Reagan would tell Americans to watch this Netflix merger hearing closely — here’s why

On Tuesday in Washington, Congress is holding a high-stakes hearing that goes well beyond Hollywood — it’s about American jobs, who controls our media and U.S. national security. If Ronald Reagan were alive today, he would urge every American to watch this hearing closely. Reagan understood that culture, storytelling and media are powerful weapons in the battle of ideas — and that foreign adversaries use them to weaken free societies from within.

Lawmakers are weighing whether U.S. companies like Netflix and Warner Bros. Discovery will be allowed to compete and grow — or whether government action will weaken them at a moment when foreign powers are aggressively using media and culture to influence the world.

This matters to everyday Americans because media is no longer just entertainment. It shapes public opinion, exports American values and serves as a counterweight to authoritarian propaganda. When U.S. companies are weakened, foreign governments — especially China — fill the void.

Decisions made Tuesday on Capitol Hill will help determine whether American storytelling remains independent and secure, or whether foreign influence gains even more ground inside one of America’s most powerful strategic assets.

ROB SCHNEIDER: GO WOKE, GO BROKE ISN’T A SLOGAN — IT’S BECOMING HOLLYWOOD’S REALITY

At the center of this debate is the proposed merger between Netflix and Warner Bros. Discovery. This should not be treated as just another corporate deal. It directly affects American jobs, American moviemaking and America’s ability to compete in a global information war.

For more than a century, American films and television have carried our values around the world — freedom, creativity and open expression. That cultural influence has been one of America’s greatest strategic advantages. Today, it is under real threat.

The entertainment industry supports hundreds of thousands of good-paying American jobs — writers, actors, camera crews, editors, visual-effects artists, set builders, marketers and engineers. These are middle-class jobs spread across states like California, Georgia, New Mexico, Texas and New Jersey.

TRUMP TRIES TO SAVE HOLLYWOOD WITH 100% TARIFF ON FOREIGN-PRODUCED FILMS, BUT INSIDERS SAY INDUSTRY IS ‘DYING’

And this is not theoretical.

Netflix recently committed $1 billion to build a new production studio at the former Fort Monmouth Army base in New Jersey, a project expected to create more than 5,000 high-paying American jobs. That investment transforms a former military base into an engine of American production, innovation and employment — and it only happens when companies have the scale and stability to invest for the long term.

Streaming, however, is capital-intensive. When companies are weakened or fragmented, productions slow, opportunities shrink and layoffs follow. Scale brings stability. Stability protects — and creates — jobs.

CNN STAFFERS FEAR FOR ‘UTTER S— SHOW’ IN NETWORK’S FUTURE IF PARAMOUNT BUYS WARNER BROS DISCOVERY: INSIDERS

A combined Netflix–Warner Bros. Discovery would create a stronger, more resilient American company able to invest consistently in U.S. production. That means more projects made here at home and more investments like Fort Monmouth, not fewer.

Hollywood, however, is more than an industry. It is a strategic national asset.

American movies and television reach more people globally than any government program or diplomatic initiative. They shape how the world views the United States and serve as a powerful counterweight to authoritarian propaganda.

HOLLYWOOD’S SELECTIVE SILENCE ON IRAN EXPOSES THE LIE OF CELEBRITY ACTIVISM

China understands this — which is why it tightly controls media at home and heavily invests in state-backed platforms abroad.

And we have already seen how that censorship works.

Consider “Top Gun: Maverick.” The film was a massive global success. Yet China refused to allow it to be shown in its theaters.

JANE FONDA SAYS WARNER BROS. DISCOVERY SALE ‘THREATENS’ THE FIRST AMENDMENT, WARNS TRUMP WILL TAKE ADVANTAGE

Why?

Because of a small patch on Tom Cruise’s leather flight jacket depicting the flag of Taiwan.

Not violence. Not offensive content. A jacket patch.

HOLLYWOOD KEEPS MAKING MOVIES FAMILIES WON’T WATCH WHILE ‘LORD OF THE RINGS’ RERELEASE RAKES IN MILLIONS

That single symbol was enough for Beijing to block the film entirely. The message was unmistakable: access to China’s market requires political compliance and self-censorship.

Ronald Reagan understood this fight long before streaming existed. He knew movies, television and storytelling were powerful tools in the battle of ideas — and that foreign or communist influence over American media posed a real threat. As Reagan warned, “Freedom is never more than one generation away from extinction.” Protecting American cultural leadership became a cornerstone of his presidency.

That lesson matters now more than ever.

COLBERT SAYS PARAMOUNT’S $108 BILLION BID FOR WARNER BROS IS PROOF THEY COULD SAVE HIS SHOW IF THEY WANTED TO

There are also serious concerns about foreign money entering the American media ecosystem — and the national-security risks that come with it.

Some competing proposals involving legacy studios would shrink the field from five major studios to four, concentrating more power in fewer hands and driving up costs for families who just want to watch a movie at home. That kind of consolidation reduces competition, limits choice and historically leads to layoffs — not innovation.

Even more troubling, some proposed takeovers are reportedly backed by $24 billion from foreign governments, including Saudi Arabia, Abu Dhabi and Qatar.

TRUMP SAYS ‘ANY DEAL’ TO BUY WARNER BROS SHOULD INCLUDE CNN

I am hardly a fan of excessive regulation. But we have laws on the books for a reason — to protect the American marketplace and the American people from foreign manipulation.

Let’s be clear: $24 billion from the Middle East is not philanthropy.

In today’s world, influence is power. When American content is weakened, something else fills the void—and increasingly, that content is shaped or approved by authoritarian governments.

Foreign governments do not invest billions in American media for fun. They do it to gain leverage, influence narratives, and shape what people see and hear. That is a direct national security concern.

BROADCAST BIAS: MEDIA CIRCLE THE WAGONS TO PROTECT THEIR ANTI-TRUMP REPORTING

In today’s world, influence is power. When American content is weakened, something else fills the void — and increasingly, that content is shaped or approved by authoritarian governments.

That is not just an economic issue. It is a national security issue.

To be clear, I have been openly critical of Netflix in the past, particularly when it comes to some of its woke and radical programming decisions. I have not hesitated to call those out publicly, and I won’t stop doing so.

I also do not own stock in Netflix, Warner Bros. Discovery, or any of the companies discussed here.

My position is not about defending a corporation — it is about defending American workers, American creativity and America’s strategic interests at a moment when cultural influence and national security are inseparable.

CLICK HERE FOR MORE FOX NEWS OPINION

The Netflix–Warner Bros. Discovery merger does not eliminate competition. The streaming market remains crowded and fiercely competitive. This deal simply allows an American company to compete at scale against Big Tech and state-backed foreign players.

Ronald Reagan knew cultural influence was national power. That truth hasn’t changed.

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

In a global competition where China and other foreign powers are using culture as leverage, America cannot afford to weaken one of its most powerful tools.

This merger strengthens it.

The Donroe Doctrine: Trump is rewriting power politics to put America First

For more than a generation, American presidents talked about leadership while quietly surrendering leverage, sovereignty and deterrence. President Donald Trump is doing something different — and the foreign-policy establishment is still struggling to catch up.

Call it the Donroe Doctrine: a modern, hard-edged update of the Monroe Doctrine in which American power is unapologetically asserted, adversaries are confronted rather than managed and allies are expected to defend themselves. Since re-entering office, Trump has struck Iran’s nuclear infrastructure, forced NATO allies to rearm, challenged China’s ambitions in the Indo-Pacific and reasserted U.S. dominance in the Western Hemisphere, from Greenland to Venezuela.

To critics, these moves look erratic. Read alongside Trump’s 2025 National Security Strategy (NSS) and the newly released 2026 National Defense Strategy (NDS), however, they reveal something else entirely: a doctrine grounded in hard realism, national sovereignty and old-fashioned power politics. The Donroe Doctrine is not improvisation. It reflects deliberate choices.

America First, redefined

IRAN STRIKES COULD SIGNAL LIMITS OF BEIJING, MOSCOW’S POWER AS US FLEXES STRENGTH

The Donroe Doctrine begins with a rejection of the post–Cold War assumption that America must solve every global problem to remain secure. The 2025 NSS warns that previous administrations expanded the definition of U.S. national interest so broadly that “to focus on everything is to focus on nothing,” arguing instead for a hard narrowing of what truly matters.

Under this approach, national security is defined narrowly and deliberately: defending the homeland, securing borders, protecting the economy and preserving U.S. sovereignty. This helps explain why Trump treats border security as national security, why he rejects open-ended global commitments and why he views economic strength and industrial capacity as central to power rather than ignored.

Peace through strength — not endless war

MARTIN GURRI: LET’S LOOK AT ALL THE GLOBAL BENEFITS TRUMP REAPED BY GRABBING MADURO

Trump’s critics accuse him of recklessness. His strategy documents tell a different story. The NSS makes clear a predisposition to non-interventionism, while insisting on a high bar for the use of force. The NDS puts that idea into practice: force exists to deter, to compel and — when necessary — to strike decisively in defense of vital interests, not to conduct ideological crusades or nation-building campaigns.

In Iran’s case, Trump treats the regime as a proliferation and coercion problem, not a nation-building project. Besides, his threats and strikes are finite, conditional and interest-bound — a case study in enforcement, not escalation.

That helps explain why Trump could authorize strikes against Iran’s nuclear program while simultaneously pushing diplomatic settlements elsewhere. In the Donroe Doctrine, overwhelming strength creates space for diplomacy; weakness invites escalation.

MORNING GLORY: THE PRESIDENT ENDS 2025 WITH A CLEAR DECLARATION OF THE TRUMP DOCTRINE

China as the pacing threat

The central threat in the Donroe Doctrine is clear, it is this: China is the “pacing threat.”

Both the NSS and NDS identify the People’s Republic of China as the only power capable of contesting U.S. military, economic and technological dominance on a global scale. The NDS is explicit — China’s military buildup, industrial capacity and regional ambitions define the tempo of U.S. defense planning.

THE AMERICA FIRST NATIONAL SECURITY STRATEGY — THROUGH THE EYES OF ‘WE THE PEOPLE’

Importantly, Trump’s doctrine does not frame conflict with China as inevitable. The goal is not regime change, humiliation or economic strangulation. It is denial — preventing Beijing from dominating the Indo-Pacific and coercing U.S. allies. Deterrence by denial along the First Island Chain, allied burden-sharing and U.S. industrial rearmament sit at the center of this approach.

Keep in mind, Trump seeks to bound China’s power, not to break China’s system. This is competition with rules — not containment without limits. As a result, Trump stresses that trade and diplomacy with China remain possible because deterrence is credible.

This is balance-of-power thinking, stripped of post–Cold War illusions.

TRUMP’S MADURO TAKEDOWN RESETS THE GLOBAL CHESSBOARD AND REASSERTS AMERICAN POWER

Allies as partners, not dependents

The doctrine is most visible in Trump’s handling of alliances. His demand that NATO allies dramatically increase defense spending is not rhetorical bluster; it reflects the NDS’ warning about a growing “simultaneity problem,” in which multiple adversaries could act at once across different theaters.

The solution is not endless U.S. deployments, but capable allies who can defend their own regions with limited American support. Europe, Trump argues, has the wealth and population to deter Russia. Israel is cited in the NDS as a model ally because it defends itself. Burden-sharing is not punishment — it is the price of credibility.

Given China’s rapid naval expansion, restoring American deterrence in the Indo-Pacific ultimately comes down to shipbuilding — more hulls in the water, faster production and shipyards capable of sustaining a prolonged competition at sea.

Geography matters again

The Donroe Doctrine also restores geography to the center of U.S. strategy. The NDS calls for enforcing a Trump Corollary to the Monroe Doctrine, denying hostile powers control over strategic terrain in the Western Hemisphere.

AMB GORDON SONDLAND: TRUMP SHOWED STRENGTH IN VENEZUELA — NOW FINISH THE JOB

Greenland, the Panama Canal, maritime approaches and cartel-dominated regions are treated not as peripheral concerns, but as vital interests. Trump’s high-profile confrontation over Greenland — and his announcement of a “framework of a future deal” with NATO — follows this logic directly.

Power built at home

Finally, the Donroe Doctrine recognizes a truth forgotten since World War II: wars are won by production. Both strategies elevate the defense industrial base to strategic priority, tying economic security directly to military readiness.

CLICK HERE FOR MORE FOX NEWS OPINION

Re-shoring industry, securing critical supply chains, expanding energy production and scaling munitions are not merely economic policies. They are instruments of deterrence.

A Doctrine Takes Shape

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

Read together, Trump’s NSS and NDS outline a governing philosophy that is hard-headed without being reckless, nationalist without retreating from the world and forceful without drifting into endless war. The Donroe Doctrine rejects utopian idealism in favor of hard choices, clear priorities, and unapologetic American power — especially in the face of a rising China.

It unsettles Washington precisely because it restores clarity. The doctrine is stabilizing because red lines are explicit and priorities are narrow. But it is also dangerous, especially for adversaries — because ambiguity is gone, free-riding is exposed and miscalculations become far more costly.

CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM ROBERT MAGINNIS

Victorious Virginia Democrats morph from pretend moderates into liberal extremists over night

A new year typically brings growth and opportunities. But not in Virginia.

Since last November, the winds in the commonwealth have carried a heavy weight. Elections have consequences, and just a few days into Democrat Gov. Abigail Spanberger’s reign, Virginians are reaping the fruit of their ballot-box decisions. This is no longer a warning.

Now that Republican Gov. Glenn Youngkin’s watch has ended, that progress is under attack. In just weeks, a newly emboldened Democrat majority has moved to drain the budget surplus by expanding costly social programs while imposing unnecessary tax hikes on middle- and lower-class Virginians. Virginians are experiencing a swift, calculated wave of anti-business, anti-family and un-American policies that will irreparably decimate everything that makes Virginia great.

We Virginians were spoiled under Youngkin’s administration. Over the past four years, Youngkin’s watchful eye prevented the Democrat majority in the Virginia legislature from leading the commonwealth down a destructive path.

VIRGINIA DEMOCRATS SEEK DOZENS OF NEW TAX HIKES, INCLUDING ON DOG WALKING AND DRY CLEANING

Thanks to his leadership, Virginia is stronger than ever. Our state is experiencing record revenues, record tax relief and record investment. Virginia’s general revenue has grown by 5.2% in the past year, with $9 billion in tax relief, $156 billion in capital investments and a $2.7 billion budget surplus. Youngkin left Virginia better than he found it, bringing our state to new heights. But the higher you climb, the harder you fall.

Now that Youngkin’s watch has ended, that progress is under attack. In just weeks, a newly emboldened Democrat majority has moved to drain the budget surplus by expanding costly social programs while imposing unnecessary tax hikes on middle- and lower-class Virginians.

These policies will only make life less affordable while creating new barriers to entry for businesses, forcing Virginians to absorb the rising cost of living or leave the commonwealth behind.

Democrats are advancing a sweeping tax agenda that will make everyday life more expensive for working Virginians. For Virginia Democrats, “affordability” means imposing new taxes on dog grooming, counseling, vehicle and home repairs, dry cleaning, hosting events and even owning electric leaf blowers and landscaping equipment. Their proposals would also authorize new local sales taxes and impose a delivery tax on services like Amazon, Uber Eats, FedEx and UPS, raising costs for families while offering nothing but a larger, more intrusive government.

VMI CADETS FIGHT BACK AS VIRGINIA DEMOCRATS THREATEN TO CLOSE HISTORIC MILITARY COLLEGE

While families are working day and night to make ends meet, Virginia Democrats are rewarding themselves. Their budget proposal includes an average 209% pay raise for state legislators, insulating politicians from economic reality as they repeal Virginia’s right-to-work law and mandate a $15 minimum wage. Together, these policies will drive up labor costs, eliminate jobs and leave workers with fewer opportunities.

At the same time, Democrats are pursuing an aggressive assault on Virginians’ Second Amendment rights. Their bills would impose an unprecedented tax on firearms and ammunition, layer on burdensome storage mandates and enact sweeping bans on both open and concealed carry in wide swaths of the commonwealth. These policies will not deter criminals. They will make it harder for law-abiding Virginians to protect themselves and their families.

Their transgressions do not stop there. Virginia Democrats are actively working to rewrite Virginia’s constitution.

VIRGINIA JUDGE VOIDS REDISTRICTING PUSH, RULES LAWMAKERS OVERSTEPPED AUTHORITY

Both the Virginia Senate and House of Delegates, despite Republicans’ vociferous opposition, voted to approve constitutional amendments that allow abortion on demand up to birth and gerrymander Virginia’s congressional districts to cheat their way to Democrat dominance for years to come. Despite recent defeats in lower courts, Democrats vow to continue disregarding procedural restraints in their pursuit of power at the expense of Virginia’s values.

In just weeks, a newly emboldened Democrat majority has moved to drain the budget surplus by expanding costly social programs while imposing unnecessary tax hikes on middle- and lower-class Virginians.

Nationwide, we’ve witnessed an exodus from California and New York City caused by radical left-wing policies, the same model that Spanberger seeks to emulate. She looks to California Democrat Gov. Gavin Newsom and New York Democrat Mayor Zohran Mamdani for inspiration but refuses to accept the repercussions of their policies, because she will never have to experience them.

CLICK HERE FOR MORE FOX NEWS OPINION

 It is the people of our great commonwealth who will carry that burden.

Spanberger and Virginia Democrats do not seek to implement commonsense policies that improve Virginians’ lives. As we have already seen in California and New York, their agenda will increase costs, undermine job growth, force families to relocate, dissuade businesses and protect criminals.

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

Through constitutional amendments, they will consolidate political control until the Californication of Virginia is complete.

The choices being made today will shape Virginia’s economy, freedoms and competitiveness for decades to come. The consequences are not theoretical; they are real, unfolding now, and will be felt by families, workers, and businesses across the commonwealth.

LIZ PEEK: Trump’s economic wins are real — now he needs to convince the country

Americans are not being told the truth about the economy. Hint: it is growing, investment is increasing, real incomes are rising and inflation is lower than it was a year ago, and considerably below where it was in 2022 and 2023.

Democrats and their media henchmen spin economic developments in the worst possible light, trying to scare voters and undermine the White House. President Donald Trump, responding to polls showing Americans unhappy with his stewardship, is trying to set the record straight.

He has a good story to tell and is frustrated that the country is not applauding our lower trade and fiscal deficits, growth above 4% and record energy production. But he undermines his own story by exaggerating his successes. In a speech at the World Economic Forum in Davos, for instance, Trump said that the U.S. has “virtually no inflation” and that grocery prices are coming down. That isn’t true. Inflation is not yet down to the Fed’s 2% goal, and except for gasoline and eggs, very few prices have actually declined.

CNN CALLED OUT FOR FRAMING OF INFLATION UNDER TRUMP VERSUS BIDEN IN VIRAL POST

Trump has the high ground here and should not cede it by straying from the facts. Democrats yap about affordability, but their every policy — high taxes, cumbersome regulations, climate zealotry — raise the cost of living. That’s why blue cities rank as the most expensive places on Earth to live.

Painting the economy with a dark brush, as the liberal media does, has real-world consequences. Confidence sinks and the consumer retrenches, torpedoing growth. That’s what the left wants. A booming economy hurts Democrats in two ways. First, rising incomes tee Republicans up to maintain control of Congress and give them two more years to further the Trump agenda. Second, it proves that lower taxes, lighter regulations and pro-energy policies deliver more jobs and rising wealth.

Democrats, regulatory zealots who love to hike taxes, (hello, Virginia Governor Spanberger! Hello NYC Mayor Zohran Mamdani!) would like to plow under our nation’s great fossil fuel reserves and cannot tolerate real-time evidence that they are wrong on all counts.

The left correctly claims that the country expanded under President Joe Biden. But it grew on the shoulders of massive federal spending, which led to 9% inflation and one of the worst hits to middle-class Americans since the Great Recession.

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

The liberal media cannot play it straight. Consider their take on Trump’s nomination of Kevin Warsh to become chairman of the Federal Reserve. After months of stoking fears that the Fed would soon lose its fabled (and mythical) independence under a Trump-picked chair, media analysts twisted themselves in pretzels hyping the dangers of a Warsh-led Fed even as markets proved them wrong by demonstrating exactly the opposite.

After Trump announced his choice of Warsh, metals prices, which had been on a tear, staged an epic collapse. Silver futures slid 31%, the worst day’s trading since 1980, and gold futures, which had been skyrocketing, dropped 11%. Why? Because Warsh is known as a hawk, concerned with keeping inflation and government spending under control. Gold and silver prices had been soaring for several reasons, but among them was the expectation that Trump’s pick would provide what the president wanted — lower interest rates. That, we were told confidently, would lead to accelerating inflation.

It was almost funny watching Bloomberg analysts, for instance, deal with the reality of the Warsh nomination. It was, they opined, an “odd” choice, implying that Trump could not possibly tap an independent thinker, but rather would demand total control over Fed policy. Wall Street, they acknowledged, expected Warsh to lead with a “hawkish” bias. Far from being a pushover, eager to do Trump’s bidding, Warsh will “need to navigate a president who…has pilloried Fed officials for not easing policy as aggressively as he would like.”

TRUMP HITS THE ROAD TO SELL ECONOMIC WINS, AS REPUBLICANS BRACE FOR HIGH-STAKES MIDTERM SHOWDOWN

The liberal media has also been endlessly critical of Trump’s tariffs, and especially the impact they would have on America’s small businesses. But surveys by the NFIB, the country’s largest association of small businesses, show that group’s proprietary optimism index rising in December to 99.5, above its 52-year average of 98. In addition, the NFIB Uncertainty Index fell in December to the lowest reading since June 2024. 

The NFIB isn’t alone in seeing positive trends. Investment bank Evercore ISI’s weekly company surveys show the same trends. Recently, the surveys had zoomed to the highest level since March 2024.

Much of the positive news of late has reflected steady spending by consumers, who are regularly reported to be running out of cash, sinking deeper into debt and depressed about the country’s outlook. And yet, hail the U.S. shopper, who once again defied expectations and stepped up to produce better-than-expected holiday sales.

WHITE HOUSE ‘LASER FOCUSED’ ON AFFORDABILITY AS TRUMP SOFTENS TARIFF STRATEGY

But why should consumers pinch? Real incomes are rising, the stock market keeps hitting new highs, producing a “wealth effect” on spending, and even Fed Chair Powell says the jobs market is stable, if not booming. 

Notwithstanding those positive trends, consumer sentiment has weakened. But the pessimism reflects not so much present conditions — i.e. the reality on the ground — as future expectations, and especially among Democrats and Independents. My view: those glued to liberal newscasts are understandably gloomy about the future. Of course they are! All they hear is hand-wringing about how Trump’s tariffs will destroy global trade and how AI will slaughter job prospects.

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

Of course, not everything is perfect, but Trump is right that he had to fix an economy addicted to ever-higher government spending; he is also right that trends are positive. Gasoline prices are down more than 7% from a year ago, and mortgage rates are just above 6%, off from nearly 7% when Trump took office. Meanwhile, investment is flooding into the U.S. and AI will almost certainly boost productivity and incomes, and drive inflation lower.

President Trump has the facts on his side; he should stick to them and win back Americans’ confidence.

CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM LIZ PEEK

CAROL ROTH: The money in your ‘safe’ savings account could vanish overnight

Most Americans believe that putting money with a trusted bank or credit union is safe — that they can set it and forget it. But doing that could just make your money disappear from your account!

My cousin called me in a panic last week. A retiree, she had put her savings (a six-figure sum) into a savings account with a credit union.

This was her life’s savings, and she received quarterly statements that showed monthly deposits of interest. She watched her balance grow.

On her third quarter of 2025 statement, everything looked fine. But when she received her fourth quarter 2025 statement, the account had been marked closed.

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

She couldn’t believe it. What happened to the account, and where was her money?

When she called the credit union, they said her account had been closed for inactivity. They had closed it as a dormant account and sent the money to the state, a process known as “escheatment” (aptly named, given the circumstances).

She didn’t understand. There was activity from the financial institution with interest deposits every month.

NATIONAL PROGRAM HELPS SENIORS SPOT SCAMS AS LOSSES SURGE

She then called the state, and they said they didn’t have the money; it also was not on their unclaimed property website.

So, what happened?

This story is a red flag for everyone, but especially for seniors or soon-to-be retirees who put money into savings and don’t do anything with it.

RETIREES LOSE MILLIONS TO FAKE HOLIDAY CHARITIES AS SCAMMERS EXPLOIT SEASONAL GENEROSITY

If you, as an account holder, do not have owner-initiated activity in your financial accounts — that is, activity you personally undertake, such as making a deposit, withdrawal, updating your information, or contacting the institution, etc. — and think you can just collect interest, you put your account at risk for closure. Automatic interest postings do not count toward keeping the account active. In Illinois, the current dormancy period is three years (though it varies by state). Simply collecting interest without any owner-initiated interaction can lead to the account being classified as dormant.

Even though my cousin received deposits and had withdrawals regularly, those were initiated by the credit union, not her. Putting away her savings for safekeeping is what ultimately put her money at risk for being sent to the state.

When she called the credit union, they said her account had been closed for inactivity. They had closed it as a dormant account and sent the money to the state, a process known as “escheatment” (aptly named, given the circumstances).

If the institution believes the account is dormant, the institution is supposed to do due diligence and contact you (such as via a mailed letter) before escheating funds. The credit union said they mailed a notice of closure, but it was not sent via certified mail, and my cousin never saw it. She only received that final notice that the account was closed.

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

Of course, they could have called her or tried harder to connect, but they did not.

The institution is then supposed to send the money to the state, but that process can apparently take a while. In my cousin’s case, it was sent in late October, and three months later, the state couldn’t account for it.

Note that currently, escheated funds are held indefinitely for the owner to claim (usually via the state treasurer’s unclaimed property office and website.) But, they have to go through the state’s administrative process first.

4 TASKS EVERY AGING AMERICAN MUST DO RIGHT NOW

Because the state did not have a record of the transfer when contacted, the Illinois State Treasurer provided a form that we then sent the credit union to receive specific information on when the money was forwarded. It took me getting involved to find the right person on staff to acknowledge their receipt and compliance with this request.

In the meantime, this scenario has caused my cousin a great deal of panic, as you can imagine. She has also lost her higher-value interest payments for three months and counting because of this scenario, and we are awaiting word from the state to see if, with the new information, they can locate and turn over the funds.

What can you do to avoid the same scenario?

FROM FRIENDLY TEXT TO FINANCIAL TRAP: THE NEW SCAM TREND

First, make sure that your bank or credit union is insured by the FDIC or NCUA, respectively. Make sure that each of your accounts does not exceed the insurance limit ($250,000 per depositor, per insured institution, per ownership category.) Divide up accounts so each is covered if you exceed the maximum in any account.

This story is a red flag for everyone, but especially for seniors or soon-to-be retirees who put money into savings and don’t do anything with it.

Second, look up the escheatment laws in your state. Even if the listed time period is longer than one year, I recommend that you make at least one transaction every six months to keep your account active and in good standing.

Next, review your statements for all your accounts regularly and look for any unusual activity, notices and the like.

I would also recommend that you work with a financial institution that has a branch you can walk into. Establish a relationship with the staff so that you have an internal ally to help you.

CLICK HERE FOR MORE FOX NEWS OPINION

If you are being dismissed by customer service at any point, have a trusted friend or relative help you navigate the process. The credit union dismissed my cousin until I called with her on the phone as her representative.

In our first interaction, I also let the customer service staff know upfront that I was recording the call for our records, so I could transparently do a recording (recording laws vary by state). That had a double benefit of letting them know this was serious and on the record, and it also created an audio record we could use in the future if the situation escalated.

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

I hope that more awareness will be made and states will consider changing this ridiculous rule that creates a burden, particularly for retirees and other seniors who want to keep their savings as untouched money.

Savings accounts are supposed to be for saving, and financial institutions are supposed to be trusted. In today’s day and age, you need to diligently keep track of your hard-earned money before it ends up missing. While funds are recoverable if escheated, preventative efforts can keep you from dealing with the time, effort and issues of this process.

CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM CAROL ROTH

MORNING GLORY: Democrats have just handed Trump the chance to fix immigration

Domestic governance and politics continue even as the world waits for President Trump’s decision on how to best defang the reckless and bloodthirsty regime that holds the Iranian population captive. No one not in the rooms with the president and his innermost circle of advisers knows what are the options before President Trump or what our intelligence and military say and how our regional allies actually feel. It is “wilderness of mirrors” time on all things Iran.

The president’s resolute actions against Iran and Venezuela in 2025 ought to have earned him enormous credibility on national security decisions, unlike Presidents Joe Biden and Barack Obama, who knew only how to retreat. President 45-47 is not the retreating type. He could, of course, disappoint and do nothing about the despots terrorizing Iranians, thereby forfeiting some, if not all, of that accumulated credit from the past year. But no one can render that judgment yet, although partisans on the left are eager to class him with the 44th and 46th presidents as appeasers. We have no idea how this crisis will resolve, and likely won’t for weeks, if not months.

In the meantime, the ongoing negotiations over the appropriations bill for the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) have gifted President Trump an unprecedented opportunity to turn the deep divisions over illegal immigration into a consensus-building breakthrough, one that will put his second term into the history books without equal in post-World War II history. A domestic “Nixon-to-China” moment stands before him.

Hard-left Democrats are demanding their congressional members push for the effective neutering of Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) by requiring judicial warrants prior to the detention of immigrants in the country without permission — either because they crossed the border illegally as “got-aways,” entered with the consent of the Biden administration as asylum or refugee seekers or overstayed a visa.

GO BIG, THEN GO SMART: TRUMP, ICE AND THE LAW. HOW TO SKIP THE LEFT’S PR TRAP

The Democrats denied that the border could be closed, but Trump has shown it can be and has been. Rather than recognize how badly Team Biden broke the immigration system, now the left now wants to deny ICE the long-standing procedures by which illegal immigrants are deported. The Republicans can never agree to this. If the Democrats shutter DHS for six months by denying the entire department funding, it will be an issue for November.

Voters, however, do not like the dragnet approach to illegal immigrants. They are fueled in their discontent by legacy media misrepresenting every case involving a sympathy-evoking migrant and by the tragedies in Minnesota.

It is pretty easy to see what super-majorities want: the rapid deportation of criminals and violent immigrants — including those not yet convicted but arrested for suspected criminal behavior. Easy to see but very difficult to execute.

DEMOCRATS CAN RUN, BUT THEY CAN’T HIDE: AN IMMIGRATION RECKONING IS NEXT IN 2028

Voters are not generally in favor of deporting hardworking migrants who came here and found work. A very loud but small slice of the right wants deportation of 100% of people in the country illegally, but that policy will boomerang in November.

America is a welcoming country, especially for the law-abiding and hard-working. Now is the moment to continue to demonstrate resolve at the border, focus on who must be deported and, crucially, compassion for specific categories of illegal immigrants determined to build a legitimate life here.

By providing ‘regularization’ for a few million of the tens of millions of illegal immigrants in the country, President Trump will again underscore that he is the president who stands for ‘common sense.’ 

President Trump should go on the offensive with the immigration equivalent of The First Step Act success from his first term. The president can demand right now that the final appropriations bill taking shape for DHS to maintain the current deportation process —including administrative warrants for detention— while fully funding the Department of Homeland Security, with some additional sections of new law.

THE SUPREME COURT IS GOING TO GIVE PRESIDENT TRUMP A MAJOR OPENING ON IMMIGRATION

He should flip the messaging script and demand of the Congress that this appropriations bill regularize all “Dreamers” — illegal immigrants brought to the country as minors — as well as other discrete categories of illegal immigrants, such as those who can present a record of work and tax returns for 10 years with no arrests, and all illegal immigrants over the age of 50 who do not have an arrest on their records. Immunity from deportation by categories, based on common sense, makes the operational workload of DHS smaller while reducing the political cost of unpopular deportations of low-skilled but dedicated labor that hardly anyone objects to when they are on the receiving end of the services provided by those migrants.

All the Dreamers — which is an “80-20” common sense issue — and other categories of illegal immigrants who should be “regularized,” should receive a five year “blue card,” a status renewable every five years provided the holder does not violate the criminal law.

The compromise President Trump puts forward should also articulate that there is no path to citizenship for anyone who entered the country illegally and thus the right to vote will never be theirs. This is a bedrock principle as important as the wall along the border: No one should be able to break the law and thereby gain the right to citizenship. Residency on terms of good behavior, yes, but voting and entitlements: No. A hard no.

TRUMP’S IMMIGRATION CRACKDOWN SPARKS BIPARTISAN CALL FOR ASYLUM FIXES, PROTECTION FOR LONGTIME MIGRANTS

“Regularization” should not be “amnesty” of the sort President Ronald Reagan delivered in 1986, which proved to be a disaster. A grant of regularization to an individual should explicitly bar that individual from qualifying another person outside the country for favorable status in any application for immigration benefits.

Democrats have unwittingly placed illegal immigrants front and center as the only issue presently impeding the ordinary operations of the government. President Trump should take the spotlight the Democrats have created on DHS funding and turn it on to a demand that cannot be rejected. Trump needs to make the Democrats an offer they cannot refuse.

CLICK HERE FOR MORE FOX NEWS OPINION

Most Americans are not eager to eject Dreamers or illegal immigrants who have been here for decades working to build their families and the country. Most Americans are also not sympathetic to the millions who rushed the border during the collapse of border controls during the Biden years.

By taking large numbers of illegal immigrants who arrived long before Biden off the target list for deportation, ICE can focus on the actual problem, which is, in the minds of most Americans, violent and usually criminally violent young men as well as illegal immigrants who arrived in the past five years and immediately imposed enormous costs on the social safety net.

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

President Trump has proven himself completely capable of managing international crises and legislative achievement at the same time. Even as the crisis continues to unfold in Iran, he should demand that Congress do more than fund the Department of Homeland Security. He should also make the bill providing the funds a first step towards a rational set of rules for the tens of millions of people in the country without any right to be here.

By providing “regularization” for a few million of the tens of millions of illegal immigrants in the country, President Trump will again underscore that he is the president who stands for “common sense.” He’s the president who sealed the border. He can also be the one to finally settle the issue of the Dreamers and long-settled immigrants who have been here for decades and decades working and building lives.

CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM HUGH HEWITT

The race to the moon is back — NASA needs to get serious to beat the Chinese

Just before my final, 2001 shuttle mission to help build the International Space Station, I asked the NASA chief of human spaceflight when he thought we’d return to the moon. “Oh, probably not until 2010,” he answered. I was floored — how could it possibly take that long to jump from the shuttle and ISS to the moon? After all, we’d landed there six times between 1969 and 1972.

NASA’s efforts to return to the moon, home to valuable space resources, have been repeatedly stalled by shifting space policies and failures in leadership. Finally, 25 years after my question, NASA is ready to make that giant leap. It rolled its giant Space Launch System booster to the launch pad and is poised to send the Artemis II crew of four astronauts on a looping path nearly 5,000 miles beyond our celestial neighbor.

President Donald Trump’s first administration directed NASA to lead an international return to the moon with the Artemis program, but progress has been delayed by halting technical progress and anemic funding. Artemis II will launch the first Orion spacecraft crew on a key, 10-day test flight to wring out their ship’s systems, and test astronauts and mission controllers in the harsh environment 240,000 miles from Earth. A successful flight — the first piloted moon journey since 1972’s Apollo 17, will pave the way for the next Artemis crew to try a harrowing touchdown on the lunar surface.

NASA SAYS AMERICA WILL WIN ‘THE SECOND SPACE RACE’ AGAINST CHINA

Though Artemis II won’t try to land, it’s still a risky and challenging flight. Their Orion, “Integrity,” will venture into the extreme environment of cislunar space, a thousand times farther from Earth than the space station’s orbiting astronauts. Orion’s four astronauts will rely on its new life support system for 10 days, and if there’s a problem, an emergency abort to Earth might take as long as three or four days. Crew and mission control must navigate precisely around the moon to safely target their Earth return, where Orion’s heat shield must survive a searing, 5,000˚ F plunge through the atmosphere to splashdown.

BLUE ORIGIN LAUNCHES NEW GLENN ROCKET TO MARS AFTER DELAYS

During Artemis I’s uncrewed reentry in 2022, Orion’s heat shield, instead of charring and eroding smoothly away, shed palm-sized chunks of its resin-like Avcoat ablator material. That worrisome cracking behavior, caused by trapped, superheated gas within the heat shield, has taken three years to analyze and understand. To minimize gas generation and spalling of the heat shield, mission planners have altered Artemis II’s reentry path. NASA’s new administrator, Jared Isaacman, praised the heat shield plan after a review, and cleared Artemis II to fly.

A solid Artemis II success is vital for NASA; proving technical competence is vital to maintaining congressional and presidential funding for the lunar landing challenge to come. Isaacman and his mission managers must not only ensure the success and safety of Artemis II, but make a critical decision in the weeks ahead: how best to field a lander that can get future Artemis crews down to the moon’s rocky terrain.

SpaceX’s Starship rocket was chosen by NASA to serve as Artemis III’s lander, but Starship has progressed slowly in test launches, suffering several major setbacks. Each Starship lander launch from Earth will require 15 or more other Starship launches to fuel it for its lunar mission, and SpaceX is nowhere near attempting its promised robotic demo mission to the moon.

Isaacman has re-opened the lander design to other concepts, perhaps from Blue Origin or other industry partnerships; one workable approach was outlined before Congress last year by former administrator Mike Griffin. But time is running out for NASA to decide on a lander that will do the job within two or three years — China is forging ahead with its own plans to send its taikonauts to the moon by 2030.

CLICK HERE FOR MORE FOX NEWS OPINION

China won’t take that long. The CCP is far along in testing its own heavy-lift moon rocket, command ship and lander. Merely by repeating our Apollo 11 moon feat — something NASA can’t do today — China will celebrate a deep space propaganda victory and lay claim to the Moon’s polar ice — hundreds of millions of tons of water and potential rocket fuel.

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

Competing for those resources calls for bold NASA leadership, lately in short supply. To lead its partners back to the moon, that probably means putting SpaceX on the back burner while choosing a more practical lander design in the near term.

Artemis II will take three Americans and a Canadian around the moon for the first time in 54 years. Establishing a permanent human presence on the moon will be even more challenging. Building on Artemis II’s bold leap moonward, NASA must direct a new, workable plan for the Artemis III lander. Only then will NASA prove it has the “Right Stuff” to lead to the moon and beyond.

Elon Musk says you can skip retirement savings in the age of AI. Not so fast

Billionaire Elon Musk recently told people not to worry about “squirreling” money away for retirement because advances in artificial intelligence would supposedly make savings irrelevant in the next 10 to 20 years.

Let me translate that into plain financial English: Don’t bother preparing for your future because robots and automation will take care of it.

That may sound exciting on a podcast. Even my own “Red, White, and Green” podcast. It may even sound comforting to those who don’t have a 401(k) plan.

But for everyday Americans trying to plan their financial lives, it’s reckless advice.

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

Here’s why.

First, Musk is a visionary entrepreneur. He’s also worth hundreds of billions of dollars. Somewhere between $600 billion to $750 billion depending on the day. Those two facts matter. When you already have generational wealth, it’s easy to talk about a future where money doesn’t matter. Most families don’t have that luxury when many are just scraping by the promise of Social Security in the future is an unknown.

Your retirement isn’t a science experiment. It’s groceries. It’s housing. It’s healthcare. It’s dignity.

REMOVE YOUR DATA TO PROTECT YOUR RETIREMENT FROM SCAMMERS

Those bills don’t wait for AI. Those bills can’t be picked up by Tesla.

Musk’s argument rests on a futuristic idea that artificial intelligence and robotics will create so much productivity that scarcity disappears. In this world, goods become cheap, income becomes universal and money loses importance.

That’s an interesting theory. However, since the dawn of time money and power have always mattered.

TRUMP’S 401(K) PLAN TRIES TO FIX HOUSING CRISIS. IT’S A FULL-BLOWN RETIREMENT DISASTER

And it’s certainly not a financial plan.

It assumes three massive things all happen perfectly: technology advances on schedule (that would be a first), wealth gets broadly distributed, and government systems adapt smoothly. History tells us that technological revolutions don’t spread benefits evenly, and they usually concentrate wealth first and fix inequality later if they ever do at all. Just ask Musk.

Ask factory workers displaced by automation. Ask retail employees replaced by self-checkout. Ask taxi drivers competing with ride-sharing apps.

‘SPAVING’ IS NOT SAVING. IT COULD COST YOU UP TO $50,000 OUT OF YOUR RETIREMENT

Technology doesn’t automatically equal financial security.

Meanwhile, back here in reality, Americans are facing rising healthcare costs, expensive housing, stubborn inflation and record household debt. Social Security already faces long-term funding challenges. Pensions are disappearing. Many workers don’t even have access to employer retirement plans.

That’s the environment people are retiring into right now. It’s not utopia.

HOW TO SECURE YOUR 401(K) PLAN FROM IDENTITY FRAUD

Musk’s argument rests on a futuristic idea that artificial intelligence and robotics will create so much productivity that scarcity disappears. 

And here’s the most dangerous part of Musk’s message as a person giving financial advice for almost 35 years … it encourages people to delay action.

If someone in their 30s or 40s hears this and decides to stop contributing to their 401(k), skip their Roth IRA or pay down their mortgage, that lost time compounds forever. You lose that snowball effect. Compound interest works best when you start early, not when you’re hoping Silicon Valley saves you.

Hope is not a strategy.

LAID OFF? HERE’S WHY LOSING YOUR JOB MIGHT BE THE BEST BREAK OF YOUR LIFE

Let’s do some simple math. A 40-year-old who stops saving for 10 years waiting for an AI miracle could easily miss out on hundreds of thousands of dollars in future retirement income. That’s not theoretical. That’s real money driven by real market returns.

Even if AI dramatically reshapes the economy, and it likely will, money will always buy something incredibly valuable called optionality. The ability to have choices.

Savings give you flexibility. They give you independence. They give you negotiating power over how you live, where you live and when you stop working. They protect you from medical surprises, job disruptions, market downturns and policy changes.

HOW TO SAFEGUARD YOUR CREDIT SCORE IN RETIREMENT AS FRAUD AND IDENTITY THEFT RISE AMONG SENIORS

A future with advanced technology doesn’t eliminate risk. It changes the shape of it.

And let’s be honest about something else. Even in Musk’s dream world, someone still controls the machines. Someone still owns the platforms. Someone still collects the profits. Betting that those gains will automatically flow to everyone equally is optimistic at best.

And here’s the most dangerous part of Musk’s message as a person giving financial advice for almost 35 years … it encourages people to delay action.

So should people planning for retirement take Musk seriously?

TRUMP BROKE HIS PROMISE TO PROTECT A LIFELINE FOR 71 MILLION AMERICANS

As a dream experiment? Sure.

As day-to-day financial guidance? Not a chance.

Here’s my takeaway from all of this.

Keep funding your retirement accounts. Take the free employer match. Build your emergency reserve. Invest consistently on a monthly basis. Reduce high-interest debt. Diversify your assets and review your plan annually.

CLICK HERE FOR MORE FOX NEWS OPINION

If AI creates abundance someday, great. You’ll enter that future with real assets and not real anxiety.

But if it doesn’t arrive on schedule or doesn’t benefit everyone equally, you’ll be very glad you didn’t outsource your retirement to a prediction made by Elon.

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

You can’t retire on optimism.

You can retire on preparation.

CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM TED JENKIN

PALANTIR CTO SHYAM SANKAR: The American people are being lied to about AI

The American people are being lied to about artificial intelligence (AI). On one hand, we’re offered apocalyptic prophecies of job loss and oppression — even the extinction of the human race. On the other, we hear utopian fantasies of a future without toil, without sickness, perhaps even without death — a life without meaning or mission.

The utopians and the doomers commit the same error: they neglect human agency. 

The future of AI is not an inevitability to be endured by the American people — it is for us, the American people, to shape. 

AI is not a divinity. It cannot snap its fingers and eliminate jobs; people will use AI to cut jobs or create them. AI cannot decide to oppress us; people will build AI tools that either enforce privacy and civil liberties or erode them. AI did not choose to write poems or generate pornography; people chose to build cheap consumer goods rather than genuine tools of productivity.

AMERICA NEEDS AI MANUFACTURING SPEED TO PREVENT GLOBAL CONFLICT AND OUTPACE ADVERSARIES, PALANTIR CTO SAYS

These are choices you and I must make every day. 

I’ve spent the past two decades alongside men and women who are building the future of American AI. They include some of the best software engineers in the world, but also college dropouts, veterans, blue-collar autodidacts and nurses. They don’t treat AI as something that will happen to them — they recognize it as a tool for them to wield to make themselves more productive and our country safer and more prosperous. And so should you. 

The benefits of AI belong to all Americans.

Below are some principles and themes I’ve seen informing the people and organizations wielding AI effectively and in service of worthy ends: reindustrialization, deterrence, improved healthcare and more.

I. AI is a tool for the American worker, not his replacement

The job-loss narrative is a ploy to attract investors, drive media attention and consolidate political power. The real promise of AI in the enterprise is to make the American worker 50x more productive — to unleash his taste and agency. This isn’t speculation; it’s reality. 

I’ve seen maritime industrial base manufacturers use AI to open a third shift. I’ve spoken with the ICU nurse who learned to wield AI so she could spend more time at the bedside, where she’s needed most.

Doomerism is a luxury of the ivory tower; the future of AI is being built on frontlines and factory floors.

II. The American worker will wield AI to do more with less—and become more productive and valuable as a result

For a century, American prosperity was underwritten by a simple bargain: when the worker produces more, the worker earns more. That bargain was broken in the 1970s — not by technology, but by policy choices that stripped workers of power. We will not repeat that mistake.

FOX NEWS POLL: VOTERS SAY GO SLOW ON AI DEVELOPMENT — BUT DON’T KNOW WHO SHOULD STEER

When AI doubles output, the worker who wields it should see that gain reflected in his paycheck, equity stake and share of the enterprise. This is not redistribution — it is recognition. The worker is not a cost center; he is a co-creator of value. Treat him accordingly.

III. The American worker deserves world-class tools, not AI trinkets

The electrical engineer in Georgia who enlisted in the Navy out of high school deserves the same capabilities as the Stanford computer science grad in Silicon Valley. He deserves access to instruments of genuine productivity, not consumer toys.

NEW U.S. MILITARY GENAI TOOL ‘CRITICAL FIRST STEP’ IN FUTURE OF WARFARE, SAYS EXPERT

Before Gutenberg, a book cost as much as a house. Knowledge was locked in monasteries and chained to shelves. The printing press broke that monopoly on information. AI is the printing press of our age — the same technology that serves Fortune 500 companies should serve the worker in Tulsa, the nurse in Tampa and the farmer in North Dakota.

The benefits of AI belong to all Americans.

IV. AI is an American birthright

AI is the product of American grit, ingenuity and culture. It is our birthright. No American worker should be left behind for lack of training. Workers should have access to meaningful AI education that helps them bend AI to their will — not the other way around. The ICU nurse doesn’t need to learn to code; she needs AI to surface the right patient data at the right moment — so that her clinical judgment, honed over years at the bedside, can be applied faster and more accurately.

The American worker is not deficient; he is under-leveraged. AI is the lever.

V. AI implementation should be shaped by and for frontline users

The frontline worker understands what the C-suite cannot. Policy should be shaped by practitioners — the ICU nurse, the manufacturing technician, the logistics coordinator — not by academics, consultants or lawyers. 

TRUMP CALLS FOR FEDERAL AI STANDARDS, END TO STATE ‘PATCHWORK’ REGULATIONS ‘THREATENING’ ECONOMIC GROWTH

Toyota built the most successful manufacturing system in history on a simple premise: the worker knows best. Its Creative Idea Suggestion System has operated for more than 70 years. Ideas flow up from the factory floor, not down from corner offices. The result: billions in value created and a culture where every worker is an owner of quality. 

AI development and deployment should prioritize American workers and American industry. The goal is not efficiency in the abstract—it is American prosperity in the concrete.

Push power to the tip of the spear and let the American worker do what he does best.

VI. AI should be used to slash bureaucracy and unleash human agency

AI should eliminate bureaucracy, not add to it. No new compliance theater. No “AI governance” committees designed to slow things down and centralize power in “managers.” AI should empower the American worker to move faster, not slow him down.

WE’RE ON OPPOSITE SIDES OF THE AISLE. BUT WE KNOW AMERICA MUST WIN THE AI RACE, OR ELSE

Every layer of process that stands between the frontline worker and their ability to do their job is deadweight to be destroyed.

VII. The development and deployment of AI should prioritize American workers and American industry

AI development and deployment should prioritize American workers and American industry. The goal is not efficiency in the abstract — it is American prosperity in the concrete.

China’s manufacturing productivity grows at 6% per year. Ours grows at 0.4%. If we don’t invest in AI and automation, we’ll lose. The American worker with AI superpowers erodes China’s competitive advantage. 

KEVIN O’LEARY WARNS CHINA ‘KICKING OUR HEINIES’ IN AI RACE AS REGULATORY ROADBLOCKS STALL US

I see these principles embodied and practiced every day by men and women who are not invited to speak on panels or record podcasts and publish op-eds. They are quietly leading by example and proving what is possible when the most powerful technology ever created meets the most capable workforce ever assembled.

CLICK HERE FOR MORE FOX NEWS OPINION

Armed with AI, the American worker will rebuild our industrial base. He will outproduce any competitor. He will create prosperity not just for himself but for his children, who will inherit not a diminished nation, but an ascendant one.

Silicon Valley builds AI. Wall Street funds it. Washington regulates it.

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

But the American worker — on the factory floor, in the ICU, in the field — wields it.

And that will make all the difference.

Mamdani’s class warfare against New York businesses is ‘economic vandalism’

Last fall, when New York’s business community warned that the election of a self-described democratic socialist as mayor would trigger an assault on the city’s economic engine, we were waved off as hysterical. The press assured us that Zohran Mamdani was “evolving,” that his rhetoric would soften, that we should focus instead on his vague promises of “affordability.”

That reassurance evaporated almost instantly.

Barely two weeks after his swearing-in — amid lofty rhetoric about the “warmth of collectivism” — the Mamdani administration unveiled its real agenda. Sam Levine, the newly installed commissioner of the Department of Consumer and Worker Protection and a veteran of Lina Khan’s Federal Trade Commission, released a sensational report accusing companies like DoorDash and Uber Eats of “diverting” more than $500 million from delivery workers.

The charge was dramatic. It was also profoundly misleading.

MAMDANI SIGNALS DISBANDING NYPD PROTEST UNIT, CALLS FOR HIGHER TAXES ON TOP 1% AMID BUDGET RECKONING

The report was less an exercise in economic analysis than a political weapon — crafted to inflame public opinion against large, visible companies operating in New York City. What it obscured is far more important than what it alleged.

In 2021, New York imposed a delivery-worker pay mandate exceeding $21 an hour — one of the highest in the nation, rivaled only by Seattle, another city governed by ideological experimentation. Proponents promised higher earnings without consequences. Economics, as usual, was ignored.

Anyone who has taken Economics 101 knows that artificially inflating labor costs does not create free prosperity. It raises prices, reduces demand and forces businesses to restructure. Unsurprisingly, delivery platforms responded by shifting tipping to post-checkout — exactly how tipping works in restaurants, ride-sharing and countless other service industries.

LIZ PEEK: WHY EVERY ‘AFFORDABLE’ PROMISE FROM DEMOCRATS ENDS UP COSTING YOU MORE

That was not exploitation. It was adaptation.

Yet City Hall was not finished. Lawmakers then mandated that apps prompt tipping before service is rendered, requiring preset options of at least 10%. At a time when consumers already suffer from widespread “tip fatigue,” this was another blow to affordability — and to demand.

Levine’s report then claimed that these changes “cost” workers over $500 million. What the press conference omitted — though the report quietly admitted — was that delivery workers earned $1.2 billion more overall under the new system. That inconvenient fact did not fit the narrative, so it was buried.

BILL MAHER CALLS MAMDANI A ‘STRAIGHT UP COMMUNIST,’ WARNS DEMS WILL ‘LOSE MORE ELECTIONS’ IF THEY DENY IT

Even more telling: Levine’s own department had previously acknowledged this very dynamic. In 2022, DCWP explicitly stated that apps could discourage or eliminate tipping to offset higher mandated wages — and that workers would still receive substantial pay increases. Today’s outrage directly contradicts yesterday’s regulatory guidance.

Rather than correct course, the Mamdani administration doubled down. The mayor appeared at a press conference alongside activists demanding a $35-an-hour minimum wage for delivery workers — nearly double what many first responders earn. During his campaign, Mamdani promised $30 an hour by 2030. Now the demand is $35 immediately. Reality is optional; slogans are mandatory.

CLICK HERE FOR MORE FOX NEWS OPINION

Anyone who has taken Economics 101 knows that artificially inflating labor costs does not create free prosperity. It raises prices, reduces demand and forces businesses to restructure. 

What New York truly needs is not performative class warfare, but policies that expand take-home pay without destroying jobs. One obvious reform? End the tax on tips. Tips are not corporate profits; they are direct compensation from customer to worker. Taxing them penalizes service workers while discouraging generosity and transparency. Eliminating that tax would raise incomes instantly — without raising prices or killing jobs.

The broader issue is not delivery apps. It is a governing philosophy that treats profit as sin and enterprise as something to be punished. Using distorted reports to publicly shame companies is not leadership — it is economic vandalism.

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

For New York to remain the world’s capital of commerce, it needs cooperation among workers, businesses and consumers — not ideological warfare. Affordability does not come from mandates and misinformation. It comes from growth, competition and policies that reward work.

Socialism has been tested countless times. It always fails. Let us hope New York’s new mayor learns that lesson quickly. If not, delivery companies won’t be the only casualties. Every entrepreneur, employer and investor in the city will soon find themselves in the crosshairs — and, as always, it will be ordinary New Yorkers who pay the price.

CLICK HERE TO READ MORE BY STEVE FORBES

SEN BERNIE SANDERS: We need to cap credit card interest rates at 10%

We live in a nation of unprecedented wealth and income inequality — where a handful of billionaires are getting much richer while the working class falls further and further behind.

Just since Election Day, while millions of Americans are struggling to afford housing, food, electricity and healthcare, the three wealthiest people in America have become over $625 billion richer and are now collectively worth $1.3 trillion. Meanwhile, as a result of a rigged political system, billionaires now pay a lower effective tax rate than the average truck driver, teacher or nurse.

At the same time, Wall Street has never been more consolidated and powerful than it is today. Incredibly, just four Wall Street firms now manage roughly $38 trillion in assets — more than 120% of our annual GDP — and are major shareholders in over 95% of S&P 500 companies. Further, just five massive financial institutions led by JPMorgan Chase, Bank of America, American Express, Citigroup and Capitol One now account for nearly 70% of all credit card transactions and just two giant credit card networks (Visa and Mastercard) process well over 80% of credit card transactions.  

With that enormous concentration of ownership, Wall Street has incredible impact over the prices, interest rates and fees we pay and the well-being of workers.

LAWMAKER SAYS TRUMP COULD KEEP HOUSING-COST PLEDGE BY BACKING DEMOCRATIC BILL IN RARE CALL FOR COMMON GROUND

Within that reality, President Donald Trump went to Davos, Switzerland, on Jan. 21, to speak about his so-called “affordability agenda.” Really? Is there anyone left in America who does not understand that Trump’s concern about “affordability” is nothing more than a flailing attempt to shore up his rapidly declining poll numbers?

Remember: This is a president who gave a front-row seat at his inauguration to Elon Musk, Jeff Bezos and Mark Zuckerberg, and who filled his Cabinet with more billionaires than any administration in American history.

This is a president who gave a trillion dollars in tax breaks to the top 1%, while throwing 15 million people off of healthcare and did nothing to prevent healthcare premiums from doubling, on average, for 20 million Americans.

This is a president who is working with Elon Musk and the other Big Tech billionaires to push AI and robotics on the American people, which will result in the loss of tens of millions of decent-paying jobs.

TRUMP CHEERS STEADY INFLATION NUMBERS AS AFFORDABILITY FIGHT SHAPES 2026 MIDTERM BATTLE

But, I have to admit, there is one issue that Trump has identified that does make sense. He is right when he says that big banks are ripping off the American people with outrageously high credit card interest rates.

In 2024, credit card companies raked in more than $190 billion from interest and fees charging obscenely high interest rates, while bombarding Americans with roughly 3 billion solicitations. Today, as a result of their efforts to addict Americans into purchasing their high-interest plastic, Americans are drowning in a record $1.23 trillion in credit card debt.

Despite the fact that big banks can borrow money at less than 4% interest from the Federal Reserve, the average interest rate consumers are forced to pay for credit cards is nearly 24%. Yes. 24%.

In other words, while working-class Americans pay unconscionably high interest rates, Wall Street banks and their executives make out like bandits.

GOLD PRICES SURGE AMID ECONOMIC UNCERTAINTY

When big banks charge 24% or 30% interest on credit cards, they are not engaged in the business of “making credit available.” They are involved in extortion and loan sharking — squeezing working families who are already stretched to the breaking point. And that should not be acceptable in the United States of America.

So, what do we do about it?

Trump has proposed to cap credit card interest rates at 10%. That is a good idea. The problem is that his proposal would only last for one year and, in many instances, would end up costing consumers even more than they are paying right now.

Today, many big banks already lure people into signing up for their credit cards with introductory rates of 0% only to jack those rates up — sometimes to 36% — once the teaser period expires.  In other words, what Trump is proposing is nothing more than a bait and switch.  

TRUMP’S 401(K) HOUSING PITCH COLLAPSES INTO REALITY CHECK AS ECONOMISTS SAY SUPPLY IS THE REAL CRISIS

If we are serious about helping working families, we need something real — not another scam.

That is why I introduced bipartisan legislation to cap credit card interest rates at 10% for at least five years. After that, I believe we should move toward a permanent cap of no more than 15% — similar to the long-standing statutory cap that credit unions have operated under since 1980.

Surprise, surprise. The billionaires on Wall Street and organizations representing the financial services industry like the American Bankers Association don’t like this idea (you can read their full statement here).

Jamie Dimon, the CEO of JPMorgan Chase, who we all know stays up nights worrying about the needs of working families, has come out strongly against this bill.  I wonder why?  Could it have something to do with the fact that last year, Dimon made $770 million in compensation while the bank he runs made $57 billion in profits charging Americans interest rates as high as 30%?

In other words, while working-class Americans pay unconscionably high interest rates, Wall Street banks and their executives make out like bandits.

Mr. Dimon claims my bipartisan bill would restrict access to credit for low-income consumers. He has it backwards. This bill would restrict JPMorgan Chase and other financial behemoths from charging working-class Americans predatory credit card interest rates that trap them into a vicious cycle of debt.

Researchers at Vanderbilt University have estimated that my legislation would save the American people $100 billion a year in interest payments or about $899 a year.

How could this legislation benefit working families?

Let me give you one example.

A 28% interest rate on a credit card balance of $5,000 can cost a consumer as much as $11,000 in interest and take up to 24 years to pay off.  With a 10% credit card interest rate cap, that consumer would save more than $7,200 in interest. The bank would still be able to make over $3,700 in profit off that consumer. It just wouldn’t be able to gouge them.

Let’s be clear: Charging outrageously high interest rates is not a financial service. It is usury — a practice condemned by every major religion on Earth.

In “The Divine Comedy,” Dante reserved a special place in the Seventh Circle of Hell for people who charged usurious interest rates.  Today, we don’t need the hellfire and the pitchforks, we don’t need the rivers of boiling blood, but we do need a national usury law that caps interest rates on credit cards at 10%.

CLICK HERE FOR MORE FOX NEWS OPINION

This is not a radical idea. Polling suggests that it is enormously popular. The American people — Democrats, Republicans and Independents agree: Credit card companies are ripping us off. It has got to stop.

But, I have to admit, there is one issue that Trump has identified that does make sense. He is right when he says that big banks are ripping off the American people with outrageously high credit card interest rates.

This is also a matter of economic justice.

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

When Wall Street’s greed and recklessness brought the economy to the verge of collapse in 2008, causing millions of Americans to lose their homes, jobs and life savings, the taxpayers came to the rescue. The Federal Reserve gave these huge banks trillions of dollars in emergency loans at virtually zero interest. We bailed out the banks. 

Now it’s time for Congress to stand with working families, end Wall Street greed and pass legislation that caps credit card interest rates at 10%.  

CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM SEN. BERNIE SANDERS

Hollywood keeps making movies families won’t watch while ‘Lord of the Rings’ rerelease rakes in millions

The profitable rerelease of Peter Jackson’s “Lord of the Rings” trilogy reflects more than the staying power of the quarter-century-old J.R.R. Tolkien-based film franchise – it reveals a troubling creative gap in today’s Hollywood.

First released in 2001, “The Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring,” the epic high adventure fantasy film, grossed upwards of $900 million at the box office. Sequels “The Two Towers” (2002) and “The Return of the King” (2003) grossed over $2 billion combined.

Rereleasing profitable and popular movies is a tradition that goes back generations beginning with classics such as “The Wizard of Oz,” “Gone with the Wind” and “Casablanca.” Before television and then video cassette recorders, the theater was the only place to re-watch what you saw on your neighborhood big screen.

But studio executives recognized that viewers consider it satisfying to see a movie more than once (or twice or more!) – and sometimes even years or decades apart. Holiday or anniversary rereleases have proven profitable. With the advent of IMAX technology and digital restoration capabilities, it’s been easy to find an excuse to reintroduce some of the classics.

MELANIA TRUMP HOSTS STAR-STUDDED WHITE HOUSE SCREENING AHEAD OF HER FILM’S RELEASE

In the hundred-plus years of Hollywood moviemaking, over 25,000 films have been made. Major studios today are churning out between 200 and 300 titles every year. That may sound like a lot, but it’s a dramatic decrease from a century ago when over 800 films were made every 12 months.

While ranking movies is subjective, the vast majority are forgettable – but some are memorable, and not always because we love them. It’s interesting and revealing that according to IMDb, the Internet Movie Database, of the top 10 worst movies of all time, all but one (“RoboCop 3”) were made this century. Conversely, of the top 10 best movies, just four were made in the last quarter-century – and two of them were “Lord of the Rings” titles.

Keep in mind, the British writer J.R.R. Tolkien wrote his famed series in the early to middle part of the last century.

One of the more curious and baffling habits of Hollywood is studios’ stubbornness and reluctance to produce more movies that appeal to families. Instead, they insist on making films that offend our moral sensibilities, despite evidence suggesting cleaner and more wholesome fare would perform better than the trash they’re creating. We’re bombarded with dark storylines littered with unnecessary profanity and gratuitous doses of sexuality and violence. Instead of goodness, we get garbage.

KRISTEN STEWART PLANS DRAMATIC EXIT FROM US OVER TRUMP’S AMERICA-FIRST FILM INDUSTRY POLICIES

Since it costs more to see a movie today than generations ago, it’s misleading to look to the top-grossing films in history to see what struck a chord with audiences. Instead, look at what movies sold the most tickets. Of the top 10 titles that have been seen by the most people, six are solid family fare: “Gone with the Wind,” “Star Wars: Episode IV – A New Hope,” “E.T. the Extra-Terrestrial,” “The Sound of Music,” “The Ten Commandments” and the 1937 “Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs.”

A seventh, “Jaws,” scared lots of children and beachgoers alike, but was still relatively tame compared to today’s offering. There’s not one “R” rated movie on the list.

So why not make more of what’s obviously working? This disconnect is something I’ve seen during my three decades working at Focus on the Family, a global family-help organization. We hear from countless mothers and fathers hungry for wholesome and inspiring movies. That’s why we’re releasing our first animated children’s movie in theaters this coming fall: “Adventures in Odyssey: Journey Into the Impossible.” It’s the origin story of a long-running children’s radio program.

PATRICK SCHWARZENEGGER CREDITS PRAYING WITH WIFE AS DAILY ANCHOR IN HOLLYWOOD ‘ROLLER COASTER’

Of course, movies reflect the culture, but they also reveal the hearts and minds of those running studios and writing the scripts for the stories being told. You probably don’t know the name Lewis R. Foster, but you’re likely familiar with the movie he won an Academy Award for writing: “Mr. Smith Goes to Washington” starring Jimmy Stewart and directed by Frank Capra.

Stewart credited the classic film about the idealistic junior senator fighting corruption in the D.C. swamp with shaping his career and helping him see how strong and moral characters can positively influence the world. Foster personally embodied those ideals, loved America, his wife and family, and dreamed up the story. Because of that one story, Stewart pursued others like it – including “It’s a Wonderful Life” and “The Man Who Shot Liberty Valance.”

One man’s beautiful mind helps make other minds more beautiful, too. Everything affects everything else.

CLICK HERE FOR MORE FOX NEWS OPINION

There’s a reason the apostle Paul, who called himself the “chief of sinners,” urged people to be careful what they watched and read. There were no movies 2,000 years ago, obviously, but there were plenty of other things vying for attention that influenced human behavior. That’s why Paul wrote, “Whatever is true, whatever is noble, whatever is right, whatever is pure, whatever is lovely, whatever is admirable—if anything is excellent or praiseworthy—think about such things.”

Of course, movies reflect the culture, but they also reveal the hearts and minds of those running studios and writing the scripts for the stories being told. 

If we really want to redeem culture, we’ll encourage the making of more movies like the “Lord of the Rings” trilogy that embody these very virtues, of hope over fear, good over evil, and the importance of friendship, loyalty and sacrifice.

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

In his 1954 New York Times review of “The Fellowship of the Ring,” the poet and essayist W.H. Auden praised the British writer, suggesting his “invention is unflagging.” He then added, “Mr. Tolkien is fortunate in possessing an amazing gift for naming and a wonderfully exact eye for description… No fiction I have read in the last five years has given me more joy than ‘The Fellowship of the Ring.’”

Hollywood would be doing us all (and its own financial bottom line) a favor if they would seek to emulate these same attributes of its screenwriters when sorting through scripts and stories for the big screen.

CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM PAUL BATURA

Trump can solve the housing crisis, but he needs to get tough with states

America is in the middle of a housing crisis, and it is not a mystery why. Home prices have surged far beyond wage growth, first-time buyers are locked out of the market and young families are increasingly forced to rent indefinitely or leave high-cost states altogether. This did not happen overnight, and it is the predictable result of decades of policy choices that made it harder and harder to build owner-occupied housing.

The data tells a clear story when viewed over time.

In 1950, the United States had 23.6 million owner-occupied housing units. By 2000, that number had climbed to roughly 70 million. That represents an increase of about 196% over 50 years. During that same period, the U.S. population grew from roughly 151 million to about 281 million, an increase of approximately 86%. For half a century, America was building owner-occupied housing at more than twice the rate of population growth. Housing supply was not merely keeping up with demand. It was staying well ahead of it.

That era is over.

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

At the end of the third quarter of 2025, the number of owner-occupied housing units had reached approximately 86.92 million. That is an increase of only about 24% since 2000. Over that same period, the U.S. population grew by roughly 22%. Housing growth and population growth are now moving almost in lockstep, which is a dramatic departure from the postwar model that made broad homeownership possible.

This slowdown is critical because population growth alone does not capture housing demand. Household formation, immigration, the number of families purchasing a second home and changing family structures all increase pressure on supply. When construction merely matches population growth, shortages become inevitable. When it falls behind, prices skyrocket.

One of the biggest reasons America is not building enough owner-occupied housing is regulation. In many cities and popular suburban areas, building codes are hundreds of pages long, and the number of regulations can reach the thousands.

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

The massive regulatory burden weighing down homebuilders makes it harder and more expensive to construct new homes. In 2021, an economic analysis by the National Association of Home Builders found that regulations add nearly $94,000 to the cost of building a new home. That burden prices millions of families out of the market before construction even begins. 

Zoning restrictions, environmental reviews, permitting delays and land-use rules combine to make building slower, riskier and far more expensive than necessary. These barriers overwhelmingly benefit entrenched interests while harming working families and first-time buyers.

Land-use regulations have become particularly burdensome. In many states, huge swaths of land are owned by the federal or state government. In other cases, land is privately owned, but local regulatory bodies have blocked developers and families from adding new homes. This has squeezed millions of homes into relatively small areas.

California offers a stark illustration. Roughly 90% of the state’s population lives on just 5.1% of its land area.

Because zoning and land-use rules are largely imposed by state and local governments, Washington cannot solve the housing crisis by decree. But it is not powerless.

The massive regulatory burden weighing down homebuilders makes it harder and more expensive to construct new homes.

President Donald Trump and Congress should use federal leverage to force change. Federal dollars for education, infrastructure, transportation and housing should be conditioned on measurable progress toward expanding owner-occupied housing. States that refuse to loosen land-use restrictions and reduce regulatory barriers should not receive unlimited federal subsidies.

This approach respects federalism while acknowledging reality. The federal government should not draw zoning maps, but it also should not bankroll policies that artificially restrict housing supply and drive up costs nationwide.

CLICK HERE FOR MORE FOX NEWS OPINION

For America’s entire history, home and land ownership have been essential to economic stability, family formation and upward mobility. In previous generations, Americans built accordingly. Today, that commitment has been undermined by regulatory systems that make new housing scarce by design.

Politicians in both parties have wrongly tried to solve these problems in recent years by calling for more subsidies or hatching schemes to make it easier for people to go deeper into debt to purchase a home. But this is terrible economics. When you increase the availability of money without decreasing demand or increasing supply, you end up causing prices to rise rapidly, and that is exactly what has occurred.

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

If the housing crisis is going to be solved, states must be forced to change course. And for now, that pressure will have to come from Washington.

If the Trump administration and Congress want to solve the housing crisis, it is time they get tough with states.

CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM JUSTIN HASKINS

Despite Catholic mission, Notre Dame appoints pro-abortion professor to lead Asian studies institute

The University of Notre Dame announced it has appointed a professor who has publicly supported abortion access to lead its Liu Institute for Asia and Asian Studies — a move that has drawn scrutiny given the school’s Catholic identity.

Susan Ostermann, who joined Notre Dame in 2017 as a global affairs professor, will assume her role as director of the Asian studies center in July, the university said.

In 2022, Ostermann co-authored an article titled, “Lies about abortion have dictated our health policy,” with former Notre Dame professor Tamara Kay. 

In the article, Ostermann and Kay argued, “Almost 90% of abortions occur during the first 10 weeks of pregnancy when there are no babies or fetuses. There are only blastocysts or embryos so tiny they are too small to be seen on an abdominal ultrasound.”

They also called it a “lie” that abortion is dangerous, writing, “This could not be further from the truth. Research shows abortion is safe and does not have long-term effects on physical or mental health.”

CATHOLIC UNIVERSITY IN CHICAGO COVERS ‘ABORTION CARE SERVICES’ THROUGH STUDENT HEALTH PLAN 

The authors further wrote that abortion “doesn’t cause cancer, it doesn’t affect future fertility, and most people feel relief after an abortion and do not regret their decision. Up to 11 weeks, medication abortions are generally performed using mifepristone and misoprostol, which are safer than taking Tylenol.” 

In another 2022 article published by Salon, titled “Forced pregnancy and childbirth are violence against women — and also terrible health policy,” Ostermann and Kay wrote, “Criminalizing abortion results in irreparable harm. In fact, it actually has the opposite policy effect that anti abortion advocates say they want: It can increase abortion rates, unintended pregnancies and infant mortality.”

Additionally, they wrote, “Abortion access is freedom-enhancing, in the truest sense of the word. Consistent with integral human development that emphasizes social justice and human dignity, abortion access respects the inherent dignity of women, their freedom to make choices and to evaluate medical and other risks associated with pregnancy and childbirth.”

STUDENTS FOR LIFE REPORT FINDS MASSIVE UPTICK IN CHRISTIAN COLLEGES’ SUPPORT FOR ABORTION, PLANNED PARENTHOOD

Notre Dame’s position on life issues is published in a 2010 statement on its website, titled, “Institutional Statement Supporting the Choice for Life.” 

It reads, “Consistent with the teaching of the Catholic Church on such issues as abortion, research involving human embryos, euthanasia, the death penalty, and other related life issues, the University of Notre Dame recognizes and upholds the sanctity of human life from conception to natural death.” 

Notre Dame told Fox News Digital in a statement that Ostermann “is a highly regarded political scientist and legal scholar whose insightful research on regulatory compliance — from forestry conservation in India and Nepal to NSF-funded disaster mitigation in the U.S. territories — demonstrates the rigorous, interdisciplinary expertise required to lead the Liu Institute.”

“A deeply committed educator who has led study abroad programs in Mumbai, she is well prepared to expand the Institute’s global partnerships and create impactful research opportunities that advance our dedication to serving as the preeminent global Catholic research institution,” the university continued. 

TRUMP ADMIN STOPS FUNDING FOR RESEARCH THAT INVOLVES ABORTED BABY TISSUE

“Those who serve in leadership positions at Notre Dame do so with the clear understanding that their decision-making as leaders must be guided by and consistent with the University’s Catholic mission. Notre Dame’s commitment to upholding the inherent dignity of the human person and the sanctity of life at every stage is unwavering,” the statement added.

Ostermann told Fox News Digital in a statement, “As I step into this role, my primary focus is to serve as a steward for the Liu Institute mission in the context of the University’s larger mission, and a facilitator for our world-class faculty.”

She said she is “fully committed to maintaining an environment of academic freedom where a plurality of voices can flourish. I have long worked with scholars who hold diverse views on a multitude of issues, and I welcome the opportunity to continue doing so. While I hold my own convictions on complex social and legal issues, I want to be clear: my role is to support the diverse research of our scholars and students, not to advance a personal political agenda.” 

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

Ostermann added that the “commitment to academic inquiry and mutual respect is deeply rooted in my appreciation for Notre Dame’s identity as a global Catholic research university. I am inspired by the University’s focus on Integral Human Development, which calls us to promote the dignity and flourishing of every person.”

She continued, “I respect Notre Dame’s institutional position on the sanctity of life at every stage. By fostering a collaborative space that values rigorous inquiry, we contribute in important ways to global development and human well-being. As Liu Director, I look forward to working closely with my colleagues to ensure the Liu Institute remains a place where truth is pursued with both excellence and integrity.”

DAVID MARCUS: Don Lemon’s ‘other’ unforgivable crime was against his old profession

Whether Don Lemon broke federal law in his role in an attack on a Minnesota church will be up to a jury, but we can already say he deserves the max for his crime against journalism.

At issue, both in the criminal case and the one in the court of journalistic ethics: Was the former CNN anchor present at the disruption of the church service in St. Paul to document the event or was he participating in it? It was quite clearly the latter.

In the moments prior to the harebrained “protest” in the house of worship that left children in tears, Lemon can be seen outside, on video he took himself, telling his viewers the “operation is a secret,” adding, “I can’t tell you what’s going to happen, but you’re going to watch it live.”

Lemon clearly knows exactly what is going to happen next because he explains why the crowd of agitators is so White and looks “MAGA coded.”

“There is a reason they have so many white people here, I’m going to be honest, for the operation they are doing today, it is important to have allies, White allies here,” Lemon says.

MARJORIE TAYLOR GREENE DEFENDS ARREST OF DON LEMON ON CIVIL RIGHTS CHARGES: ‘THAT’S ACTIVISM’

The only plausible meaning to Lemon’s bizarre leftist gobbledygook above is that the “White allies” among the agitators were there to infiltrate the church service without arousing suspicion until everyone was in place.

At that moment, Lemon was making a fateful choice that should formally end his career in journalism. Instead of choosing to tell his viewers the truth, which he knew, he chose to abet the invasion of a church by agitators.

Lemon could have broken the story, but instead he helped to build it.

DON LEMON WARNS TRUMP WILL ‘RETROFIT’ LAWS TO PROSECUTE HIM AFTER JUDGE REJECTS CHARGES

Once the alleged criminal disruption of the church service begins, leaving parishioners shocked and shaken amid piercing screams, Lemon tries to suddenly pretend he’s just a journalist who stumbled on a story. It’s a ridiculous lie.

It is, in fact, very similar to the lie that agitators who physically interfere with ICE operations are just “legal observers,” not participants in the chaos.

During his livestream prior to the disruption of the service, Lemon kept operational security for the group he was supposedly just “covering,” which crosses the brightest line in journalistic ethics.

DON LEMON REMAINS DEFIANT, DARES TRUMP DOJ TO ‘MAKE ME INTO THE NEW JIMMY KIMMEL’ AS POTENTIAL CHARGES LOOM

By allowing himself to be on the agitators’ “team,” as one of them blatantly says on video, Lemon made himself ineligible to cover them, and the biased results inside the church show exactly why.

Every churchgoer Lemon interviewed, including the pastor trying to tend to his flock in an emergency, was given the third degree about the supposedly evil actions of ICE, while Lemon’s resistance compatriots were not challenged on their disruption.

Lemon has quite clearly convinced himself that President Donald Trump, ICE and all of MAGA are an evil, fascist threat and that his first responsibility is to fight that evil. You might say, “At least he is fairly honest about it.” But it’s not ethical journalism.

FIX IS IN IN MINNESOTA, WHERE ANTI-ICE FEDERAL JUDGE LEAVES HIS LANE TO SIDE WITH MOB

It is possible to do “activist journalism” within an ethical framework. One could argue that James O’Keefe and some other gonzo shock video jocks on the right do so. But what is vital is that they admit they are activists, and they don’t participate in criminal activity.

Lemon and far too many others in journalism on the left have decided that they can somehow be part of the resistance to Trump while also covering it, warts and all, in a fair manner. This has just proven not to be the case.

It has long been argued that the only way to save the journalism industry, which is fundamentally distrusted by 70% of Americans, is for there to be real consequences for ethical violations.

CLICK HERE FOR MORE FOX NEWS OPINION

The First Amendment prohibits the government from meting out consequences for unethical journalism. Only the industry itself can impose them, and that is why Lemon should never be hired by another news organization.

These kinds of harsh penalties are the only way that ethics in journalism can be enforced, and my goodness, are we in desperate need of some serious enforcement.

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

There will be reasonable and rigorous debate about the legality of Lemon’s actions in Minnesota as there should be. But there should be no debate regarding his crime against journalism, proven by his own livestream.

It is time for examples to be made, or journalism could lose the trust of the people forever.

CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM DAVID MARCUS

DAN GAINOR: Leftists don’t understand the internet and it’s costing them the culture war

The Left can’t meme. That has been online reality for years. And they get indignant when the right does it. That’s been reality since the beginning of the political era of President Donald Trump. I still remember my favorite Trump meme – the one that redid his WWE appearance, yet turned it into a 2017 presidential smackdown of CNN. Hilarious. More so because of the media freakout.

Fast forward nearly nine years, and Trump is still meming and the press is still fuming. The latest meme pairs Trump with the infamous solitary penguin. The White House combined an iconic image of the penguin marching off on his own with Trump joining him. Add in an American flag and some Greenland mountains with the caption: “Embrace the penguin.”

The response was predictable – a blizzard of angry comments and awful headlines. First the awful: Forbes chimed in with, “TikTok’s ‘Nihilistic Penguin’ Meme, Explained.” Shockingly, they weren’t the only ones to put “nihilistic penguin” in headlines, which hopefully is a first for mankind. USA Today, The Independent and The Week all chimed in with similar word of the day headlines. There hasn’t been this much hatred for the penguin since the last Batman movie.

Then came the berserk ones from the Left. Under the header “Climate Change,” Gizmodo whined, “Trump Urges Americans to Embrace a Suicidal Penguin as ‘Doomsday Clock’ Hits 85 Seconds to Midnight.” The outlet tried to get all sciency by embracing an entirely bogus measure of how near doomsday is. These are the same people who are convinced Mother Nature is big mad at mankind.

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

For an added little dig, it wrote: “There aren’t any penguins in Greenland.”

I want to write how no one cares, but clearly some in the press did. So, I’ll stick with no one important cared. There are only about 57,000 people in Greenland. It would have to look like the Opus-filled version of the Falklands (Human population 3,500, sheep population 500,000.) for people to care about the penguins in Greenland. Put another way, Greenland is similar to the population of mega cities like Kalamazoo, Mich., and nearby to me, Gainesville, Ga. But bigger than Alaska and California combined. “Hee Haw” fans, say it with me, “Salute!”

Trump and his multimedia minions don’t care about any of that. They care that they kept the entire world talking Trump and Greenland. And Trump. And the press looked silly freaking out about it. That’s a win, another win, another win. Oh, and a win.

BROADCAST BIAS: THE TOP 10 WORST EXAMPLES OF MEDIA MALPRACTICE IN 2025

Sadly, Gizmodo wasn’t the only site made of soulless, humorless scolds – the Karens of the internet. Lefty Mediaite unknowingly embraced the “Ackchyually” meme while complaining, “White House Posts AI Slop of Trump and a Penguin in Greenland, Which Doesn’t Have Penguins.” The Hill went the same route, noting, “Users on social media were quick to mock the White House’s post, pointing out that penguins live almost exclusively in the southern hemisphere.”

The bitter folks at The Daily Beast had to remind their equally bitter readers of Trump’s age in their headline: “Trump, 79, Revives Greenland Fantasy With Absurd AI Post.” Yes, at 79, he’s still better at this game than the entire Daily Beast staff. Newsweek warned, “White House Meme About Greenland Penguin Sparks Jokes, Backlash.” Horrors, not “backlash.” That never happens.

The pre-Trump penguin image comes from a 2007 documentary “Encounters at the End of the World.” The White House responded to the silly media uproar, writing: “The penguin does not concern himself with the opinions of those who cannot comprehend.” That’s a paraphrase of the famous quote, “The lion doesn’t concern himself with the opinions of the sheep.” Sheep, my lefty journalism friends, means ya’ll.

CLICK HERE FOR MORE FOX NEWS OPINION

Normal online people (i.e., not the Gizmodo staff) also know the penguin is a metaphor. Conservatives, especially conservative men, see the penguin going off on his own as a statement that they don’t have to follow the crowd, that the penguin, “no longer belongs where everyone else is,” as one TikToker phrased it. That he can make his own way in the world.

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

That is the essence of Trump’s appeal. The essence of America First, the opposite of the globalist nightmare that exported jobs and imported job takers. The U.S. doesn’t have to do what other nations do. The U.S. doesn’t have to commit cultural suicide, embrace open borders or censor online speech like Europe and the rest of the West. We don’t have to destroy ourselves in a modern version of World War I, like Russia. We can be strong, independent and successful.

We aren’t the 1985 propaganda hit, “We Are the World.” We are the penguin. Trump gets it. The press and their leftist allies never will.

CLICK HERE FOR MORE FROM DAN GAINOR

RT. REV. MARIANN BUDDE, 153 BISHOPS: The question facing America — Whose dignity matters?

We, the undersigned bishops of The Episcopal Church, write today out of grief, righteous anger, and steadfast hope.

What happened a week ago in Minnesota, and is happening in communities across the country, runs counter to God’s vision of justice and peace. This crisis is about more than one city or state — it’s about who we are as a nation. The question before us is simple and urgent:

In the wake of the tragic deaths of two U.S. citizens, Alex Pretti and Renee Good, we join Minnesotans and people across the nation in mourning two precious lives lost to state-sanctioned violence. We grieve with their families, their friends, and everyone harmed by the government’s policies. When fear becomes policy, everyone suffers.

DOJ OPENS CIVIL RIGHTS INVESTIGATION INTO MINNESOTA DEATH OF ALEX PRETTI

We call on Americans to trust their moral compass — and to question rhetoric that trades in fear rather than truth. As Episcopalians, our moral compass is rooted firmly in the Gospel of Jesus Christ.

This is what we know: Women were shoved to the ground, children torn from their families, and citizens silenced and demeaned for exercising their constitutional rights. These actions sow fear, cast doubt, and wear communities down with endless noise.

BIDEN SPEAKS OUT AGAINST IMMIGRATION CRACKDOWN IN MINNESOTA, SAYS IT GOES AGAINST AMERICAN VALUES

We cannot presume to speak for everyone or prescribe only one way to respond. For our part, we can only do as Jesus’ teaching shows us.

A Call for Action

This is a moment for action. We call on people of faith to stand by your values and act as your conscience demands.

We urge the immediate suspension of ICE and Border Patrol operations in Minnesota and in any community where militarized enforcement has endangered residents or destroyed public trust.

We also call for transparent, independent investigations of the people killed—investigations centered on truth, not politics. Justice cannot wait, and accountability is essential to healing.

Every act of courage matters. We must keep showing up for one another. We are bound together because we are all made in the image of God. 

We call on the elected officials of our nation to remember the values we share, including the rule of law. Rooted in our Constitution, it ensures that law—not the arbitrary will of individuals—governs us all, protecting individual rights, ensuring fairness, and maintaining stability.

A Shared Commitment

Every act of courage matters. We must keep showing up for one another. We are bound together because we are all made in the image of God. This work begins with small, faithful steps.

BEN & JERRY’S CO-FOUNDER CALLS FOR ICE TO BE ‘DEFUNDED AND DISBANDED’: ‘THIS IS NOT FREEDOM’

As bishops in The Episcopal Church, we promise to keep showing up — to pray, to speak, and to stand with every person working to make our communities just, safe, and whole. We are committed to making our communities safer and more compassionate:

• So children can walk to school without fear.
• So families can shop, work, and worship freely.
• So we recognize the dignity of every neighbor — immigrant communities, military families, law enforcement officers, nurses, teachers, and essential workers alike.

You may feel powerless, angry, or heartbroken right now. Know that you’re not alone. Each of us has real power: community power, financial power, political power, and knowledge power.

CLICK HERE FOR MORE FOX NEWS OPINION

We can show up for our neighbors, support small businesses and food banks, contact elected officials and vote, and learn our rights so we can speak up peacefully without fear.

Choosing Hope

The question before us is simple and urgent:

Our faith gives a clear answer: Everyone’s.

Safety built on fear is an illusion. True safety comes when we replace fear with compassion, violence with justice, and unchecked power with accountability. That’s the vision our faith calls us to live out — and the promise our country is meant to uphold.

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

In the face of fear, we choose hope.

By the grace of God, may this season of grief become a season of renewal. May courage rise from lament, and love take root in every heart.

1. The Rt. Rev Gladstone B. Adams, III, X Bishop of Central New York (Retired)
2. The Rt. Rev. Laura J. Ahrens, Bishop Suffragan of Connecticut
3. The Rt. Rev. Diana D. Akiyama, Bishop of Oregon
4. The Rt. Rev. David A. Alvarez, VI Bishop of Puerto Rico (Retired)
5. The Rt. Rev. Lucinda Beth Ashby, Bishop of El Camino Real
6. The Rt. Rev. David C. Bane, IX Bishop of Southern Virginia (Retired)
7. The Rt. Rev. J. Scott Barker, Bishop of Nebraska
8. The Rt. Rev. Cathleen Bascom, Bishop of Kansas
9. The Rt. Rev. Jennifer Baskerville-Burrows, Bishop of Indianapolis
10. The Rt. Rev. Nathan D. Baxter, Bishop of Central Pennsylvania (Retired)
11. The Rt. Rev. Mark Beckwith, X Bishop of Newark (Retired)
12. The Rt. Rev. Barry L. Beisner, Bishop Provisional Missionary Diocese of Navajoland
13. The Rt. Rev. Patrick W. Bell, Bishop of Eastern Oregon
14. The Rt. Rev. Scott Anson Benhase, OA, X Bishop of Georgia (Retired)
15. The Rt. Rev. Mark Allen Bourlakas, Assistant Bishop of Virginia
16. The Rt. Rev. Thomas E. Breidenthal, IX Bishop of Southern Ohio (Retired)
17. The Rt. Rev. Jennifer Brooke-Davidson, Assistant Bishop of North Carolina
18. The Rt. Rev. C. Franklin Brookhart, Assisting Bishop of Los Angeles
19. The Rt. Rev. Kevin S. Brown, Bishop of Delaware
20. The Rt. Rev. Thomas J. Brown, Bishop of Maine
21. The Rt. Rev. Susan Brown Snook, Bishop of San Diego
22. The Rt. Rev. Diane M. Jardine Bruce, Bishop Suffragan of Los Angeles (Retired)
23. The Rt. Rev. Mariann Edgar Budde, Bishop of Washington
24. The Rt. Rev. Elías García Cárdenas, Bishop of Colombia
25. The Rt. Rev. Paula E. Clark, Bishop of Chicago
26. The Rt. Rev. Angela Maria Cortiñas, Bishop Suffragan of West Texas
27. The Rt. Rev. Matthew Cowden, Bishop of West Virginia
28. The Rt. Rev. James E. Curry, Bishop Suffragan of Connecticut (Retired)
29. The Rt. Rev. Michael B. Curry, XXVII Presiding Bishop of the Episcopal Church (Retired)
30. The Rt. Rev. Joe Morris Doss, X Bishop of New Jersey (Retired)
31. The Rt. Rev. Ian T. Douglas, Assisting Bishop of Massachusetts
32. The Rt. Rev. DeDe Duncan-Probe, Bishop of Central New York
33. The Rt. Rev. J. Zache Duracin, Bishop of Haiti (Retired)
34. The Rt. Rev. Mark D.W. Edington, Bishop in charge of the Convocation of Episcopal Churches in Europe
35. The Rt. Rev. Dan Edwards, XII Bishop of Nevada (Retired)
36. The Rt. Rev. C. Christopher Epting, VIII Bishop of Iowa (Retired)
37. The Rt. Rev. Douglas Fisher, Bishop of Western Massachusetts
38. The Rt. Rev. Jeff W. Fisher, Bishop Suffragan of Texas
39. The Rt. Rev. Robert L. Fitzpatrick, Bishop of Hawai’i
40. The Rt. Rev. James E. Folts, VIII Bishop of West Texas (Retired)
41. The Rt. Rev. Jonathan H. Folts, Bishop of South Dakota
42. The Rt. Rev. R. William Franklin, Assisting Bishop of Long Island
43. The Rt. Rev. Sally French, Bishop of New Jersey
44. The Rt. Rev. J. Michael Garrison, X Bishop of Western New York (Retired)
45. The Rt. Rev. Alan M. Gates, XVI Bishop of Massachusetts (Retired)
46. The Rt. Rev. Wendell N. Gibbs, Assisting Bishop of Southern Ohio
47. The Rt. Rev. Mary D. Glasspool, Assisting Bishop of Massachusetts
48. The Rt. Rev. Susan E. Goff, Bishop Suffragan of Virginia (Retired)
49. The Rt. Rev. William O. Gregg, VI Bishop of Eastern Oregon (Retired)
50. The Rt. Rev. Daniel G. P. Gutiérrez, Bishop of Pennsylvania
51. The Rt. Rev. Douglas Hahn, VII Bishop of Lexington (Retired)
52. The Rt. Rev. Michael Hanley, X Bishop of Oregon (Retired)
53. The Rt. Rev. John T.W. Harmon, Bishop of Arkansas
54. The Rt. Rev. Gayle Elizabeth Harris, Assistant Bishop of Virginia
55. The Rt. Rev. Scott B. Hayashi, XI Bishop of Utah (Retired)
56. The Rt. Rev. Susan B. Haynes, Bishop of Southern Virginia
57. The Rt. Rev. Matthew Heyd, Bishop of New York
58. The Rt. Rev. Rayford B. High, Jr., Bishop Suffragan of Texas (Retired)
59. The Rt. Rev. Mark Hollingsworth, Jr., XI Bishop of Ohio (Retired)
60. The Rt. Rev. Barry R. Howe, VII Bishop of West Missouri (Retired)
61. The Rt. Rev. Carlye J. Hughes, Bishop of Newark
62. The Rt. Rev. Michael B. Hunn, Bishop of the Rio Grande
63. The Rt. Rev. Robert W. Ihloff, XIII Bishop of Maryland (Retired)
64. The Rt. Rev. James I. Jelinek, VIII Bishop of Minnesota (Retired)
65. The Rt. Rev. Don E. Johnson, III Bishop of West Tennessee (Retired)
66. The Rt. Rev. Deon Johnson, Bishop of Missouri
67. The Rt. Rev. Anne B. Jolly, Bishop of Ohio
68. The Rt. Rev. Charles I. Jones, VII Bishop of Montana (Retired)
69. The Rt. Rev. David Colin Jones, Bishop Suffragan of Virginia (Retired)
70. The Rt. Rev. W. Michie Klusmeyer, VII Bishop of West Virginia (Retired)
71. The Rt. Rev. W. Nicholas Knisely, SOSc, Bishop of Rhode Island
72. The Rt. Rev. Chilton Knudsen, VIII Bishop of Maine (Retired)
73. The Rt. Rev. James E. Krotz, IX Bishop of Nebraska (Retired)
74. The Rt. Rev. Philip N. LaBelle, Bishop of Olympia
75. The Rt. Rev. Stephen T. Lane, Bishop Provisional of Western New York,
76. The Rt. Rev. Mark Lattime, Bishop of Alaska,
77. The Rt. Rev. Jeffrey Lee, XII Bishop of Chicago (Retired)
78. The Rt. Rev. Edward L. Lee, Jr., Bishop of the Great Lakes (Retired)
79. The Rt. Rev. Frank S. Logue, Bishop of Georgia
80. The Rt. Rev. Craig Loya, Bishop of Minnesota
81. The Rt. Rev. Kym Lucas, Bishop of Colorado
82. The Rt. Rev. Shannon MacVean-Brown, Bishop of Vermont
83. The Rt. Rev. F. Clayton Matthews, Bishop Suffragan of Virginia (Retired)
84. The Rt. Rev. J. Scott Mayer, Bishop of Northwest Texas
85. The Rt. Rev. Dorsey McConnell, VIII Bishop of Pittsburgh (Retired)
86. The Rt. Rev. Jack McKelvey, VII Bishop of Rochester (Retired)
87. The Rt. Rev. Jeffrey W. Mello, Bishop of Connecticut
88. The Rt. Rev. Juan Carlos Quiñonez Mera, Bishop of Central Ecuador
89. The Rt. Rev. Rodney Michel, Bishop Suffragan of Long Island (Retired)
90. The Rt. Rev. Betsey Monnot, Bishop of Iowa
91. The Rt. Rev. Robert O’Neill, X Bishop of Colorado (Retired)
92. The Rt. Rev. Todd Ousley, Bishop Provisional of Wyoming
93. The Rt. Rev. Jacob W. Owensby, Bishop of Western Louisiana
94. The Rt. Rev. George E. Packard, Bishop Suffragan of Armed Forces and Federal Ministries (Retired)
95. The Rt. Rev. Bonnie A. Perry, Bishop of Michigan
96. The Rt. Rev. Kenneth L. Price, Jr., Assisting Bishop of Southern Ohio
97. The Rt. Rev. Brian N. Prior, X Bishop of Minnesota (Retired)
98. The Rt. Rev. Lawrence C. Provenzano, Bishop of Long Island
99. The Rt. Rev. John Rabb, Bishop Suffragan of Maryland (Retired)
100. The Rt. Rev. Rayford J. Ray, Bishop of Northern Michigan
101. The Rt. Rev. David G. Read, Bishop of West Texas
102. The Rt. Rev. Jennifer Reddall, Bishop of Arizona
103. The Rt. Rev. Poulson Reed, Bishop of Oklahoma
104. The Rt. Rev. Gretchen Rehberg, Bishop of Spokane
105. The Rt. Rev. David Rice, Bishop of San Joaquin
106. The Rt. Rev. Austin K. Rios, Bishop of California
107. The Rt. Rev. Ann Ritonia, Bishop Suffragan of Armed Forces and Federal Ministries for the Episcopal Church
108. The Rt. Rev. Bavi (Nedi) Rivera, VII Bishop of Eastern Oregon (Retired)
109. The Rt. Rev. Phoebe A. Roaf, Bishop of West Tennessee
110. The Rt. Rev. Gene Robinson, IX Bishop of New Hampshire (Retired)
111. The Rt. Rev. Samuel S. Rodman, Bishop Diocesan of North Carolina
112. The Rt. Rev. Catherine S. Roskam, Bishop Suffragan of New York (Retired)
113. The Rt. Rev. Kathryn M. Ryan, Bishop Suffragan of Texas
114. The Rt. Rev. Audrey C. Scanlan, Bishop Diocesan of the Susquehanna
115. The Rt. Rev. Alan Scarfe, IX Bishop of Iowa (Retired)
116. The Rt. Rev. Carrie Schofield-Broadbent, Bishop of Maryland
117. The Rt. Rev. Gordon P. Scruton, VIII Bishop of Western Massachusetts, (Retired)
118. The Rt. Rev. Brian Seage, Assisting Bishop of Texas
119. The Rt. Rev. James J. Shand, X Bishop of Easton (Retired)
120. The Rt. Rev. Kara Wagner Sherer, Bishop of Rochester
121. The Rt. Rev. Allen Shin, Bishop Suffragan of New York
122. The Rt. Rev. Mark S. Sisk, XV Bishop of New York (Retired)
123. The Most Rev. Melissa M. Skelton, Bishop Provisional of Olympia (Retired)
124. The Rt. Rev. Rob Skirving, Bishop of East Carolina
125. The Rt. Rev. John McKee Sloan, XI Bishop of Alabama (Retired)
126. The Rt. Rev. William E. Smalley, VIII Bishop of Kansas (Retired)
127. The Rt. Rev. Andrew D. Smith, XIV Bishop of Connecticut (Retired)
128. The Rt. Rev. George Wayne Smith, X Bishop of Missouri (Retired)
129. The Rt. Rev. Douglas E. Sparks, Bishop of Northern Indiana
130. The Rt. Rev. Phyllis Spiegel, Bishop of Utah
131. The Rt. Rev. Marty Stebbins, Bishop Diocesan of Montana
132. The Rt. Rev. E. Mark Stevenson, Bishop Diocesan of Virginia
133. The Rt. Rev. William H. Stokes, XII Bishop of New Jersey (Retired)
134. The Rt. Rev. George Sumner, XII Bishop of Dallas (Retired)
135. The Rt. Rev. Eugene Taylor Sutton, Assisting Bishop of Washington
136. The Rt. Rev. G. Porter Taylor, VI Bishop of Western North Carolina (Retired)
137. The Rt. Rev. John Harvey Taylor, Bishop of Los Angeles
138. The Rt. Rev. Jos Tharakan, Bishop of Idaho
139. The Rt. Rev. Brian Thom, Bishop of North Dakota
140. The Rt. Rev. Morris K. Thompson, Jr., XI Bishop of Louisiana (Retired)
141. The Rt. Rev. John S. Thornton, XI Bishop of Idaho (Retired)
142. The Rt. Rev. Martin G.Townsend, IX Bishop of Easton (Retired)
143. The Rt. Rev. Megan Traquair, Bishop of Northern California
144. The Rt. Rev. Michael L. Vono, IX Bishop of the Rio Grande (Retired)
145. The Rt. Rev. Pierre W. Whalon, IX Bishop in charge of the Convocation of Episcopal Churches in Europe (Retired)
146. The Rt. Rev. Kristin Uffelman White, Bishop of Southern Ohio
147. The Rt. Rev. Keith B. Whitmore, V Bishop of Eau Claire (Retired)
148. The Rt. Rev. Julia E. Whitworth, Bishop Diocesan of Massachusetts
149. The Rt. Rev. Arthur B. Williams, Jr., Bishop Suffragan of Ohio (Retired)
150. The Rt. Rev. Jeremiah D. Williamson, Bishop of Albany
151. The Rt. Rev. Ruth Woodliff-Stanley, Bishop of South Carolina
152. The Rt. Rev. Wayne P. Wright, X Bishop of Delaware (Retired)
153. The Rt. Rev. Rob Wright, Bishop of Atlanta
154. The Rt. Rev. George D. Young, III, III Bishop of East Tennessee (Retired)

BROADCAST BIAS: Media circle the wagons to protect their anti-Trump reporting

The liberal media includes a cadre of media reporters who see their jobs as waging war on any media owner or executive who might move their outlet ever so slightly toward the center. They’re very happy to find their allies inside newsrooms and grant them anonymity to trash anyone who doesn’t see their job as impeaching and jailing President Donald Trump and describing everyone who works for him as Gestapo equivalents.

CBS News under new owner David Ellison and his hand-picked Editor-in-Chief Bari Weiss became a hot topic again this week when Weiss held an all-staff meeting to clear the air with all the anonymous sources who are trashing her behind her back. The Daily Beast headline captured their tilt: “MAGA-curious CBS boss dares defiant staffers to quit in tense all-hands.” Their headlines on new evening news host Tony Dokoupil tag him as “MAGA-coded.”

Critics of this new regime love to predict doom around the corner. The Ringer literally cartooned Weiss’s CBS as “pancaked, Wile E. Coyote–style, against the side of the mountain.” Variety’s CBS sources described the network being on the verge of a “death spiral” that is “hard to reverse.” CBS News has been in third place for decades, and their audience continues to decline, but only adding viewpoint diversity is “death spiral” material.

Weiss was blunt about the declining appeal of traditional media. “We are not producing a product enough people want,” she said. She sounds a lot like other network chieftains in the realization that most younger Americans don’t watch TV news or listen to traditional radio. They’ll have to grab them in some other format. The “graying” of the audience is a hard fact.

BARI WEISS SUGGESTS CECOT ’60 MINUTES’ PIECE SHE DELAYED WASN’T ‘FAIR’ IN MEMO TO STAFFERS

But the liberal hardliners can’t abide trying to find new audiences by including dissenting opinions, or “news judgment” that isn’t fervently anti-Trump. NPR media reporter David Folkenflik relied on eight anonymous CBS complainers. Some were outraged that the “CBS Evening News” brushed over the fifth anniversary of January 6 in less than a minute, but ended the program with a light, jokey segment about memes of Secretary of State Marco Rubio. Dokoupil offended the insiders by concluding, “Marco Rubio, we salute you.”

The traditional CBS approach can be seen on their “Sunday Morning” program a year ago, on January 12, 2025, when CBS reporter Martha Teichner celebrated then-President Joe Biden’s Secretary of State, Antony Blinken, under the headline “Man Of The World.” Teichner, a classmate of Hillary Clinton’s at Wellesley, gushed over Blinken “photo bombing” a picture of female foreign ministers at a NATO meeting, and celebrated Blinken as a square. He “promoted music diplomacy — by performing the Muddy Waters blues standard ‘Hoochie Coochie Man’ in a suit and tie.” Saluting Democrats is the norm.

The bias-boosting media reporters are also upset at Washington Post CEO Will Lewis, who is expected to announce mass layoffs any day now, with expected cuts to sports and foreign coverage, which do not click profitably. Making a newspaper less broad-based may be the wrong strategy, but it’s fascinating to see journalists blame the owners and the “business side.”

BARI WEISS TELLS STAFF ’60 MINUTES’ CECOT STORY WASN’T READY, SAYS DISRESPECT AMONG COLLEAGUES IS UNACCEPTABLE

Former Post reporter Ashley Parker tweeted: “I don’t understand how laying off a bunch of talented and hardworking journalists solves what is fundamentally a publisher and business side problem. The Post deserves better.” An anonymous Postie claimed: “The newsroom is being punished for absolute incompetence from the owner and publisher.”

It’s better for journalists to stay anonymous when they accuse a self-made billionaire of incompetence. All this makes journalists look like an entitled class of brats. When people stop buying the newspaper and they lose $100 million a year, don’t blame “talented journalists,” it’s a “business side problem.”

CLICK HERE FOR MORE FOX NEWS OPINION

Glenn Kessler, the Post’s former fact-checker, spoke for the reporters when he told Fox News Digital: “Many have dedicated their professional careers to the Post and are worried an important American institution is being dismantled.” But would it be “dismantled” by layoffs, or by appearing more friendly to Trump?

The same internal panic is happening at “public broadcasting” networks in the aftermath of Trump and the Republicans canceling their taxpayer funding. PBS just canceled its “PBS News Weekend” show and created instead two weekend programs that don’t require any weekend staff.

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

But the liberal hardliners can’t abide trying to find new audiences by including dissenting opinions, or “news judgment” that isn’t fervently anti-Trump. 

NPR posted a long, screechy article by 19 correspondents about how Trump is engaged in “a sweeping expansion of executive power while eroding democratic norms.” Under a propagandistic graphic of Trump pulling an electric plug out of the wall, NPR charged, “Trump has targeted freedom of speech, attempting to control and change information,” including the defunding of public media. 

These media activists equate their own attack journalism with “democratic norms,” as if “democracy” is defined as trashing Republicans and helping Democrats win as many elections as possible. No one should challenge their ideological “control” of information, or they’re a troop of tyrants.

CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM TIM GRAHAM

Fix is in in Minnesota, where anti-ICE federal judge leaves his lane to side with mob

Patrick Schiltz serves as chief judge of the United States District Court for the District of Minnesota. Schiltz has presided over several disputes relating to Operation Metro Surge in Minneapolis. Recently, for instance, he became embroiled in the battle over the proposed arrest of Don Lemon after he and his anti-ICE friends allegedly stormed a St. Paul church. Schiltz absurdly delayed ruling on whether to overturn a magistrate judge’s decision not to issue an arrest warrant for Lemon, claiming that he would rule on overturning the magistrate within a week. Thankfully, Attorney General Pam Bondi has now obtained an indictment of Lemon from a grand jury, but Schiltz made things more difficult for no particularly good reason.

Another clash almost occurred involving Schiltz and Acting ICE Director Todd Lyons this week. Schiltz was furious that a detainee had not been released and ordered Lyons to appear for a Friday hearing with the possibility of a contempt citation in play. “The Court’s patience is at an end,” Schiltz ominously wrote. The detainee is now free, so the Friday showdown is off. It is easy to fathom how future conflict could arise, and Schiltz should not preside over some immigration-related cases.

Earlier this week, Bill Melugin of Fox News reported that Schiltz and his wife Elizabeth had donated and volunteered for the Minnesota Immigrant Legal Center (MILC). MILC provides representation for immigrants in court, as do other legal aid organizations. Schiltz acknowledged to Fox News that he and his wife have donated to MILC for a long time. He compared it to his donations to Mid-Minnesota Legal Aid, an organization that provides representation and services for the poor.

There is a crucial distinction between the two organizations, however. MILC does not simply ensure that immigrants are represented in court. It also advocates in favor of and against various immigration policies. For instance, it branded President Trump’s early executive orders on immigration as “cruel and inhumane” in a Jan. 24, 2025, press release. Suppose that one of those executive orders were to come before Schiltz in a case where an immigrant was challenging its legality.

The judicial recusal standard is codified in 28 U.S.C. § 455. A judge must recuse when, among other things, there is an appearance of impropriety. In other words, recusal is required if a reasonable person, familiar with all relevant facts, would question the judge’s ability to be fair and impartial. This standard also appears in Canon 3(C) of the Code of Conduct for United States Judges. That is absolutely the case here. Just as a judge who had donated to the Equal Rights Campaign has no business overseeing gay rights litigation, a judge who has donated to an open borders advocacy organization has no business overseeing immigration cases.

Moreover, Schiltz and his fellow district judges should not even be presiding over immigration detention cases because they are barred by statute from doing so. The Immigration and Nationality Act of 1965 dictates that immigrants must litigate their removal proceedings before immigration courts. District courts lack jurisdiction to decide removal issues. The Third Circuit recently reversed a leftist New Jersey judge’s intervention in the case of Hamas supporter Mahmoud Khalil, a student at Columbia University. The district judge had enjoined Khalil’s deportation, but the Third Circuit correctly held that district courts lack jurisdiction in these cases.

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

If Schiltz adopted this position, he would not need to worry about recusal due to his MILC donations. He and all other district judges should stop intervening in deportation cases where jurisdiction is improper. In the meantime, Schiltz should recuse from such cases and others concerning President Trump’s executive orders that the group with which he has affiliated for many years has characterized as “cruel and inhumane.” If he doesn’t, higher courts will need to step in to maintain the integrity of the judicial process.

DR. BEN CARSON: Patients should never fear political bias in healthcare

We all have deeply-held beliefs, and, thankfully, we live in a nation where we can freely express our ideas without fear of government oppression. That freedom is one of our nation’s greatest strengths. But freedom also comes with responsibility — especially for those entrusted with the lives of others. Recently, several shocking incidents have brought to light a disturbing trend: Doctors, nurses and other healthcare professionals are putting politics and ideology ahead of their duty to protect the health and safety of their patients. 

The examples are legion. A nurse in Florida posted on TikTok wishing White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt a severe fourth-degree tear during childbirth. 

A nurse in Virginia uploaded a video suggesting ways to injure ICE agents, urging viewers to “make their lives miserable.” Detectives in New York City who were injured while making an arrest were reportedly treated rudely and disrespectfully by hospital workers because staff suspected that they were ICE agents. 

Even internationally, in Sydney, Australia, two healthcare workers threatened to kill an Israeli man and claimed they had harmed Jewish patients in their care. Antisemitic conduct by health care providers in Britain is so pervasive that the secretary of state for Health and Social Care admitted it was “completely failing to protect Jewish patients.” These incidents are more than just shocking, unacceptable lapses in judgment. They are violations of the trust and ethical responsibility that are central to medicine. 

CHRISTIAN NURSE WHO FACED ‘RACIAL ABUSE’ FROM TRANSGENDER PATIENT REINSTATED AFTER SUSPENSION

Trust and morality are the bedrock of good healthcare. Unfortunately, that trust has already been tested and broken in recent years. The poor handling of COVID-19, combined with widespread misinformation about vaccines and the efficacy of masking, to name just two, left many Americans skeptical of the health care providers and the public health establishment generally. 

Now, when medical professionals publicly express hostility or wish harm on individuals, it deepens a rift that puts the public at risk. Common sense tells us that no one should have to worry that a healthcare provider’s political or religious beliefs will affect their ability to care. Yet these incidents make that concern all too real. 

Medical misconduct includes breaches of ethical duty and intentional bias. When health care professionals publicly wish harm on someone they have never met, they violate the most fundamental principles of their profession. How can patients be expected to trust a system in which those entrusted with their lives might treat them differently because of their views, religion or background? And what happens when a patient challenges them or is perceived to be “difficult”? Because of this fear, patients may delay seeking care or choose to avoid care entirely. This breach of trust is a tangible threat to public health.

During my years as a neurosurgeon, I treated patients from a variety of backgrounds, beliefs and personalities. None of that mattered on the operating table. Medicine demands that doctors and nurses set aside personal biases and focus entirely on the well-being of the patient. If your mind is occupied with judgments about a patient’s beliefs or lifestyle, you simply cannot practice good medicine. 

An injured drunk driver must receive the same level of care as the people they injured in an accident. Anything less is unethical and unlawful. Indeed, even in warfare — where the stakes are literally life and death — battlefield medics are under ethical and legal obligations to treat enemy wounded so long as the wounded no longer presents a military threat. 

At the heart of the matter, we have drifted as a society from the moral compass and principles of faith on which our nation was founded. Without a higher authority such as God determining the inherent value of human life, the value of life becomes subjective and changeable. 

Medical professionals hold a unique position of power and trust, and with that comes a higher standard of accountability. Using one’s professional status to promote harm, encourage violence or suggest that certain people deserve mistreatment is utterly unacceptable. Those who engage in this behavior should face severe consequences, including loss of their license and employment. The public relies on healthcare providers to act in the best interest of every patient, regardless of personal beliefs. 

CLICK HERE FOR MORE FOX NEWS OPINION

Violations of professional ethics must carry real consequences, including revocation of medical licenses and job termination, so that others understand that these behaviors are intolerable.

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

Ultimately, the health care industry exists to heal people, not to advance political agendas. Professionals who cannot meet this standard should not be entrusted with the health and lives of others. Protecting trust in healthcare is not optional; it is essential to the safety and well-being of all Americans. It does us no good to have amazing ways to heal the sick if patients do not trust us to act in their best interests, regardless of any other factor. 

The medical profession demands more than skill. It demands character, integrity and compassion. If we allow personal beliefs to compromise care, we risk lives. Common sense, foundational faith and ethical responsibility must guide our healthcare system if we hope to maintain trust and ensure that every patient is treated with dignity, respect, and the care they deserve.

GREGG JARRETT: Don Lemon left his press pass at the door when he joined church-storming mob

It is a popular fallacy that freedom of the press enshrined in the First Amendment is absolute. It is not and never has been.

The recent arrest of podcaster Don Lemon on federal criminal charges that he willingly joined a mob of anti-ICE protesters who stormed a St. Paul, Minnesota church during Sunday services will inevitably test well-established limits on press freedoms. 

Journalists, however defined, cannot, without legal consequences engage in incitement, defamation, obscenity, threatened violence, national security breaches, and the commission of crimes.  

Calling yourself a “journalist” or claiming that you are simply “committing journalism,” as Lemon has done, is not a defense. It is your  that the law examines. Both words and actions can reveal your intent.

MINNESOTA AG KEITH ELLISON DENIES DON LEMON, ANTI-ICE PROTESTERS VIOLATED FACE ACT AS DOJ MULLS CHARGES

This is why Lemon has found himself in criminal jeopardy. His own digital videos seem to incriminate him.  

In footage that Lemon posted online, it appears that he was not merely an observer recording the illegal protest inside the church, which would be a typical role of a reporter. Instead, he seemed to be an active participant who embedded himself with the mob and joined their cause in harassing and tormenting the parishioners.

Lemon confronted the pastor with contentious questions, the same way that the agitators accosted stunned —and perhaps fearful — congregates. You can see and hear him arguing on their behalf that they were allowed to invade the church, disrupt the service, and shutdown worshipers under the guise of the First Amendment’s free speech clause.

DON LEMON COULD BE PROSECUTED FOR EMBEDDING WITH PROTESTERS AT MINNESOTA CHURCH, LEGAL ANALYST SAYS

Not surprisingly, Lemon’s arrogant lecture shows a stunning ignorance of the law. Free speech is no more absolute than freedom of the press. 

In America, the right to protest does not extend to private property and certainly not to houses of worship. By law, they are protected places — secured spaces where people of all faiths can exercise their other First Amendment right to practice their religion without punishment or persecution.  

There are several federal statutes that afford protection. The Klan Act of 1871 makes it a crime for anyone to conspire to intimidate and interfere with the civil rights of congregants. A different act codified in 18 USC 247 prohibits the intentional obstruction, by force or threat of force, of any person’s free exercise of religious beliefs.

DON LEMON TAPS HUNTER BIDEN’S ATTORNEY TO FIGHT TRUMP DOJ CHARGES

However, the indictment charges Lemon with conspiring to deprive others of their civil rights and violating the FACE Act (18 USC 248). Section 2 of that law strictly protects places of worship from threats, intimidation and interference.

Predictable outrage over the charges was voiced immediately by Lemon’s attorney, Abbe Lowell, who declared that it was an “unprecedented attack on the First Amendment.” It was an ironic statement, given that worshipers were attacked for exercising  First Amendment religious rights.

Lowell, who represented Hunter Biden in two criminal cases resulting in convictions and guilty pleas, invoked Lemon’s right as a journalist to cover events of newsworthy interest.

JONATHAN TURLEY: WHEN MINNESOTA AG ELLISON EXCUSES MOB RULE, RELIGIOUS FREEDOM IS TRAMPLED

But is that what he was really doing? It is the core question that will be central in any forthcoming trial. Was Lemon acting as a journalist? Or did he shed that role and, by his behavior, join the mob as a willing participant? This is where his actions and words become pivotal.  

Based on video footage, Lemon knew of the protesters’ plan to barge into the church and take over morning prayers. He admitted that he had done “reconnaissance” with them, some of whom were members of Minnesota Black Lives Matter. He handed out donuts and coffee to the demonstrators and vowed to accompany them on their “Operation Pull-Up.” 

As activists rushed into the Cities Church, so did Lemon who shoved his microphone in the face of the obviously shocked Pastor Jonathan Parnell who called the noisy intrusion “unacceptable and shameful.” What followed wasn’t an interview, but a condescending and belligerent dressing-down.

THE CHURCH IS HOLY GROUND, NOT A STAGE FOR THE LEFT’S POLITICAL RAGE

“There’s such a thing as a Constitution and a First Amendment,” lectured Lemon, unaware that churches are protected venues and that such an antagonistic invasion constituted the crimes of trespass, disorderly conduct, disturbing a religious meeting, and violations of the FACE Act.

Whether Lemon behaved as a journalist or not is arguably irrelevant. Churches are private property, not public spaces.  Access is restricted. An invitation to the general public to worship does not give rise to a right to disrupt services.  Even assuming that Lemon acted as a journalist, he still committed a criminal trespass.

Indeed, when a parishioner objected that Lemon and the mob were trespassing, he glibly replied, “Nobody’s fighting.” That, of course, is not the litmus test for trespass. In another video, he boasted that the whole point of ruining the church service was “to make people uncomfortable.” He clearly shared that goal with the mob.

BROADCAST BIAS: NETWORKS SIDE WITH CHURCH INVADERS, CALL ATTACK MOSTLY ‘PEACEFUL’

Later, Lemon appeared on a leftist podcast and described the members of the church as “entitled white supremacists,” as if that somehow justified an attack on them. It is not just a despicable remark, but it suggests that the congregants were taunted because of their race, which could qualify as a hate crime.   

After Lemon learned that he was the subject of a criminal investigation, he suddenly embraced the mantle of victimhood by stating, “I’m the biggest name there.” As he has done before, he claimed that he was being targeted because he’s a “gay black man.”

CLICK HERE FOR MORE FOX NEWS OPINION

In our system of justice, Lemon enjoys the presumption of innocence. The case against him will not be an easy one to prosecute. Lowell is an able lawyer who will mount a formidable defense in casting reasonable doubt. He will also file a myriad of pre-trial motions challenging the indictment itself.

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

If the case does go to trial, the outcome may further define the limits of what journalists can and cannot do in the pursuit of stories. Good reporters know that their job is to cover events, not to participate in or influence them.  

Lemon, who was fired from CNN, never seemed to understand this basic tenet of journalism.

CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM GREGG JARRETT 

DAVID MARCUS: Why Melania and her fans deserve her silver screen star turn

Something that pretty much any honest observer should be able to admit is that if Melania Trump were the first lady of a Democrat president, she would be the greatest fashion and style icon since Jackie Kennedy.

On Friday, “Melania,” a documentary about the first lady and the 20 days leading to the 2025 inauguration of President Trump opens in theaters nationwide, putting her squarely in the spotlight for once.

It is frankly remarkable, given that Melania is literally a fashion model, that while former presidents’ wives such as Jill Biden and Michelle Obama regularly graced glamorous magazine covers, Mrs. Trump is treated as the icy foreigner when she isn’t just ignored completely.

This cold shoulder from the legacy fashion and social pages, while obvious, does not mean that the first lady doesn’t have a lot of loyal fans. Quite the opposite: Among Trump supporters, especially women, she is wildly popular.

GUCCI HEIRESS LAUNCHES NEW ‘UNITY’ HANDBAG WITH PROCEEDS BENEFITING MELANIA TRUMP’S ‘FOSTERING THE FUTURE’

At Turning Point USA’s AmFest in Phoenix last month, many of the women I spoke with, mothers in particular, could not hold Melania in higher esteem, both as fashion icon and as someone with sway over the president.

One woman, in a sparkly custom MAGA jacket told me, “I think Melania is the only one Trump really listens to.”

The fans of the first lady are clearly the potential moviegoers that Amazon studios is after with the ambitious project, even though no matter how many see the movie, we all know it will be treated as a flop, a failure and a joke.

VANITY FAIR EDITOR RAGES OVER POTENTIAL MELANIA TRUMP COVER, PREDICTS HALF THE EDITORIAL STAFF ‘WILL WALK’

In fact, the debasement of ‘Melania” has already begun. Take, for example, a USA Today headline that blares, “Mocking Melania Trump’s documentary is an act of patriotism.”

The author of this strange and unhinged column asks, “For starters, there’s the question of why. Why do we need this documentary? Who asked for it, aside from the film’s namesake? And who cares?”

This elitist attitude on the left, while not surprising from writers such as this, who have likely never met a Trump supporter, answers the question. People need or want this Melania documentary because these leftists blacklist her from everything else.

MELANIA TRUMP OPENS UP ABOUT SON BARRON’S CAMPAIGN ROLE, LIFE BEHIND THE SCENES BEFORE 2025 INAUGURATION

The cultural institutions of our country and the Western world are still controlled by the left, and though their power over the populace is waning, they retain goodies and prizes to hand out that are for true believers only.

This is how President Trump can settle wars across the globe, and yet we know he won’t get a Nobel Peace Prize. It’s how the New York Post can break the Hunter Biden laptop story without a whisper of a Pulitzer, and it’s how the most stunning first lady in a generation can’t get on any magazine covers.

The film is already being knocked as a “vanity project,” but when entire cultural industries are blacklisting a person, as they are with Melania, how else can you reach your fans and tell your story?

MELANIA TRUMP TO RECEIVE PATRIOT OF THE YEAR HONOR AT FOX NATION’S PATRIOT AWARDS

I have no idea how many people will see “Melania.” I do know whatever the number is will be mocked, but for the millions of Americans who admire the first lady, who want to know more about her and role in the White House, the movie is a very rare treat.

CLICK HERE FOR MORE FOX NEWS OPINION

The larger problem of anti-conservative bigotry and censorship in our cultural institutions will take a long time to fix, but there are positive signs. Recent shakeups in the venerated halls of such places as CBS News, the Trump Kennedy Center and Florida’s university system, for example, seem to annoy all the right, or should I say, lefty, people.

Other institutions, like fashion magazines, Hollywood and late-night TV, well, they still have quite a ways to go to achieve fairness and balance.

MELANIA TRUMP NAMED FOX NATION’S ‘PATRIOT OF THE YEAR’ FOR GLOBAL CHILDREN’S ADVOCACY WORK

President Trump is fond of noting that the attacks he suffers are really meant for his supporters, that he is just the one standing in the way. On some level, the same can be said of his wife.

Melania Trump is the stand-in for women who prioritize their husbands and families, who are accomplished but do not insist on honorifics, who go to church but can also rock stilettos and seductive gowns when the situation calls for it.

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

These are women who are mainly mocked in our society, and yet behind the scenes, they make much of our society function, a role many think Melania Trump plays in the White House, as well.

So, good for Melania and good for her fans. They deserve this star turn, and if it makes a bunch of whiny liberals upset, then that’s just the tiara on top.

CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM DAVID MARCUS

Democrats can run, but they can’t hide: An immigration reckoning is next in 2028

How Democrats’ fear of enforcing the law led us to this point.

At 5:00 a.m. on a cold January morning, pounding on the front door jolted Johana Gutierrez and Salvador Alfaro awake as flashlights cut through their windows and voices shouted from outside. Inside, their children and relatives were asleep. Minutes later, armed men were standing in their living room.

The children, still in their pajamas, were crying and shaking as agents searched the home room by room — the bedrooms, the kitchen, the laundry room, even the garage. When Gutierrez reached for her phone, she was told not to move. When she offered to get identification, an agent rested his hand on his gun. She was threatened with arrest.

There was no judicial warrant. No emergency. The agents had entered by deception.

DEMOCRATIC SENATOR CALLS OUT PARTY ‘BULL—-‘ FOR CAVING TO ‘SECURE THE BORDER’ TALK

By the time they left, a mother and her 10-year-old son were gone — taken away in unmarked cars to a detention center.

This was not Donald Trump’s America. It was Barack Obama’s.

The raid was part of a 2016 ICE operation that apprehended 121 people — mostly mothers and children — with final deportation orders. The ACLU called it “a mockery of due process.” Inside the Democratic Party, scenes like this left a lasting scar.

They also left behind a political myth: that Obama-era immigration enforcement was gentle, restrained or fundamentally different from what came before or after.

THE SUPREME COURT IS GOING TO GIVE PRESIDENT TRUMP A MAJOR OPENING ON IMMIGRATION

It wasn’t.

Obama never pretended enforcement was painless. “As long as the current laws are on the books,” he said in a 2011 speech in El Paso, “it’s not just hardened felons who are subject to removal, but sometimes families… or decent people with the best of intentions. We don’t relish the pain that it causes.”

He didn’t capitulate to interest groups or activists in the face of their criticism. He doubled down and enforced the law anyway.

Tom Homan — now Trump’s border czar — ran deportation operations under Obama. He was awarded one of the highest civil service honors by Obama’s DHS for removals that were described as “impressive and wide-reaching in scope.” Obama didn’t just inherit ICE’s machinery. He modernized it, expanded it and made it more effective.

Trump didn’t invent aggressive interior enforcement. Trump 1.0 exploited it — and weaponized it — adding cruelty, chaos and family separation to a system that already existed.

Inside the Democratic Party, however, Obama’s record became radioactive. “Deporter-in-Chief” wasn’t just a nickname. It was a warning label for anyone running for president in 2020.

JONATHAN TURLEY: DEMOCRAT POLITICIANS ARE RISKING LIVES WITH RECKLESS ANTI-ICE RHETORIC

And Joe Biden paid the price for it.

I saw it up close. Our campaign was hyper-sensitive — sometimes paralyzed — around immigration. Whenever the issue came up, Biden and Dr. Jill Biden emphasized humanity, restraint and decency. The message was clear: Biden would not be Trump. And he would not be Obama either.

In 1988, when George H.W. Bush promised a “kinder and gentler America,” Nancy Reagan famously turned to the person next to her and asked, “Kinder than who?” In 2020, our campaign answered that question preemptively.

DEM SENATOR WARNER ADMITS BIDEN ‘SCREWED UP’ THE BORDER, BUT CLAIMS ICE NOW TARGETING NON-CRIMINALS

But in the White House, the rhetoric became policy. And policy became a catastrophe.

Biden’s hyper-correction away from both Trump’s and Obama’s enforcement models produced one of the gravest political and governing failures of his presidency. By dismantling deterrence, narrowing enforcement, and signaling retreat, our administration helped create the conditions for system-wide collapse, and ultimately, Trump’s return to power.

Biden didn’t cause global instability, regional violence, or economic desperation. But he did choose to govern in a way that prioritized intraparty accommodation and reassurance over systemic credibility. And once credibility is gone, it is brutally hard to recover.

For nearly two decades now, Democrats have been stuck in a civil war over enforcement. We pretend the argument is about compassion versus cruelty. It isn’t. It’s about whether a governing party can say, out loud, that enforcement is not a moral failure — it is a prerequisite for a functioning system.

Both Obama and Biden knew the truth: there is no executive solution to America’s immigration challenge. We are still operating under a 1986 law for a reason. Fixing it requires legislation. Legislation requires cooperation and compromise. And compromise is hard.

Instead, Democrats have turned ICE into a moral proxy war.

Not “How should it be reformed?” Not “What should its mission be?” But a loyalty test: Are you for abolishing it? Or are you willing to fund it?

Every appropriations cycle now becomes a ritual of self-flagellation. Funding ICE is treated as moral surrender. Defunding it is treated as virtue. The result is a party that often cannot say, clearly and honestly, whether it believes its own laws should be enforced at all.

So every Democratic president ends up trapped in the same vise.

Enforce the law, and you risk revolt inside your own coalition. Fail to enforce it, and the system collapses — and voters punish you.

Obama chose enforcement and paid a reputational price inside the party.

Biden chose accommodation and paid a governing and political price.

CLICK HERE FOR MORE FOX NEWS OPINION

Bad policy is bad politics.

The truth — uncomfortable but unavoidable — is that a country cannot function without credible enforcement. Not theatrical enforcement. Not indiscriminate enforcement. But visible, consistent, legitimate enforcement.

Borders without it are not compassionate. They are fictitious.

“Abolish ICE,” like “Defund the Police,” was never a serious governing proposal. It was a signal — a marker of moral identity. And like “Defund the Police,” it produced exactly what moral posturing so often does: confusion, backlash, and political self-harm.

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

Obama understood something our party still struggles to say plainly: America is a nation of immigrants, and it is also a nation of laws. Those two ideas are not in tension. They depend on each other.

Until Democrats stop treating enforcement as a moral sin and start treating it as a governing responsibility, we will keep oscillating between virtue signaling and damage control. And future candidates — the 2028 Democrats — will keep paying the price for a debate the party is still too afraid to finish.

CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM MICHAEL LAROSA

The most unique thing Trump could do with stolen money recovered from blue states

Several recent news stories inspired me to think of a way to help the neediest in our nation. Most especially those being ripped off in our “blue” states. 

The first story deals with the tens of billions of taxpayer dollars stolen by organized fraud rings in Minnesota, California, New York and in a number of other “blue” states. Some estimates range well over $100 billion. Literally, the equivalent of the Gross National Product of many nations of earth being stolen from the American people.

The next story deals with the ever-growing controversy involving far-left Minnesota Democrat Rep. Ilhan Omar’s personal wealth. For years, many have wondered if Omar legally entered the United States and what her legal status is at the moment. But in addition to that mystery comes one news story after the other, seeming to document the fact that the personal wealth of her and her husband has skyrocketed of late. Inquiring minds want to know “how?”

Just one year ago, the congresswoman’s required federal financial disclosure form listed two assets at a combined maximum of approximately $51,000. Now, those two assets are listed at a combined maximum of approximately $30 million. Other than stock tips from former Democrat House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, what is Omar’s secret? Or, what is she hiding?

CONGRESS OPENS ‘INDUSTRIAL-SCALE FRAUD’ PROBE IN MINNESOTA, WARNS WALZ DEMANDS ARE ‘JUST THE BEGINNING’

Last, was a recent very telling report from Fareed Zakaria on CNN stating in part: “If America has an affordability crisis, it tends to be in places Democrats govern, like New York, Illinois and California, which all feature high taxes, soaring housing costs and stagnant outcomes in basic areas like education and infrastructure…” Always a bit shocking when CNN and the greater left admit to destructive policies pushed by the left, but truly welcome and much needed in this case.

CNN via Zakaria said the quiet part out loud. That being that in reality, it is the poorest and most disadvantaged in these Democrat-controlled “blue” states who pay the highest price – quite literally – for the ideological incompetence offered up by the far left in those states. Men, women and children who have long been taken for granted by the left.   

But, from such Democrat-manufactured chaos and misery, could come a great deal of clarity and … increased “affordability” for the poorest in those beleaguered states. As the Trump administration continues to successfully claw back billions in stolen taxpayer money from those “blue” states, I suggest it establish a “lottery” for the poorest and most disadvantaged legal citizens in those states.

I’VE WORKED THOUSANDS OF MONEY LAUNDERING CASES — FRAUD IS A NATIONAL SECURITY THREAT

Once established, every single day, pick a name from the barrel and award that person $10,000. As one who grew up homeless as a child, I can assure you that such an amount is life-changing for those without.

CLICK HERE FOR MORE FOX NEWS OPINION

Such a lottery would have four immediate benefits. First, it would capture the news cycle and spread like wildfire. Next, it would awaken millions in these “blue” states – and tens of millions more across the country — to the fraud perpetrated upon them while cementing in their minds who just created the lottery to help them.

Next, it would demonstrate desperately needed and wanted accountability for such theft taking place. And last, it would create hope in those who have felt neglected and abandoned for decades.

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

For those decades, far-left criminal gangs — often aided and abetted by far-left politicians — have successfully stolen billions of dollars from the American people. Now that the Trump administration has exposed this theft, flip the script against those who created and abetted these schemes by helping those most hurt by the crimes. The “Hunger Games” created by the left become the “Feeding Games” for those without.

I can assure you millions of Americans will sign up for such a needed — and eye-opening — lottery.

CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM DOUG MACKINNON

Big Tech’s tobacco moment is here — and the truth about harming kids is out

For over a decade, child victims and their parents have been denied the chance to get justice for the harms they have suffered from social media’s products–ranging from anxiety, depression, eating disorders, substance use disorders, suicide, sextortion, and, in the starkest cases, death. Starting this week, they will finally have their day in court. 

On Tuesday, the first bellwether trial against social media companies began in Los Angeles, serving as the initial test case for many more pending lawsuits. Meta, TikTok, Snap and YouTube face more than 3,000 lawsuits in California alone, along with more than 2,000 additional cases in federal court. 

Startling evidence is already coming to light. One internal Meta employee message exchange compares Instagram to drugs and slot machines. “Oh my gosh yall IG is a drug,” “Lol, I mean, all social media. We’re basically pushers.” 

FRENCH LAWMAKERS DECLARE ‘BATTLE FOR FREE MINDS’ AFTER APPROVING SOCIAL MEDIA BAN FOR CHILDREN UNDER 15

This is a landmark case. Never before have we been able to see this evidence, to reach this stage of litigation with social media where courts, and the public, can finally see for themselves the choices these companies have made when it comes to minors.

For years, any lawsuits brought against social media companies were dismissed outright because of a law from 1996 called Section 230 that gives internet platforms immunity for harm caused by third-party content they host. But this new wave of cases takes a novel approach: Rather than alleging that harm to the victims was caused by the content victims were exposed to, they argue that harm was caused by the product design features of the companies themselves. 

These lawsuits do not blame bad content or “too much screen time,” dismantling the idea that parents are to blame for allowing kids to be online too much. Instead, they claim the defendants engineered their platforms to be addictive and failed to warn users about their addictive potential. 

TEXAS FAMILY SUES CHARACTER.AI AFTER CHATBOT ALLEGEDLY ENCOURAGED AUTISTIC SON TO HARM PARENTS AND HIMSELF

The features designed to foster addiction that are at issue include infinite scroll, autoplay, recommendation algorithms that send minors down rabbit holes, push notifications and “likes,” all of which create addictive dopamine-driven feedback loops to keep a user engaged for as long as possible. 

Parents are fighting back because Washington didn’t. Congress hasn’t passed a child online safety law since 1998, nearly a decade before social media even existed.

As with the massive litigation against tobacco companies in the late 1990s and opioid manufacturers more recently, the key question for the jury to decide in this social media trial is straighforward: Did these companies negligently design and market a highly addictive product to children and did they know — and fail to warn users—-that their products cause harms to minors? 

Critics of the social media lawsuits argue that these cases don’t belong in court – claiming that it is too difficult for victims to prove causation of their harms from social media, given the complex interplay of personal experience, personality and online exposure.

AUSTRALIA REMOVES 4.7M KIDS FROM SOCIAL MEDIA PLATFORMS IN FIRST MONTH OF HISTORIC BAN

Similar arguments, however, were also made in the past against bringing lawsuits against Big Tobacco or opioid producers. Critics argued that people fall into addiction for all kinds of reasons, and therefore companies weren’t to blame. But we know how those massive litigations turned out: multibillion-dollar settlements from Big Tobacco and the pharma companies to hundreds of thousands of plaintiffs who were harmed by their products. These social media suits appear to be on that same path. 

The evidence speaks for itself. Newly unsealed documents provide smoking-gun evidence that Meta, Google, Snap and TikTok all purposefully designed their social media products to addict children and teens and that youth addiction was an intentional part of their business models. 

The documents include internal discussions among company employees, presentations from internal meetings, and their own research studies. One exhibit of an internal report from Meta states that “the lifetime value of a 13 y/o teen is roughly $270 per teen.” Another Meta report says, “the young ones are the best ones” in explaining how young users have greater long-term retention for the company in using their products. 

CLICK HERE FOR MORE FOX NEWS OPINION

These companies quantified our children and their attention to maximize their profit value, all while knowing their products were harming minor users. Results of a Meta internal study on teen mental health found that “Teens can’t switch off from Instagram even if they want to” and that “Teens talk of Instagram in terms of an ‘addict’s narrative’ spending too much time indulging in a compulsive behavior that they know is negative but feel powerless to resist.” 

Meta and these other platforms allowed our children to be harmed and said nothing. Now the public will finally know.

Unsurprisingly, two of the four companies in this first trial, Snap and TikTok, both settled before the proceedings began. These companies don’t want damning internal evidence that they knew their products were harming children, and they did nothing to change the design or warn users, to come to light. Nevertheless, parents and teens will finally have their day in court. 

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

Parents are fighting back because Washington didn’t. Congress hasn’t passed a child online safety law since 1998, nearly a decade before social media even existed. Whereas Australia has recently passed a social media ban for minors under 16, with France and the UK proposing the same. In the United States, parents and states are the ones stepping in to the void to hold the social media companies accountable through the courts. If Congress won’t do it, parents will. 

This trial is the tobacco moment for Big Tech. 

CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM CLARE MORELL