state for Lyndon Johnson when the book came out, let it be known that he was only silent around Schlesinger because Schlesinger was a notorious gossip on the Georgetown cocktail party circuit. 

Sometimes, responses to a book can be less ad hoc and more systematic. Charlie Kolb, a domestic policy aide to President George H.W. Bush, wrote a critical memoir called “White House Daze,” which came out in 1993, after Bush had lost to Bill Clinton. The memoir was particularly harsh on Kolb’s boss, Roger Porter, as well as Bush’s Office of Management and Budget Director Dick Darman, with whom Kolb had clashed in the White House. Bush staffer Tom Scully, who had been an aide to Darman, dismissed the very idea of Kolb having had the access for writing a revealing book, saying, “Charlie was so cut out of everything that for him to be in a position to write a book was a joke.” Scully was not alone in being unhappy with Kolb, as the Bush alumni collectively froze Kolb out. In 1999, years after the administration ended, Scully – who had endorsed Kolb’s hiring to begin with – recounted that “Nobody’s talked to Charlie in seven years that I know of. He’s the most unpopular guy as a result of that book.”

Unlike the Kolb book, George Stephanopoulos’ “All Too Human” came out while President Clinton was still in office. Stephanopoulos’ revealing memoir called out the sitting president’s behavior in the Monica Lewinsky affair as “stupid, selfish, and self-destructive.” Clinton staffers responded to Stephanopoulos’ best-selling book both on and off the record. Anonymous aides called Stephanopoulos a “backstabber” and an “ingrate.” Clinton ally Mandy Grunwald also sniped that if Clinton hadn’t given him the “opportunity of a lifetime,” he wouldn’t have become a “multimillion-dollar book writer and commentator.”

KAMALA HARRIS DISPARAGES WASHINGTON POST, LA TIMES OVER NON-ENDORSEMENTS IN 2024

Another damaging memoir that came out during an administration was Scott McLellan’s “What Happened.” McLellan made a number of criticisms of President George W. Bush, writing that Bush “convinces himself to believe what suits his needs at the moment,” and that he engaged in “self-deception.” McLellan also called the invasion of Iraq a “serious strategic blunder,” and claimed that the Bush White House made “a decision to turn away from candor and honesty when those qualities were most needed.”

The Bush White House responded with a seemingly organized effort to dismiss McLellan’s book.

After the memoir came out, multiple Bush allies criticized McLellan with similarly crafted talking points. Senior Adviser Karl Rove said, “This doesn’t sound like Scott. It really doesn’t. Not the Scott McClellan I’ve known for a long time.”

CLICK HERE FOR MORE FOX NEWS OPINION

These types of pushback are, of course, fair game from those targeted in a negative memoir. John Bolton probably expected President Trump to criticize him and even call him a “liar” following Bolton’s critical memoir of his time in the first Trump administration, “The Room Where It Happened.” He probably did not expect Trump’s second term, in which Bolton is being investigated for misuse of classified information, an investigation that probably would not have happened but for the book.

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

Memoir writers do not have to take people on by name, as Harris did to Shapiro. Sometimes memoirists call out anonymous antagonists. Examples of this include John Podhoretz, who created composite characters in his George H.W. Bush book “Hell of a Ride,” and Condoleezza Rice, whose memoir of the George W. Bush years, “No Higher Honor,” is replete with over 20 uses of anonymous characters. This could be a way to spare someone’s feelings, but it could also minimize the odds of someone taking revenge. When someone is criticized by name, as Shapiro was, the odds of blowback are much higher, as Harris has now learned.

Memoirs are part of the game, but Harris should have known that taking on a savvy player like Shapiro was not without cost. If she had paid more attention to history, she might have been aware of the risks she was taking in calling out Shapiro. Her lack of awareness of what other politicos have done in response to poor memoir depictions is just one more sign of her lack of aptitude for politics – and left her vulnerable to Shapiro’s revenge.

CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM TEVI TROY

Young men aren’t failing America — America is failing to give them purpose

What could two men from entirely different generations, politics, and backgrounds possibly share in common? A mutual concern for America’s future and the young men growing up in it.

Our shared lived experience—an experience that we’re seeing become less frequent—is driving our concern as we see it move from the norm to the exception. As young men, both of us volunteered. It instilled in us a sense of pride, duty, identity and connection. For Neil, it was a summer with a nonprofit to engage with kids in a small low-income fishing village in Labrador, Canada. For Alex, it was time spent as a Boy Scout learning the power of collective action and shared responsibility to community. 

These service experiences were formative in shaping who we are. However, as volunteering declines and isolation increases, opportunities for connection through service are not top of mind for most young American men. 

DEPRESSION AND ANXIETY MAY IMPACT YOUNG ADULTS TWICE AS MUCH AS TEENS, HARVARD SURVEY FINDS

Across classrooms, workplaces and online, we’re seeing what happens when young men become untethered from their communities. The data alone tells a powerful story. Among 18-35 year-olds, men are significantly more likely to feel lonely compared to their female counterparts. Fifteen percent of young men today report having no close friends, compared to 3 percent in the 1990s. Perhaps most alarmingly, suicide rates among men in 2021 were four times higher than those of women. And the most common last words men use to describe themselves before they take their own lives are “worthless” and “useless.” 

People are taking note, but we need to take action. This year, California launched a statewide initiative to shine a spotlight on this growing emergency and, more importantly, an unexpected solution: .

Volunteering gives men a structured way to build relationships and feel part of something larger than themselves. Research shows that young people who volunteer show significantly better well-being. Youth who volunteer have 25% lower anxiety, are 35% less likely to have behavioral problems, and are 66% more likely to be “flourishing” compared to non-volunteers.

IF YOU WANT TO HELP AMERICA, START SERVING

Yet in 2023, only 34.1%  of young people ages 16 to 17 volunteered in the past year. Consider a recent NBC poll in which Gen Z men ranked making their family or community proud and using their talents to help others among the top five markers of success. Volunteering is one of the few cost-free ways to live out these values and create purpose and connection as a result.

So, what must we do to reconnect young men to community through service? We need to rebuild the civic infrastructure around volunteering so that people understand  and  to get involved. We also need to show young people that volunteering isn’t just good for their communities – it’s profoundly good for them too.

Points of Light found that 44% of people who want to volunteer are unsure how to get involved and where to find opportunities, or say they cannot find opportunities near where they live or work. 

Every young man should have access to opportunities that foster purpose, pride and belonging.

That’s why Points of Light is calling for a collective national response—to elevate the value of volunteering, reduce these barriers by meeting young people where they are, and ultimately double the number of volunteers by 2035.

CLICK HERE FOR MORE FOX NEWS OPINION

Already, the organization—whose mission is to increase volunteerism around the world—engages 4 million volunteers annually. But expanding our volunteer infrastructure through public and private investment is critical to achieving this goal.

Every young man should have access to opportunities that foster purpose, pride and belonging. That could mean corporations putting real dollars and time where it matters, offering paid volunteer hours for workers to mentor and serve alongside young men. It could mean schools–from primary to post-secondary–community centers and youth organizations strengthening the programs that make volunteering accessible: from service-learning in classrooms to after-school and weekend opportunities.

As America approaches its 250th birthday, it raises the question: what kind of nation do we want the next generation to inherit? How can we ensure it’s one that doesn’t leave  behind? 

Governments, institutions and leaders must come together to make service central to American life. In turn, this will build a culture where a generation of young men feels connected to one another, proud of their roles and rooted in the communities they serve.

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

No crisis can be solved overnight, but the choices we make right now will determine the future we hand off to young people. We can either continue to watch our young men drift further into isolation, or we can offer them a life raft—an opportunity that we know will work.

Together, we can help the next generation of young men find purpose and belonging—one act of service at a time.

JOSH HAMMER: Case against Israel cheapens the word ‘genocide’

The horrific regime slaughter in Iran and President Trump’s aggressive campaign to acquire Greenland have resulted in the neglect of a major case now underway at the International Court of Justice (ICJ).

The ICJ last week began hearings brought by Gambia against Myanmar alleging genocide against the Rohingya people—about 1.4 million of whom live in Myanmar. Several other states have intervened in support of Gambia, which has presented the court with evidence it contends proves that Myanmar’s military forces committed a genocide against the Rohingya population. Myanmar vehemently denies the allegation.

While this case does not concern Israel directly, the ICJ’s determinations may have major ramifications for the case Israel is now defending at the tribunal against South Africa.

This is especially true since one of the judges hand-picked by Gambia to sit on its ICJ panel is South African national Navi Pillay. That would be the same Navi Pillay who recently rushed to publish a report accusing Israel of genocide before retiring as head of the UN Human Rights Council commission of inquiry—a panel widely criticized for its flagrant institutional bias against Israel and the anti-Semitic remarks of its members.

‘UNPRECEDENTED’ ANTISEMITISM PANEL TACKLES SURGING NATIONAL ISSUE

In reality, South Africa’s ICJ case against Israel is riddled with flaws. It is also pushing to redefine a term that been held sacrosanct since the end of the World War II.

The term “genocide” was coined by Raphael Lemkin, a Holocaust survivor who in 1944 strived for its incorporation into modern international law. That occurred in 1948 via the UN Genocide Convention.

The prohibition on genocide is considered a norm—that is, a non-derogable rule accepted by all of the first-world community with no exceptions. The definition of “genocide” requires no law degree to understand, and it should never, ever be politicized.

WESTERN LEADERS MUST CONFRONT ISLAMIST-INSPIRED ANTISEMITIC VIOLENCE BEFORE IT TARGETS EVERYONE

For a genocide to take place under Geneva, there must be acts committed “with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnic, racial, or religious group.” The phrase “intent” here is of paramount importance.

South Africa’s pending case before the ICJ alleges Israeli intent to destroy the Palestinian-Arab population of Gaza. Israel, by contrast, (correctly) maintains that its recent actions in Gaza have been a just and proper military response to the war of annihilationist jihad and unspeakable atrocities launched against it by the Hamas terrorist organization on Oct. 7, 2023.

Israel’s “intent” is to free Gaza from Hamas, to return hostages abducted and held by Hamas, and to ensure Hamas has no future role in Gaza and cannot undertake another October 7-style massacre. It repeatedly offered to end the war if Hamas laid down its arms and released all hostages.

ANTISEMITIC THREATS ESCALATE NATIONWIDE AS PROTESTERS CALL FOR REPEAT OF OCT 7 MASSACRE

Hamas, on the other hand, has shown a complete disregard for human life and has openly stated that its sacrifice of Gazan civilians is a cynical strategic necessity to turn public opinion against Israel. It has for years embedded military infrastructure within Gazan civilian infrastructure—schools, hospitals, UN facilities, mosques, and children’s bedrooms. Israel has waged a defensive campaign in one of the most complex operational environments of any modern war.

At the same time, it has worked with states and NGOs to allow and facilitate extensive amounts of humanitarian aid, rebuilt water supplies, coordinated the vaccination of young Gazans against polio, and helped coordinate and approve the evacuation of those in need of urgent medical care.

Israel repeatedly provides advanced warnings of impending military strikes and has held off strikes where intelligence of nearby civilians has come to light. For a fighting party to so often relinquish the element of surprise to reduce harm to the local civilian population of its enemy is extraordinary.

MORNING GLORY: 2026 SHOULD BE YEAR ANTISEMITISM BECOMES UNACCEPTABLE IN AMERICA AGAIN

None of this constitutes a “genocide”—and clearly shows the lack of any by Israel to destroy the local Palestinian-Arab population in Gaza.

Nonetheless, since South Africa brought its case before the ICJ, numerous groups and states have leapt at the opportunity to join in on the anti-Israel campaign. This has ranged from tendentious so-called online genocide scholars to anti-Semitic mobs to deeply politicized NGOs. Amnesty International, for instance, shamelessly waited more than two years before publishing a report focusing on Hamas’ crimes on Oct. 7, while straining to remind readers of its slanderous accusation of genocide made against Israel a year prior.

Together, they have all been involved in a campaign to redefine the term “genocide” to suit their narrative—all while ignoring the reality of Hamas’ own Nazi-esque barbarism.

The politically motivated efforts to undermine the concept should be of grave concern to us all. If successful, it will result in the ICJ’s further self-discrediting as an institution of political point scoring, rather than meaningful justice.

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

Israel has legitimately responded to genocidal attacks by a terrorist organization that has repeatedly called for its entire annihilation and the murder of all global Jewry—something it broadcast live to the world on Oct. 7, 2023.

The term “genocide” is one too important to be cheapened. Those pushing for its redefinition must be stopped in their tracks.

CLICK FOR MORE FROM JOSH HAMMER

America doesn’t need to own Greenland — there’s a better, more peaceful way

At the World Economic Forum in Davos, President Trump backed off his threat to use the military to gain control of Greenland. He said that he doesn’t need to use military force and later announced that the U.S. had reached agreement on the “framework of a future deal” with NATO. Denmark, Greenland and our European allies have rejected any attempt by the U.S. to acquire the island.

Contrary to President Donald Trump’s views, the U.S. does not need to own Greenland to defend it. For decades, our national security has been strengthened by cooperative agreements with Greenland, Denmark and other NATO nations extending back to the Second World War.

During World War II, the Nazis occupied Denmark and had a military outpost in Greenland. The U.S. ousted the Nazis from Greenland and established military bases on the island. In 1951, the U.S. entered into an agreement with the Danish government providing for joint defense, and throughout the Cold War the U.S. maintained military facilities on the island. In 2004, the agreement was updated to give Greenland’s government a greater say in how U.S. military operations impacted its citizens.

TOP NATO OFFICIAL REVEALS DETAILS OF STUNNING MEETING WITH TRUMP THAT PRODUCED GREENLAND DEAL ‘FRAMEWORK’

In recent decades, the U.S., in cooperation with the Danish and Greenland governments, has maintained a limited military presence on the island. Under these agreements, the U.S. has had wide discretion in running military operations in Greenland for national defense. Danish and Greenland citizens now ask the obvious question: If President Trump wants to beef up the U.S. military presence in Greenland, why doesn’t he do it within the framework of existing agreements?

One argument used by President Trump is that the U.S. needs to own Greenland to secure rare earth mineral deposits on the island. The pretext for this claim is the decision by China to impose export controls on their rare earth mineral producers. The fact is that in recent years the U.S. has significantly reduced its dependence on Chinese rare earth minerals. Greenland has substantial reserves of rare earth minerals. However, access to these rare earth minerals is constrained by both technology and limited downstream facilities required to bring rare earth minerals to market. It will take many years to explore and develop Greenland’s rare earth minerals and bring them to market.

Greenland should retain control over its rare earth minerals and develop these resources to benefit its people. The proven way to do this is to rely on markets, not politics. Greenland should grant leases to multinational corporations in a competitive market. These lease agreements could generate royalties and revenue for Greenland based on market conditions. Greenland should place this royalty revenue in a sovereign wealth fund for the benefit of its citizens. The precedent for such a sovereign wealth fund is that created in Norway, the Government Pension Fund of Norway. The creation of a sovereign wealth fund could guarantee that these revenues are used to benefit Greenland’s people rather than elites, special interests, or foreign interests.

CLICK HERE FOR MORE FOX NEWS OPINION

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

The U.S. should support this approach to the exploration and development of rare earth resources in Greenland because it is in our national interests. In the long run, Greenland could emerge as a major partner in NATO, much like Norway. President Trump should pursue policies to strengthen NATO, not undermine it. Greenland and Denmark remain committed to this cooperative approach.

No marriage. No babies. No future. America’s going from birth to death

A new report by the Congressional Budget Office shows that, absent immigration, America’s population will begin to shrink by 2030. As we approach the 250th anniversary of our nation’s founding, this projection underscores a hard truth: the collapse of marriage and family life represents the gravest threat to our great nation’s future.

That is why The Heritage Foundation has released the first in a series of special reports on Saving America by Saving the Family. The central argument is straightforward. Our country cannot afford to continue ignoring our declining marriage and birthrates, as lawmakers on both the Left and Right have done for decades. The discussion ranges from eliminating all marriage penalties embedded in welfare programs, to new tax credits for married families, to offering public honors to couples for every decade they remain married.

These proposals reflect a blend of longstanding conservative priorities and new ideas, all animated by a shared belief: that strong American families were at the heart of the nation in 1776 and remain essential to its future. They are not offered as a final word, but as the beginning of a long-overdue national conversation about how to halt America’s demographic and social collapse.

HERITAGE FOUNDATION WARNS AMERICA ‘DANGEROUSLY CLOSE’ TO FAMILY BREAKDOWN POINT OF NO RETURN

Unfortunately, there are those—on both the radical Left and the libertarian Right—who are rigidly and ideologically opposed to our key ideas for supporting married families.

Critics on the Left argue that opposition to abortion and support for married parents who prefer to provide home child care (usually through the mother) amount to a patriarchal assault on women’s “autonomy” and “reproductive freedom.” Meanwhile, critics on the libertarian Right contend that government has no business trying to incentivize decisions related to family structure.

America is a nation rooted in its people, culture, laws and customs, as well as its ideals—and it cannot be sustained if Americans themselves do not marry, form families, and raise children

Few dispute that marriage rates are falling, that traditional families are weakening, or that the nation stands on a demographic precipice. What is striking is how our critics echo each other in saying the government should not be doing anything proactively about it.

The problem is that if traditional families continue to disappear, we will eventually lose America itself.

AMERICA’S NEXT HEALTH REVOLUTION STARTS IN THE KITCHEN — AND AROUND THE DINNER TABLE

America is a nation rooted in its people, culture, laws and customs, as well as its ideals—and it cannot be sustained if Americans themselves do not marry, form families, and raise children. And yes, we do believe it is legitimate for government to encourage ways of life that allow its people to endure and flourish, and the social science is crystal clear—traditional married families outpace the alternatives in a host of wealth, education, health, and happiness measures.

We make no apology for wanting to persuade more young Americans to marry, own homes, raise the next generation, and find deep fulfillment in family life.

We also do not believe the solution lies in mass immigration when we can’t even assimilate the immigrants that are already here. Nor do we believe that modern technology can substitute for the home, the neighborhood, and the family.

CLICK HERE FOR MORE FOX NEWS OPINION

The quintessential American Dream of a family with a house and a white-picket fence remains as important as ever to the American imagination, and our task is to convert that dream into a reality. We want to make sure young Americans can realistically achieve these goals by, at a minimum, removing obstacles that stand in the way, and by assuring our policies actually privilege, prefer and support married family formation.

That is a winning message conservatives would do well to embrace in 2026. And the good news is that President Trump is already leading the way. He recently announced his intention to tackle the unaffordability of single-family homes and abuses in the credit-card industry, and Heritage looks forward to contributing our thoughts and recommendations into that discussion and those to come.

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

More broadly, we will continue to answer those—on the Left and on the libertarian Right—who either see no problem or see no solution. They are wrong on both counts. A society that refuses to defend marriage and child-rearing is not neutral; it is choosing between accelerated or managed decline. And a movement that shrugs its shoulders in the face of that decline offers nothing but surrender.

If our critics have new ideas, they should by all means present them. But we are done watching our kids fall further behind, our families struggle and our societal pillars crumble, and we are calling for action that meets the moment. Heritage will be proud to work on ushering in a new American Golden Age, centered on the family, and the next phase in reaching that goal begins now.

CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM KEVIN ROBERTS

SEN DEB FISCHER: The EV scam that stuck taxpayers with the bill for elite perks

In 2022, Democrats rammed through what they misleadingly called the Inflation Reduction Act. The name was deceptive then, and the results are undeniable now: it didn’t reduce inflation. What it did accomplish was shovel hundreds of billions of taxpayer dollars into “Green New Deal” subsidies — chief among them, electric vehicle (EV) tax credits that disproportionately benefited the wealthy.

At the time, I stood on the Senate floor and asked: Why should working Americans struggling with high prices be forced to subsidize luxury car purchases for the rich? Nearly every Senate Democrat voted to keep these handouts alive. Now, more than four years later, the data proves I was right.

The National Bureau of Economic Research found that seven out of 10 EV tax credit recipients would have bought an electric car anyway. In other words, taxpayers were footing the bill for decisions affluent households were already going to make. That’s not an incentive — that’s a windfall.

AMERICANS ARE PUMPING THE BRAKES ON ELECTRIC VEHICLE ADOPTION: ‘AFFORDABILITY IS A BIG ISSUE’

And who reaped that windfall? The wealthiest Americans. A study conducted by the National Bureau of Economic Research shows that before the so-called Inflation Reduction Act, the top 5% of earners claimed half of all EV tax credit benefits, while the bottom 60% of earners received less than 3%. Democrats claim they fixed this by adding income caps, but they set the ceiling at $300,000 for joint filers. 

Since when is $300,000 considered middle class? In what world should taxpayers be buying $80,000 SUVs for families earning three times the median household income?

The environmental case isn’t much stronger. Yes, EVs produce fewer emissions than gas-powered cars. But the Congressional Research Service highlights research showing that the credits mostly displaced sales of other efficient vehicles like hybrids. When you account for that substitution, the supposed climate benefits are overstated by nearly 40%. Simply put, these credits aren’t nearly as “green” as Democrats claim.

CLICK HERE FOR MORE FOX NEWS OPINION

Meanwhile, the price tag was massive. That’s why I’m pleased we repealed these wasteful tax credits in July’s reconciliation law. The Joint Committee on Taxation estimates that this will save taxpayers $190 billion over the next decade. Republicans are saving taxpayers from this costly policy that was never going to deliver on Democrats’ own goal of 50% EV sales by 2030.

“In what world should taxpayers be buying $80,000 SUVs for families earning three times the median household income?”

The verdict is clear: EV tax credits are inefficient, inequitable and irresponsible. They don’t meaningfully change consumer behavior, they don’t deliver the promised environmental gains and they drain taxpayer dollars into the pockets of the rich. 

If Democrats were serious about helping working families — instead of virtue-signaling about climate change — they would back policies that deliver a real return on investment.

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

A good place to start would be addressing the dwindling Highway Trust Fund (HTF), which is projected to run insolvent by 2028. While drivers of gasoline-powered cars pay into the HTF through the federal gas tax, EVs do not contribute at all despite their heavier batteries putting greater wear and tear on our roads and bridges. That means higher maintenance costs, and, once again, working Americans footing the bill.

That’s why I introduced the Fair SHARE Act, which would require EVs to contribute to this fund. I encourage my Democratic colleagues to cosponsor it and to work with me on including an EV fee in the upcoming Surface Transportation Reauthorization Act. That would be a fairer, smarter policy – one that actually serves working families instead of subsidizing the wealthy.

CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM SEN. DEB FISCHER

DAVID MARCUS: From borders to bombs, 5 times Trump defied experts in Year 1

Donald Trump’s second first year in the presidency will go down in history as one of the most eventful in our nation’s first 250 years, largely because time and again he made experts who doubted his methods look like fools.

For decades, at least since the death of Franklin Delano Roosevelt, we have seen presidents as caretakers of our democracy, not as drivers of it, but Trump, seeing the caustic caution of a Congress which couldn’t pass a bill to decide where to have lunch, has acted.

These actions have paid dividends, loath though the legacy media is to admit it, and they are reasons to be excited about what his next three years may hold.

ONE YEAR BACK IN THE OVAL OFFICE, TRUMP WHITE HOUSE SAYS EVERY MAJOR CAMPAIGN PROMISE DELIVERED

I’ll give you five examples where the experts said Trump was out of his mind, but, in reality, it all worked out fine.

1. Closing the Border

Prior to Trump taking office, Democrats had assured the American people that the border could not be closed without congressional action, and the experts gravely agreed.

DAVID MARCUS: TRUMP UNDERSTANDS THAT SAFETY IS FOR EVERY CITIZEN, NOT JUST THE LUCKY FEW

“A president doesn’t have the unilateral authority to shut down the border,” insisted Alberto Benitez, director of the Immigration Clinic at George Washington University Law School, in 2024, for example.

That has simply, and objectively, turned out to be false. According to Customs and Border Protection, there have been seven straight months of zero illegal immigrants being released into the country, not 1,000, not 100, but zero.

The border is shut. It’s actually incredible, but too often when an incredible thing happens we just accept it as the norm, as if it’s always been. No. Trump made that happen.

MORNING GLORY: PRESIDENT DONALD TRUMP HAS BECOME THE ‘PUNISHER-IN-CHIEF’

2. Tariffs

On “Liberation Day,” as Trump dubbed it, in the spring of last year, tariffs went through the roof on almost every nation, and the stock market tanked immediately, with pundits predicting the president’s approval ratings would tank just as quickly.

On every TV network and in every serious financial journal we were told that soon stock brokers would be selling apples on the street corner from carts in black-and-white photographs.

DAVID MARCUS: WHY TRUMP’S MAJOR TRIUMPHS WILL OUTLAST HIS POLLING DIP

“This is a disaster, and anyone who says otherwise is lying,” the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee posted on X, back then.

In fact, Trump’s “yuge” tariffs were an opening position, and about four gazillion trade deals have been accomplished as a result. Like those deals or not, the stock market today is at record highs, and everyone on Wall Street is still in color.

3. Bombing Iran

Critics of Trump, from both the left and the right, warned that if he were to attack Iran, it could unleash unrest in the Middle East and perhaps even World War III!

LIZ PEEK: TRUMP IS PUTTING AMERICA FIRST BY BACKING IRAN INTO A CORNER

Ryan Crocker, a distinguished chair in diplomacy and security at RAND, said prior to the strike, “… it is unlikely that air power alone will eliminate Iran’s ability to produce nuclear weapons,” adding, “Perhaps the U.S. force would persuade Iran to agree to such restrictions. If not, it will broaden the conflict and deepen Iranian determination to acquire nuclear weapons, whatever the cost.”

Once again, Trump was right, and the experts were wrong.

What actually happened was that the U.S. military, under the direction of Secretary of War Pete Hegseth, neutralized that very nuclear program that Barack Obama and his buddies wanted to contain through appeasement.

Now, Iran’s murderous regime is on the brink of destruction because Trump refused to listen to the experts.

4. Crime in Washington, D.C.

The murder rate in Washington, D.C., dropped 40% last year, second only to Denver at 41%. For almost half of that year, President Trump had the National Guard deployed to protect the city and its citizens.

But what did the experts say at the time about the use of the National Guard?

DAVID MARCUS: SECURE BORDER BRINGS PLUMMETING OVERDOSE DEATHS, BUT DON’T EXPECT TRUMP TO GET CREDIT

David Kennedy, a professor at John Jay College of Criminal Justice in New York City, had this to say: “When communities don’t feel they’re being policed properly, they stop helping. It’s very common for what’s seen as illegitimate policing to result in spikes of violence. And I’m very concerned about that in this instance.”

The experts insisted that the Guard wasn’t even in the areas where most crime occurred, but Trump, who witnessed former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani’s miraculous anti-crime transformation of Gotham in the 1990s, knew better.

According to The Trace, improvement was immediate, “From August 11 to October 11 — the first two months of Trump’s takeover — 41 people were shot in Washington, 10 of them fatally. That’s a 62 percent drop in the number of shootings over the same period last year.”

The Trump administration’s broken-windows policing is working. And everybody knows it.

DAVID MARCUS: HOW MANY AMERICAN LIVES HAS TRUMP’S BORDER MIRACLE ALREADY SAVED?

5. The Cabinet

Whether it was Pete Hegseth, Tulsi Gabbard, Robert F. Kennedy Jr., Sean Duffy or Pam Bondi, almost all of Trump’s cabinet picks, save maybe Marco Rubio, because everyone likes Rubio, were viewed by critics on the left as sycophantic wannabes who had no business in their roles.

Jonathan Hanson, a political scientist and lecturer in statistics at the University of Michigan’s Gerald R. Ford School of Public Policy, said a year ago, “We’re in untested waters,” going on to say, “It’s true that people’s standards have shifted, but the question is, when does it really cross a line?”

REBECCA GRANT: TRUMP’S 8 BIGGEST NATIONAL SECURITY WINS OF 2025

In practice, Trump’s Cabinet has been one of the most effective and cohesive cabinets in modern history and has delivered on several successes for the president, as listed above. Not only that, but televised, hours-long, cabinet meetings have kept Americans quite informed about what they are actually doing.

The expert class demanded that those of their own fill these coveted slots and basically make sure that nothing changes very much, even if they use big words to pretend it will.

CLICK HERE FOR MORE FOX NEWS OPINION

That’s not how Trump rolls, at least not in his second term.

The American people must hope that the Trump administration continues to confound the expert class, and the Davos conglomerates of too-skinny billionaires.

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

The experts are on tap for Trump, as they should be, but they are not on top. Instead, on top are the interests of America, and time and again, on that score, he always seems to prove the experts wrong.

CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM DAVID MARCUS

Jeremy Piven hopes ‘Rush Hour 4’ won’t ‘operate out of fear’ and stays true to franchise

EXCLUSIVE – Fans of the movie franchise are likely to always remember actor Jeremy Piven’s wild cameo in “Rush Hour 2.” And it turns out he had just as much fun acting it as audiences did watching.

In the sequel, Piven plays a flamboyant Versace store clerk in Las Vegas who helps Carter and Lee, played by Chris Tucker and Jackie Chan, with their suit shopping. In the Brett Ratner-directed films, Chan stars as a top Hong Kong inspector and Tucker as a Los Angeles police officer who team up to solve international crimes. Piven’s brief scene had audiences praising him for pulling off “one of the greatest cameos of all time” with his flashy, comedic timing as he confuses Carter and Lee as a gay couple and promises to turn them into “the belle of the ball.”

“You know, when I played that scene, it was just before I had done ‘Entourage,'” Piven told Fox News Digital. “I was still in my kind of journeyman actor phase. I think I still am in that phase, fortunately or unfortunately. You know, about 40 movies before ‘Entourage’ and that was one of them. And I had one line, you know, ‘May I help you?’ And I improvised and had fun with it and, yeah, it would be great to explore that character again.” 

‘ENTOURAGE’ STAR JEREMY PIVEN SAYS PEOPLE ARE TOO EASILY TRIGGERED AND NEED TO HEAR EACH OTHER OUT

Fans were thrilled by the news that nearly two decades since the last movie, “Rush Hour 4” was in the works, yet some may be concerned about whether the latest film in the franchise would suffer in today’s more sensitized environment. The first three films are known for their politically incorrect humor as much as for their action sequences.

“I would like whatever sequel comes out, for it to be true to its nature with ‘Rush Hour,'” Piven said. “And yeah, it’d be fun to see where my character is now.”

Piven also addressed his famous scene in a recent interview with New Yorkers Live, saying he was glad viewers didn’t think he was “demeaning the gay community” with his portrayal. In the same interview, Piven said that once people stop being so “easily triggered” by comedy in general, they’re “going to have a better life.” 

PARAMOUNT REVIVES ‘RUSH HOUR’ FRANCHISE REPORTEDLY AFTER TRUMP’S REQUEST

Piven suggested that as long as the movie stays true to what made the franchise funny in the first place, fans will show up. The “Rush Hour” movies earned big laughs out of the culture clash of Lee and Carter when out of their element — one particularly memorable scene in the first movie shows Chan’s character accidentally using a racial slur that he thinks is endearing him to a bartender; in the second movie, Carter nearly gets himself killed by gangsters at a Hong Kong club when he starts talking too much.

“I think if they try to second-guess the humor and play it safe or operate out of fear, no good can come creatively when you operate out of fear,” Piven told Fox News Digital. “So, I think if they’re true to the spirit of the rest of those movies. . . . You know, Chris has evolved since then as a person and as a performer. And so has Jackie. Jackie is an absolute legend. And so it’d be really fun to see where they are now. And it would be fun to be a part of that again. I love those guys.” 

Fox News Digital has reached out to Paramount for comment.

JACKIE CHAN REVEALS HE IS IN TALKS FOR ‘RUSH HOUR 4’ DURING FILM FESTIVAL APPEARANCE: REPORT

Piven, best-known for his Emmy-winning turn as Hollywood agent Ari Gold in HBO’s “Entourage,” is currently on a comedy tour throughout the U.S., Canada and Australia. The show, according to the official website, “highlights Piven’s successful transition into stand-up comedy, a comedic muscle he’s been flexing to showcase his dynamic personality.”

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

“What’s so fun about doing stand-up is, no matter what the room is, no matter the temperature is, it’s our job to navigate it and to kind of be the best version of ourselves in that moment,” Piven told Fox News Digital. “Whether, no matter what you’re facing. So, I mean, that’s one of the great challenges, I believe.”

THE PROSECUTORS: Arkansas father caught in legal nightmare for saving daughter from monster

A travesty of justice is unfolding in Arkansas, but it isn’t too late to stop it.

At 1:12 a.m. on the morning of Oct. 8, 2024, Aaron Spencer and his wife awoke to find their 13-year-old daughter missing from her bed. Spencer’s wife called 911, while Spencer jumped into his vehicle and sped off into the night, desperate to find any trace of his missing child. He hadn’t gone far when he spotted the truck of Michael Fosler, with his daughter inside.

Fosler was no stranger to the Spencers. In July of that year, Fosler allegedly raped Spencer’s daughter, resulting in his indictment for 43 separate counts including sexual assault of a minor, internet stalking of a child and possession of child pornography. The Lonoke County prosecutors handled the case, with it landing on the desk of Circuit Judge Barbara Elmore. It’s a little unclear who dropped the ball — Lonoke County, Judge Elmore, or some combination of both — but what we know for sure is that this dangerous abuser of children was released from custody on a $5,000 bond, with a no contact order in place to prevent further abuse of Spencer’s daughter. Then Oct. 8 came, and neither the bond nor the no contact order was worth the paper it was printed on.

Spencer’s actions in that moment were nothing short of heroic. He ran Fosler’s truck off the road, and firearm in hand, ordered him to release his daughter. Instead, Fosler fought back, and the struggle ended with Spencer emptying his firearm into Fosler. Spencer then rescued his daughter from the truck and called 911.

ARMY VET DAD RUNS FOR SHERIFF WHILE CHARGED WITH GUNNING DOWN DAUGHTER’S ALLEGED SEXUAL PREDATOR

Spencer never should have been in this situation. He shouldn’t have had to save his daughter from a monster. But because local elected prosecutors and judges failed him, that was the position he was put in. Astonishingly, the prosecuting attorney not only failed to take any responsibility for what had transpired; he charged Aaron Spencer with second-degree murder. And wouldn’t you know it, the judge on the case was none other than Circuit Judge Barbara Elmore.

Judge Elmore immediately took action to hide this affair from the public eye, dropping a gag order on everyone in any way connected with the case, preventing them, on penalty of contempt of court, from speaking with the press or the public about the case. Gag orders are not that unusual, but this one was so expansive and so obtrusive that the Arkansas Supreme Court stepped in and declared it unconstitutional, finding that it “was on its face a plain, manifest, clear, and gross abuse of discretion and in excess of its authority.”

Judge Elmore was undeterred. Despite the constitutional right every defendant has to a public trial, she essentially closed the trial to the public, greatly limiting the seats available to the public, media, and even Spencer’s own defense team. Elmore did this without providing any alternative means of viewing the trial, and without any evidentiary hearing or judicial findings justifying it. For the people of Arkansas, it seemed like the fix was in. The judge who had once failed Aaron Spencer’s daughter was now committed to ensuring that his trial would happen in as close to secrecy as she could muster.

Fortunately, the Arkansas Supreme Court stepped in, again, vacating the judge’s order. But they didn’t stop there. The high court took the extraordinary step of removing Judge Elmore from the case. The unusual remedy showed just how egregious her behavior had become.

This is the first step toward justice, but it shouldn’t be the last. The prosecuting attorney should drop this case altogether.

Not that the prosecution’s behavior up to this point has been indicative of good judgment. Statements from the prosecutors in this case are not only embarrassing; they should trouble the people of Arkansas. Prosecutors suggested that Spencer’s angry comments from July—when he discovered that his daughter had been raped by Fosler—were somehow evidence of his intent in October. Never mind that such anger would be the natural reaction of any father. And never mind that Spencer didn’t hunt down Fosler and murder him in the weeks or even months that followed; he shot him while rescuing his daughter from another kidnapping by Fosler.

Prosecutors also suggested that Spencer should have just called 911 when he saw his daughter in the truck with Fosler. That a father should give up the pursuit of his daughter’s kidnapper and rapist in the hopes that the police could arrive in time to save her is so astonishingly absurd it boggles the mind that any prosecutor charged with protecting and defending citizens and victims of crimes would countenance it.

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

But the removal of Judge Elmore and the attendant delay in Spencer’s trial provide an opportunity to end this farce. The local prosecutors should drop this case. The state attorney general should refuse to defend any conviction, in the unlikely event a jury returns one. And the governor should promise to do everything in her power to pardon Spencer, if she must. To do otherwise is to turn justice on its head and to leave every person in Arkansas at the mercy of the predators who would victimize them and their children.

BROADCAST BIAS: Networks side with church invaders, call attack mostly ‘peaceful’

When the radical left feels the urgent need to protest, and to make it saucy enough to go viral, it doesn’t want to observe any rules, or even laws. On Sunday, Jan. 18, a “racial justice” contingent invaded the evangelical Cities Church in Minnesota. Organizer Nekima Levy Armstrong brought at least 20 other people who interrupted the sermon, yelling things like “Justice for Renee Good” and “Hands up, don’t shoot.” The church emptied, and the activists closed down their operation about 45 minutes later, once police arrived.

The broadcast networks didn’t want to acknowledge this story, perceiving that it might be a little too extreme for the average American. This was a violation of the Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances Act — and everyone can guess how energetically ABC, CBS and NBC would respond with outrage to protesters marching into an abortion clinic and interrupting anyone’s “right to choose.” We could guess the same for Trump supporters walking into a mosque during their weekly worship. 

But through mid-week, through early Wednesday morning, these networks could only muster two minutes and 43 seconds among them on their morning and evening newscasts. Most of that was NBC, because reporter Maggie Vespa offered Armstrong a platform to proclaim, “They need to be investigating Jonathan Ross for the killing of Renee Good, not trying to weaponize their power against nonviolent, peaceful demonstrators.” Armstrong wasn’t asked how disrupting (and basically ending) a church service is “peaceful.”

ABC gave this invasive protest 51 seconds overall in those first three news cycles, and CBS News – the supposedly Trump-friendly network under new boss Bari Weiss – gave it only 14 seconds to that point.

ANTI-ICE PROTESTER WILLIAM KELLY DARES PAM BONDI TO ARREST HIM AFTER MINNESOTA CHURCH DISRUPTION

Overall, the church protest, when it had to be mentioned, was merged into the constant template of “growing protests” and “rising tensions” — in other words, we’re going to play this story as long as we can. The deadly riots after George Floyd’s death were grist for the networks to tout a “racial reckoning” — as if the violent deaths would lead to a positive outcome for the “right side of history.”

ABC’s Matt Rivers squeezed the church protest into a narrative of outrage at Trump, “as tensions rise in Minneapolis, as anti-ICE protesters disrupted this Sunday service demonstrating against one of the pastors who is also the director of an ICE field office, though it’s unclear if he was even there.”

The “public” broadcasters didn’t love this story. “PBS News Hour” offered 14 seconds in passing on Monday and nothing on Tuesday, while they did offer an eight-minute segment with the online headline, “Migrant families allege children held by ICE face unsafe and unsanitary conditions.” On Wednesday, Jan. 21, PBS anchor Geoff Bennett did ask St. Paul Mayor Kaohly Her if the protest was appropriate in a “sacred space.” She said no, but rhetorically added schools and hospitals into the “sacred space” category.

ICE REJECTS ‘FALSE NARRATIVE’ ABOUT FAMILY SEPARATION, ASSERTS MINNESOTA CHURCH RIOTERS WERE NOT PEACEFUL

You couldn’t find a story on the church protest (other than one AP dispatch) in multiple searches of NPR’s website. But on Thursday morning, NPR did broadcast three and a half minutes pushing a focus group: “Some voters who backed Trump say ICE is going ‘too far.'”

The Justice Department’s indictment of Armstrong on Thursday offered an exhibit in how much the networks cared about violating the FACE Act. ABC skipped it, pushing instead some fake news about a 5-year-old boy who was “detained by ICE” because his father was an illegal alien. CBS gave it 20 seconds in passing.

NBC’s 27 seconds were mostly Vespa offering the defense lawyer for Armstrong: “Well, now the DOJ announcing arrests of three protesters with charges, including conspiracy to deprive rights. A lawyer for one of them telling NBC News they were arrested doing a peaceful, non-violent protest in a church.” 

It’s not “peaceful” to force an end to a church service with incessant yelling.

CLICK HERE FOR MORE FOX NEWS OPINION

Overall, the church protest, when it had to be mentioned, was merged into the constant template of “growing protests” and “rising tensions” — in other words, we’re going to play this story as long as we can. 

ABC and CBS also skipped it on Friday morning. Vespa’s outrage in her two Friday morning reports came from the left, after Team Trump digitally altered a photo of Armstrong’s arrest to make it look like she was crying after her arrest. In a brief burst at the end of each report, Vespa quoted a White House X account run by Kaelan Dorr announcing, “Enforcement of the law will continue. The memes will continue.”

None of the fragments of stories this church invasion received mentioned the on-scene cheerleading of former CNN host Don Lemon, who came along for the radical ride. Lemon later embarrassed himself by getting into a debate with people on the street, where he insisted misdemeanors weren’t “criminal acts.” The media elites know that Lemon isn’t anyone’s best representative of the leftist viewpoint.

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

At this late date, the click-baiters like Lemon aren’t practicing journalism now, even if they protest that they are. What they’re doing is making anti-Trump content for clicks, and if that means egging on a church invasion, then they are proud to be part of “the struggle.”

The media elites think objections to the church invasion are a “Republicans Pounce” story, a right-wing narrative, and that’s exactly why they are prone to avoid spending any serious time on it.  

CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM TIM GRAHAM

Chicago Mayor Brandon Johnson takes jab at Clarence Thomas while defending city’s reparations task force

Chicago Mayor Brandon Johnson on Wednesday shared a post when he defended the city’s Reparations Task Force and took a sharp jab at Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas.

“Judicial Watch is suing the City of Chicago over its reparations task force, saying that it’s discriminatory by race,” a reporter told Johnson at the press conference. 

“When you said it wouldn’t just benefit Blacks, especially foundational Black Americans, doesn’t deviation from recently supported case law to institutions of higher learning, where Clarence Thomas laid out a legislative package, make the program unnecessarily vulnerable, status by race versus status by injured class?”

DEMOCRATIC GOVERNOR FACES PUSHBACK FROM LYNCHING RESEARCH COMMISSION OVER REPARATIONS STANCE

“Yeah, I’m not aware of anything that Clarence Thomas has ever done that has benefited Black people,” Johnson replied.

“I just told you,” the reporter said.

“I mean, you read something, but there’s no evidence that anything that the Justice has ever done on behalf of the interests of Black people, or even marginalized people in general,” Johnson continued.

“It’s in his concurrent opinion, but anyway,” the reporter responded.

“But as far as any lawsuit against the City of Chicago as it relates to reparations, the whole point of reparations is to repair the harm that was done to Black folks,” Johnson continued. “That’s what it’s designed to do. As you might know, [the] Department of Justice, under the leadership of Donald Trump, is also suing the city of Chicago because of our efforts to right the wrongs of the past, particularly as it relates to descendants of slaves.”

“They can’t have it both ways. They can’t accuse the City of Chicago of focusing solely on Black folks while at the same time trying to make a claim that somehow we’re doing the opposite of that,” he added.

Thomas, who has served on the Supreme Court since 1991 and is the second Black justice to sit on the bench, sided with the 6-3 majority ruling shutting down affirmative action in 2023, saying the Court’s decision “sees the universities’ admissions policies for what they are: rudderless, race-based preferences designed to ensure a particular racial mix in their entering classes.”

Judicial Watch, a conservative watchdog group, sued Johnson last year for his effort to challenge the Trump administration’s immigration law enforcement activities. 

UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS HOSTED STATE-FUNDED COMMITTEE MEETING WHERE PROFESSORS ADVOCATED FOR REPARATIONS

In regard to Judicial Watch’s lawsuit over Chicago’s Reparations Task Force, the organization did not respond to Fox News Digital’s request for comment. The mayor’s office did not respond to Fox News Digital‘s inquiry about the particular lawsuit either.

In 2024, Johnson signed an Executive Order establishing a Reparations Task Force that addresses “historical harms committed against Black Chicagoans and their ancestors through the form of reparations.”

Judicial Watch filed a lawsuit against Evanston, Illinois,‘ reparations program, due to its use of race as an eligibility requirement for the program. The program issues $25,000 direct cash payments to Black residents and descendants of Black residents who lived in Evanston between the years 1919 and 1969. Evanston was the first city in the nation to pass a reparations plan, pledging $10 million over a decade to Black residents.

SAN FRANCISCO MAYOR QUIETLY SIGNS REPARATIONS FUND THAT COULD LEAD TO $5M PAYMENTS PER PERSON

The Supreme Court’s Public Information Office did not respond to Fox News Digital’s request for comment regarding Johnson’s remarks about Thomas.

CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP

Trump’s 401(k) plan tries to fix housing crisis. It’s a full-blown retirement disaster

Every few years, Washington comes up with a “creative” solution to an affordability problem that sounds helpful on the surface and quietly creates a much bigger problem underneath. 

The latest example? A proposal tied to President Donald Trump’s housing affordability agenda that would allow Americans to tap their 401(k) retirement savings to fund a down payment on a home. 

I understand the intent. Housing affordability is stretched. Home prices are near all-time highs. Mortgage rates are still hovering around 6%. First-time buyers feel locked out. COVID-19 buyers can’t afford to trade up. Politically, this all sounds like a win. 

Financially, it’s a terrible idea, in my view. This is the classic case of robbing Peter to pay Paul and, in this case, Peter is your future self.

GEN Z IS STRUGGLING TO SURVIVE — AND REPUBLICANS CAN’T AFFORD TO LOOK AWAY

Retirement accounts are not piggy banks 

Your 401(k) was designed for one purpose. To fund decades of income when you can no longer work. It was never meant to double as a short-term housing fund or a policy pressure valve when affordability gets tight. 

When you pull money out early of your 401(k), even if it’s labeled a “loan” or “special access,” three brutally damaging things happen:

PRO-TRUMP GROUP UNLEASHES BLUEPRINT FOR CRUCIAL HOUSING INITIATIVE FEATURING TOP MAGA INFLUENCER

• You permanently shrink your retirement base
• You lose years and sometimes decades of compounding interest
• Most people never fully pay it back

That last point matters more than politicians would like to admit. 

AMERICANS HAVE NEVER HAD ACCESS TO MORE LUXURIES, BUT WHY DO WE FEEL SO POOR?

According to multiple retirement studies, a large percentage of 401(k) loans are never repaid because of job changes, layoffs or life disruptions. What do we think will happen when someone takes a 401(k) distribution for a down payment on a home? The odds are it will never ever get paid back for retirement. 

Compounding is the Eighth Wonder of the World until you interrupt it

Let’s put real numbers behind this. 

If a 35-year-old pulls $50,000 from their 401(k) to buy a home and never replaces it, that single decision could cost them $300,000 to $400,000 by retirement, assuming long-term market averages. That’s just math. 

And here’s the irony about this. The people most likely to use this proposal are the ones who already struggle to save consistently. They don’t have excess cash flow. They don’t max out retirement plans. So, once the money is gone, it’s gone.

TRUMP’S 50-YEAR MORTGAGE JUST INTRODUCES A NEW KIND OF DEBT

Housing risk + retirement risk = double exposure 

Supporters of this idea argue that “homeownership builds wealth.” That’s partially true, but it’s also incomplete in the financial planning equation. 

A home is:

BIPARTISAN PLAN AIMS TO MAKE THE AMERICAN DREAM AFFORDABLE AGAIN FOR MILLIONS OF FIRST-TIME HOMEBUYERS

• Illiquid
• Expensive to maintain and requires regular ongoing investments
• Highly dependent on local markets
• Often leveraged with debt

Retirement accounts, on the other hand, are: 

• Diversified

CONSTRUCTION LABOR CRUNCH DRIVES UP COSTS AND DEEPENS AMERICA’S HOUSING AFFORDABILITY CRISIS

• Liquid when needed in retirement
• Designed to generate income

Using retirement money to buy a home concentrates risk instead of spreading it. You’re tying your future financial security to one asset in one location at one moment in time.

WHITE HOUSE TEASES MAJOR HOUSING AFFORDABILITY PLAN AS PRICES SQUEEZE AMERICANS

This doesn’t fix housing. It masks the real problem 

The truth is uncomfortable right now, but necessary to review. 

Housing isn’t unaffordable because Americans aren’t creative enough with their retirement money. It’s unaffordable because:

REPORTER’S NOTEBOOK: GOP TARGETS AFFORDABILITY WITH RECONCILIATION 2.0 PLAN AHEAD OF MIDTERMS

• Supply is constrained
• Affordable housing starts are a decade behind
• Zoning is broken

SCAMMERS TARGET RETIREES AS MAJOR 401(K) RULE CHANGES LOOM FOR 2026 TAX YEAR AHEAD NATIONWIDE

• Large institutions are buying up residential homes
• COVID-19 Interest rates reset home prices

Letting people tap 401(k)s doesn’t fix any of that. It simply injects more demand into a broken system, which can push prices higher and reward sellers not buyers.

6 KICK-BUTT FINANCIAL RESOLUTIONS YOU SHOULD MAKE TODAY TO PROTECT TOMORROW

In other words, this proposal could make homes even more expensive while quietly hollowing out retirement security, putting even more pressure on Social Security. 

It’s a shaky foundation 

Policies that trade long-term stability for short-term relief almost always backfire.

CLICK HERE FOR MORE FOX NEWS OPINION

Using retirement money to buy a home concentrates risk instead of spreading it. You’re tying your future financial security to one asset in one location at one moment in time.

We’ve already watched Americans underfund retirement for decades. Encouraging them to drain the one bucket that actually works for them, which is a tax-advantaged long-term, automated saving program, is going to move people backward. 

Homeownership matters.

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

Retirement security matters more. 

And no matter how you dress it up, it’s never a good idea to rob Peter to pay Paul, especially when Peter is the older version of you who won’t get a second chance to fix it. 

CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM TED JENKIN

SEN JAMES LANKFORD: When we March for Life, we must fight for the Hyde Amendment

This Jan. 23, as we mark the 53rd annual March for Life, we also recognize the 50th anniversary of the Hyde Amendment, which settled in law that American taxpayers do not subsidize elective abortions. Period. The Hyde Amendment is not about if elective abortion should be legal, it’s about who has to pay for it. For five decades, each Congress has voted in favor of the annual appropriation bills to affirm the Hyde Amendment. The citizens of our great nation have strongly held and widely diverse opinions about abortion, but in poll after poll, Americans agree that they should not be forced to pay for someone else’s abortion.

The Hyde Amendment has two clear tenets: federal taxpayers do not pay for abortions or subsidize programs that pay for abortions. Every federal healthcare program has Hyde Amendment protections, including Medicaid, Tricare, the Children’s Health Insurance Program, and Indian Health Services and Medicare, except for one healthcare program: Obamacare.  

The so-called “Affordable Care Act” is the only healthcare plan that circumvents Hyde protections with its notorious “Section 1303” accounting gimmick created when the bill passed 16 years ago. 

Democrats will often say that Obamacare abides by Hyde because Section 1303 requires a “separate payment” of at least a dollar each month for abortion coverage, which they know is an accounting sleight of hand. As soon as the law passed 16 years ago, the Obama administration ruled that “separate” actually meant “together” which allowed one payment to be split into two parts, often paid for by federal tax dollars.

ABORTION RESTRICTIONS CREATE MAJOR ROADBLOCK FOR BIPARTISAN OBAMACARE SUBSIDY DEAL IN SENATE

The millions of people paying zero premiums for Obamacare do not pay an additional dollar for their abortion coverage; it’s included in their taxpayer-subsidized premium tax credit. 

There are now 12 states that will not even allow a healthcare plan to be sold in the state unless it covers surgical and chemical abortion. In those states, every taxpayer is forced to subsidize abortions with their tax dollars and with their monthly premium dollars. Roughly 15 different insurers failed to even itemize dollars associated with abortion coverage on their enrollees’ bills, nor did they separately bill for the abortion premium amount, which is required by law.

CLICK HERE FOR MORE FOX NEWS OPINION

Of course, the biggest evidence that Obamacare does not really have Hyde Amendment protections actually comes from the pro-abortion groups Planned Parenthood Action Fund and Reproductive Freedom for All. They recently sent a strong letter to all Democratic members of Congress letting them know that they would fight against any member of Congress who adds Hyde protections to the Obamacare tax credits. They know that Obamacare is the only federal healthcare that pays for abortions, and they do not want to lose that revenue stream. 

There is no debate that the cost of healthcare has skyrocketed. Former President Barack Obama’s pledge of a $2,500 savings for all American families in healthcare premiums has never materialized. For years, Republicans have laid out simple strategies to reduce the cost of healthcare, like allowing small businesses to join together into groups, creating subsidized high-risk pools to lower the cost for all health insurance and confronting the pharmacy benefit managers that limit formulary choices and drive up costs for the consumer.

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

But, each time we attempt to address healthcare costs, Democrats demand that any deal must include elective abortion coverage, paid for by American taxpayers. That is a non-starter for the millions of Americans that want healthcare to save lives, not take it. We don’t believe that some children are disposable and some children are valuable. We believe all children are valuable. 

Which is why the conversation about the 50-year-old Hyde Amendment matters, because children matter. All of them. We can reduce the cost of healthcare, but to do it, Democrats are going to have to be more flexible on Hyde. 

CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM SEN. JAMES LANKFORD

The March for Life is proof that life is a gift and truth still moves us

If you watched the Super Bowl last year, you probably remember the Rocket Mortgage commercial that cut through the noise and went straight to the heart. Instead of flash or controversy, it told a quiet story: a family, a home, children growing, ordinary moments that turn out to be anything but. 

For a moment, it almost felt like a pro-life message. 

Of course, it wasn’t. It was an advertisement. But it worked because it tapped into something deep and universal, something every human heart recognizes instinctively. Life, family, love and belonging matter. Life is not a problem to be solved. Life is a gift. 

That simple truth is our theme for this year’s 53rd National March for Life: Life Is a Gift.

TRUMP URGES GOP TO BE ‘FLEXIBLE’ ON HYDE AMENDMENT, IGNITING BACKLASH FROM PRO-LIFE ALLIES

For more than 50 years, Americans have gathered in Washington, D.C., for the world’s largest annual human rights demonstration to affirm a foundational belief: every human life, born and unborn, has inherent dignity and immeasurable worth, and deserves protection and support in our laws, our communities and our families.  

The abortion debate has always been waged on two levels. One is intellectual: facts, science, public policy and law. That level matters. Truth must be defended clearly and honestly. 

And the facts are compelling. Science shows that human life begins at conception. From that first moment, a new human being exists with genetically unique DNA. By six weeks, a heartbeat can be detected. It is unmistakably the child’s, not the mother’s. By 12 weeks, organs have formed, fingerprints are emerging, and babies often suck their thumbs, sometimes favoring one hand over the other. By 15 weeks, science indicates unborn children can feel pain.

PRO-LIFE LEADER PRAISES VATICAN’S ‘INSPIRING’ ANTI-ABORTION NATIVITY SCENE: ‘IT’S REALLY BEAUTIFUL’

The facts also reveal ugly truths about the abortion industry. Planned Parenthood’s abortion numbers continue to rise even as other health services decline. Today, 97% of pregnant women who enter a Planned Parenthood facility leave no longer pregnant. Chemical abortions now account for more than half of all abortions in the United States, despite mounting evidence that abortion drugs pose serious risks to women’s health. 

A major study found that nearly 11% of women who take mifepristone experience serious or life-threatening complications – a number that’s far higher than what women are often told and that would surely not be tolerated for almost any other type of drug. 

These facts should be shouted from the rooftops. But facts alone do not change a culture. 

Especially in our current moment, when a great deal of debate happens online, asynchronously and impersonally, human beings are often not moved by a set of bullet points. We are moved by encounters with what philosophers call the transcendentals: truth, beauty and goodness. Our minds change and our hearts soften when we see something worth loving and holding onto.

PRO-LIFE ORGANIZATION CALLS ON HHS AND FDA TO SUSPEND ABORTION PILL APPROVAL, TIGHTEN SAFETY RULES

That is why the March for Life continues to endure after so many years. Movements fueled primarily by anger tend to burn out. Anger is not sustainable. But joy is. 

The abortion debate has always been waged on two levels. One is intellectual: facts, science, public policy and law. That level matters. Truth must be defended clearly and honestly. 

Anyone who has attended the March knows this. The face of the March for Life is not rage or resentment, but joy: the singing, the energy, the love for both mother and child. Countless thousands of people, many of them young, standing together in the cold to bear peaceful witness to life.

CLICK HERE FOR MORE FOX NEWS OPINION

That youthful presence is particularly striking at a time when Gen Z pro-life self-identification is rising, and Gen Z’s willingness to accept abortion on demand throughout pregnancy is plummeting, according to Gallup polling from last summer. Across campuses, social media and local communities, a rising generation is engaging this issue with clarity and compassion, unafraid to tell the truth boldly and determined to shape a culture that sees life not as a burden, but as a blessing. 

What ultimately gives the pro-life movement its staying power is that it is not defined by what it rejects, but by what it embraces. At its best, our movement points toward a complete vision of human flourishing: one rooted in love, responsibility and the belief that no life is disposable. A full three quarters of voters – including strong majorities of Democrats, independents and women – support pregnancy centers that offer support before and after birth instead of abortion. That positive witness is what continues to move hearts, long after arguments fade.

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

The world will continue to change. Politics will shift. Cultural winds will blow. But the mission of the March for Life remains steadfast: to affirm the priceless value of every human life, to advocate for more protections for the littlest humans, to support women and families, and to bear joyful witness to a truth that never loses its power. 

No matter the circumstances, life is a gift. That truth speaks to the heart of every human person. And it is why we keep on marching for life. 

Johnny can’t read — even in college. I lead a university and it’s terrifying

A stunning report revealed that many university professors now find themselves teaching students who struggle to read, not just to interpret literature or write essays, but to understand basic text on a page. According to Fortune, a growing number of Gen Z students enter college unable to “read effectively,” forcing professors to break down even simple passages line by line.

That trend should alarm every parent, employer and policymaker in this country. It is not just an academic concern. It is a cultural crisis.

At its core, education is the cultivation of the mind. It is the ability to grapple with ideas, wrestle with complexity and communicate meaningfully with others. Those are not optional extras. They are essential for success in the workplace, in civil society and in a free nation.

HEAD OF AMERICA’S ‘FREE ENTERPRISE’ COLLEGE OPTIMISTIC ABOUT ACADEMIA DESPITE LEFT-WING BIAS: ‘THERE IS HOPE’

As university leaders, we cannot simply diagnose the problem. We must also take responsibility for the role higher education has played in lowering expectations, prioritizing comfort over competence and treating students as consumers instead of future leaders. Universities have spent years chasing satisfaction scores and graduation rates while quietly sacrificing the intellectual foundations that make real formation possible.

What happens when students don’t learn to read deeply? They lose the ability to think deeply.

Reading shapes more than academic skills. It forms attention spans, builds empathy, strengthens discipline and stretches the imagination. These are the very traits that make leadership and community possible. When students are conditioned to skim headlines, scroll social media or rely on AI summaries, they lose not just literacy. They lose the habits that sustain wisdom and maturity.

And employers see the effects. According to surveys cited in the same Fortune report, a significant portion of Gen Z graduates feel unprepared for the workforce. Many cite difficulty with communication, lack of real-world exposure and anxiety over professional expectations. The disconnect between what universities offer and what the marketplace demands is widening.

WATCHDOG FINDS DEI, CRT BAKED INTO ACCREDITATION RULES FOR HUNDREDS OF UNIVERSITY SOCIAL-WORK PROGRAMS

That should concern us. Not because young people are inherently incapable. Quite the opposite. They are smart, creative and full of potential. But potential without formation leads to frustration. And that is where too many students find themselves: anxious, underprepared and overpromised.

So where did higher education go wrong?

Part of the problem lies in culture. Nearly half of U.S. adults read no books at all last year, and Gen Z reads fewer than any prior generation. But the problem is also institutional. In the name of flexibility or equity, many universities have quietly lowered standards, cut reading requirements and simplified curriculum to avoid student discomfort.

UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS LESSON MATERIALS PUSH LEFTIST RACE, CLASS STRUGGLES ON FUTURE TEACHERS: LEAKED LECTURES

This approach may feel compassionate. In reality, it is condescending.

Universities should be leading the way in rebuilding a culture of learning. That begins with restoring the dignity of hard reading, deep thinking and intellectual perseverance. These are not relics of a bygone era. They are prerequisites for leadership, responsibility and growth.

At Southeastern, we form students to read deeply, think critically and lead faithfully. They wrestle with ideas in community and pursue truth through both reason and faith. That is not elitism. It is discipleship. It is preparation for leadership.

AFTER 30 YEARS, 5 THINGS I LEARNED FROM MY STUDENTS WHY THEY LIKE SOCIALISM

We have built our model on the belief that students rise when we raise the bar, not when we lower it. Our classrooms are grounded in biblical wisdom, academic excellence and a vision of education that forms the whole person: intellectually, spiritually, and vocationally.

This is the kind of education students are craving, whether they realize it yet or not. And it is the kind of leadership American higher education urgently needs.

CLICK HERE FOR MORE FOX NEWS OPINION

We do not have to accept a generation that struggles to read. But we do have to build institutions that expect more, form more and prepare students to lead. Not just in their careers, but in their character.

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

Because if we fail to form students with the ability to read, we will fail to form the citizens who preserve freedom, the leaders who pursue justice and the believers who carry truth into every corner of culture.

The stakes are too high to stay silent.

DAVID MARCUS: New York Dems pull dirty districting trick as ‘aw shucks’ Indiana GOP folds

New York City has only one Republican member of Congress, Rep. Nicole Malliotakis, who represents Staten Island, the city’s only red borough, and parts of South Brooklyn that are purple. An absurd and obviously partisan judicial ruling on Wednesday has put the seat at risk.

This isn’t just political hardball, it’s a fastball to the face. But too many Republicans are too “principled,” or too scared, to retaliate.

State Supreme Court Justice Jeffrey Pearlman, who was not only appointed by far-left Democrat Gov. Kathy Hochul, but once served as her chief of staff, found that the district map, which was signed into law in 2024 by Hochul herself, is suddenly unconstitutional.

Incredibly, Hochul agrees that she and the New York Democrats themselves signed into law an unconstitutional district just over a year ago, and her state government has refused to defend its own map in court.

TRUMP FORCES INDIANA GOP INTO REDISTRICTING REVERSAL IN RACE TO DRAW NEW MAGA MAP

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

Having lived from 2013 to 2023 in the district, I can tell you this argument is a bag of nonsense, set on fire and left on the doorstep of sanity. It does not remotely represent the reality on the ground, where there are no smoldering racial tensions.

The judge also finds, ludicrously, that residential Staten Island has more in common with the skyscraper-strewn Financial District of Lower Manhattan than the Brooklyn of homes and churches it is literally connected to by the Verrazano Bridge.

REPUBLICANS PUSH BACK OVER ‘FALSE ACCUSATIONS OF RACISM’ IN BLOCKBUSTER REDISTRICTING FIGHT

In reality, deceitful Democrats want to swap right-leaning White voters in Bay Ridge with left-leaning White voters in the ritzy FiDi.

This is as blatant as partisan gerrymandering gets, and in corrupt New York state, that is saying a lot.

Democrats will argue that they are just responding to redistricting efforts by the GOP, but the Texas Republicans only started engaging in what the Democrats have done forever.

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

That’s why there are no GOP seats in all of New England composed of states where 45% voted for Trump. Likewise, Illinois, New Mexico and others have nearly no GOP districts.

The response by states like Texas has prompted the Democrats to see if they have left anything on the table anywhere, hence this New York duplicity along with similar plans in Virginia.

The problem for Republican voters, who would love a fair shake, is that states like Indiana still won’t respond. As usual, Dems are united and playing fast-break basketball, while the GOP is taking the “high road” and playing as the Washington Generals.

REAGAN-APPOINTED JUDGE TORCHES COLLEAGUES IN TEXAS MAP FIGHT: CALLS RULING ‘FICTION,’ ‘JUDICIAL ACTIVISM’

We see this as well with the blue slips in the Senate needed for judicial confirmations. Democrats abuse it, and now Trump has filled only 15 out of over 90 US attorney seats. He can’t get anyone confirmed if Democrats can block it.

It’s the same with the filibuster and government shutdowns. They left plays smashmouth, and the GOP just gets played.

Vice President JD Vance has been leading the charge to stiffen the spine of the soft GOP of yesteryear. He called out Indiana state Senate President Pro Tem Rodric Bray, and he wasn’t subtle.

MIKE DAVIS: SCOTUS MUST SAVE TEXAS FROM MEDDLING LIBERAL JUDGES

“I’d like to thank (Bray) for not even trying to fight back against this extraordinary Democrat abuse of power. Now the votes of Indiana Republicans will matter far less than the votes of Virginia Democrats. We told you it would happen, and you did nothing,” Vance wrote on X following Virginia’s plan to erase GOP seats.

Where is the lie in this?

CLICK HERE FOR MORE FOX NEWS OPINION

What do Indiana Republicans think the “aw shucks, Mr. Smith Goes To Washington” routine is going to achieve? That they can hold their heads up high for two years as a Democrat-controlled House impeaches President Donald Trump two or three more times?

TRUMP RIPS INDIANA GOP LEADER OVER REDISTRICTING FIGHT, WARNS REPUBLICANS COULD FACE ‘MAGA PRIMARY’

From the very first time quill met cartography to carve out a Congressional district in the 1780s, the practice has been fraught with politics. It always will be.

But just because Democrats spent recent decades as the side abusing the system the most doesn’t mean Republicans must resign themselves to that stilted status quo.

If sanity prevails in the Empire State, admittedly a big ask, then a federal judge will squash Pearlman’s partisan, and frankly absurd, ruling, keeping the district intact.

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

Whether Malliotakis’ district survives as is or not, and don’t count her out either way, Republicans need to fight back with all guns blazing, not with one Hoosier hand tied behind its back.

CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM DAVID MARCUS

Stephen A Smith shreds Newsom for violating ‘America First’ with disparagement of Trump in a foreign country

Commentator Stephen A. Smith tore into California Gov. Gavin Newsom for disparaging President Donald Trump at the World Economic Forum (WEF) in Davos, Switzerland, this week.

On Wednesday’s episode of Smith’s “Straight Shooter” podcast, the host asserted that while he has no problem with Newsom criticizing Trump while on American soil, slamming the president in a foreign country is a completely different story.

“I have no problem with Gavin Newsom being candid and open about his feelings about our president on United States soil. To go over to another country, Switzerland, to go over there and to be in the presence of other European leaders, speaking against the President of the United States — I’m not down with that,” Smith asserted. 

‘BOND VILLAIN’: NEWSOM ROASTED AS PHOTO OF HIM POSING WITH ‘SUGAR DADDY’ ALEX SOROS GOES VIRAL

Smith questioned why Newsom was in Switzerland “speaking negatively about the President of the United States” before playing a clip of the governor criticizing Trump.

The “Straight Shooter” host reiterated that he felt it was unacceptable for an elected U.S. official to come out in opposition to the president while speaking to foreign leaders outside the country.

“Say whatever you want here, as a governor from the opposite side of the aisle of a state in the United States, on American soil — fine. But I’m one of those people: when we go somewhere else, it’s America first,” Smith said.  

While acknowledging that his argument may sound “very simplistic” to some, he argued that “some things are worthy of being simple.”

“I understand you trolling Trump. I understand that you’re aiming to run for the presidency in 2028, but we got problems here in the United States,” he contended. “And don’t tell me they don’t exist in California.”

Smith then pointed to issues impacting California like sanctuary status and affordability.

BESSENT MOCKS NEWSOM AT DAVOS AS ‘PATRICK BATEMAN MEETS SPARKLE BEACH KEN’

“I’ll be damned if affordability ain’t at the top of the list in the state of California! It’s expensive as hell! And a lot of it has happened on Gavin Newsom’s watch,” he railed.

Although critical of Newsom, Smith conceded that he likes the governor “as a person” and believes that the “number one impediment to his governing ability is his heart because he truly cares, and he wants to do right by everybody.”

He added that while he won’t call Newsom out of his name like others do, his decision to disparage Trump in front of the rest of the world was unacceptable.

“You going overseas to do that — that don’t cut the mustard. Can’t do that. I mean, you can, but it’s not good,” he argued. “I got a lot of problems with Donald Trump and a lot of problems with the decisions that he made. I’m not going on foreign soil to do it. I’m not going on a world stage to do it about him.”

NEWSOM TOUTS CALIFORNIA’S NUMEROUS LEGAL FIGHTS WITH TRUMP ADMINISTRATION IN FINAL STATE OF THE STATE

Smith also pointed out that Newsom had been invited onto the show on “numerous occasions” but never accepted the invitation, calling out the governor for declining to do so.

“What the hell you running from me for? I just want to ask questions. I want to give you an opportunity to answer to the people of California and to the American people if you’re going to be a presidential candidate in 2028. Gavin Newsom not appearing on this show doesn’t stop me from talking about him and his record,” he said. “I don’t know all about his record. He does. And he has the platform here anytime he wants to make sure that the record is set straight.”

Fox News Digital has reached out to Newsom for comment, but did not immediately hear back.

NEWSOM LASHES OUT AT TRUMP OVER ‘CARNIVAL OF CHAOS’ AMID MINNESOTA ICE SHOOTING FUROR

On Tuesday, Newsom slammed foreign world leaders for “rolling over” when confronted by Trump, declaring he should have brought “kneepads” for foreign dignitaries attending the WEF.

“People are rolling over. I should have brought a bunch of kneepads for all the world leaders,” Newsom told reporters at the event. “It’s just pathetic.”

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

I tried for years to buy a home. Wall Street always beat me — Trump made the right call

I tried to buy my first home for years. I never thought it would be so difficult. But I ran into barriers that I didn’t know existed — one of which President Donald Trump is trying to break down with an executive order he signed on January 20th.

I’m a 30-something man living in Marco Island, Florida, a community with a rich history and beautiful beaches. It’s been a popular place for decades, and naturally, that’s pushed prices higher. The typical home now costs in the high six figures, with a lot of homes selling for more than a million bucks. That makes homebuying difficult enough for young people, especially young families.

But what makes it even more difficult is that a huge number of homes aren’t even used as homes. About one out of every four homes on Marco Island is used as a short-term rental. While they were built for families and first-time homebuyers like me, they aren’t actually available for purchase. A lot of them are owned by regular people who’ve decided to rent out their old place. But others are owned by institutional investors — i.e., companies as far away as New York City.

TRUMP’S RUMORED HOUSING EMERGENCY WOULD BE A ‘GAME-CHANGER,’ KEY GOP LAWMAKER SAYS

Let’s be clear: These companies have zero ties to the island. But they’ve been snapping up homes left and right anyway. That’s been especially true as homes have been rebuilt after the devastating hurricane that made landfall here in 2017. The data shows that my county has since had some of the highest activity from institutional investors in America. And that’s a problem for homebuyers like me.

These institutional investors are pricing folks out. It’s the iron law of supply and demand. There are a lot of would-be homebuyers like me in the area, but when big companies buy homes first, that leaves fewer properties for the rest of us. More people competing for fewer homes is guaranteed to spike prices. That helps explain why local home prices have consistently risen over the last decade. Again, not all of it, but not none of it, either.

What’s more, the institutional investors are buying homes in all-cash deals. It’s all but impossible for normal people to compete. Even if we agree to the same sale price as an investor, a homeowner is always going to choose the all-cash offer. I get it: It’s less risky, and you get the money right away. But what chance do everyday Americans have of beating Wall Street?

In 2021, I made offers on four or five places without success. I always offered a competitive bid at or near the asking price, but it didn’t help. By the middle of 2021, I gave up on a single-family home and settled for a small condo instead. But things have only gotten more difficult since then as more institutional investors have piled into the market. I know a lot of people — landscapers, waiters, fishing guides, you name it — who are struggling to find even a condo. That’s how bad things are.

It didn’t use to be like this. In 2011, there wasn’t an investor in America who owned more than 1,000 single-family homes. Less than 15 years later, the five largest investors alone own more than 300,000 homes. And it’s not just in places like Marco Island.

In Atlanta, about 25% of homes are owned by big investing companies. In Jacksonville, it’s 21%. As of 2022, there were 12 big cities where investors owned more than 10% of all homes. That number has surely grown since then, and with it, the homeownership affordability crisis has grown, too. In the second quarter of 2025, investors bought one out of every three new homes in America. That’s a gut punch.

CLICK HERE FOR MORE FOX NEWS OPINION

Is there hope for potential homebuyers like me? Hopefully. President Trump’s new executive order sets the stage for new federal rules protecting Main Street homebuyers from Wall Street. He said, “people live in homes, not corporations,” — and he’s right. That’s why the president is exploring a variety of unilateral actions and also working with Congress to enact this reform into law. I couldn’t be more supportive.

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

The critics — especially on Wall Street — say that cracking down on institutional investors won’t do much to lower the cost of homes. While that may be true in places where investors don’t own any homes, it doesn’t hold up in places like Marco Island. If more homes are available, prices will decrease — or at least not rise nearly as quickly. Besides, when it comes to lowering home prices, you have to start somewhere. Banning institutional investors from consuming massive numbers of single-family homes is a good choice. And hopefully it will just be the first reform of many.

One thing’s for sure: People like me need help. We’re not asking for a handout or a bailout or anything like that.  We just want a chance to buy a home — and stop getting beat out by billionaires on Wall Street. I don’t understand why they’re blocking us to begin with. And I’m grateful to President Trump for fighting to get them out of the way.

CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM HAYDEN DUBLOIS

DAVID MARCUS: UK’s promotion of first-cousin marriage at odds with Western culture

There is a roiling debate in the United Kingdom over the practice of first cousins marrying, which is fairly common in some immigrant communities, but still taboo to most of the indigenous population. Which side wins could have broad implications not just for Brits, but for the entire West.

Prime Minister Keir Starmer recently blocked a vote to ban first-cousin marriage in the U.K. and then the National Health Service put out guidance in which the supposed benefits of the incestuous arrangement were touted despite real medical concerns.

After acknowledging that children who are the product of first-cousin marriage are indeed substantially more likely to suffer genetic defects, the official guidance to midwives went on to say those concerns “must also be balanced against the potential benefits.”   

Listed among these benefits are “collective social capital” as well as “financial and social security at the individual, family and wider kinship levels.” Finally, there was a government note claiming that critics have placed an “unwarranted, narrow focus on close-relative marriage.”

A SOLUTION TO THE HOUSING AFFORDABILITY PROBLEM: MARRIAGE

Let’s set to one side the absurdity of balancing legitimate and serious medical concerns against social justice, something we remember from being told the only acceptable large gatherings during COVID were protests, because racism was supposedly also a health risk. There is something deeper at play here.

They may not know it, but these leaders in the U.K. are pulling on a thread that threatens to unravel the fabric of Western culture, which was, in many ways, built on just the prohibition they seek to undo.

Research done by Joseph Henrich, chair of the Department of Human Evolutionary Biology, and a team of collaborators, published in the jounal “Science” in 2019, argued convincingly that the Roman Catholic Church’s ban on cousin marriage in the Middle Ages was essential to developing the individualism that is a hallmark of the West.

DAVID MARCUS: SOMALI POWER SURGE RAISES THE QUESTION MINNESOTA AVOIDS — WHERE’S ASSIMILATION?

The Harvard Gazette summarized Henrich’s hypothesis: “Kin-based institutions reward conformity, tradition, nepotism, and obedience to authority, traits that help protect assets — such as farms — from outsiders. But once familial barriers crumble, the team predicted that individualistic traits like independence, creativity, cooperation, and fairness with strangers would increase.”

When the team looked at 24 personality traits associated with individualism, they did indeed find far higher rates in societies that scorn cousin marriage.

They also found, somewhat hilariously, that U.N. diplomats from nations with cousin marriages were more likely to get New York City parking tickets and less likely to pay them, presumably because they feel little responsibility to those outside their tribe.

EVILS OF COLLECTIVISM ARE JUST WARMING UP. ‘RUGGED INDIVIDUALISM’ BETTER BE READY

The prohibitions on intrafamily marriage in the West for over a thousand years compelled the wealth, be it genetic, monetary, land, titles or education, to be spread; clans and tribes were far less able to operate as mini-societies.

One of the underreported stories of the Minneapolis mayor’s race was that Jacob Frey won in part by exploiting internal clan or tribal divisions within the Somali community, something that is entirely foreign to anyone in the West.

The fear here is not that those of the Western tradition in the U.K., or the U.S., where several states allow first-cousin marriage, will take up the practice. Aside from side plots in “Arrested Development” or “Godfather III,” it’s not a thing for us. But if allowed, it will stand in the way of assimilation.

HERITAGE FOUNDATION WARNS AMERICA ‘DANGEROUSLY CLOSE’ TO FAMILY BREAKDOWN POINT OF NO RETURN

One of the researchers in the study said, “We’re not saying that less-intensive, kin-based institutions are better. Far from it. There are trade-offs.” 

Better is, of course, a subjective concept and not the proper subject of science, but from the point of view of the Western tradition, and specifically that of the English-speaking world, it is hard to argue that the individualism our tradition sparked was anything other than a wild success.

CLICK HERE FOR MORE FOX NEWS OPINION

Whether it is the U.K. or here, those who wish to live in the West must adhere to certain standards that make the West what it is, just as you or I would if we moved to China or Dubai. It is not bigotry or chauvinism to protect one’s own culture.

For reasons we neither fully understand, nor have full access to, the great doctors of the Catholic church in the Middle Ages decided that marrying within one’s own family ran afoul Christ’s message. They could not have known how much it would change the future.

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

Marriage in the West from then on would be far more focused on uniting disparate clans and families than on ensuring they stay insular and “pure.” It is essential to the social DNA of the West.

America should be ready for this issue to emerge. Often these social issues start in England or Canada before migrating here, and on this one there must be no compromise. Obviously, first cousins should not get married, and of course, that should never change.

CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM DAVID MARCUS

JONATHAN TURLEY: When Minnesota AG Ellison excuses mob rule, religious freedom is trampled

Minnesota Attorney General Keith Ellison declared Sunday that there are no federal grounds for prosecuting the mob that disrupted St. Paul’s Cities Church and characterized the conduct as “First Amendment activity.” Ellison not only supported the protesters as exercising their First Amendment rights in an interview with CNN, but also signaled an unwillingness to enforce state laws allegedly violated by the protesters, including trespass and disorderly conduct.

Ellison is infamous for his prior support for violent groups and has long-faced criticism for statements and associations involving extremist movements and figures linked to political unrest. Ellison previously drew backlash for saying that Antifa would “strike fear in the heart” of Trump while holding up the “Antifa Handbook.” His own son, Minneapolis City Council member Jeremiah Ellison, publicly expressed support for Antifa in the heat of the protests this past summer.

A past defender of extremist Louis Farrakhan, Ellison has also criticized the U.S. Constitution, arguing that “their constitution is the bedrock of American law; it’s the best evidence of a white racist conspiracy to subjugate other peoples.”

BONDI VOWS ACCOUNTABILITY AFTER CHURCH ATTACK, SAYS MINNESOTA ‘A MESS RIGHT NOW’

One would think that a mob action against a church would be something that would transcend political divisions as a grotesque and chilling act. If you thought that, you do not know Keith Ellison.

Protesting outside a church is a First Amendment activity. Disrupting worship services, trespassing, and verbally abusing congregants inside a church constitutes conduct, not protected speech.

Notably, in the CNN interview, host Erin Burnett raised the incident largely in terms of its “bad optics” rather than focusing on the underlying attack on a house of worship. Yet Ellison was not even willing to take that narrower cue, refusing to object even on appearances, let alone on the denial of religious exercise. He insisted that this was “a First Amendment activity” and not a crime.

He is wrong. Protesting outside a church is a First Amendment activity. Disrupting worship services, trespassing and verbally abusing congregants inside a church constitutes conduct, not protected speech.

Ellison is supposed to enforce state law without favoritism. Instead, he pivoted to attacking the Trump administration, stating, “If Trump likes you, you can do no wrong.” There may be good-faith concerns over criticisms of being unfairly targeted by federal authorities. But Ellison’s selective enforcement posture substantially weakens his credibility in raising such objections.

WHAT TO KNOW ABOUT THE DOJ THREATS AGAINST DON LEMON AFTER HE FOLLOWED ANTI-ICE PROTESTERS IN ST. PAUL CHURCH

There is not even a suggestion of self-awareness as Ellison dismisses enforcement of his own state laws against protesters who trespassed and engaged in disorderly conduct — setting aside entirely the targeting and disruption of religious services.

Putting aside his refusal to investigate or prosecute under state law, Ellison has also declared that there are no grounds for federal charges. He is wrong. Several federal statutes could plausibly apply to the conduct described.

Ellison went on Don Lemon’s podcast, a former CNN host who has been denounced for his filming the targeting of Cities Church and his subsequent handling of the incident, where Lemon appeared intent on reframing the controversy by attacking the faith of the congregants. Lemon stated, “I think people who are, you know, in the religious groups like that, it’s not the type of Christianity that I practice, but I think that they’re entitled, and that entitlement comes from a supremacy, a White supremacy.”

FBI DIRECTOR PATEL WARNS ELECTED OFFICIALS ‘NO ONE’ IS EXEMPT FROM FEDERAL SCRUTINY AMID MINNESOTA PROBE

That statement mirrored remarks from organizer Nekima Levy Armstrong of the local Racial Justice Network, who declared that churchgoers “need to check their theology and they need to check their hearts.”

Ellison nonetheless insisted on Lemon’s show that no federal crime occurred. He specifically argued that the FACE Act could not apply because it was designed solely to protect abortion rights, stating: “the FACE Act, by the way, is designed to protect the rights of people seeking reproductive rights… so that people for a religious reason cannot just use religion to break into women’s reproductive health centers.”

While it is true that the FACE Act is best known for protecting abortion clinics, the statute expressly extends to places of religious worship, making it a federal crime to prohibit by force or physical obstruction the exercise of religious freedom. The law bars conduct that “injures, intimidates, or interferes with a person seeking to… exercise the First Amendment right of religious freedom at a place of religious worship.” Other federal statutes likewise protect against the denial of civil rights.

GABBARD SLAMS DEMOCRATS’ ‘HOSTILITY TOWARDS GOD,’ CONDEMNS ANTI-ICE AGITATORS WHO STORMED CHURCH

Ellison nevertheless told the public that no such federal laws exist and that the FACE Act cannot apply in this case. That representation is, at minimum, incomplete and misleading.

Unfortunately, this episode reflects a broader pattern for Ellison, who has long been accused of tailoring criminal enforcement to political priorities.

Ellison has been criticized for failing to aggressively pursue what federal investigators later described as one of the largest pandemic-related fraud schemes in the nation. More recently, recordings surfaced showing Ellison meeting with community figures who were later convicted in that fraud case.

At the same time, Ellison has shown a disregard for legal boundaries by filing what critics describe as a frivolous lawsuit seeking to block federal authorities from deploying additional personnel to investigate fraud or enforce immigration laws within the state.

CLICK HERE FOR MORE FOX NEWS OPINION

Ellison presents a curious model of attorney general — one who resists enforcing his own laws while suing to prevent the federal government from enforcing its own. It is akin to a doctor who opposes the actual administration of medicine.

In that sense, Ellison has come to embody a politicized model of law enforcement, excusing mob conduct while expressing hostility toward traditional policing.

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

Ironically, Ellison has made the case for increased federal involvement in Minnesota. By declining to enforce laws against political allies, he has created the very vacuum that invites federal intervention.

At the end of the day, it may be appropriate that Ellison is in court opposing expanded federal enforcement. After all, his conduct offers some of the strongest evidence for why such oversight may be necessary.

CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM JONATHAN TURLEY

MORNING GLORY: Trump uses Davos to showcase American strength and shake the global order

When President Donald Trump agreed to address the “World Economic Forum” in Davos, he rescued that gathering from looming irrelevance — at least for a year. If the president of the United States attends a forum, the world’s collective attention will turn to it. 

The American public usually squints at this collection of would-be world big wigs — drawn from the world’s wealthiest, who are mostly not from our republic, but talking about it and how it and the world should work — and doesn’t like that look at all.

But President Trump came with some of his “A Team” on international economic and security matters, and Made Davos Great Again. People tuned in.

Two comments stood out to me.  On the president’s desire to acquire Greenland, he did make one thing very clear: “I won’t use force.” That simple statement buoyed markets around the world which had imagined some sort of intra-NATO kinetic conflict and panicked on Tuesday. That’s not going to happen, though the president has made it very clear he will use all levers open to him. “You can say yes, and we will be very appreciative,” the president said regarding Greenland. “You can say no, and we will remember,” he added. Message sent and received.

LIZ PEEK: TRUMP IS PUTTING AMERICA FIRST BY BACKING IRAN INTO A CORNER

The president’s speech was a reminder to the assembled globalists of the surging American economic growth and of the enormous American economy behind it. But anyone who listened to the president’s press conference on Wednesday had heard most of the recap already.

It’s good to hammer those points home in every forum the president visits — from Switzerland to Iowa (where he’s off to next) because American voters’ perceptions of the economy will drive the midterms.

A reminder: the second set of midterm elections in the last four second terms of Republican presidencies — Ike’s in 1958, Nixon/Ford’s in 1974, Reagan’s in 1986 and George W. Bush’s in 2006 were tough going for the GOP, seeing, for example, the net loss of 49, 48, 5 and 30 House seats respectively. The tidal charts of American politics typically forecast bad news for the “in” party in that dreaded sixth year of a presidency.

TRUMP’S LEADERSHIP CREATES ‘RARE OPPORTUNITY’ FOR CHANGE IN IRAN, FORMER IRANIAN POLITICAL PRISONER SAYS

So it is a very smart move to repeat, and repeat, and repeat the good news on the economy.

Only when President Trump sat down for questions did anything new cross our screens. 

“Iran was the bully of the Middle East. They aren’t the bully anymore,” President Trump told his questioner in a brief 15-minute sit-down after his speech. The very polite Eurocrat didn’t think follow up to ask about the 18,000 Iranians murdered by their regime last week or the tens of thousands imprisoned in that theocracy run by fanatics, a regime waiting for the world to lose interest before doling out its punishments to the captives.

CLICK HERE FOR MORE FOX NEWS OPINION

We have no idea what President Trump will order the American military to do with regards to Iran. Not to punish them severely for the barbarity that has few if any parallels in this century other than 9/11 and 10/7 would be a terrible mistake.

USS Abraham Lincoln (CVN-72) and the strike group of warships gathered around it was ordered last week to close on Iran and almost certainly will be within striking range of Iran by this weekend if it isn’t already. Other military weaponry has been dispatched to the region. Our allies in Israel and among the Gulf States have had sufficient notice to prepare should Iran be foolish enough to respond to a punishment strike.

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

But punishment should be forthcoming. To do nothing is to reward the savagery of the ayatollahs. “That which gets rewarded gets repeated” is among the oldest — and truest — of clichés. If Iran can mow down thousands of its own people and the world yawns in response, it will do so again, and again and again.

President Trump has lots of options. Pray he uses at least one of them to send the message: Never do that again. 

CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM HUGH HEWITT

SEN TIM SCOTT: Republicans just getting started, but need time to stop radical leftists

Victories for the American people didn’t end when President Donald J. Trump defeated then-Vice President Kamala Harris. They were just beginning.  

Within a year, Trump, alongside House and Senate Republicans, delivered on the promises of the campaign trail: securing our borders, passing tax cuts, and reversing the mess and misery left behind by President Joe Biden and Democrats. As a result, America is safer, stronger and more affordable under Trump and Republican leadership. 

We’re just getting started, because 2026 is the year of affordability.  

The success of the first year comes from a laser-like focus on the working-class coalition that elected Trump. The first step was to stop a $4.3 trillion tax hike. By passing the Working Families Tax Cut, Republicans delivered more take-home pay for families — $3,752 on average in 2026. We ended taxes on tips and overtime. We eliminated taxes on Social Security benefits. We increased the child tax credit and expanded Opportunity Zones. Wages are now outpacing inflation. And the results are tangible: more money in the pockets of the American people.  

ELON MUSK BACKS NATE MORRIS WITH $10 MILLION IN KENTUCKY SENATE RACE

As these policies take effect in 2026, life becomes more affordable for working families. We are reversing the runaway inflation and rising costs of the Biden years, especially at the pump. Americans are paying the lowest gas prices in five years, with average national prices near $2.80 per gallon. Families are beginning to feel relief and have the breathing room to afford everyday essentials.  

Other major victories for the working-class coalition are upholding the rule of law, securing our southern border, and reestablishing America’s strength on the world stage. Under Trump’s leadership, we’re stopping criminals and deadly drugs from pouring into our country, while removing violent illegal immigrants from our communities. America is safer and stronger because of Trump’s leadership. If Democrats take control of Congress, they’d reverse the steps taken by Trump and Republicans to keep our country and communities safe.  

All this is possible with the help of Republican majorities. One year of a Trump Senate majority has been good. Two years will be great. But four years of America First policies will be even better. Bold and unafraid, President Donald J. Trump delivers.  

JASMINE CROCKETT HITS BACK AT LIBERAL CRITICS OF HER SENATE BID, SUGGESTS THEY MIGHT BE GETTING PAID

That is why, as chairman of the National Republican Senatorial Committee, we’re working to defend and expand Trump’s Senate majority. By protecting key Senate seats in states like North Carolina, Maine, Iowa, Alaska and Ohio, we can ensure the opportunity agenda continues. Plus, we’re going on offense to grow our majority in New Hampshire, Michigan, Georgia and Minnesota.  

With the Senate on the line in November, we’re raising record money, recruiting the best candidates and holding radical Democrats accountable.  

While Republicans are committed to working with President Trump, unleashing opportunity and making 2026 the year of affordability, Democrats are recruiting radical and socialist candidates. Sen. Jon Ossoff in Georgia voted for higher taxes. Former Gov. Roy Cooper in North Carolina made communities less safe. Gov. Janet Mills in Maine fought to let men play in girls’ sports.

CLICK HERE FOR MORE FOX NEWS OPINION

Radicals like Abdul El-Sayed in Michigan refused to face the flag during the national anthem. Lt. Gov. Peggy Flanagan in Minnesota has had billions taken fraudulently during her administration. Former Rep. Mary Peltola in Alaska said Biden is “one of the smartest, sharpest people I’ve ever met in D.C.” Not only are the Democrat recruits radical, but they also oppose Trump’s agenda of affordability, lower taxes and secure borders.  

MICHELE TAFOYA SAYS MINNESOTA NEEDS POLITICAL OUTSIDER ‘WITH A SPINE’ IN REPUBLICAN SENATE BID

Under Trump’s leadership, we’re stopping criminals and deadly drugs from pouring into our country, while removing violent illegal immigrants from our communities. 

We have an opportunity this election year to stand with Trump and hold the Senate majority so we can continue to make America great again. But this will take Republicans and independents of all backgrounds to volunteer, donate and get involved so we can protect Trump’s majorities and ensure we continue to deliver for the working-class coalition.

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

By keeping the main thing the main thing, we can celebrate the success of President Donald Trump’s first year in office. But we still have work to do to reverse the failures of the Biden administration, make 2026 the year of affordability and defend Trump’s Senate Majority.  

We’re just getting started.  

CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM SEN. TIM SCOTT

Credit card rate caps are a socialist trap that will crush working-class Americans

At the World Economic Forum in Davos, President Donald Trump called on Congress to cap credit card interest rates at 10%, a policy which Sen. Bernie Sanders already proposed through legislation. There is little doubt these policies are popular — for now. But popularity is no measure of wisdom. 

As someone who served as chief economist at the Office of Management and Budget during President Trump’s first term, I find President Trump’s turn to the Sen. Sanders economic playbook especially disappointing. That administration’s economic success when I worked in it was built on many free-market principles: deregulation, competition and respect for price signals. Those policies expanded access, lowered costs and delivered strong growth. Embracing price controls now is a rejection of that record. It is borrowing directly from the socialist playbook that Trump once ran against.

Price controls on credit have a long and dismal history, and the Americans who would suffer are lower-income borrowers with imperfect credit histories who need access to credit the most.

TRUMP OPENS DOOR TO LIZ WARREN ON CREDIT CARD RATES AS GOP WEIGHS AFFORDABILITY FIGHT

The frustration driving these proposals is real. Millions of Americans feel squeezed by inflation, high prices and stagnant wages. But bad policy piled on top of economic pain only makes things worse.

Credit card companies price their products based on risk. When lenders can’t charge rates that reflect actual default risk, they stop lending to higher-risk customers.

Consider what a 10% interest rate cap would mean in practice. The average credit card APR currently hovers around 20%, but that masks enormous variation. Prime borrowers enjoy rates as low as 14%, while subprime borrowers pay 25% or more. These higher rates reflect reality: some borrowers default at rates five times higher than others. A 10% cap doesn’t eliminate this risk. It merely prohibits lenders from pricing it into their offerings. 

The result? Millions of Americans would find themselves shut out of the credit market entirely.

GOP SENATOR PUSHES TRUMP’S 10% CREDIT CARD RATE CAP AS PARTY LEADERS PUSH BACK

The American Bankers Association estimates that at least 137 million cardholders could lose access to their credit cards from such a cap. These are often the very people who most need access to credit to handle emergencies, smooth consumption between paychecks or build credit histories. Price controls would drive them toward payday lenders, pawn shops or unlicensed loan sharks who charge truly unconscionable rates beyond the reach of regulation.

We’ve seen this movie before. Interest rate caps in the 1970s decimated consumer credit availability until a Supreme Court decision allowed interstate banking. France’s strict usury laws have created a permanent underclass denied legal credit. Japan’s 2006 rate caps led to the collapse of the consumer finance industry and drove desperate borrowers into the arms of organized crime.

Even the notion that these policies would curb “excessive” profits doesn’t survive scrutiny. Credit card issuers operate on thin margins despite high nominal rates because default rates consume much of the spread. JPMorgan Chase’s credit card division posted a return on equity of 27% in recent years — healthy but hardly obscene by financial industry standards, and a reflection of the genuine risks involved.

THIS BLACK FRIDAY, DON’T LET ‘SWIPEFLATION’ SWIPE $1,400 OF YOUR HOLIDAY CASH

The better solution is to promote competition and financial literacy, not price controls. Removing regulatory barriers to new entrants, requiring clearer disclosure of terms and encouraging alternatives like credit-builder loans and secured cards would also expand access rather than restrict it.

The first Trump administration understood this. It trusted markets to work — and they did. Replacing that approach with interest caps and fee ceilings doesn’t make the economy more compassionate. It makes it smaller, tighter, and less accessible for the people who can least afford it.

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

Politicians promising to “fight” credit card companies with rate caps are really fighting arithmetic. The laws of economics, like the laws of physics, remain unimpressed by legislative declarations. The poor and those who are financially struggling will learn this lesson the hardest, discovering too late that a credit card with a 25% rate they can obtain beats a 10% rate card they cannot.

The road to financial exclusion is paved with popular intentions. Let’s pave the way for economic growth instead, and do so with market-oriented solutions that have already proven effective.