Fox News Latest Headlines
Democrats abandon embattled candidate Graham Platner after rape allegation implodes Senate bid
Democrats swiftly turned on Maine Senate candidate Graham Platner on Monday after a rape allegation triggered a full-on revolt among his most prominent supporters, with calls pouring in from across the party for him to suspend his campaign.
The mounting defections came after Maine resident Jenny Racicot, 41, accused Platner of rape in interviews with Politico and CNN, alleging the Senate hopeful entered her home uninvited while intoxicated nearly five years ago and forced himself on her despite repeated attempts to get him to stop.
Racicot, who was seeing Platner on and off at the time, told Politico she immediately cut ties with him after he forced her to engage in unprotected sex, saying, "I remember the specific moment where I thought to myself, like, ‘This is no longer my choice.’"
She also told CNN that the alleged encounter was the "dictionary definition" of rape.
PLATNER'S LATEST ACCUSER CLAIMS THE DEMOCRATIC SENATE CANDIDATE 'ABSOLUTELY' RAPED HER
Platner immediately issued a statement denying Racicot’s account and said he was "taking the time to reflect on the best path forward" for his imploding campaign.
The vast majority of Democrats signaled Monday they were unwilling to give Platner that opportunity, with many lawmakers racing to issue statements calling on the Senate hopeful to immediately end his campaign.
The pleas stretched from Platner's most fervent progressive champions to the party’s establishment wing, most of whom had only recently rallied behind Platner after he won the Democratic primary nomination in June.
"There can be no tolerance for sexual assault," Sen. Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass., one of Platner’s most prominent supporters, said in a statement rescinding her endorsement. "With so much at stake, the best path forward is for Graham Platner to step aside as the Democratic nominee and address these serious allegations outside this Senate race."
Meanwhile, Rep. Ro Khanna, D-Calif., who had closely aligned himself with Platner, also withdrew his endorsement and called on him to exit the race after news of the rape allegation circulated.
Sens. Martin Heinrich, D-N.M., and Ruben Gallego, D-Ariz., also pulled their support Monday, with Gallego stopping short of calling on Platner to suspend his campaign.
FOX NEWS POLL: MAINE SENATE RACE IS TIGHT, WITH CONCERNS ABOUT BOTH CANDIDATES
The progressive lawmakers continued to support Platner after Lyndsey Fifield, a former Platner girlfriend, accused the Maine Democrat of abuse in June — an allegation Platner has repeatedly denied as false and politically motivated.
Khanna notably traveled to Maine to campaign with Platner the following day after The New York Times first reported Fifield’s accusation.
Khanna previously said in multiple interviews that he would disavow Platner if a sexual assault allegation emerged, but told Fox News Digital that the Senate hopeful was "taking accountability" for his past and argued Platner was deserving of redemption.
The reaction among establishment Democrats was equally swift, with Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., and Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee Chair Kirsten Gillibrand, D-N.Y., publicly demanding that Platner "immediately" suspend his campaign to give the party time to put forward a new nominee.
The senior Democrats had only recently endorsed Platner following his June primary win after their preferred pick, Gov. Janet Mills, D-Maine, ended her campaign amid fundraising struggles.
"The DSCC will not invest in the Maine Senate race if Platner remains on the ballot," the pair wrote in a joint statement Monday.
The Schumer-aligned Senate Majority PAC, a top outside spending group focused on electing Democrats to the Senate, also said Monday that it would redirect resources away from Maine as long as Platner remained in the race.
TOP PLATNER ALLY TURNS ON HIM AFTER BOMBSHELL RAPE ALLEGATION ROCKS CAMPAIGN: 'RED LINE'
The warning comes as Democrats are up against a fast-approaching deadline to replace Platner as the party's nominee. Under Maine law, Platner can be replaced on the ballot if he withdraws by 5 p.m. on July 13, with the state party allowed to put forward a replacement by July 27.
Democrats view Maine as a top flip opportunity to retake Senate control during November's midterm elections, but Platner's rapidly unraveling campaign could derail those plans.
His plethora of scandals — from a former Nazi-linked tattoo to infidelity during his marriage — has sharply divided Democrats as the party seeks to unseat longtime Sen. Susan Collins, R-Maine.
Collins on Monday issued a statement calling the rape accusation "appalling" but declined to weigh in on whether Platner should continue in the race.
DEM SENATE HOPEFUL UNDER FIRE FOR RESURFACED COMMENTS CALLING COPS 'OPPORTUNISTIC COWARDS'
Other lawmakers hailing from the party’s centrist flank, including Sens. Mark Kelly, D-Ariz., and Elissa Slotkin, D-Mich., also publicly urged Platner to end his campaign. Neither had formally endorsed Platner before Monday’s rape allegation broke.
Many prominent Maine Democrats also called on Platner to drop his Senate bid on Monday, including Rep. Chellie Pingree, D-Maine and her daughter, former State House Speaker Hannah Pingree, D-Maine, who is the Democratic gubernatorial nominee to succeed Mills.
Former Maine public health official Nirav Shah and State Sen. Troy Jackson, D-Maine, who both ran for the open gubernatorial seat and have been floated as potential Platner replacements, also said Monday that he should withdraw his candidacy. Jackson, who campaigned with Platner, was among the candidates that the Senate hopeful endorsed to succeed Mills.
A vast swath of left-wing organizations also pulled their support of Platner on Monday.
"The allegations reported today are profoundly disturbing and disqualifying," Tiffany Muller, president of the Democratic-affiliated group End Citizen United, said in a statement. "The conduct described is fundamentally inconsistent with the standards we expect from the candidates we support."
VoteVets, an organization that works to elect Democratic veterans, also withdrew its endorsement of Platner, who served in multiple overseas deployments. Meanwhile, Our Revolution, a leftist organization founded by former Sanders campaign staffers, called on Platner to leave the race while demanding that his successor share his far-left policy views.
Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., one of Platner’s few remaining progressive supporters, had not weighed in on the sexual assault allegation as of late Monday evening.
A spokesperson for Sanders did not respond to a request for comment.
Far-left Twitch streamer Hasan Piker also broke with Platner on Monday, saying "the accusations — they are as credible as it is going to get."
"This is beyond red flags. This is irredeemable," Piker added during his livestream.
MORNING GLORY: The Supreme Court officially closes the books on another term
Teaching Constitutional Law is a joy, not a job — except for the 11th Amendment and the "Dormant Commerce Clause" cases and materials. The law school classroom is also a great vantage point from which to recognize that American constitutional law moves at a very gradual pace — and that this pace is a very good thing for the enduring "rule of law" that Americans enjoy.
Every semester since 1996, my students hear that Con Law ought to be their most interesting class of their three years of law school. Every law student is different, of course, and the "Uniform Commercial Cod might float some boats and "Trusts and Estates" can be pretty shocking —people do in fact "throw grandma from the train"— but Con Law impacts every citizen’s life and thus law students ought to care about it as citizens if not as lawyers. In fact, only a relatively small percentage of lawyers will run into issues that relate to the Constitution in the course of their careers. Fewer still will "practice" in the field and only a handful will argue a case involving the country’s highest law before even its lowest courts, much less before the United States Supreme Court.
Still, there are many reasons why, come every June or at latest early July, most of the nation’s news media focuses on the decisions flowing out of One First Street, N.E., Washington, D.C. As a republic of laws, the nation’s highest court makes decisions impacting every American as we are equal before the law. The most difficult cases it accepts and decides matter to our 330 millions. The news media — legacy and "new" alike — love the storylines.
DEMOCRATIC SENATOR CLAIMS GOP 'STOLE' TWO SCOTUS SEATS IN 2016, 2020, CALLS FOR EXPANSION
"SCOTUSblog" has thus become an extremely useful gathering place for Court watchers of all sorts, but especially for non-lawyers trying to make sense of the end-of-term rush of decisions. That goes double for laymen trying to figure out if the Court is shifting hard-right or hard-left on many issues or even some.
"By several measures, this term was more ideologically divided than the last one," Jake Truscott and Adam Feldman wrote for the SCOTUSblog platform on the first day of this month. "Last term, 15.2% of the court’s decisions were decided by a 6-3 vote, and 9% of all decisions were 6-3 ideological splits. This term, those figures rose significantly, to 28.8% and 22.7%, respectively."
So the Court has shifted "rightward" a bit, but of all of its cases resulting in opinions, only a little more than a fifth are decided along the divide of "originalists" v. "living Constitutionalists." (The "originalists" are Chief Justice John Roberts and Justices Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito, Neil Gorsuch, Brett Kavanaugh and Amy Coney Barrett. Of those six, Roberts, Barrett and Kavanaugh are often grouped together as "moderates." The "liberal" justices are Justices Elena Kagan, Sonia Sotomayor and Ketanji Brown Jackson.)
NPR RETRACTS FALSE REPORT CLAIMING JUSTICE SAMUEL ALITO IS RETIRING FROM THE SUPREME COURT
The Court issued 67 majority opinions this term, though it actually makes hundreds of smaller decisions throughout the Court year that begins in October and ends (usually) as June closes.
"The justice-level data reinforces this picture of a court still organized around a conservative center, but not operating in a purely ideological pattern in every major case," Truscott and Feldman wrote. "Roberts and Kavanaugh were in the majority most often this term, each at 95%. Barrett followed at 92%."
"[Justice] Jackson remained the justice least often in the majority," they continued. "She was in the majority 67% of the time overall this term and 41% of the time in non-unanimous cases."
SUPREME COURT STRIKES DOWN LIMIT ON PARTY CAMPAIGN SPENDING IN COORDINATION WITH CANDIDATES
So the justice widely regarded as the most ideological and the most left-wing was still in the majority in two out of three major cases. That should reassure the non-lawyer that there is no revolution by the robes underway. Because quite a few district court judges issue bolts-from-out-of-the-blue on a regular basis, there is a growing perception of a judiciary that is politicized and highly ideological. That is true of some lower courts. Our highest court, however, is an enormous force for stability in the country that just turned 250 years old.
Con Law students learn that the Court generally moves slowly and when it doesn’t — as with the radical Roe v. Wade decision of 1973 which declared unconstitutional every anti-abortion law in the land — it cannot expect the country as a whole to shrug and follow along. The Court will sometimes be a bit ahead of public opinion, but rarely, if ever, can it change the course of politics. When it tries, it opens and/or exacerbates rather than closes deep divisions among the citizenry.
CLICK HERE FOR MORE FOX NEWS OPINION
This year’s most controversial decisions are not actually anywhere near as divisive as Roe or the "Obamacare" decision (2012’s National Federation of Independent Business v. Sebelius) or Bush v. Gore which effectively decided that election by ending the (seemingly) endless recounting —correctly, by the way, as post-election "audit" after post-election "audit" showed. The most significant of this term’s cases may turn out to be National Republican Senatorial Committee v. Federal Election Commission, which held that the provisions of the Federal Election Campaign Act restricting the amount of money a party can spend in direct coordination with a candidate’s campaign were unconstitutional, thus breathing much-needed life into the two major political parties which need the lift.
The "birthright citizenship" case, Trump v. Barbara, drew lots of attention but very little genuine surprise among the population at large. Find me anyone outside of academia and a few think tanks who even knew there was a question about the citizenship of any baby born in America before the abandonment of border enforcement in the Biden years, and I'd be surprised if that person knew the underlying text, history and tradition of the arguments. Like most "big cases," the "importance" of the case will fade even as policy arguments about the actual issue of rational immigration policy continues.
Which is itself a triumph for the rule of law. Americans generally accept the Court’s rulings and move on. Contrary to the overheated and indeed absurd "Trump is a fascist" rhetoric, President Trump has always complied with every court decision, even those with which he deeply and loudly disagrees. Such is the authority of the Supreme Court. The Court gets the final say on the "cases and controversies" that divide the country. It has been that way since the Civil War, and we will all be blessed if it stays that way.
So push away the alarmists. Ignore the doomsayers. The Supreme Court has gone about its work successfully — again — and will be back at it in October (or earlier if need be.) The "republic of laws not men" carries on. Con Law is still the most interesting course in law school, but its textbooks change very little from year to year. And that is a very, very good thing.
Hugh Hewitt is a Fox News contributor and host of "The Hugh Hewitt Show" heard weekday afternoons from 3 PM to 6 PM ET on the Salem Radio Network, and simulcast on Salem News Channel. Hugh drives Americans home on the East Coast and to lunch on the West Coast on over 400 affiliates nationwide, and on all the streaming platforms where SNC can be seen. He is a frequent guest on the Fox News Channel’s news roundtable, hosted by Bret Baier weekdays at 6pm ET. A son of Ohio and a graduate of Harvard College and the University of Michigan Law School, Hewitt has been a Professor of Law at Chapman University’s Fowler School of Law since 1996 where he teaches Constitutional Law. Hewitt launched his eponymous radio show from Los Angeles in 1990. Hewitt has frequently appeared on every major national news television network, hosted television shows for PBS and MSNBC, written for every major American paper, has authored a dozen books and moderated a score of Republican candidate debates, most recently the November 2023 Republican presidential debate in Miami and four Republican presidential debates in the 2015-16 cycle. Hewitt focuses his radio show and his column on the Constitution, national security, American politics and the Cleveland Browns and Guardians. Hewitt has interviewed tens of thousands of guests from Democrats Hillary Clinton and John Kerry to Republican Presidents George W. Bush and Donald Trump over his 40 years in broadcasting. This column previews the lead story that will drive his radio/ TV show today.
SEN DAVE McCORMICK: Trump Accounts give all Americans a stake in prosperity
Last week, my friend Senator John Fetterman and I stood on a court at the 6th Man Center — a Philadelphia Youth Basketball facility in North Philly — watching dozens of children crowd around their phones grinning. They weren’t watching a video or playing a game. They were looking for investment accounts in their own names — accounts that give them a real stake in America’s future and become available on July 4.
Parents can celebrate Independence Day knowing that their children are eligible for a Trump Account: a $1,000 Treasury seed for every child born between 2025 and 2028, and another $250 for children ten and under in lower-income communities, funded not by Washington but by philanthropy.
These accounts were created a year ago as part of President Trump’s Working Families Tax Cuts Act, for which I cast the deciding vote in the Senate. Alongside no tax on tips or overtime and new tax credits for school choice and childcare, these measures are a down payment on the American Dream. They are also proof that we can share American prosperity without sacrificing the free markets and individual liberty on which this country was founded.
Capitalism is the greatest engine of prosperity and human flourishing the world has ever known. No economic system has lifted more people out of poverty, rewarded more work and innovation, or created more opportunity for ordinary people to build better lives. But to preserve that system — and the prosperity it makes possible — more Americans must have a real stake in its success.
Today, too many Americans are helping build this country’s future without sharing meaningfully in its upside. Since the global financial crisis, the top one percent’s share of the nation’s wealth has climbed from about 27 percent to 32 percent. That same one percent now owns roughly half of all the stock in America; the bottom half of households owns about one percent. As artificial intelligence and other new technologies transform our economy, this trend will only worsen — it’s both indefensible and politically unsustainable.
For decades, Washington’s answer to this dilemma was always the same: stand up a new agency, build a bureaucracy to run it, and redistribute hard-earned money through a system riddled with waste and fraud. It deepened dependence on government, and still the American Dream slipped further out of reach.
The Working Families Tax Cuts Act — signed into law last July 4 — chose another road: not redistribution from above, but incentives for Americans to invest directly in one another. A $1,000 seed fund is the first rung of a ladder every American child can climb — and gives parents, family and friends, employers, and philanthropists a vehicle to invest directly in the next generation.
That is the magic of tax-advantaged compounding: a $1,000 investment at birth, combined with just $10 added to the account each week, could grow to nearly $400,000 by the time that child reaches my age of 60.
Michael and Susan Dell have shown what private investment in the next generation can look like. Their $6.25 billion pledge — enough to seed accounts for 25 million children — is patriotism made concrete: private generosity expanding ownership, opportunity, and a stake in America’s future for millions of children. Many wealthy and patriotic Americans are following suit.
CLICK HERE FOR MORE FOX NEWS OPINION
Across the country, six million children have been signed up, but more must follow, including the 1.4 million eligible kids in Pennsylvania.
But Trump Accounts are only one part of a larger effort to revitalize the American Dream on our nation’s 250th birthday. The Working Family Tax Cuts Act is also bringing more jobs, more investment, and more opportunity to families across the country. The school-choice scholarship credit, for example, lets Americans direct their own dollars to a child’s education, so families can choose the school that best fits their child’s needs.
Abraham Lincoln called us to be dedicated to the unfinished work of liberty. That work continues in every generation. On July 4, as Trump Accounts launch nationwide, we will help make the American Dream more than just an inheritance of words for the next generation, but also a concrete stake in America’s promise. And they give the rest of us a chance to invest in the future of America’s next generation.
More will need to be done. But programs such as these — voluntary, guided by incentives, circumventing government bureaucracy, and which provide opportunity, not entitlement — are an excellent starting point.
WATCH: Ex-Warren campaign volunteer spotted praising murderous ex-Iranian leader
A far-left activist who previously helped organize youth support for Sen. Ed Markey, D-Mass., and volunteered for Sen. Elizabeth Warren’s, D-Mass., presidential campaign appeared in an Iranian state media interview praising the late Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, calling him the "greatest anti-imperialist leader" of her lifetime.
Calla Walsh, who describes herself as a journalist from the U.S. working in Lebanon, made the remarks in an interview aired by Iranian state media PressTV during the outlet's coverage of Khamenei’s funeral. Walsh was previously profiled by Boston Magazine as a young organizer who helped form Students for Markey and "played a pivotal role" in Sen. Markey’s 2020 primary win over then-Rep. Joe Kennedy III, after first volunteering for Sen. Warren’s presidential campaign.
"He was a leader to all people in the world who struggled against imperialism, against arrogance, against Zionism, against genocide," Walsh said in the interview. "To me, he was the greatest anti-imperialist leader to live during my lifetime."
During Khamenei’s 37 years in power, multiple reports cited his regime killing thousands of citizens, according to the National Council of Resistance of Iran.
IRANIANS CHANT ‘DEATH TO AMERICA’ AMID FUNERAL FOR LATE AYATOLLAH KHAMENEI
Her comments came with an Iranian flag seen in the backdrop.
Public profiles have traced Walsh’s political work through several Massachusetts progressive campaigns. Boston Magazine reported that Walsh later served as communications director for Jordan Meehan, a left-wing Massachusetts state House candidate, and was organizing with Act on Mass while doing digital media work for Boston City Councilor Julia Mejia’s re-election campaign in 2021.
The conservative Capital Research Center's InfluenceWatch, citing Walsh’s LinkedIn, also reported that Walsh was a regional organizer and strategist for Act on Mass from November 2020 to September 2021 and worked as digital director for Mejia in 2021.
Walsh has been tied to Michelle Wu’s Boston mayoral bid as well. A New York Times profile identified Walsh as part of the "Markeyverse" network and showed her canvassing for then-Boston mayoral candidate Wu.
SECRET SIGNAL CHATS REVEAL HOW ANTI-ICE AGITATORS COORDINATED NEWARK RIOTS
Meanwhile, Walsh has previously appeared in Fox News Digital reporting on far-left protest networks. In January, Fox News Digital reported that Walsh shared video of unrest in Minneapolis after the fatal Border Patrol shooting of Alex Pretti and bragged that protesters had trapped "ICE Gestapo" at the scene.
The same report noted that Walsh had previously been filmed in Iran shouting, "Death to America! Death to Israel!"
The interview from Iran's state media about the supreme leader's funeral was published under the headline, "Ayatollah Khamenei’s message of resistance was truly universal: American activist." Press TV summarized Walsh’s remarks as arguing that Khamenei’s legacy extended beyond Iran and the Muslim world and that the massive funeral crowds represented "not only grief but a march of victory."
Walsh also framed the recent conflict as a defeat for the United States, saying, "It’s still fair to say that the U.S. has been more humiliated than it has ever been before in its history and has signed away huge concessions to Iran."
Fox News Digital reached out to Walsh, as well as to the high-profile Democrats she has worked or campaigned for, but did not receive a response in time for publication.
LIZ PEEK: July Fourth exposed Democrats' big problem with America's silent majority
July Fourth was a bad day for Democrats.
Americans turned out in force to celebrate the birthday of the country they love, applauding the virtues and values that have made the United States an exceptional nation for 250 years. The silent majority, the folks who believe in the essential promise and goodness of this beautiful land, made their voices heard.
A recent Cato poll confirmed that sentiment, showing that 86% of respondents are grateful and 79% are proud to be Americans. Moreover, "most also believe America is a land of opportunity (61%), and even more believe the American Dream (74%) is available to them personally." Cato reports that three-quarters of Americans feel positive about the nation’s founding, and 70% believe its founding principles remain relevant today. "In particular, overwhelming majorities believe the U.S. Constitution is important for protecting our rights and freedoms (86%) and for enabling America’s prosperity (82%)."
MAMDANI BLASTS ICE AGENTS, ELON MUSK AND 'SUPREMACY' IN AMERICA 250 SPEECH AHEAD OF JULY 4 WEEKEND
That sure isn’t what we’ve been hearing from democratic socialist darling Zohran Mamdani, who has, incredibly, become the voice of the Democratic Party. In his Fourth of July speech, the New York City mayor lambasted our "nativist" country as one characterized by "monopolies that dominate every industry," "oligarchs who buy elections" and a "health insurance industry that exploits the sick."
Mamdani’s false and cliche-ridden diatribe doesn’t even make sense. In one breath, he excoriates the U.S. as dominated by an exclusive wealthy elite, but in the next, he exults in the "power each of us holds to bring America ever closer to the greatness so many have seen when they looked upon these shores." How can both those things be true? In an "authoritarian" regime, what power?
The democratic socialist surge, newly led by Mamdani, is real and is terrifying the party establishment. Party leaders New York Sen. Chuck Schumer and House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries are running scared as the DSA threatens their political lives. Fifteen House moderates — the kind being wiped out by insurgent leftist newcomers — penned an open letter declaring, "We are capitalist, not socialist," and "We are mainstream, not extreme." They also proclaimed, "We are proud, not ashamed of America." Imagine elected politicians having to make that pronouncement.
It’s about time they did.
Democrats have only themselves to blame for the rise of the socialist left. They have offered the country nothing but hatred of Donald Trump for over a decade. They have opposed even the most popular policies proposed by the president, like deporting criminals and reducing taxes. They have absurdly blocked investigating and eliminating hundreds of billions of taxpayer dollars lost to fraud every year — a problem that even Joe Biden’s administration said required urgent action. They have become the party that champions boys competing in girls’ sports and resists voter ID laws. They have fawned over European governments that have approval ratings below 30% and especially applauded those nations’ green energy policies that have stifled their economies and left them unable to compete for emerging industries like AI.
Democrats’ consistent and mindless opposition to President Trump created a policy vacuum, giving democratic socialists an opportunity to fill that hole with outlandish policies like abolishing prisons and eliminating private property rights. Those are policies the silent majority will not accept, no more than they accepted the woke excesses of the George Floyd and #MeToo protests.
The Democratic Socialists of America first showed up as supporters of Vermont independent Sen. Bernie Sanders when he ran for president in 2016. The DSA's membership increased from 6,500 to 8,500 during his campaign; another 13,000 people signed up in the eight months following the election.
Democrats should have disavowed the socialist Sanders then, when the DSA movement was tiny, but instead they played to the so-called Bernie Bros, who some thought denied Hillary Clinton the Oval Office by sitting out the election. In 2020, the corrupt hierarchy in charge of the party, along with a compliant media, promoted the big lie that Joe Biden was fit to serve as president. They engineered the defeat of Sanders, who led the early primaries, and forced the nomination of Biden. In recompense, they gave Bernie a seat at the table, allowing him to co-write the party’s platform and thus legitimizing his influence.
Riding that newfound acceptance, Sanders’ signature issues, like Medicare for All and taxing the rich, took on new weight, attracting the likes of New York’s Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, who became one of two democratic socialists elected to the House of Representatives in 2019.
After the bruising defeat in 2024, the party scurried to find a new message and adopted "affordability" as its issue. Democrats crusading to bring down the cost of living are laughable, given that the most expensive places to live in the U.S. are all run by Democrats. What drives costs higher? Burdensome regulations, pro-union labor policies and high taxes, all signature attributes of Democrat-run governments.
CLICK HERE FOR MORE FOX NEWS OPINION
Massive government spending — pushing too many dollars into the economy — also drives up inflation. It is no coincidence that during Joe Biden’s presidency, when government spending hit the highest levels relative to the economy since World War II, inflation soared to above 9%.
DSA candidates are also running on affordability, but with socialist solutions like providing free buses as well as government-subsidized groceries and child care. So far, they have succeeded mainly in deep-blue districts and with low voter turnout. Ultimately, Mamdani and his ilk will fail, as socialism always has, because it denies the driving human force of self-interest and the wisdom and adaptability of free markets.
But Democrats need to take a stand against the noisy radical leftists who will ultimately cost them voters. The movement is driven not only by socialist economic policies, but also by opposition to Israel and by antisemitism. Black Americans and Jews are important Democratic voting blocs; both are already speaking out against DSA candidates.
America’s silent majority has rallied to defend our nation in the past; if socialism gains ground, those quiet patriots will do so again. Count on it.
Trump arrives at NATO summit as Iran rift looms above alliance talks
President Donald Trump is arriving at the Turkey-held NATO summit with fresh frustration toward several European allies for their responses to the U.S.-led operations against Iran, opening a new front in his long-running campaign to pressure the alliance over burden-sharing.
The summit, which takes place Tuesday and Wednesday in Ankara, Turkey, is expected to focus on defense spending, Ukraine and NATO's long-term strategy toward Russia.
But it will bring Trump face to face with some of his biggest foes in NATO, including Spain, whose Prime Minister Pedro Sánchez has called the U.S. war in Iran "illegal, absurd and cruel."
U.S. Ambassador to NATO Matthew Whitaker said Wednesday that Trump remains "disappointed" by allies that declined to allow U.S. forces to use military bases or overflight rights during the operation, as well as by political statements criticizing the strikes.
WHY NATO'S DEFENSE SPENDING IMBALANCE LASTED FOR DECADES
"The president has expressed disappointment in both a couple of our allies' unwillingness to support us using our bases in their countries," Whitaker said. "And, as importantly, he's also incredibly disappointed in the political statements that came out around the time of the launch of Epic Fury."
The disagreements are expected to loom over a summit where Trump will once again press allies to increase defense spending, while also raising broader questions about whether NATO members are prepared to back the United States during conflicts beyond the alliance's traditional focus on Europe.
Trump's frustration has been evident publicly as well.
Ahead of the summit, he said he was attending largely because of his relationship with Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan, while again criticizing some NATO allies over defense spending and questioning their commitment to the alliance.
"Except for the fact that it was being held in Turkey by President Erdogan, I don't think I would have gone to it," Trump told reporters at the White House June 24.
During the same appearance, he renewed criticism of Spain and other NATO allies over their refusal to support U.S. operations against Iran, declaring, "There's a problem with Spain."
Whitaker said the operation also highlighted disparities in military capabilities across the alliance, noting that while some NATO members possess "exquisite capabilities," others lack the capacity to contribute meaningfully to a large-scale U.S.-led military operation.
The administration's frustration stems from a series of decisions by European allies during Operation Epic Fury.
The United Kingdom initially declined to allow U.S. forces to launch strikes against Iran from British bases before later reversing course after Iranian attacks escalated. Spain denied the use of its territory and airspace for combat operations while Sánchez publicly criticized the U.S.-led campaign.
Italy also sought to distance itself from the operation, insisting U.S. flights from bases on Italian soil were limited to logistical support rather than combat missions, while Germany served as a key logistics hub but stopped short of publicly endorsing the military campaign.
European governments defended their positions by citing domestic legal constraints and concerns about being drawn into a wider Middle East conflict. Britain later allowed U.S. strikes after initially withholding approval, while Spain continued opposing the campaign, Italy restricted its support to noncombat operations and Germany limited its role to logistics.
EUROPE'S $116B FIGHTER JET 'FAILURE' RAISES FRESH DOUBTS ABOUT ABILITY TO DEFEND ITSELF WITHOUT US
Several allies later agreed to support maritime security operations aimed at restoring commercial shipping through the Strait of Hormuz, but administration officials say the initial reluctance to back the U.S. campaign continues to shape Trump's view heading into the summit.
While the Middle East is not expected to dominate the formal agenda, they underscore broader questions Trump is bringing to Turkey about burden-sharing and whether NATO allies are prepared to back the United States beyond the alliance's traditional focus on Europe.
The tensions over Iran build on years of Trump's criticism of NATO, which he has repeatedly accused of relying too heavily on the U.S. During both his first and second terms, Trump has questioned whether Washington should continue defending allies that fail to meet spending commitments and has at times floated withdrawing from the alliance altogether.
"If they don't pay, I'm not going to defend them," Trump said March 6. "If the United States was in trouble and we called them ... you think they're going to come and protect us? They're supposed to. I'm not so sure."
Trump is expected to use the summit to press allies to meet NATO's new benchmark of spending 5% of GDP on defense.
"The United States spends more money on NATO than any other country, by far, to protect them, without getting any benefit from so doing," he wrote on Truth Social Thursday.
Whitaker suggested the administration increasingly views burden-sharing as extending beyond defense budgets alone.
"We believe that those that are doing more should get benefits from doing more," he said.
Whitaker confirmed the administration was considering countermeasures for allies that don’t meet defense spending goals. He added that countries contributing more could receive advantages ranging from priority in defense procurement to greater engagement with U.S. leaders.
While the summit is expected to focus publicly on defense spending, Ukraine and NATO's long-term strategy toward Russia, analysts say the fallout from Operation Epic Fury is likely to shape private conversations between Trump and several European leaders.
Former Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense Ian Brzezinski said during a press briefing the recent conflict has created "two scorecards on the table" for the summit— NATO's traditional priorities of strengthening deterrence against Russia and Trump's assessment of which allies proved most supportive of the United States during the Iran conflict.
"We have low expectations because of the issues not on the agenda, but that are driving the atmospherics," Torey Taussig, director of the Transatlantic Security Initiative at the Atlantic Council, said.
Charlie Kirk's family comes face to face with accused assassin for first time
PROVO, Utah — The family of Charlie Kirk came face to face with his accused assassin for the first time in a Utah courtroom Monday — the first day of what is expected to be a weeklong preliminary hearing.
Tyler Robinson, 23, was already in the room before members of the media were allowed in at around 8:55 a.m. He was wearing a gray suit, pink shirt and black tie, with his wrists and ankles cuffed. Later in the hearing, when videos of Kirk's shooting death were played for the sides and the judge, he showed no visible response when the sound of the fatal gunshot rang out.
Utah State Bureau of Investigation Agent David Hull was on the stand to introduce several videos, including images of Kirk’s death that were not shown publicly in court but were shown to the judge and attorneys for both sides. Two of them were described as showing the moment a sniper’s bullet struck Kirk in the neck, and they included audio that reporters could hear.
CHARLIE KIRK'S PARENTS, WIDOW TO ATTEND TYLER ROBINSON'S PRELIMINARY HEARING NEXT WEEK
While Judge Tony Graf Jr. flinched and leaned away from the screen when the shot rang out in one of the videos, Robinson remained still during both.
Kirk’s family had already left the courtroom before they were played. They were expected to receive warnings before graphic evidence would be introduced and left twice ahead of mentions of the assassination itself.
For much of the rest of the hearing, Erika Kirk and her in-laws, Rob and Kathy Kirk, sat next to one another watching the proceedings closely, occasionally exchanging looks or glancing down. Other relatives present included Erika's sister, Tonya, and niece and nephew.
At another point, with Kirk's family out of the courtroom, Hull also testified about the autopsy report, which listed Kirk's death as a homicide by a gunshot wound to the neck. During that testimony, Robinson’s mother leaned over to her husband and held her hand on his shoulder.
The Kirks also had some high-profile supporters join them near the front — including Donald Trump Jr., his wife Bettina and conservative commentators Jack Posobiec and Brandon Tatum.
Robinson’s parents, who usually sit in the front row, were in the fourth row Monday with other relatives.
The first witness of the day was Officer Christopher Bagley, now a member of the Spanish Fork Police Department. He was working at Utah Valley University when Kirk was shot and killed during a Turning Point USA event there on Sept. 10, 2025.
He testified that he believed he heard a rifle shot — not a pistol shot — from the direction of the Losee Center. He said he reached that conclusion after seeing an empty handgun holster on the ground amid the early chaos and looking up to find that the Losee Center rooftop had a clear line of sight to where Kirk was speaking.
He went to the Losee rooftop, where he found a black and red screwdriver and impressions in the gravel that he described as what looked like a "sniper’s pad."
He also said he reviewed surveillance video showing the suspect on top of the roof, and he found footprints in the grass where the suspect dropped down and scuff marks on the roof above them. Defense attorney Kathy Nester only got in about 10 minutes of cross-examination before the recess for lunch, but she asked Bagley if his police report from the day mentioned a direction the shot came from.
It didn’t, he said. He also didn't know what happened to the handgun holster.
As prosecutors planned to show some UVU surveillance video, Robinson’s defense objected. While Graf had overruled most of their objections throughout the day, he sustained this one on the grounds that the video, due to edits including face blurs, zooms and red circles, had not been properly authenticated and could not be played.
The video is expected to be introduced later after prosecutors said they planned to provide an unedited version.
Hull was the second of four witnesses prosecutors said they planned to call to the stand Monday. He is expected to resume testimony Tuesday morning at 9 a.m. MT.
Other video shown Monday included a vehicle alleged to be Robinson’s coming and going from a house near the UVU campus after midnight on Sept. 11 — about 12 hours after Charlie Kirk’s murder on Sept. 10.
As Fox News Digital previously reported, Robinson also allegedly had an encounter with law enforcement in the area hours after the shooting.
At some point during the week, the court is expected to hear a previously recorded statement from Robinson's former lover Lance Twiggs, who prosecutors allege received a written confession after the crime.
Robinson has not yet entered a plea. He could face the death penalty if convicted of the top charge against him, aggravated murder.
England's Jordan Henderson officially ruled out after freak fall causes fracture, opts for surgery
A freak mishap Sunday night abruptly ended England midfielder Jordan Henderson's 2026 World Cup.
Henderson, 36, spent the match on the bench in England's 3-2 win, but quickly drew attention after falling over an advertising board, leaving him writhing in pain during a moment of victory for England.
On Monday, Henderson opted to undergo surgery, bringing an unusual ending to the World Cup campaign of one of England's veteran leaders.
As the stadium speakers blasted Oasis, Henderson tried to climb over a pitch-side advertising board to celebrate with the traveling supporters. He lost his footing and landed awkwardly on his wrist.
WATCH:
England captain Harry Kane reacted to Henderson's injury Sunday night after the match.
"Yeah Hendo just fell over there. I think he's OK. Something to do with his arm," Kane said, unaware of the severity of Henderson's injury at the time.
The celebrations quickly turned to concern as medical staff rushed onto the field, administered oxygen, and stretchered Henderson off the pitch.
Before the accident, Estadio Azteca hosted a World Cup classic. Jude Bellingham sparked England with a first-half brace before Harry Kane added a penalty. Mexico answered through Julian Quinones and a late Raul Jimenez penalty.
Henderson watched the thriller from the bench, picking up a yellow card in the 98th minute for his touchline protests. The match fell into chaos when England defender Jarell Quansah was shown a straight red card, forcing the Three Lions to desperately hang on.
While manager Thomas Tuchel and the squad flew to Kansas City to prepare for a quarterfinal clash against Norway, Henderson remained hospitalized in Mexico City. England next faces Erling Haaland's Norway on Saturday without the suspended Jarell Quansah.
Henderson's World Cup had its ups and downs. The last one ended it.
Send us your thoughts: alejandro.avila@outkick.com / Follow along on X: @alejandroaveela
Team USA's World Cup run ends as Belgium wins Round of 16 matchup to advance
Team USA’s run at the 2026 FIFA World Cup has come to an end.
Belgium, in front of a sold-out, U.S.-heavy crowd in Seattle, defeated the USMNT, 4-1, in a match where they took full advantage of their opponent’s mistakes.
Charles De Ketelaere was the man who not only scored just nine minutes into the match for Belgium, but his goal in the 39th minute made Team USA manager Mauricio Pochettino kick water bottles on the sideline.
CLICK HERE FOR MORE SPORTS COVERAGE ON FOXNEWS.COM
The reason? Malik Tillman, who scored a free kick against Bosnia and Herzegovina in the Round of 32 victory in the Bay Area, took another just in front of Belgium’s box, and it deflected off a Belgian defender and threw off legendary keeper Thibaut Courtois to even the game at one apiece.
The momentum was back for the USMNT at that moment in the 37th minute. But once again, shoddy defense by the U.S. resulted in an easy goal for De Ketelaere right in front of Matt Freese’s net.
Freese, though, had a massive error of his own in the second half that crushed the momentum that had conjured up while down one goal.
In the 57th minute, a total game-changer came when Freese decided to leave his net while De Ketelaere was chasing the through ball. Freese was first to get there, but as he was trying to clear the ball, his foot got caught in the turf.
In a desperation attempt, he tried to kick it with his right foot, but De Ketelaere got in the way and Hans Vanaken kicked it past Freese and Ream, who couldn’t turn his body around to save it for one of the worst goals allowed by a team at this World Cup.
Overall, it wasn’t Team USA’s best effort in the moment they needed it most in the Round of 16.
To make matters worse, Pochettino was forced to sub out Christian Pulisic, dubbed "Captain America," after a shot attempt resulted in an injury. Pulisic wound up for a kick on his right foot when a Belgian defender stepped in front of him. Instead of kicking the ball, Pulisic belted the back heel of the Belgian defender, and he went down in clear pain.
Pulisic tried to run it off, but with a clear limp, Pochettino sent in Sebastian Berhalter instead.
As for the biggest story of this match, Folarin Balogun, who became available after FIFA invoked Article 27 of its disciplinary code to suspend his red card, wasn’t much of a factor for the team. Belgium did a good job of buttoning up their defense, and Balogun never got a clean look to find the back of the net as he has in past matches.
The U.S. tried desperately to get back into the match, especially when Berhalter just missed getting a ball past Courtois, but it just went wide left. However, Belgium did their defensive duties and refused to allow what Senegal did to them in the round of 32 – a second-half miraculous comeback.
Instead, Romelu Lukaku, Belgium's superstar striker, put a cherry on top of their victory with a stoppage time goal past Freese in the second half. It was quite the statement in a game they dominated throughout.
As you'd expect, it was a sad group for the U.S. following the loss, while Belgium celebrated their spot in the quarterfinals where they will take on Spain later this week.
Follow Fox News Digital’s sports coverage on X and subscribe to the Fox News Sports Huddle newsletter.
New Yorker suing ICE after officers went to his home to warn him over criticism of agency
A New York resident is suing after officers went to his home to serve him with a warning after he sent an email criticizing Immigration and Customs Enforcement leadership over the agency's tactics in immigration raids.
David Streever, a U.S. citizen in Rochester, filed the lawsuit on Monday in Washington, D.C., against the Department of Homeland Security and ICE, arguing that officials violated his First Amendment right to speak out against the government, according to the complaint reviewed by Fox News Digital.
Streever was on a trip to Finland with his 7-year-old daughter last month when two officers showed up to his home and handed his wife a warning notice informing him that an email he sent months earlier was considered a threat.
He had sent an email in January to Todd Lyons, who was the acting director of ICE at the time, after an ICE agent shot and killed U.S. citizen Renee Nicole Good during an immigration raid in Minneapolis.
ANOTHER NEW YORKER SAYS OFFICERS CONFRONTED HIM AFTER HE CRITICIZED ICE
In the email, Streever told Lyons he was "a monstrous human being" who "will never know peace" and will "go down in history as America's Reinhard Heydrich, the butcher," a reference to a Nazi leader.
"The way you are protecting the obvious execution in Minnesota, even as we see the videos, will lead to your downfall. Even Trump will turn on you before the end, and you will be a sad, despised man who eats himself alive with shame at your own pathetic weakness," Streever said in the email, according to the complaint.
"You will seek to lose yourself, to escape the burden of knowing the truth about yourself. But wherever you go, you will find yourself. You will torment yourself until your last day on Earth," the email added.
When officers arrived at his home, Streever's wife answered the door and was handed a "warning notice" explaining that her husband "may be in violation of federal law" for sending his email to ICE's former acting director.
The notice, reviewed by Fox News Digital, urges Streever to "promptly remove and/or discontinue" his "behavior," warning that the notice will be "taken into consideration" if he continues to be involved" in "criminal activities."
Streever’s wife told the officers he was out of the country but would return to Rochester later that week, according to the lawsuit. But federal officers did not wait and instead attempted to confront him at a New York City hotel after he returned from Finland, although they were turned away by hotel staff.
That same night, officers repeatedly called Streever’s phone, leaving voicemails identifying themselves only as Homeland Security Investigations.
On their train ride home, Streever told his daughter about the possibility that federal officers might confront him, and the young girl broke down in tears, fearing for her father's safety.
Adam Steinbaugh, an attorney with the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression who is representing Streever, argued the email was protected speech under the First Amendment and does not represent a legitimate threat.
"If someone is really threatening a government official, you don’t wait five months to act on it," Steinbaugh said in a statement. "The fact that authorities didn’t respond immediately shows that David presented no threat. This pursuit is designed to intimidate lawful speech, pure and simple."
Streever said he was shocked that federal officers came to his home to question him over his email.
"I cherish our right to speak openly about issues of public concern," Streever said. "I hope others will not be discouraged from peacefully expressing their views, even when those views are critical of the government."
"Like many Americans, I was deeply upset after the shootings in Minnesota and I felt compelled to do something," Streever said in an earlier statement. "Writing an email to the head of ICE seemed like the least I could do to express my sense of outrage. I never dreamed it would lead to a knock on my door by federal officers or descending on my hotel in the dark of night."
Fox News Digital reached out to DHS and ICE for comment.
The lawsuit also names Homeland Security Secretary Markwayne Mullin, whose office released a statement claiming, "Any allegation DHS and its components are attempting to ‘squash’ free speech is categorically FALSE," according to the Associated Press.
The complaint asks the court to order DHS and ICE officials to stop its "coercion and retaliation" against Streever for his protected speech.
The warning to Streever was presented the same week poll worker Paigelynne Gonyea, of Syracuse, said two federal officers confronted her at a voting site during New York’s primaries to question her about a social media post she made about Jonathan Ross, the ICE officer who killed Good.
Gonyea said she believes the warning to her was because of a post she made in January in which she shared a picture of Ross along with the caption: "I think today is a great day for Jonathan to be indicted."
Her post was made after Ross had already been identified by the media.
A spokesperson for DHS, Lauren Bis, shared an image of a different social media post from Gonyea in which she said the woman shared Ross’ address, according to the Associated Press, although part of the post was redacted.
Bis said in a statement last week that Gonyea "committed a federal crime by posting the address of an ICE law enforcement officer online" and "if you doxx our officers, we will investigate you, and you will be brought to justice."