Category

Latest News

Category

President Donald Trump on Friday said the U.S. will ‘just take a pass’ at peace efforts for Ukraine if Russian President Vladimir Putin refuses to agree to ceasefire terms. 

‘If for some reason, one of the two parties makes it very difficult, we’re just going to say ‘you’re foolish, you’re fools, you’re horrible people,’ and we’re going to just take a pass,’ Trump told reporters. ‘But hopefully we won’t have to do that.’

The president’s comments echoed those made by Secretary of State Marco Rubio early Friday morning following a meeting in Paris with special envoy Steve Witkoff and French President Emmanuel Macron, as well as officials from Ukraine, Germany and the U.K. — the first meeting of its kind, which signaled greater European involvement in U.S. efforts to secure a Ukraine-Russia ceasefire.

While Ukraine has agreed to both full and interim ceasefire proposals, Russia has delayed any agreement for weeks, though it is for the most part still believed to be adhering to a 30-day ceasefire on Ukraine’s energy infrastructure.

‘If we’re so far apart this won’t happen, then the president is ready to move on,’ Rubio told reporters in Paris following his talks, which he described as ‘very positive.’

‘We’re not going to continue to fly all over the world and do meeting after meeting after meeting if no progress is being made,’ Rubio said. ‘We’re going to move on to other topics that are equally if not more important in some ways to the United States.’

It remains unclear where the U.S. would stand in not only aiding Ukraine, should Russia refuse to end its illegal invasion, but whether Trump would go through with his previous threats to enact more sanctions on Russia. 

Last month, during an interview with NBC News, Trump said he was ‘very angry’ and ‘pissed off’ after Putin first showed signs of being unwilling to engage in a ceasefire with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy.

‘If Russia and I are unable to make a deal on stopping the bloodshed in Ukraine, and if I think it was Russia’s fault — which it might not be — but if I think it was Russia’s fault, I am going to put secondary tariffs on oil, on all oil coming out of Russia,’ he said.

‘That would be that if you buy oil from Russia, you can’t do business in the United States,’ he added. ‘There will be a 25% tariff on all oil, a 25- to 50-point tariff on all oil.’

Trump would not comment on the ‘specific number of days’ Russia has before he determines whether it’s serious about ending the war, but he told reporters on Friday it needs to happen ‘quickly — we want to get it done.’

This post appeared first on FOX NEWS

Days of highly publicized departures at the Pentagon appear to have come from weeks – if not months – of simmering tensions and factional infighting, Fox News Digital can reveal. 

According to multiple defense officials, the three employees put on leave this week were never told what they were accused of leaking, were not read their rights and were given no guidance on who they could or couldn’t speak to. They were also not asked to turn over their cellphones as part of the leak probe.

At least one of the former employees is consulting with legal counsel, but none have been fired and all are awaiting the outcome of the investigation.

Top aides to Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth were placed on leave and escorted out of the building this week as the Pentagon probes unauthorized leaks: senior adviser Dan Caldwell, deputy chief of staff Darin Selnick and Colin Carroll, chief of staff to Deputy Secretary of Defense Stephen Feinberg.

Another press aide, John Ullyot, parted ways with the Pentagon because he did not want to be second-in-command of the communications shop. 

Officials denied that the three men were placed on leave because of their foreign policy views and said they saw no connection to their positions on Iran and Israel – even as reports surfaced that President Donald Trump told Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu the Pentagon would not intervene if Israel attacked Iran.

Selnick was focused on operations, administration and personnel matters; Carroll was focused largely on acquisitions; and Caldwell advised mostly on the Europe portfolio. 

But the trio were united, according to one defense official with knowledge of the situation, in the fact that Hegseth’s chief of staff, Joe Kasper, had a ‘deep vendetta’ against them. Kasper issued a memo in late March directing the Pentagon to investigate unauthorized disclosures to reporters and to go so far as using lie detector tests if necessary. 

The three had raised concerns to Hegseth about Kasper’s leadership, and Kasper believed they were trying to get him fired, according to the official. 

Those tensions had boiled into ‘shouting matches in the front office,’ the official said. 

Another Pentagon official disputed those claims and insisted that any accusation the firings had to do with anything other than the unauthorized leak investigation was ‘false.’ 

‘This is not about interpersonal conflict,’ that official said. ‘There is evidence of leaking. This is about unauthorized disclosures, up to and including classified information.’ 

Legal experts say the employees don’t need to be notified of what they’re accused of doing until the investigation is concluded.

‘Being placed on paid leave is not considered a disciplinary decision. It’s considered a preliminary step to conduct an investigation, so if they think they’re being railroaded or hosed, they’ll have some due process opportunity to respond when there’s a formal decision,’ said Sean Timmons, a legal expert in military and employment law. 

‘They’ve been humiliated in the media to some extent. However, this happens every day in the federal government. Generally speaking, what’s happened so far is not necessarily considered discipline. It’s just considered a security protocol step to suspend their authorization, suspend their access to their emails, and a full, thorough independent investigation can be conducted.’

The three aides are civilian political appointees, meaning they could be fired at-will regardless of the investigation. But if they are found to have engaged in unauthorized leaking, they could have their security clearances yanked away.

‘There are very few protections when it comes to political appointees versus career civilian staff,’ said Libby Jamison, an attorney who specializes in military law. ‘For appointees, there is very broad discretion to be placed on administrative leave or reassigned.’ 

If employees are accused of leaking, a report is sent to the Defense Information System for Security, and then there is an independent review of their eligibility for access to sensitive information.

‘They’ll get a chance, potentially, to try to keep their clearance and show that they didn’t violate any security clearance protocols when it comes to handling sensitive information,’ said Timmons. ‘If it is found they were leaking information in violation of the rules, and then there’s a guideline violation for personal misconduct and for breaching of sensitive information. So they could be possibly criminally prosecuted and certainly terminated from their employment and have their clearance stripped and revoked.’

Or, if the independent officer does not find sufficient evidence to tie them to the leaks, they could return to their positions and maintain clearances. 

Ullyot, meanwhile, said that he had made clear to Hegseth from the beginning that he was ‘not interested in being number two to anyone in public affairs.’

Ullyot ran the public affairs office on an acting basis at the start of the administration, leading a memo that yanked back workspaces for legacy media outlets and reassigned them to conservative networks. Ullyot also took a jab at former chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Mark Milley, saying his ‘corpulence’ set a bad example for Pentagon fitness standards. 

But as his temporary chief role came to a close and Sean Parnell took the Pentagon chief spokesperson job, Ullyot said he and Hegseth ‘could not come to an agreement on another good fit for me at DOD. So I informed him today that I will be leaving at the end of this week.’

Ullyot said he remains one of Hegseth’s ‘strongest supporters.’ 

The office of the secretary of defense and the three aides who were placed on leave this week either declined to comment or could not be reached for this story. 

This post appeared first on FOX NEWS

President Donald Trump said Thursday that China has been reaching out ‘a lot’ ever since he nearly tripled U.S. tariffs on Chinese imports, and he suggested to reporters that the two nations could reach a deal in as soon as three to four weeks. 

During a gaggle with reporters after signing executive orders related to deregulating the seafood industry, Trump was asked about his ongoing negotiations with Chinese officials and, in particular, whether he has yet spoken to Chinese President Xi Jinping about the ongoing trade battle.

‘They have reached out a number of times,’ Trump said, referring to high-level Chinese officials. When asked how frequently they’ve been in touch since last week – after Trump tripled his Chinese tariff increase from 54% to 145% – the president responded, ‘A lot.’

His comments come amid media reports that Trump has indicated he is unwilling to reach out to China first amid the ongoing trade war. According to sources close to Trump, U.S. officials have been urging the Chinese to initiate a call between Xi and Trump, but so far they have not.    

When asked if he had spoken to Xi yet, Trump would not confirm one way or the other.

‘I’ve never said whether or not [it’s] happened, but I have a very good relationship with President Xi, and I think it’s going to continue. They have reached out a number of times,’ Trump told reporters. 

The press then quickly pounced on Trump’s response, requesting the president to clarify if he was referring to Xi or other Chinese officials when he said, ‘They have reached out a number of times.’

‘I view it very similar,’ Trump responded. ‘It would be top levels of China, and if you knew [Xi], you would know that if they reached out, he knew exactly – he knew everything about it. He runs it very tight, very strong, very smart. And, yeah, we’re talking to China.’

The president said that while some have urged him to fast-track his negotiations, he believes there is ‘plenty’ of time left to make a deal with China and expects it will eventually come to fruition.

 

‘I would think over the next three or four weeks, I think maybe the whole thing could be concluded,’ Trump told reporters Thursday. 

The president added that if a deal cannot be reached, things will ‘be fine.’

‘At a certain point, if we don’t make a deal, we’ll just set a limit. We’ll set a tariff. We’ll set some parameters, and we’ll say, ‘Come in and shop,” Trump said. ‘They always have a right not to do it, so they can say, ‘Well, we don’t want it, so we’re not going to shop there, we’re not going to shop in the store of America.’ We have something that nobody else has, and that’s the American consumer.’

This post appeared first on FOX NEWS

NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!

Why are President Donald Trump and his national security team focused on Panama and Greenland? 

Donald Trump understands that modern threats – China’s predatory mercantilism and its massive military buildup, including the ability to destroy our reconnaissance satellites in orbit – requires an urgent reinvigoration of the 200-year-old Monroe Doctrine.

The Monroe Doctrine, America’s fundamental national security imperative, seeks to exclude outside powers from the Western Hemisphere. It is key to protecting the U.S. and our neighbors from China’s malicious designs. 

Trump understands that Greenland and Panama aren’t merely the key in any potential conflict with China, they are key to deterring China from conflict in the first place.

During WWII and the Cold War, prior to the advent of near-global real-time overhead satellite coverage, America maintained forward bases in a string from Hawaii to Alaska to Canada to Greenland to Puerto Rico to Panama. These bases hosted naval assets, electronic listening posts, early warning radars and airfields for patrol aircraft. 

The forward presence not only protected the American heartland, but it also served to guard the sea lanes needed for trade and to support our allies in Europe and Asia. 

Trump recognizes the shifting geopolitical landscape, with China’s rise posing a new challenge to U.S. dominance in the Western Hemisphere – and a secure homeland. In 2019, he expressed interest in purchasing Greenland from Denmark, citing its vast natural resources and strategic Arctic location. This is more relevant than ever, with the Northwest Passage becoming increasingly accessible due in part to Russia and China’s rapidly growing heavy icebreaker fleet. 

Similarly, Trump and Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth are taking significant steps to secure the Panama Canal – with full cooperation from the Panamanian government. 

The Panama Canal is a vital artery for global trade and military logistics. But in 1997, just before Britain handed over Hong Kong to China, Hutchison Whampoa, a Hong Kong-based shipping and logistics firm, bought the concession that privatized operations of the Panama Canal. 

When, in 2020, China ended the ‘one country, two systems’ model with Hong Kong, it meant for all intents and purposes that Hutchison Whampoa (now known as CK Hutchison) must do the Chinese Communist Party’s bidding. This greatly increases the risk to the Panama Canal – and it’s why the firm, reacting to pressure from Panama and the U.S., agreed to sell its global assets to an American holding company. That proposed sale was quickly threatened by the Chinese Communist Party, which instituted an ‘antitrust review.’

Just to be sure, the Trump White House directed the U.S. military to develop options for increasing troop presence in Panama to ensure ‘unfettered’ access to the canal, reflecting concerns about ongoing Chinese threats to the canal’s operation. 

Strategic Importance in a Conflict with China

The strategic importance of Greenland and Panama is heightened in the context of a potential conflict with China, particularly if America’s extensive network of reconnaissance and nuclear missile early warning satellites are destroyed by China in its opening attack. Modern warfare relies heavily on satellite technology for communication, navigation and intelligence gathering. 

If these assets are compromised, the U.S. would need to rely on traditional methods, such as long-range patrol aircraft and naval vessels, operating from forward bases. Greenland, with its airfields and ports, provides an ideal location for staging operations in the Arctic, deploying assets like the P-8 Poseidon to monitor submarine activity and secure shipping routes. 

The Panama Canal, meanwhile, ensures rapid deployment of naval forces between the Atlantic and Pacific Oceans, maintaining flexibility in military operations.

This focus on forward bases aligns with the need to defend the homeland and secure vital shipping lanes critical for global trade and military logistics despite enemy efforts. China’s growing naval capabilities, including advanced submarines and aircraft carriers, necessitate robust strategic positioning to deter potential threats and maintain maritime routes.

Historical Parallels: WWII and Cold War Operations

Historical precedents underscore the importance of forward bases in national defense. During WWII, the U.S. established the Caribbean Defense Command – forerunner to today’s U.S. Southern Command – to protect the Panama Canal and monitor German U-boat activity in the Atlantic. Bases in Trinidad, Brazil and Puerto Rico were instrumental in anti-submarine warfare, ensuring the flow of supplies to Europe and preventing Axis powers from gaining a foothold in the Americas. 

During the Cold War, the U.S. maintained a significant military presence in Latin America to counter Soviet influence. Today, in Cuba, what’s old is new again, as China has occupied and upgraded the massive Cold War-era Soviet eavesdropping base at Lourdes. From that perch, China can listen to every cellphone conversation in the American Southeast. 

The Broader Challenge

Beyond Greenland and Panama, China’s activities in the Western Hemisphere, such as its Belt and Road Initiative infrastructure projects – some serving as replenishment ports for its navy – pose a direct challenge to U.S. interests and regional security. Along with the malevolent presence of Iran’s proxy, Hezbollah, and hostile regimes such as Maduro’s Venezuela, Trump’s team has a big task to clean up decades of neglect in the Western Hemisphere. 

This post appeared first on FOX NEWS

A federal judge in Baltimore issued a preliminary injunction Thursday restricting the Department of Government Efficiency’s access to Social Security data. 

U.S. District Judge Ellen Hollander, an Obama appointee, said DOGE-affiliated staffers must purge any of the non-anonymized Social Security data that they have received since Jan. 20. They are also barred from making any changes to the computer code or software used by the Social Security Administration, must remove any software or code they might have already installed, and are forbidden from disclosing any of that code to others.

The injunction does allow DOGE staffers to access data that’s been redacted or stripped of anything personally identifiable, if they undergo training and background checks. 

‘The objective to address fraud, waste, mismanagement, and bloat is laudable, and one that the American public presumably applauds and supports,’ Hollander wrote in the ruling issued late Thursday night. ‘Indeed, the taxpayers have every right to expect their government to make sure that their hard earned money is not squandered.’

But that’s not the issue, Hollander said — the issue is with how DOGE, led by billionaire Elon Musk, wants to do the work.

‘For some 90 years, SSA has been guided by the foundational principle of an expectation of privacy with respect to its records. This case exposes a wide fissure in the foundation,’ the judge wrote.

The case was brought by a group of labor unions and retirees who allege DOGE’s recent actions violate privacy laws and present massive information security risks. 

During a federal court hearing Tuesday in Baltimore, Hollander repeatedly asked the government’s attorneys why DOGE needs ‘seemingly unfettered access’ to the agency’s troves of sensitive personal information to uncover Social Security fraud.

‘What is it we’re doing that needs all of that information?’ Hollander said, questioning whether most of the data could be anonymized.

Attorneys for the Trump administration said changing the process would slow down their efforts.

‘While anonymization is possible, it is extremely burdensome,’ Justice Department attorney Bradley Humphreys told the court. He argued the DOGE access doesn’t deviate significantly from normal practices inside the agency, where employees and auditors are routinely allowed to search its databases.

But attorneys for the plaintiffs called it ‘a sea change’ in terms of how the agency handles sensitive information.

Skye Perryman, President and CEO of the legal services group Democracy Forward, which is behind the lawsuit, said the ruling has brought ‘significant relief for the millions of people who depend on the Social Security Administration to safeguard their most personal and sensitive information.’ 

Hollander made clear that her order didn’t apply to SSA workers who aren’t affiliated with DOGE, so they can still access any data they use in the course of ordinary work. But DOGE staffers who want access to the anonymized data must first undergo the typical training and background checks required of other Social Security Administration staffers, she said.

Hollander, 75, is the latest judge to consider a DOGE-related case. Many of her inquiries Tuesday focused on whether the Social Security case differs significantly from another Maryland case challenging DOGE’s access to data at three other agencies: the Education Department, the Treasury Department and the Office of Personnel Management. In that case, an appeals court recently blocked a preliminary injunction and cleared the way for DOGE to once again access people’s private data.

Hollander’s injunction could also be appealed to the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, which sided with the Trump administration in other cases, including allowing DOGE access to the U.S. Agency for International Development and letting executive orders against diversity, equity and inclusion move forward.

The Associated Press contributed to this report.

This post appeared first on FOX NEWS

The Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) is probing ‘a major pediatric teaching hospital’ over the alleged firing of a nurse who sought a religious exemption to avoid administering puberty blockers and cross-sex hormones to children.

‘The Department will robustly enforce federal laws protecting these courageous whistleblowers, including laws that protect healthcare professionals from being forced to violate their religious beliefs or moral convictions,’ Acting HHS OCR Director Anthony Archeval said in a statement.

While HHS has not confirmed the hospital’s identity, it is believed to be Texas Children’s Hospital (TCH) — the largest children’s hospital in the U.S. — as the investigation follows whistleblower nurse Vanessa Sivadge’s testimony on Capitol Hill. Sivadge first came forward publicly in June 2024 and was later fired in August 2024.

Sivadge told lawmakers that she had witnessed ‘disturbing trends and concerning practices’ relating to the treatment of children diagnosed with gender dysphoria. She also said that she ‘observed the powerful and irreversible effects’ of treatments that patients were told were ‘lifesaving.’ 

‘I witnessed firsthand how doctors emotionally blackmailed parents by telling them that if they did not affirm their child’s false identity, their child would harm themselves. In particular, I was saddened to see young girls suffering from profound mental health struggles like depression and anxiety, many of whom had also suffered sexual abuse or trauma, persuaded by doctors at Texas Children’s that a hormone would resolve their gender confusion,’ Sivadge told lawmakers.

Dr. Eithan Haim, who was accused of violating HIPAA while in surgical training at Baylor College of Medicine, which is affiliated with TCH, also blew the whistle on the hospital for ‘lying about the existence of its transgender program.’ The Biden DOJ brought charges against Haim for the alleged HIPAA violations, but the case was ultimately dropped under the Trump administration.

Haim claimed the hospital was engaging in fraudulent billing practices to hide the fact that it was carrying out transgender procedures on minors even though it was against Texas law. This included recording mastectomies as ‘breast reduction’ surgeries and billing testosterone prescribed to a teen girl under a male diagnosis.

In her testimony, Sivadge said that federal agents came to her home when investigating the whistleblower, now known to be Haim, because of her objections to transgender medicine. She described the interaction as intimidating and said that one of the special agents ‘effectively asked me to compromise my Christian beliefs and made veiled threats regarding my career and safety if I didn’t comply with their demands.’

Sivadge’s attorney filed a complaint with the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) on April 11, alleging that she ‘observed TCH doctors, after very little deliberation or critical analysis, embarking children on dangerous and often irreversible courses of ‘gender-affirming’ treatment.’

According to the complaint, TCH ‘temporarily’ paused ‘gender-affirming services’ for minors after Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton said in February 2022 that such treatments could constitute child abuse. The treatments were banned in the state following the passage of a bill in May 2023, which went into effect in September 2023. According to Sivadge’s attorney, she asked to be transferred back to cardiology in May 2024, citing her religious beliefs. 

Sivadge publicly blew the whistle on TCH on June 18, 2024, and was asked not to report to work the next day, according to the complaint. Just days later, on June 21, she was placed on administrative leave and was officially terminated in August 2024. TCH alleged that the termination of her employment was due to improper access to medical records.

On Jan. 28, 2025, President Donald Trump signed the ‘Protecting Children from Chemical and Surgical Mutilation’ order, which prevents minors from undergoing transgender treatments. In accordance with this order, HHS has issued guidelines for prospective whistleblowers.

Fox News has reached out to TCH and HHS for comment.

This post appeared first on FOX NEWS

Globalization has long been regarded as an unstoppable wave in the world of international trade and cooperation, promoting economic growth and cultural exchanges all over the world.

However, in recent years, several obstacles have emerged that threaten to undercut decades of development.

According to a Statista report, the revival of nationalism and the protectionist measures are some of the factors altering the global trading landscape, prompting many to wonder if we have passed the apex of globalisation.

A terminal decline: the impact of the pandemic

The course of global trade has been anything but linear.

Following decades of stable expansion, the 2008 financial crisis exposed flaws in the system.

However, it was the COVID-19 outbreak that served as a watershed moment, plunging world trade to levels not seen since 2003.

The World Bank observed a significant drop in the trade-to-GDP ratio, highlighting the vulnerability of global supply networks that rely significantly on international collaboration.

A short-lived resurgence?

Despite the depressing circumstances, global trade showed a remarkable recovery following the pandemic.

By 2022, the trade-to-GDP ratio had risen to an astonishing 62.8%, indicating a recovery and return to pre-pandemic levels of activity.

However, this quick recovery was not without hurdles. In 2023, the percentage fell again to 58.5 per cent, indicating potential volatility in the global trading framework.

While some industries swiftly adapted to new rules, others struggled with ongoing supply chain disruptions and shifting demand.

Companies and governments alike recognised the importance of assessing and redesigning their supply chains to avoid the dangers associated with global dependencies.

The timetable for such changes is unknown as businesses navigate complex trade conditions and uncertain future regulations.

Nationalism and protectionism: emerging threats

As globalisation seeks to regain its foothold, the resurgence of nationalism poses considerable problems.

Politics in several regions have evolved toward protectionism, intending to prioritise domestic industries over international commerce.

In the United States, the Trump administration’s continuation of trade battles, including the imposition of new tariffs on a variety of imported commodities, has further undermined the free trade concept that had gained traction in previous decades.

These protectionist tactics are not restricted to the United States; countries all around the world are taking similar positions, changing tariffs, and instituting regulatory barriers that impede commerce.

This wave of nationalism not only impedes economic interoperability but also risks sparking retaliatory actions among trading partners, producing an unstable atmosphere that could lead to market fragmentation on a global scale.

The future of global trade: uncertainty looms

The future of globalisation is uncertain, as nationalistic sentiments rise and protectionist measures shape trade policy.

While it is difficult to anticipate the long-term consequences of the Trump administration’s current trade policy, many experts warn that the combination of new tariffs and shifting political priorities may leave a lasting impact on global trade dynamics.

The complexity of modern supply chains requires strategic planning and adaptability.

As businesses reconsider their foreign relationships, the option of shifting production closer to home or diversifying suppliers may become a popular trend.

However, this reconfiguration requires time and capital, which adds to the unpredictability in the immediate term.

The post Is globalization at a crossroads? Nationalism and protectionism threaten trade recovery appeared first on Invezz

The Trump administration announced sanctions against the International Bank of Yemen Y.S.C. (IBY) on Thursday for its financial support of Houthi terrorists.

Along with the bank, the U.S. Department of the Treasury’s Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) is sanctioning key leaders of IBY, like its Chairman of the Board of Directors Kamal Hussain Al Jebry; Executive General Manager Ahmed Thabit Noman Al-Absi and Deputy General Manager Abdulkader Ali Bazara. By sanctioning IBY, the U.S. hopes to stop Houthi attacks on commercial ships in the Red Sea.

‘Financial institutions like IBY are critical to the Houthis’ efforts to access the international financial system and threaten both the region and international commerce,’ Deputy Secretary of the Treasury Michael Faulkender said. ‘Treasury remains committed to working with the internationally recognized government of Yemen to disrupt the Houthis’ ability to secure funds and procure key components for their destabilizing attacks.’

Based in Sana’a, Yemen, the IBY is controlled by the Iran-backed Houthis and provides the group with access to the bank’s Society for Worldwide Interbank Financial Telecommunications (SWIFT) network to make international financial transactions, the Treasury said.

The IBY, for instance, has allegedly aided Houthi businesses and officials to pursue oil on the SWIFT network, while also facilitating attempts by the terrorist group to evade sanctions oversight.

Under Thursday’s sanctions, all property and interests in property of the leaders named, that are in the United States or in the possession or control of U.S. persons are blocked and must be reported to OFAC. Additionally, any entities that are owned, directly or indirectly, individually or in the aggregate, 50 percent or more by one or more blocked persons are also blocked.

OFAC’s regulations generally prohibit all transactions by U.S. persons or within, or transiting, the United States that involve any property or interests in property of designated or otherwise blocked persons. 

U.S. State Department spokesperson Tammy Bruce spoke about the sanctions during a press briefing Thursday, sending a message to anyone who supports foreign terrorist organizations like the Houthis.

‘The United States is committed to disrupting the Houthi financial networks and banking access as part of our whole-of-government approach to eliminating Iran’s threat network,’ she said. ‘Moreover, we can confirm the reporting that Chang Guang Satellite Technology Company Limited (CGSTL) is directly supporting Iran-backed Houthi terrorist attacks on U.S. Interests. Their actions and Beijing’s support of the company, even after our private engagements with them, is yet another example of China’s empty claims to support peace.

She continued, urging partners of the U.S. to judge the Chinese Communist Party and Chinese companies on their actions, and not just their words.

‘Restoring freedom of navigation in the Red Sea is a priority to President Trump,’ Bruce said. ‘Beijing should take this priority seriously when considering any future support of CGSTL. The United States will not tolerate anyone providing support to foreign terrorist organizations such as the Houthis.’ 

This post appeared first on FOX NEWS

President Donald Trump said the late President Jimmy Carter could die peacefully knowing he wasn’t the worst U.S. president because that title belongs to former President Joe Biden. 

Trump issued the remarks to reporters during a press conference with Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni, who visited the White House on behalf of European nations to assist in brokering a trade deal between the U.S. and the European Union.

‘Worst administration in the history of our country,’ Trump said on Thursday. ‘Worse than Jimmy Carter. Jimmy Carter died a happy man. You know why? Because he wasn‘t the worst. President Joe Biden was.’

Trump has routinely railed against Biden and the former president’s mental fitness, and the remarks coincide with multiple books detailing Biden’s cognitive function while in office. One White House aide said that staff isolated Biden and allowed his faculties to ‘atrophy’ in the book, ‘Uncharted: How Trump Beat Biden, Harris, and the Odds in the Wildest Campaign in History.’ It was released on April 8. 

A spokesperson for Biden did not immediately respond to a request for comment from Fox News Digital. 

Trump’s comments come days after Biden slammed the Trump administration for creating so much ‘damage’ during the early days of the administration. 

‘Fewer than 100 days, this administration has done so much damage and so much destruction. It’s kind of breathtaking it could happen that soon,’ Biden said in his first public speech post-presidency on Tuesday. Biden delivered the speech during a disability advocacy conference in Chicago.

On Thursday, Trump and Meloni said they were confident the U.S. and Europe could hash out a trade deal. Trump unveiled 20% tariffs on European Union goods coming into the U.S. on April 2, but he announced on April 9 the tariffs would remain at 10% for 90 days to allow the U.S. and the EU to strike a deal.

‘There will be a trade deal, 100%,’ Trump told reporters. ‘Of course there will be a trade deal, they want to make one very much, and we’re going to make a trade deal. I fully expect it, but it’ll be a fair deal.’

This post appeared first on FOX NEWS

President Donald Trump is the greatest challenge Canada is facing, Prime Minister Mark Carney said during a Wednesday night electoral debate with conservative challenger Pierre Poilievre.

‘This election [is about] the question of who will succeed, and who will face up to Trump,’ Carney said in French, according to a Reuters translation.

His comments came in retort to Poilievre, who moments prior, had accused him of being too similar to Justin Trudeau, who stepped down from the top job earlier this year following a rapid decline in approval ratings. 

‘We are in a crisis. The most serious crisis of our lives,’ Carney reportedly added. ‘We have to react with strength, which will allow us to succeed with Trump.’

Carney, who was voted into the role by the governing Liberal Party last month in a landslide win, is believed to be the favored candidate to win the prime minister’s seat in a nationwide election later this month, though recent polling suggests polling margins could be narrowing.

Just prior to Trudeau’s exit, the Liberal Party was expected to take a nosedive in the federal election against Poiliervre’s Conservative Party – but Trump appears to have changed all that. 

Immense concern over a trade war with the U.S. and Trump’s threats to annex Canada as the 51st state have rallied support once again for the Liberal Party under Carney. 

Reports suggest that Carney is now viewed as the candidate more equipped to take on the tough negotiations that Canada will face to ease the steep tariffs Trump implemented this year. 

Poilievre has also reportedly faced a drop in support for his Canada First message, which some reports suggest may be too similar a message to Trump’s America First agenda. 

The conservative candidate has also reportedly faced criticism within his own party for not responding fast enough to the threat posed by the U.S. president. 

Some reporting has suggested the race to be Canada’s next prime minister could be narrowing between Poilievre and Carney. 

Canadians concerned by cost-of-living tend to back Poilievere, according to a Politico report, while voters concerned with the economy and relations with the U.S. tend to back Carney.

Poilievere has been in the political sphere since 2004, when he entered Canada’s Parliament.

Carney’s background is in running first the Bank of Canada in 2008 and then the Bank of England in 2013 – prompting some to believe he may be best suited to take on the financial crisis looming over Canada amid Trump’s tariff war. 

This post appeared first on FOX NEWS