DeSantis takes victory lap on Florida’s ‘momentous immigration legislation’ enforcing Trump agenda
Republican Gov. Ron DeSantis says that when it comes to implementing President Donald Trump’s crackdown on illegal immigration, Florida is “rocking and rolling.” Florida’s two-term conservative governor used a portion of his State of the State address on Tuesday to spotlight a sweeping package of immigration laws passed a few weeks ago during a special session of the GOP-dominated legislature. “We are convening for the regular legislative session having already enacted groundbreaking legislation to fulfill the historic mission of delivering on President Donald Trump’s mandate to end the illegal immigration crisis once and for all,” DeSantis said in his address to lawmakers inside the state capitol in Tallahassee. FLORIDA SHOWDOWN: GOP STATE LAWMAKERS DEFY DESANTIS OVER IMMIGRATION PUSH And the governor touted that “no state has done more, and no state did it sooner than we did in Florida.” Florida’s new measures stiffen immigration enforcement by state and local law enforcement. ‘THANK YOU RON’ – TRUMP PRAISES DESANTIS IMMIGRATION PUSH IN FLORIDA “Thanks to the recent legislation, it is now a crime to enter Florida illegally, the days of catch and release are over, and all state and local law enforcement have a duty to assist in interior immigration enforcement efforts,” the governor emphasized. The new law also mandates the death penalty for immigrants in the U.S. without legal authorization who commit capital offenses such as first-degree murder or child rape. The legislation goes even further than a slew of executive orders signed by Trump since his return to the White House in late January. Speaking with reporters following his speech, DeSantis described the new laws as “momentous immigration legislation” and touted that “we’ve gone so much faster than any other state.” The governor signed the immigration bills into law last month after a compromise with the Republican leaders of the legislature was brokered, which brought to an end a weekslong standoff over dueling bills. DeSantis called the original special legislative session, but lawmakers quickly gaveled out and then held a separate special session, where they passed their own immigration bills, which the governor criticized. DeSantis, reflecting Tuesday on the standoff with lawmakers, said “we got there. It wasn’t necessarily a straight shot, but we got there.” The governor, who waged a bitter and unsuccessful primary challenge against Trump for the 2024 Republican presidential nomination, was praised by the then-president-elect in January for calling the special session. “Thank you Ron, hopefully other governors will follow!” Trump wrote in a social media post after DeSantis announced the special session.
Vance denies criticising UK, France over Ukraine peacekeeping proposal
VP says he did not mock allies who fought in US-led wars after UK, France commit to sending peacekeepers to Ukraine. United States Vice President JD Vance has denied that his criticism of a potential European peacekeeping force in Ukraine was aimed at the United Kingdom and France, both of which have supported US-led wars in the past. Vance, in an interview with Fox News Channel’s Sean Hannity aired Monday evening, said the economic pact with Kyiv sought by President Donald Trump “is a way better security guarantee than 20,000 troops from some random country that hasn’t fought a war in 30 or 40 years”. Vance took to X on Tuesday to clarify his remarks, claiming that it was “absurdly dishonest” to suggest he had been referring to the UK and France. The UK and France are the only countries that have publicly committed to a European peacekeeping force in Ukraine as part of broader continental efforts to secure a deal between Moscow and Kyiv. “I don’t even mention the UK or France in the clip, both of whom have fought bravely alongside the US over the last 20 years, and beyond,” Vance posted on X, after his remarks drew an angry response from politicians and veterans in both countries, who said he was dishonouring hundreds of troops killed while fighting alongside US forces in Afghanistan and Iraq. Advertisement However, he went on to question the viability of what British Prime Minister Keir Starmer earlier called “a coalition of the willing” to police any ceasefire in Ukraine. “But let’s be direct: there are many countries who are volunteering (privately or publicly) support who have neither the battlefield experience nor the military equipment to do anything meaningful,” said Vance in the social media thread. Vance’s criticism follows a dramatic row in the Oval Office last week during a visit by Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy to sign a minerals deal with Washington. Zelenskyy left the White House without signing the deal. Trump, who has been accused of sidelining both Kyiv and European allies as he moves to negotiate directly with Russia’s President Vladimir Putin, has since cut off military aid to Kyiv. Vance’s latest broadside drew criticism in the UK and France. French President Emmanuel Macron’s Renaissance party said on X, “The French and British soldiers who died fighting terrorism, who fought and sometimes died alongside American soldiers, deserve better than the disdain of the American vice president.” In the UK, Conservative MP Ben Obese-Jecty, who fought in Afghanistan and Iraq, said, “The disrespect shown by the new US vice president to the sacrifices of our service personnel is unacceptable.” Obese-Jecty cited Mr Vance’s description of serving as a Marine Corps journalist in Iraq in his memoir, Hillbilly Elegy. The vice president had said he “was lucky to escape any real fighting”. Advertisement Johnny Mercer, a British veteran and a former junior defence minister, called Vance a “clown”. Adblock test (Why?)
‘Dumb thing to do’ Canada, Mexico, China condemn Trump tariffs
Toggle Play ‘Dumb thing to do’ Canada, Mexico, China condemn Trump tariffs NewsFeed Canada, Mexico and China have condemned US President Donald Trump’s tariffs and retaliated with their own, as Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau labels Trump’s move as “very dumb”. Trump says the tariffs will protect US jobs and prevent trafficking of drugs like fentanyl. Published On 4 Mar 20254 Mar 2025 Adblock test (Why?)
What is Egypt’s plan for the reconstruction of Gaza?
Arab states have adopted Egypt’s Gaza reconstruction plan, providing a potential path forward after Israel’s devastating war on the Palestinian enclave. Egypt unveiled its plan on Tuesday while hosting an Arab League Summit in its capital Cairo. The plan offers an alternative to United States President Donald Trump’s suggestion that the Gaza Strip be depopulated in order to “develop” the enclave, under US control, in what critics have called ethnic cleansing. Under the Egyptian plan, Gaza’s Palestinian population would not be forced to leave the territory. Trump had insisted that Egypt and Jordan take Palestinians forced out of Gaza by his plan, but that was quickly rejected, and the US has signalled that it is open to hearing what an Arab plan for Gaza’s post-war reconstruction would be. Speaking at the start of the summit, Egyptian President Abdel Fattah el-Sisi said that Trump would be able to achieve peace in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Here’s everything you need to know about the plan, based on Al Jazeera’s own reporting, as well as drafts of the plan reported on by the Reuters news agency and the Egyptian newspaper Al-Ahram. Advertisement What does the Egyptian plan call for? The plan consists of three major stages: Interim measures, reconstruction and governance. The first stage would last about six months while the next two phases would take place over a combined four to five years. The aim is to reconstruct Gaza – which Israel has almost completely destroyed – maintain peace and security and reassert the governance of the Palestinian Authority (PA) in Gaza, 17 years after it was kicked out following fighting between Fatah, which dominates the PA, and Hamas. How does the plan aim to rebuild Gaza? A six-month interim period would require a committee of Palestinian technocrats – operating under the management of the PA – to clear the rubble from Salah al-Din Street, which is the main north-south highway in the Gaza Strip. Once the roads are clear, 200,000 temporary housing units would be built to accommodate 1.2 million people and about 60,000 damaged buildings restored. According to the blueprint, longer-term reconstruction requires an additional four to five years after the interim measures are completed. Over that span, the plan aims to build at least 400,000 permanent homes, as well as rebuilding Gaza’s seaport and international airport. Gradually, basic provisions such as water, a waste system, telecommunication services and electricity would also be restored. The plan further calls for the establishment of a Steering and Management Council, which would be a financial fund supporting the interim governing body in Gaza. Advertisement In addition, conferences will be held for international donors to provide the necessary funding for reconstruction and long-term development in the Strip. Who would be in charge of Gaza? The plan calls for a group of “independent Palestinian technocrats” to manage affairs in Gaza, in effect replacing Hamas. The technocratic government would be responsible for overseeing humanitarian aid and to pave the way for the PA to administer Gaza, according to el-Sisi. The plan does not mention elections, but, speaking at Tuesday’s summit, PA President Mahmoud Abbas said that an election could take place next year if circumstances allowed. On the security front, Egypt and Jordan have both pledged to train Palestinian police officers and deploy them to Gaza. The two countries have also called on the United Nations Security Council to consider authorising a peacekeeping mission to oversee governance in Gaza until reconstruction is complete. How much is this going to cost? Egypt is calling for $53bn to fund the reconstruction of Gaza, with the money distributed over three phases. In the first six-month phase it would cost $3bn to clear rubble from Salah al-Din Street, construct temporary housing, and restore partially damaged homes. The second phase would take two years and cost $20bn. The work of rubble removal would continue in this phase, as well as the establishment of utility networks and the building of more housing units. Phase three would cost $30bn and take two and a half years. It would include completing housing for Gaza’s whole population, establishing the first phase of an industrial zone, building fishing and commercial ports, and building an airport, among other services. Advertisement According to the plan, the money will be sourced from a variety of international sources including the United Nations and international financial organisations as well as foreign and private sector investments. Is the plan going to work? There are still a number of variables that could complicate the plan. Perhaps most importantly, it’s unclear whether Hamas, Israel or the United States will agree to it. Hamas welcomed the reconstruction plan, and has previously agreed to a technocratic government. But it is less clear if it will accept the return of the PA, which itself would face the perception from its critics that it has returned to Gaza on the back of Israel’s tanks. And Hamas may be willing to discuss its removal from governance, but is adamantly against its disarmament – something that the Egyptian plan adopted by the Arab League did not discuss. Israel has made it clear that is a red line, and that Hamas will not be allowed to keep its weapons. But Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has also said that he will not allow the PA to return to Gaza. In its response to the adoption of the Egyptian plan, Israel said that Arab states needed to “break free from past constraints and collaborate to create a future of stability and security in the region”. The statement from the Israeli foreign ministry instead backed Trump’s Gaza displacement plan – which echoes a long-standing call from the Israeli far-right to depopulate Gaza. There is also the question of whether US President Trump will abandon his idea of a US-controlled “Middle East Riviera” for the Egyptian plan. It is difficult to predict what Trump’s position will be, particularly if Israel signals its opposition to the Egyptian plan. Advertisement Adblock test (Why?)
Supreme Court appears skeptical of Mexico’s lawsuit against American gunmakers
The U.S. Supreme Court looked skeptically Tuesday at Mexico’s efforts to hold American gunmakers legally responsible for their weapons being smuggled in and contributing to that country’s drug cartel violence. In a brisk 90-minute oral argument, the justices debated whether the production and sale of firearms in the United States is the “proximate cause” of alleged injuries to the Mexican government and its people, by somehow knowingly aiding and abetting illegal sales of guns to traffickers across the border. The U.S. neighbor to the south, which has strict gun sale restrictions, argues it should be allowed to file a $10 billion civil suit in American courts. DOD SENDS OVER 1,000 ADDITIONAL TROOPS TO HELP BOLSTER SOUTHERN BORDER EFFORTS But weapons manufacturers say their “routine business practices” are being unfairly targeted, and strongly deny being aware their products have been illegally transported into Mexico. Both sides of the bench asked tough questions. “We know that a straw seller is going to sell to someone who is going to use the gun illegally, because if they weren’t, they wouldn’t use the straw purchaser, and that illegal conduct is going to cause harm, and harm like this that the gun is going to be used in some way to injure people, correct?” said Justice Sonia Sotomayor, summarizing Mexico’s legal position. “Your theory of aiding and abetting liability would have destructive effects on the American economy,” said Justice Brett Kavanaugh. “Lots of sellers and manufacturers of ordinary products know that they’re going to be misused by some subset of people. They know that to a certainty, that it’s going to be pharmaceuticals, cars, what you can name, lots of products. So that’s a real concern.” The case comes to the high court during a delicate time for both countries, politically and diplomatically. The Trump administration has pushed the Mexican government to better patrol its border to block drugs and migrants from entering the United States, while Mexican officials have demanded the U.S. stop military-style firearms from ending up in Mexico – fueling the very drug crisis both sides seek to end. The public session arguments provide a high-profile American forum for Mexico and its complaints about its northern neighbor, just as the U.S. on Tuesday launched historic tariffs on Mexican imports. MEXICO’S PRESIDENT ON TRUMP TARIFFS: ‘NOBODY WINS’ The case could also affect the broader national debate over competing rights contained in the Second Amendment. A 2005 federal law known as the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act (PLCAA) was designed to shield gunmakers from civil suits when their products were criminally misused by others. But Mexico is relying on exceptions in the law to pursue its claims. Families of gun violence, like the parents of the 2012 Sandy Hook Elementary School massacre, have since still tried to file such claims, but this will be the first time the Supreme Court will rule on its limits. Those families reached a $73 million out-of-court settlement with gunmaker Remington. Supporters of gun control argue a high court ruling against Mexico will make it harder for them to go after U.S. gunmakers when future mass shootings occur, if it can be proved they knowingly and foreseeably broke the law. Gun rights groups counter that a lawful, heavily regulated industry should not be subject to liability for criminal acts committed by armed gangs in another country. Known as the “Iron River,” anywhere from 200,000 to 500,000 American-made guns are illegally trafficked into Mexico each year, according to U.S. Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives estimates. More than 70% of illegal guns seized in Mexico between 2013-18 were sold in the U.S., according to the Giffords Center for Violence Intervention, named after former Rep. Gabby Giffords, severely wounded in a Tucson, Arizona-area mass shooting in 2011. Mexico has only one gun store – managed by the country’s military – with no private shops, gun shows or commercial manufacture of firearms. Court records show only 3,215 private gun licenses were issued in the country for low-caliber weapons as of the year 2018, and that illegal possession was the third leading cause of criminal imprisonment. Mexico is usually among the top three countries globally in annual gun deaths. Two weeks ago, the Trump administration designated six Mexican cartels as foreign terrorist organizations. Much of the oral arguments centered on whether gunmakers could be sued on the “proximate case” standard, when the complex commerce pipeline goes from them to wholesalers, distributors, rogue retail dealers, straw purchasers, smugglers, and then to Mexican cartels themselves. “You haven’t sued any of the retailers that were the most proximate cause of the harm,” Justice Amy Coney Barrett told Catherine Stetson, lawyer for Mexico. “And you haven’t identified them that I can tell in the complaint.” “All of the things that you asked for in this lawsuit would amount to different kinds of regulatory constraints that I’m thinking Congress didn’t want the courts to be the ones to impose,” said Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson, when it came to such remedies as gun distribution and marketing practices. But some on the court suggested the scope of the problem Mexico alleges has real consequences. “The complaint says that 2% of the guns manufactured in the United States find their way into Mexico,” asked Chief Justice John Roberts of the gunmakers’ attorney Noel Francisco. “And I know you dispute that, but is there a number where your legal analysis might have to be altered – if it’s 10%, if it’s 20%? At some point, the proximate cause lines that you draw really can’t bear the weight of the ultimate result.” The case is Smith & Wesson Brands, Inc. v. Estados Unidos Mexicanos (23-1141). A ruling is expected by late June.
Federal judge reverses Trump firing of federal employees’ appeal board chairwoman
The former chairwoman of a little-known agency that hears appeals by fired or disciplined federal government employees has been ordered reinstated to her position by a federal judge. Cathy Harris, a Democrat who led the Merit Systems Protection Board (MSPB) until she was fired by President Donald Trump on Feb. 10, has been put back in her position after a judge issued a permanent injunction. Harris had filed an appeal the day after her sacking, arguing that Trump and other federal officials did not have the authority to terminate her and that an email outlining her dismissal showed no reason for cause to terminate her. She cited the U.S. Supreme Court’s 1935 ruling in Humphrey’s Executor v. United States that has limited a president’s ability to fire certain agency heads. Some justices on today’s 6-3 conservative-majority court have signaled a willingness to rein in or perhaps overturn that ruling. TRUMP FIRES 17 GOVERNMENT WATCHDOGS AT VARIOUS FEDERAL AGENCIES On Tuesday, U.S. District Court Rudolph Contreras of the District of Columbia agreed with Harris and wrote that federal law states that members of the MSPB may be removed from office “only for inefficiency, neglect of duty, or malfeasance in office.” Contreras wrote that President Donald Trump informed Harris that her position on the MSPB was “terminated, effective immediately,” but provided no reason for Harris’s termination. Harris was appointed to the board in 2022 by former President Joe Biden for a 7-year term. The merit Systems Protection Board is the primary agency used by civil servants to file complaints within the federal government. Trump named Henry Kerner, a Republican, as its acting chair upon returning to the White House on Jan. 20. FEDERAL JUDGE HINTS SHE WILL CONTINUE BLOCKING TRUMP FROM FIRING HEAD OF WHISTLEBLOWER PROTECTION AGENCY Contreras further ordered that Harris shall continue to serve as a member of the MSPB until her term expires, unless she is earlier removed for inefficiency, neglect of duty, or malfeasance in office under that statute. Contreras, who was nominated by President Barack Obama, a Democrat, and has served on the court since 2012, initially agreed on Feb. 18 to issue a temporary restraining order for Harris to continue chairing the three-member board until the court decides her case. After a hearing on Monday, the judge issued a permanent injunction extending that previous order. “Harris has undoubtedly experienced an injury to this independence in her capacity as a member of the MSPB following the President’s attempt to terminate her without cause, and any future attempts would prove just as harmful to that autonomy,” the judge wrote. “In addition, unlike most other federal employees, Harris was duly appointed by the President and confirmed by the Senate to a position carrying a term of years with specific reasons for her removal.” The judge wrote that injunctive relief in this case is in the public interest, and the balance of the equities tips in Harris’s favor. “Given that federal law limits the conditions under which Harris’s tenure may be terminated, Supreme Court precedent supports the constitutionality of those conditions, and defendants do not argue that those conditions were met here, the court finds that it is in the public interest to issue injunctive relief,” the judge wrote. Government attorneys had argued that the court didn’t have the authority to reinstate Harris or bar Trump from replacing her on the board. “The American people elected President Trump to run the executive branch,” they wrote in court documents. “And President Trump has determined that keeping (Harris) in office no longer serves the best interests of the American people. That democratically accountable choice should be respected.” The Associated Press and Reuters contributed to this report.
Noem says DHS will ‘not be deterred’ after ICE hit by new leaks ahead of Virginia raid
Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem on Tuesday said her agency “will not be deterred” by leaks after an Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) raid was leaked ahead of time — the latest leak to dog the agency. “We will not be deterred by leaks. If you come to this country and break our laws, we will hunt you down,” Noem said on X. She pointed to what she said was a successful operation that hauled in MS-13 and 18th Street gang members, as well as sex criminals. NEW HOUSE REPORT EXPOSES HOW CONTROVERSIAL ‘AMNESTY’ PROGRAM EXPLODED UNDER BIDEN Migrant Insider had reported on Sunday that raids were planned on Monday and Tuesday in Northern Virginia, and that the agency had obtained between 75 and 100 warrants. “Judicial warrants mean ICE can go into your homes, so plan accordingly,” the outlet’s editor, Pablo Manriquez, said on X. He later posted where they had been allegedly spotted in Northern Virginia. Migrant Solidarity Mutual Aid also reported where ICE activity could be expected and urged followers to what they should do when approached by ICE. ICE MAKES MAJOR MOVE ON DETAINING ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS IN HEART OF BLUE STATE The leaks drew anger from ICE, with one official telling Fox they feared it could result in an ICE agent being killed. Previous leaks to the news media have included raids in Los Angeles and Aurora, Colorado. Asked by Fox News Digital if he was hoping to prevent the raid or effect any other outcome, Manriquez told Fox News Digital that he was “just breaking news.” When asked why he thinks there have been so many leaks, Manriquez said he didn’t know the answer, but said, “If people wanna send me a scoop, I’m here for it.” He also rejected concerns that revealing the details of raids could result in agents getting harmed. “We break immigration news all the time. We follow this topic very closely and haven’t seen any reports of ICE being harmed,” he said. Border czar Tom Homan said last month that the administration was closing in on the individual responsible for the leak of the Aurora raid. Noem had pointed the finger at the FBI. “The FBI is so corrupt,” Noem wrote on X. “We will work with any and every agency to stop leaks and prosecute these crooked deep state agents to the fullest extent of the law.” CLICK HERE FOR MORE IMMIGRATION COVERAGE Homan confirmed last month that “some of the information we’re receiving tends to lead toward the FBI” and promised consequences for whoever is found responsible. Attorney General Pam Bondi echoed Homan’s concerns in a separate interview on “Fox Report.” “If anyone leaks anything, people don’t understand that it jeopardizes the lives of our great men and women in law enforcement,” Bondi said. “If you leaked it, we will find out who you are, and we will come after you.” Fox News’ Bill Melugin and Madison Colombo contributed to this report.
5 things to watch in Trump’s primetime address to Congress
President Donald Trump, the consummate showman, is hyping his primetime address Tuesday to a joint session of Congress. “TOMORROW NIGHT WILL BE BIG. I WILL TELL IT LIKE IT IS!” the president touted in a social media post on the eve of his first major speech to Congress since the start of his second presidential administration six weeks ago. Trump has been moving at warp speed since returning to the White House on Jan. 20, and he is expected to use the closely watched address to tout his many accomplishments — some of which have been very controversial. During his first six weeks back in office, Trump has signed a flurry of executive orders and actions — 82 as of Tuesday, according to a Fox News count. His moves not only fulfilled some of his major campaign trail promises, but also allowed the returning president to flex his executive muscles, quickly putting his stamp on the federal government and making major cuts to the federal workforce, dramatically altering U.S. foreign policy, implementing steep tariffs on the nation’s top trading partners and also settling some long-standing grievances. TUNE IN: LIVE COVERAGE OF TRUMP’S ADDRESS TO CONGRESS TONIGHT ON FOX NEWS The president will tout his domestic and international accomplishments, spotlight what the Trump administration has done for the economy, make a renewed push for Congress to pass additional border security funding and detail his plans for peace around the globe, according to details from the White House that were shared first with Fox News. FIRST ON FOX: WHAT TRUMP WILL SAY IN HIS PRIMETIME SPEECH The theme of the speech is “The Renewal of the American Dream.” “The renewal of the American Dream is underway already. Look at all that President Trump has accomplished in his first month as president. He’s going to highlight some of those accomplishments,” White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt said hours before the address in an appearance on Fox News’ “Fox and Friends.” Here are five things to watch for when Trump speaks to Congress, the nation and the world. Trump will deliver his address hours after his 25% tariffs on Canada and Mexico — the nation’s neighbors and top trading partners — kicked in. FORMER PRESIDENTIAL SPEECHWRITERS ON WHAT TRUMP NEEDS TO SPELL OUT IN HIS ADDRESS The speech will likely offer him a platform to explain his controversial tariff moves, which have been widely panned by critics, and to outline how he will combat continued inflation. Democrats and even some Republicans warn that the tariffs could further boost inflation and raise prices even higher. Additionally, Democrats argue that “Donald Trump has done nothing to lower costs for you.” Inflation, which dogged former President Joe Biden for much of his four years in the White House, was a key issue that boosted Trump back to the presidency. However, Trump has not talked much about inflation since returning to power, other than to blame Biden for continued high prices. He has acknowledged that consumers could feel “some pain” from his tariffs but has said they are necessary to help boost the nation’s manufacturing. “IF COMPANIES MOVE TO THE UNITED STATES, THERE ARE NO TARIFFS!!!,” Trump wrote in a social media post hours ahead of his address. Arguably the biggest attention-grabber during the opening weeks of Trump’s second administration has come from his recently created Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE). Trump named Elon Musk — the world’s richest person and the chief executive of Tesla and SpaceX — to steer DOGE. POLITICAL STRATEGISTS WEIGH IN ON WHAT TRUMP NEEDS TO DO IN HIS SPEECH DOGE has swept through federal agencies since Trump was inaugurated, rooting out what the White House argues was billions in wasteful federal spending. It has also taken a meat cleaver to the federal workforce, resulting in a massive and controversial downsizing of employees. The moves by DOGE have triggered a slew of lawsuits in response. Trump has defended and applauded the moves made by DOGE. While public opinion polling suggests that Americans approve of slashing government waste and shrinking a bloated bureaucracy, a growing number have a negative view of Musk and worry that he has too much power. The speech gives Trump an opportunity to explain Musk’s mission with DOGE. Trump is expected to detail his plan to end the war in Ukraine, which was triggered three years ago by Russia’s invasion of its neighbor. The speech comes four days after last week’s verbal clash in the Oval Office between Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy, Trump and Vice President JD Vance. The tense meeting and Trump’s booting of the Ukrainians out of the White House, which put on hold a mineral resources deal between Washington and Kyiv, was seen as a key step toward reaching a deal to end the bloody war with Moscow. However, on Tuesday, Zelenskyy said he was ready for peace negotiations after a “regrettable” meeting in the White House. The speech gives Trump a platform to explain his diplomatic efforts and fend off criticism from Democrats and a handful of Republicans that he is reading out of Russian President Vladimir Putin’s playbook. “He’s going to dive into foreign policy – talk about his intention to end the war in Ukraine,” Leavitt said in her “Fox and Friends” interview. Trump told reporters on Monday that he would talk about the minerals deal in his address. Border security has long been Trump’s signature issue and was a key element in his successful 2024 campaign to win back the presidency, and since returning to the White House, the president has cracked down on illegal immigration. Trump suspended asylum efforts and launched a mass deportation program, but he and his administration want to speed up efforts, and he’ll use his speech to ask Congress for help. Leavitt highlighted that Trump is “going to make an ask of Congress tonight: We need more border funding to continue these deportations.” Which Donald Trump will show up in front of Congress; will it be a
Reporter’s Noteboook: Sorting it out
It’s a little hard to sort out. Wait. The government runs out of money next week? I thought the House and Senate just passed a budget? When do the House and Senate vote on President Trump’s “big, beautiful bill?” Doesn’t that address the debt ceiling? I don’t blame you if it’s hard to follow. There are really four distinct issues with which Congress is grappling. So let me try to sort it out for you. THEME OF TRUMP’S ADDRESS TO CONGRESS REVEALED Let’s first explain government funding. The deadline for Congress to avoid a government shutdown is 11:59:59 p.m. ET on Friday, March 14. The House and Senate must figure out how to either re-up all current funding at existing levels for a short time period – or face a shutdown. The other option – which is utterly unrealistic at this point – is for the House and Senate to pass all 12 of the annual spending bills which run the government. The House approved several of these last year, but the Senate hasn’t OK’d any of those bills. Keep in mind, these are spending measures for fiscal year 2025. They were due Oct. 1, so both Democrats and Republicans have stumbled in this effort. Congress finally approved a “skinny” stopgap spending package just before Christmas to keep the lights on. That was after adopting another interim measure to avoid a government shutdown last Oct. 1 – the start of fiscal year 2025. What does all of this mean? Well, for starters, Congress is already running behind funding the government for fiscal year 2026 – which begins this coming Oct. 1. Lawmakers are trapped on a vicious treadmill. That’s because it’s been years since Congress finished its bills on time. Congress didn’t approve the final spending plan for fiscal year 2024 until April of last year, seven months and change after the deadline. House Speaker Mike Johnson, R-LA, and President Donald Trump are signaling they’re good with another “year-long” Continuing Resolution, or CR in Congress-speak. That just renews the funding at existing levels through the fall. House Appropriations Committee Chairman Tom Cole, R-Okla., says to expect text of a CR over the weekend. But some conservatives are opposed to all CRs. Military hawks have yet to weigh in on the consequences of a CR, but those who support the military generally hate them. The reason? The Pentagon consumes about 55% of all money that Congress appropriates to federal departments and agencies annually. So a CR is disproportionately damaging to the armed forces. No department likes to operate under a CR because spending doesn’t go up, but it’s particularly troubling for the military since it enjoys the largest slice of federal dollars doled out by Congress. SEVERAL DEMOCRATS TO BOYCOTT TRUMP’S ‘PEP RALLY’ SPEECH TO CONGRESS Funding the government is completely separate from what House and Senate Republicans prepped in late February: a budget. Yes, a “budget” may sound like the legislative vehicle to run the government, but it’s not. A “budget” is a general, non-binding blueprint which lays out the prospective expenditures for all federal programs. That includes “discretionary” spending – which is what Congress allocates to run the government each year – and “mandatory” spending. That includes dollars which lawmakers green-lighted at one point for Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security. Beneficiaries of those programs receive assistance based on qualifications. A big chunk of the mandatory spending pie includes interest on the debt. Congress doesn’t draw up a bill to alter this spending each year, but it could, and that’s where Republicans are eyeing cuts. Note that entitlements and mandatory spending comprise about 65% of every dollar spent by the government. Earlier, I wrote about how the Pentagon consumes more than 50% of discretionary spending. That’s a pittance compared to what goes out the door for entitlements. And that’s why it’s such a challenge for Republicans to cut spending – and cut taxes – without blowing an even bigger hole in the already yawning deficit chasm. But mechanically, here’s what must happen next. The House and Senate approved different budget frameworks. The House plan went all the way with major spending cuts and a renewal of the 2017 Trump tax cuts. The Senate version was leaner – focused on border security. Here’s the most important thing I will write in this column. The only reason Republicans want to develop a budget blueprint is so they can sidestep a Senate filibuster when it comes to advancing their final piece of legislation. It’s about the math. Republicans only have 53 Senate seats. Sixty votes are required to overcome a filibuster. So while Republicans might be able to thread the needle and approve the plan with their narrow majority in the House, moving it through the Senate is tough. Unless… They can avoid a filibuster. That’s why House and Senate Republicans prepared a budget framework. Then they have the opportunity to plop their final bill into the budget reconciliation vehicle and avoid a filibuster. Otherwise, the gig is up. Still, there are lots of problems for the GOP. In order to use budget reconciliation, the House and Senate must approve the SAME framework. That hasn’t happened yet. Then, via the budget reconciliation process, the House and Senate must align on the same bill. There’s a lot of work ahead. And don’t forget that a government shutdown could sidetrack or delay all of this. That brings us to the debt ceiling. First, let’s define the debt ceiling. It is a distinct issue from government funding and the budget frameworks lawmakers are now working on. The debt ceiling is simply a threshold as to how much red ink the federal government can carry at any one time. That figure is now around $36 trillion. A failure to address the debt ceiling could make the stock and bond markets go bonkers. President Trump tried to get Congressional Republicans to shoehorn an increase or suspension of the debt ceiling into the CR to avoid a government
Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass recall effort launches
FIRST ON FOX: An effort to recall Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass officially launched its website on Tuesday. The Democratic mayor faces significant backlash due to her response to the wildfires that burned through the Pacific Palisades in January, including the fact that she was in Ghana despite dangerous fire conditions warnings ahead of time. If the recall petition meets the threshold of needed signatures — 15% of Los Angeles registered voters — then a special election would be triggered. The group launching the effort includes people directly impacted by the wildfire and other residents frustrated with crime and homelessness issues plaguing the city, according to a source familiar with the campaign. The source added that there is a bipartisan makeup of the people involved in the effort. The Los Angeles Times reported on Monday that the groundwork was being laid to raise funds for Bass’ potential ouster. LA MAYOR BASS’ CLASHES WITH REPORTERS ON WILDFIRES REMOVED FROM LEADER’S SOCIAL MEDIA, LIVESTREAMS “The LAFD’s budget was slashed by more than $17 million, stripping critical resources from firefighters as Los Angeles faces escalating wildfire threats and emergency response challenges. At a time when rapid response is more crucial than ever, officials are underfunding the very department responsible for protecting lives and property,” the website, RecallBassNow.com, states, along with other reasons for supporting her removal. Bass recently fired LAFD Chief Kirstin Crowley, who is appealing her termination, and replaced her with Ronnie Villanueva. Crowley previously warned about the potential risks of not having enough funding and staff for the department. “Acting in the best interests of Los Angeles’ public safety, and for the operations of the Los Angeles Fire Department, I have removed Kristin Crowley as Fire Chief. We know that 1,000 firefighters that could have been on duty on the morning the fires broke out were instead sent home on Chief Crowley’s watch,” Bass said in a statement last month. “Furthermore, a necessary step to an investigation was the President of the Fire Commission telling Chief Crowley to do an after action report on the fires. The Chief refused. These require her removal. The heroism of our firefighters – during the Palisades fire and every single day – is without question. Bringing new leadership to the fire department is what our city needs,” she added. MEL GIBSON JOINS EFFORT TO RECALL GOV. GAVIN NEWSOM, BLAMES HIM FOR ‘GROSS MISMANAGEMENT’ OF LA FIRES In a recent interview with Fox 11 Los Angeles, Bass said that she was not aware of the potential severity of the fires that burned down thousands of homes and businesses, saying she “felt absolutely terrible not being here.” “It didn’t reach that level to me to say, ‘Something terrible could happen, and maybe you shouldn’t have gone on the trip,’” the Democrat told the outlet. “I think that’s one of the things we need to look at, everything that happened, including that, needs to be examined,” she continued, revealing that there are at least two investigations into the city’s response to the fires. WOMAN ACCUSED OF LOOTING FROM HOME IN PALISADES FIRE AREA WHILE WEARING ‘PALISADES STRONG’ SHIRT The National Weather Service put out the “fire weather warning” on Jan. 3, and the mayor left for Africa the next day. She did not return until Jan. 8, according to Fox 11 LA. A Change.org petition has over 176,000 signatures asking her to resign as mayor. Still, there has been no indication that Bass would step down voluntarily. “This recall is nothing more than another extreme right-wing political stunt designed to divide Los Angeles when we need to move forward,” Doug Herman, a strategist for Bass, told Fox News Digital in a statement.