Fox News Latest Headlines
California father says Newsom ignored him after illegal immigrant trucker left daughter unable to walk
A California man whose daughter was left unable to walk or speak after a crash involving an illegal migrant truck driver says California Gov. Gavin Newsom has ignored his repeated pleas for help, for years.
"When Dalilah's accident first happened, I reached out to the governor's office, via phone as well as email. I received nothing back at all," Marcus Coleman told "The Will Cain Show" Tuesday.
According to the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), the crash was caused by Partap Singh, an illegal immigrant from India who was driving a commercial 18-wheeler. Singh reportedly failed to stop in a construction zone, triggering a multi-vehicle pileup, hitting the Coleman family’s vehicle.
Critically injured in the crash was then 5-year-old Dalilah Coleman. She spent three weeks in a coma and was left with severe, life-altering injuries.
Now 7-years-old, Dalilah is nonverbal and relearning how to walk, requiring intensive and ongoing therapy.
Coleman told Fox News host Will Cain that his family has been left hanging in their requests for help, saying they were denied Social Security benefits and other forms of government assistance to cover Dalilah’s treatments.
"It’s just kind of left up to us to sit there and take care of what we need to take care of," he said.
"I'm here… trying to make ends meet to satisfy her needs. And even then, we're still falling short and there's nobody there to help us with it," he added.
A truck driver himself, Coleman expressed frustration with California’s policies that allow foreign-born truck drivers to obtain commercial driver’s licenses (CDL) with what he described as minimal regulation, calling the practice "gross negligence."
Concerns over California’s CDL standards have drawn national attention, including from Trump administration officials like Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy, who commented about Dalilah’s case on Monday.
"California’s weak leadership is failing Americans like Dalilah every day," Duffy said on X.
ILLINOIS FATHER SAYS PRITZKER SHOWS 'INDIFFERENCE' TO HIS DAUGHTER BEING KILLED BY ILLEGAL IMMIGRANT
Dalilah’s father echoed that criticism, accusing California leadership of not doing enough for his daughter and prioritizing political interests over the safety of their constituents.
"I think they're trying to do what's going to favor them in the long run, no matter how many people it hurts," he said.
Coleman said the only acknowledgment they’ve seen from Newsom came in the form of a social media post accusing President Donald Trump and DHS Secretary Kristi Noem of politicizing the tragedy – a message he says "totally neglected" his daughter’s suffering.
He argued that, as governor, Newsom is responsible for addressing incidents like Dalilah’s and shared a message for the California leader.
"Pay attention to your people here in California. We're the ones that should matter. I shouldn't have to be reaching out to anybody else to help us when he's here in California… He should have handled this," Coleman said.
Fox News Digital reached out to Gov. Newsom's office for comment and did not receive a response.
In September 2025, Newsom's office argued responsibility for the crash rests with the federal government, not the state, and said the following in a statement to Fox News Digital:
"Our hearts go out to the Coleman family."
Trump unloads on Biden policies from Davos, warns Europe to drop the old playbook
President Donald Trump blasted his predecessor's policies from the dais in Davos, Switzerland, at the World Economic Forum in a warning to foreign leaders to buck old political playbooks and rally around the U.S., citing that "when America booms, the entire world booms."
"Under the Biden administration, America was plagued by the nightmare of stagflation, meaning low growth and high inflation. A recipe for misery, failure and decline," Trump said Wednesday in his speech before the forum. "But now, after just one year of my policies, we are witnessing the exact opposite. Virtually no inflation and extraordinarily high economic growth. Growth like I believe you'll see very shortly. Our country has never seen before. Perhaps no country has ever seen before."
Trump is in Switzerland Wednesday and Tuesday for the annual World Economic Forum, which attracts government leaders and business leaders from across the world to discuss the world's economic outlook. Trump's trip to Europe comes as he threatens to impose tariffs on a handful of European nations in an effort for the U.S. to acquire Greenland, heightening tensions at the forum.
Trump mentioned former President Joe Biden by name at least a dozen times during his speech, highlighting how his administration overturned Biden's left-wing policies as they relate to energy and the economy and immigration to strengthen the U.S.
US TRADE REP SHRUGS OFF WORLD LEADERS’ SWIPES AT TRUMP AMID DAVOS BACKLASH
"Since my inauguration, we've lifted more than 1.2 million people off of food stamps," Trump continued. "And after four years, in which Biden secured less than $1 trillion of new investment in our country, think of that $1 trillion. Substantially less than that in four years. We've secured commitments for a record breaking $18 trillion. And we think when the final numbers come out, they'll be closer to $20 trillion of investment."
He also revealed his "biggest surprise" since returning to the Oval Office a year ago as of Tuesday.
AMERICAN FLAGS TORCHED, RIOT POLICE CLASH WITH PROTESTERS AHEAD OF TRUMP DAVOS ARRIVAL
"The USA is the economic engine on the planet. And when America booms, the entire world booms. It's been the history. When it goes bad, it goes bad. … You all follow us down and you follow us up. … I never thought we could do it this quickly. My biggest surprise is I thought it would take more than a year, maybe like a year and one month. But it's happened very quickly," he said.
Trump joined the White House press briefing in Washington, D.C., Tuesday, which marked his one year back in the Oval Office. Trump delivered a lengthy recap of his administration's wins during the briefing, rehashing many of his points in Davos to the crowd of foreign leaders.
"It became conventional wisdom in Washington and European capitals that the only way to grow a modern Western economy was through ever-increasing government spending, unchecked mass migration, and endless foreign imports," Trump said. "The consensus was that so-called dirty jobs and heavy industries should be sent elsewhere, that affordable energy should be replaced by the Green New scam, and that countries could be propped up by importing new and entirely different populations from faraway lands."
"This was the path that Sleepy Joe Biden's administration and many other Western governments very foolishly followed, turning their backs on everything that makes nations rich and powerful and strong," he added.
Trump also scolded European leaders for transforming the continent into one he no longer recognizes, calling on them to set itself on the "right direction."
"I don't recognize it. And that's not in a positive way. That's in a very negative way. And I love Europe and I want to see Europe go good, but it's not heading in the right direction," he said.
Fox News Digital reached out to Biden's office Wednesday morning for comment on the criticisms but did not immediately receive a reply.
Prince Harry fights back tears in court, says UK tabloids made Meghan Markle’s life “an absolute misery’
Prince Harry fought back tears in court as he spoke about his wife, Meghan Markle.
On Wednesday, the Duke of Sussex spent two-and-a-half hours in the witness stand for his lawsuit against Associated Newspapers, publishers of the Daily Mail and Mail on Sunday.
The 41-year-old appeared visibly emotional, telling the court the Daily Mail made Meghan’s life "an absolute misery" at London’s High Court. When he left, Harry looked shaken and was still sniffling.
PRINCE HARRY SAYS HE’S ‘PARANOID BEYOND BELIEF’ IN HIGH-STAKES COURTROOM WAR WITH BRITISH TABLOIDS
According to a BBC reporter who was in court, Harry "choked on the words." He was described as "clearly very emotional" as he condemned how his private life had been "commercialized" by the media. Harry said the idea that he isn’t entitled to a private life is "disgusting," adding that the legal fight has been another "horrible experience" for him and his family.
"Prince Harry closed out his day in court visibly upset," royal commentator Meredith Constant told Fox News Digital.
"Associated Newspapers was the outlet that published Meghan’s letter to her father, Thomas Markle, in 2019," Constant added. "It was somewhat rich for the defense to suggest that Prince Harry should have gone to the palace’s preferred law firm, given how Meghan and Harry claimed they were ignored when they asked for legal action against the Mail on Sunday that year."
WATCH: KING CHARLES CAN'T GET INVOLVED IN PRINCE HARRY'S SECURITY WOES: AUTHOR
Harry and six other claimants, including Elton John and Elizabeth Hurley, are suing over alleged privacy violations dating from the early 1990s through the 2010s. They claim the U.K. tabloids engaged in the "clear, systematic and sustained use of unlawful information gathering" for two decades, according to attorney David Sherborne.
Associated Newspapers denied the allegations, calling them "preposterous." The publisher said the roughly 50 articles in question were based on legitimate sources, including acquaintances willing to talk about their famous friends.
Harry said all he and the other claimants want is an apology, adding that it’s "awful" to have to give evidence and relive painful experiences, the BBC reported. He said the hardest part of testifying was knowing that Associated Newspapers "made my wife’s life an absolute misery."
The Duke and Duchess of Sussex stepped back as senior royals in 2020, citing intense media scrutiny and a lack of support from the palace. They relocated to California.
"No one disputes that Prince Harry and his family endured extraordinary media intrusion," Kinsey Schofield, host of YouTube’s "Kinsey Schofield Unfiltered," told Fox News Digital.
"His mother, Princess Diana, suffered some of the most aggressive and unethical press treatment in modern history," Schofield said. "That included the deception used by journalist Martin Bashir to secure her BBC interview, for which there were virtually no consequences. I sympathize with Harry’s belief that his privacy was violated and that illegal methods may have been used. That should never be acceptable."
CLICK HERE TO SIGN UP FOR THE ENTERTAINMENT NEWSLETTER
"Whether he ultimately wins this case or not, I hope it brings him closure and allows him to focus on the future and the family he’s built in California," Schofield continued.
"He’s sacrificing precious time with his children to pursue this, and that shouldn’t be overlooked. Hopefully, this marks the final chapter for Harry — constantly fighting the world is both emotionally and financially draining."
Harry said private information attributed to "sources" and "friends" fueled his suspicion that people close to him were leaking details to journalists.
He cited a 2005 article about his then-girlfriend Chelsy Davy that included "an extraordinary level of detail," making him feel he was "part of an endless pursuit — a campaign, an obsession with having every aspect of my life under surveillance."
Harry admitted the coverage made him "paranoid beyond belief" and claimed the outlet wanted to "drive me to drugs and drinking to sell more papers."
He said the death of his mother marked the beginning of his "uneasy relationship" with the media. But as a "member of the Institution," referring to the royal family, he was forced to follow the policy of "never complain, never explain."
"There was no alternative; I was conditioned to accept it," he said.
Harry said "vicious, persistent attacks" on his wife pushed him to break with royal tradition and take the press to court.
LIKE WHAT YOU’RE READING? CLICK HERE FOR MORE ENTERTAINMENT NEWS
The trial is expected to last nine weeks, with a written verdict likely months away.
Taylor Swift calls Justin Baldoni a 'b----' in explosive texts with Blake Lively revealed in lawsuit
Newly released text messages between Blake Lively and Taylor Swift offer a raw, behind-the-scenes look at how the actress and her inner circle viewed Justin Baldoni as the "It Ends With Us" legal battle continues.
Swift called Baldoni a "b----," while Lively vented to the pop star in bombshell texts revealed in unsealed legal documents obtained by Fox News Digital.
Lively and Baldoni starred together in the romance drama "It Ends with Us," which was based on Colleen Hoover's 2016 book. After a press tour rife with rumors of behind-the-scenes issues between the two, Baldoni and Lively filed lawsuits against each other.
The "Age of Adaline" star accused Baldoni of sexual harassment while filming "It Ends With Us." Baldoni insisted Lively had "falsely" accused him in an attempt to repair her reputation from the fallout from the movie's press tour after she allegedly took control of the film.
On Dec. 5, 2024, Taylor Swift sent Blake Lively a link to a news story about Justin Baldoni claiming to be sexually traumatized by an ex-girlfriend. The following texts were sent weeks before Lively publicly accused Justin Baldoni of sexual harassment on the set of "It Ends With Us."
Taylor Swift: "I think this b---- knows something is coming because he's gotten out his tiny violin."
Blake Lively: "It's rings different when he doesn't end the story by saying ‘Did I always listen when they said no? No.’ like he did with me. But that must not've tested well in the focus group."
Blake Lively: "He's being honored at the vital voices for women event on Monday."
Taylor Swift: "This is so disgusting and I hate that he's clever about this s---."
Blake Lively: "This inspiring event celebrates men who are using their platforms, influence, and leadership to elevate women, combat gender-based violence, and promote gender equality worldwide."
Taylor Swift: "Well not him, her."
Blake Lively: "He's not. He just has a team. Yeah. Her. And his publicist Jennifer Abel."
Blake Lively: "And the comms people at his studio."
Taylor Swift: "He needs to be beaten by his OWN words."
Blake Lively: "Everyone weighs in before [he] responds to a text, writes and email, or trims his hair. It's wild everyone participates."
Blake Lively: "Yeah. I actually think it's important he's honored. And to all the people honoring him and not taking a moment to question… no one talks to him, no one will say his name, no one follows him, yet they all are close with each other.. maybe it was him? Nahh it was the women because they wore flowers. That's how you know."
Taylor Swift: "Jesus Christ. Is everything still on track"
Blake Lively: "Oh yes. A week later tho. But worth the wait."
Taylor Swift: "Ok that's perfect. His own words, that's gonna be powerful."
Blake Lively: "That's what wild about this entire thing. Everthing is in their own words."
Taylor Swift: "It's the only way to beat liars and hypocrites."
Blake Lively: "Can you imagine feeling as confident as these predators that you're going to always get away with it. Him accepting an award as an ally for women. And Scooter going about [the] world with his head held high as he co owns and funds a crisis PR company that silences women."
Taylor Swift: "It's like a horror film no one knows is taking place."
Blake Lively: "Oh but they will. It's the only thing that can come of this. The good that protects other women from this happening to them."
Blake Lively: "Meanwhile I walk around feeling death sentence guilty and apologetic for being sarcastic and liking a theme party."
JUSTIN BALDONI'S $400M LAWSUIT AGAINST BLAKE LIVELY ENDS AS FINANCIAL FIGHT STILL LOOMS
Text messages from April 2023 give additional context to an encounter between Blake Lively, Taylor Swift and Justin Baldoni that was first mentioned in the actor's January 2025 lawsuit against the "Gossip Girl" star.
Blake Lively: "If you get here w this doofus director of my movie is still here (I'll be ushering him out, but hope he's still here) can you do me a huge favor. I need help with him."
Blake Lively: "Can you tell him you're excited for the movie. That you read the book but what you're freaking out over is the pages I sent you. What a magnetic scene that is. Or whatever descriptives you're comfortable w. I'll send you the scene. You don't have to read of course. It's a quick read."
Blake Lively: "He's a clown and thinks he's a writer now and got this rewrite and told me he appreciates my passion. That's. It."
Blake Lively: "So having the greatest living story telling unknowingly echo to him how much you love what we're doing, (giving him credit as if he wrote them with me) will go such a long way."
Blake Lively: "You dug a movie out of a grave once already for me."
Taylor Swift: "I'll do anything for you !!"
Blake Lively: "You were so epically heroic today. I recapped every moment to Ryan. I kept remembering stuff – You making s--- up about me and lenses. And referring to yourself as my doll. This clown falling for all of it. But also resisting it. You are the worlds absolute greatest friend ever. I won the lottery."
Taylor Swift: "I WON THE LOTTERY. You are the COOLEST PERSON IN THE WORLD and you like me !!"
Blake Lively: "The most bonkers part to me is him saying to you he doesn't know pop culture made me more mad than anything he's done to me."
Taylor Swift texted Blake Lively on Dec. 21, 2024 – the day Lively's claims against Baldoni became public knowledge.
Taylor Swift: "You won. You did it"
Blake Lively: "It's turning."
Taylor Swift: "And you helped so many f---ing people who won't have to go through this ever again"
Blake Lively: "Remember August?"
Taylor Swift: "Never has a cancellation been reversed so fast. You guys don't understand how rare this is. To have proof and to take perfect steps to bring that truth into the light."
LIKE WHAT YOU’RE READING? CLICK HERE FOR MORE ENTERTAINMENT NEWS
Swift was first brought into the legal back-and-forth in an attempt to prove Baldoni's claims that Lively had taken control of the movie's production.
"As stated all along, and reflected in our client's motions, as well as in messages from Sony discussing Ms. Lively’s behaviors, the evidence does not support the claims as a matter of law," Baldoni's lawyer told Fox News Digital in a statement. "A simple read of the newly released message exchanges make the truth abundantly clear. We remain confident in the legal process and clearing the names of all of the Justin Baldoni parties."
Lively's legal team told Fox News Digital the newly released text messages show the actress had documented her concerns regarding Baldoni in real-time as early as Spring 2023.
CLICK HERE TO SIGN UP FOR THE ENTERTAINMENT NEWSLETTER
In his initial complaint, Baldoni's legal team suggested the actress had used her friendship with the globally famous Swift to threaten him. While working on the film, Lively insisted on rewriting the infamous scene. Baldoni had been hesitant about the idea, but told the actress he would "take a look at what she put together," according to the complaint. Afterward, Lively invited Baldoni to her New York City home, where the actor said he felt Swift and Reynolds had pressured him into using the rewritten scene.
"Later, Baldoni felt obliged to text Lively to say that he had liked her pages and hadn’t needed Reynolds and her megacelebrity friend to pressure him," the complaint said.
"I really love what you did. It really does help a lot. Makes it so much more fun and interesting. (And I would have felt that way without Ryan and Taylor [emoji] You really are a talent across the board. Really excited nd grateful to do this together," Baldoni's text said, according to the complaint.
A spokesperson for Swift previously denied the pop star had any connection to the 2024 film aside from the licensing of her song "My Tears Ricochet," which was featured in the movie's trailer and used in one scene.
Eli Manning implores teams to 'lose with grace' after Miami's postgame antics: 'Doing nothing is OK'
Sadness about losing the national championship turned into frustration for at least one member of the Miami Hurricanes.
After the clock hit zeroes, Canes star Mark Fletcher Jr. was caught on the ESPN broadcast taking a swing at Hoosiers defensive lineman Tyrique Tucker. Players and personnel from both schools got between the competitors before the issue escalated further.
Carson Beck was also criticized for his postgame actions. Beck ran off the field without meeting his opponents for a postgame handshake.
CLICK HERE FOR MORE SPORTS COVERAGE ON FOXNEWS.COM
Eli Manning felt for Beck and Fletcher, considering chaos ensues after such high-magnitude games.
"When the clock hits zero, it's thousands of people running onto the field, and they're bringing out stages. And it's a situation where, you know, normally you get to kind of go on the field and see different people and hang out.
"This one, it's a very different situation. You're kind of almost rushed off. ‘Hey, you gotta get off. We want the champions on here.’ So, I understand the situation," Manning told Fox News Digital in a recent interview.
ELI MANNING TAKES ON YET ANOTHER JOB AS HE TEASES POSSIBLE OLYMPIC APPEARANCE
Manning was always on the winning end of those types of games, going 4-0 in conference championship games and Super Bowls combined. So, perhaps he may not be the best person for advice. But Manning has still lost playoff games in the past and knows what it’s like to just want to go inside.
"It's never easy. You know, you’re working all year long to try to win a championship, and you're finally in that situation. And it's devastating. It's devastating to not win that situation," Manning said.
But he did have some advice.
"Sometimes, doing nothing is OK, rather than acting out, making a big scene," Manning added. "So, that’s just part of sports. You gotta win with grace, you gotta lose with grace and kind of handle both things the same way."
Beck later reflected on his lone season with the Hurricanes, calling it the best year of his life.
"And not because we made the national championship, not because won a bunch of football games or we made great plays or things of that sort. Man, for me, my whole entire life changed," he said.
"You know, 365 days ago, I was in just a really dark place, and I was trying to see the light at the end of the tunnel. It was a really difficult thing. There was just a lot going on, mentally, physically, emotionally, to be able to battle and fight through the roller coaster that life is."
The Associated Press contributed to this report.
Follow Fox News Digital’s sports coverage on X, and subscribe to the Fox News Sports Huddle newsletter.
Luigi Mangione case: If stalking and assault aren’t ‘crimes of violence,’ death penalty vanishes
Luigi Mangione's fate could hinge on a legal technicality as his defense team argues that a recent federal court decision could potentially pull the rug out from under the Justice Department's murder charge.
In the new filing, Mangione's lawyers cited the Ninth Circuit's Jan. 13 decision in United States v. Gomez — which found that a California law on assault with a deadly weapon does not meet the "crime of violence" threshold due to legal technicalities. The panel found that armed assaults can be committed recklessly, meaning the defendant should have known the act carried a risk of danger, not just purposefully, meaning the defendant intended to harm the victim.
In Mangione's case, the underlying alleged "crime of violence" is stalking.
"It’s like a series of dominoes — the only way that the federal government can get to a death penalty charge in their case is if the murder was committed during the course of a violent felony," said Joshua Ritter, a Los Angeles criminal defense attorney and Fox News contributor. "And the reason that they need that is because they need what’s called a federal hook to get them federal jurisdiction. So the way that they get that hook is through the stalking."
POLICE SERGEANT DENIES HEARING LUIGI MANGIONE MOTHER'S ALLEGED DAMNING STATEMENT ABOUT CEO KILLING
Mangione is accused of stalking UnitedHealthcare CEO Brian Thompson across state lines, then gunning him down outside a New York hotel hours before he was supposed to meet with company shareholders for a business conference.
While in this case the alleged stalking did lead to violence, Ritter said that the defense only needs to convince that court that the crime of stalking as a whole can sometimes be committed without violence in order for the legal argument to work.
"He's got a hell of a defense team, and they're making some very interesting arguments," he told Fox News Digital.
The defense told the New York judge that the Gomez decision supports dismissing the murder charge because the underlying stalking allegation does not meet the definition of a "crime of violence."
The Ninth Circuit's en banc decision isn't binding in the Southern District of New York, where Mangione faces federal charges, said Donna Rotunno, a Chicago-based criminal defense attorney and Fox News contributor.
"[The defense] will argue that it doesn’t matter, that stalking doesn’t necessarily mean it will lead to murder, therefore it should not be used to enhance the murder charge for purposes of federal court and the death penalty," Rotunno said.
Thompson, a 50-year-old father of two, lived in Minnesota. Video shows a gunman approach him from behind and open fire before fleeing the scene.
Without an underlying violent crime, the federal murder charge that depends on it should be thrown out entirely — and the potential death penalty with it, according to Mangione's lawyers.
According to the prosecution, the reason for the stalking was to allegedly carry out a politically motivated assassination.
"No other purpose," Rotunno said.
The Ninth Circuit has a reputation for being one of the country's most liberal federal appellate courts, and many of its decisions reach the Supreme Court, according to legal experts. The Gomez decision came down days after Mangione's lawyers and federal prosecutors squared off in court to deliver oral arguments on the issue. His team filed a supplemental brief hoping to add weight to their arguments.
It's unclear how the judge will rule, but other legal experts are skeptical.
"They are the most liberal circuit court in the land," said David Gelman, a Philadelphia-area defense attorney. "They also have the highest overturn rate out of all the circuits."
The filing may be a stretch, he said.
"The argument literally is backwards," he told Fox News Digital. "You don’t stalk someone and say, 'Oh, hey, I’m just having fun.' You stalk someone with the intent to harm."
Mangione is due back in federal court on Friday. He also faces state-level charges in New York and Pennsylvania in connection with the case.
House takes step closer to referring Clintons for criminal charges with Democratic support
The House of Representatives could soon consider whether to refer former President Bill Clinton and former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton for criminal charges for not complying with congressional subpoenas.
Republicans on the House Oversight Committee voted to advance a pair of contempt resolutions against the Clintons on Wednesday after they did not appear for depositions as part of the committee’s Jeffrey Epstein probe earlier this month.
The committee voted 34-8 to advance one contempt recommendation against Bill Clinton, with two members voting present, and another on Hillary Clinton in a 28-15 vote, with one member voting present. Nine Democrats voted with Republicans to advance contempt recommendations against Bill Clinton and three Democrats joined Republicans in the vote against Hillary Clinton.
The Democrats who voted to advance Bill Clinton's resolution were: Reps. Maxwell Frost, D-Fla., Raja Krishnamoorthi, D-Ill., Summer Lee, D-Pa., Stephen Lynch, D-Mass. Ayanna Pressley, D-Mass., Emily Randall, D-Wash., Lateefah Simon, D-Calif., Melanie Stansbury, D-N.M., and Rashida Tlaib, D-Mich.
The Democrats who voted to advance Hillary Clinton's resolution are Lee, Stansbury and Tlaib.
"The committee does not take this action lightly. Subpoenas are not mere suggestions," Oversight Committee Chairman James Comer, R-Ky., said of the Clintons’ no-show. "[Subpoenas] carry the force of law and require compliance. Former President Clinton and Secretary Clinton were legally required to appear for depositions before this committee."
HILLARY CLINTON EXPECTED TO DEFY EPSTEIN PROBE SUBPOENA, RISKING CRIMINAL CHARGES
"They refused," he added.
If the House votes to refer the Clintons for contempt, it would be up to the Department of Justice (DOJ) whether to prosecute. A contempt-of-Congress conviction can carry up to a $100,000 fine and a year behind bars.
Republicans on the committee contend that by not appearing before lawmakers, the Clintons impeded congressional investigations into Epstein and his activities. Bill and Hillary Clinton originally received subpoenas to appear before lawmakers on Oct. 14 and Oct. 9, 2025, respectively, to answer questions on Epstein’s dealings, but even after working with the committee to reschedule, they did not appear for questioning.
COMER RIPS 'PAID DISRUPTOR' AS BRIEFING ON CLINTON CONTEMPT PUSH DEVOLVES INTO CHAOS
An attorney for the Clintons wrote to the committee, calling the subpoenas "invalid and legally unenforceable" and claiming they lacked a connection to a legislative purpose.
Instead, the Clintons offered Comer the opportunity to travel to New York to conduct an interview by himself without an official transcript.
Comer rejected the offer, calling it "insulting."
"The Clintons’ latest demands make clear they believe their last name entitles them to special treatment," Comer said in a statement. "The House Oversight Committee rejects the Clintons’ unreasonable demands and will move forward with contempt resolutions."
Epstein, a former financier, killed himself while incarcerated on charges of sex trafficking minors in 2019, cutting short a prosecution of his crimes.
Epstein was known to have rubbed shoulders with some of the world’s most powerful and wealthy figures, including Prince Andrew, Bill Gates, now-President Donald Trump and the Clintons.
Recent disclosures from the DOJ in compliance with the Epstein Files Transparency Act revealed new images and details of Clinton’s relationship with Epstein.
HOUSE OVERSIGHT COMMITTEE TO SUBPOENA LES WEXNER, 2 OTHERS IN EPSTEIN INVESTIGATION
While none of them bear any proof of wrongdoing on their own, they have raised new questions among Republicans about what the former president may have known about Epstein’s crimes.
Rep. Jim Jordan, R-Ohio, a member of the committee, said he believes the Oversight contempt effort will ensure future compliance.
"In order for Congress to do investigations, Congress has got to be able to bring people in to ask them questions and get answers so that they can do the work to fulfill our oversight function," Jordan told Fox News Digital on Wednesday morning.
Democrats at the markup called Republican efforts a partisan attack meant to target the political adversaries of President Donald Trump.
Rep. Emily Randall, D-Wash., said she would not defend the Clintons but framed the contempt recommendations as an extension of Trump’s political objectives.
"I do not feel it is my responsibility to defend the former President of the United States as a member of Congress, in a separate and co-equal branch of government — just like it is not your responsibility, Mr. Chair, to carry out the political retribution of the current president," Randall said.
'THE VIEW' HOSTS CALL ON CLINTONS TO COMPLY WITH SUBPOENA, TESTIFY ON EPSTEIN
Rep. Dave Min, D-Calif., said he feared the committee’s efforts would continue to weaponize Congress’ investigation powers.
"I'm very troubled by this criminal contempt motion," Min said. "I have deep concerns that this looks like a political witch hunt against Trump's critics, that it will be referred to the Department of Justice."
The Clintons were two of 10 people subpoenaed by the Oversight Committee but are the only two facing contempt threats so far for not appearing.
Despite his concerns, Min added that he also believed the Clintons should have complied with the congressional orders.
"No one should be above the law, including presidents and former presidents, and congressional subpoenas are an important part of that rule of law. And I think the Clintons should be here. I think it's very shameful that they're not," Min said.
With the committee having voted to suggest House-wide contempt resolutions against the Clintons, the chamber will likely consider them sometime in February, according to statements Comer made to Fox News Digital last week.
Michele Tafoya says Minnesota needs political outsider 'with a spine' in Republican Senate bid
Former sportscaster Michele Tafoya announced her bid for the U.S. Senate as a Republican, stating that Minnesota needs an outsider "with a spine who's going to hold politicians accountable."
Tafoya said Minnesota has sustained "a failure of leadership at just about every level," blaming career politicians for allowing fraud to flourish and letting "the far left" turn the state into a "war zone."
"This isn't really right versus left. This is right versus wrong. And I want to get us back to that common sense, that normalcy that built Minnesota and really built this country, instead of the craziness and the corruption," Tafoya said Wednesday on the "Brian Kilmeade Show."
She said witnessing the fraud, rioting and "total failure of the political elites" in Minnesota pushed her to leave her sportscasting career and dive into politics.
HOUSE REPUBLICANS CALL MINNESOTA FRAUD PROBE 'TIP OF THE ICEBERG' AS MORE BLUE STATES FACE SCRUTINY
"These politicians aren't doing the job," she said. "I'm going to try to step up and do it. If not now, when?"
She asserted that Minnesota's problems were solvable, that law and order could be restored and that the middle class could thrive, but that time was of the essence.
"I fear that if we don't do it here in the midterms, it may not get done. So we're going to need everyone to help. We need all hands on deck," Tafoya said.
MINNESOTA DEMOCRATS CRITICIZE DOJ SUBPOENAS, CLAIM WEAPONIZATION OF JUSTICE SYSTEM
Minnesota's most recent Republican senator, Norm Coleman, served from 2003 to 2009.
When asked why she believed she could be elected as the state's first Republican senator in more than 20 years, she responded with a bit of humor from the sports industry.
"Indiana University was not supposed to win a national championship in football, ever, and they just did. So I think the timing is ripe," Tafoya said. "I think that Minnesotans are exhausted by what's been going on. I talk to Minnesotans every day, and they don't want to leave this state, but many of them are considering it."
Tafoya acknowledged she faces an "uphill climb." Nevertheless, she said things are changing in the North Star State.
"There is a large swath of Minnesotans who are unhappy about what's going on in the cities... and an even larger swath that is really angry about the fraud, about being ripped off of billions of their dollars – dollars that were supposed to help children that ended up going to criminals," she said.
"So people, I think, are a little bit shocked by learning this. They see Tim Walz stepping down. They know he's toxic. So there is a change about to happen here in Minnesota, and I want to be part of that change."
Oklahoma man charged with threatening to kill ICE agents, MAGA Republicans online
An Oklahoma man has been federally charged with threatening to kill U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents, "MAGA Republicans" and politicians in a series of comments posted on YouTube, the Justice Department said.
Taylor Ryan Prigmore, 30, was arrested Monday after being accused of posting the comments in several videos between May 9, 2025, and Jan. 17, federal prosecutors said.
"As attacks on law enforcement rise around the country, this Department of Justice will continue to identify and prosecute violent threats against the brave men and women who keep us safe," said Attorney General Pam Bondi. "Hiding behind a screen will not protect you from severe legal consequences."
On Saturday, the FBI was alerted by Google regarding several threatening statements made by a YouTube user alleged to be Prigmore, according to a criminal complaint.
"Based on the content of comments that were uploaded to the YouTube video service, Google believes that there presently exists an emergency involving imminent death or serious bodily injury to a person or persons, and that immediate disclosure to you of certain information is required to avert the emergency," the message from Google to the FBI states.
"The comments have been deleted but are attached to this message for your convenience, as well as information on the account associated with the comments."
Under the username "Adrian Tepes," Prigmore posted threats in the comments sections of several videos, prosecutors said.
"C*vil w*r. I can't wait for the opportunity to k*ll people like you. Tell your friends," Prigmore is accused of writing Jan. 17 on a video titled "Virginians to vote on four constitutional amendments."
NEW JERSEY TWINS CHARGED IN THREATS TO KILL DHS OFFICIAL, ‘SHOOT ICE ON SIGHT’
In another video on the same day, the affidavit alleges, he wrote, "You are late as hell. Prep for civil w*r. Prep for d*th c*mps. Prep for k*illing f*ederal *g*nts."
In another, Prigmore allegedly said he was preparing to kill federal agents and that President Donald Trump "needs to die to save lives."
In other posts, Prigmore appeared angry at Trump for threatening to invoke the Insurrection Act amid violent clashes between ICE agents and anti-ICE agitators in Minnesota, according to the affidavit.
"What is the 2nd amendment for? Ending maga," he is accused of writing. In another, he allegedly urged others users to buy a gun and kill law enforcement officers.
ICE agents have faced a sharp uptick in attacks during the Trump administration's campaign to deport criminal illegal immigrants.
"This individual allegedly made statements that he would kill ICE agents and others. If you threaten to harm law enforcement officers, the FBI and our partners will find you and hold you accountable," said FBI Director Kash Patel. "There will be no free passes for threats against the hard-working men and women who wear the badge and protect our communities."
READ THE CRIMINAL COMPLAINT – APP USERS, CLICK HERE:
Prigmore faces up to five years in prison and $250,000 in fines. He appeared in federal court Monday and was ordered held pending trial.
Supreme Court appears ready to keep Lisa Cook on Federal Reserve board despite Trump efforts to fire her
The Supreme Court appeared poised to give President Donald Trump one of his biggest legal setbacks in office, offering strong support Wednesday for Federal Reserve Governor Lisa Cook remaining in her leadership position -- at least for now.
The justices debated in their packed courtroom whether Trump has broad unilateral executive authority to fire someone from the central bank, despite its special status as a stand-alone federal agency.
During nearly two hours of oral arguments, a majority seemed to agree the Fed's unique public-private hybrid structure limited removal without clear "cause," and that Trump did not meet his legal obligations when seeking Cook's dismissal for alleged private mortgage fraud.
REPUBLICAN SENATOR VOWS TO BLOCK TRUMP FED NOMINEE OVER POWELL INVESTIGATION
The case comes before the Supreme Court on an emergency basis -- with the government seeking to dismiss Cook now, for as long as the courts decide the matter, a process that could last months.
The justices could decide the larger constitutional questions now or give the lower federal courts a chance for a full examination of the facts, with some guidance from the high court on the standards of "for cause" removal.
In arguments, most on the court seemed skeptical of Trump's actions.
"That's your position that there's no judicial review, no process required, no remedy available?" Justice Brett Kavanaugh asked Solicitor General D. John Sauer. "Very low bar for cause that the president alone determines. And that would weaken, if not shatter, the independence of the Federal Reserve."
"Let's talk about the real-world downstream effects of this. Because if this were set as a precedent, it seems to me just thinking big picture, what goes around, comes around," added Kavanaugh, who has typically been an ardent defender of executive power. "All the current president's appointees would likely be removed for cause on January 20th, 2029 -- if there's a Democratic president or January 20th, 2033. And then, we're really at, at will removal."
Others on the bench raised questions of "public confidence" if the president could fire Fed governors without fully explaining or justifying the reasons.
"We have amicus briefs from economists who tell us that if Governor Cook is" fired, asked Justice Amy Coney Barrett, "that it can trigger a recession. How should we think about the public interest in a case like this?"
Cook's lawyer told the nine-member bench court the Federal Reserve System was created by Congress in 1913 as a wholly independent entity, to insulate it from political influence, and from any one president "stacking the deck" with their own nominees.
The first Black female Fed governor claims to be a political pawn in Trump's very public efforts to dictate the board’s interest rate policies and by exploiting what she calls "manufactured charges" of wrongdoing.
GOP SENATOR SUGGESTS FED CHAIR POWELL RESIGN NOW TO DODGE POTENTIAL CRIMINAL INDICTMENT
With Cook in the audience as a show of support was Fed Chairman Jerome Powell, whom Trump has also sought to remove in a broader, ongoing feud with the agency over the pace of lowering benchmark interest rates to spur the domestic economy.
But the Trump Justice Department said he had executive authority to seek Cook's removal, free from judicial review.
The conservative court has allowed much of Trump's challenged executive actions to be enforced at least temporarily -- including upholding firings of members of the National Labor Relations Board, the Merit Systems Protection Board, the Consumer Product Safety Commission, and the Federal Trade Commission, despite federal laws protecting them against removal without good cause.
The justices last month heard arguments in a separate case, on Trump's efforts to remove Democrat-appointed Rebecca Slaughter from the Federal Trade Commission (FTC), which, like the Fed, is a congressionally-created independent, multi-member regulatory agency.
The 6-3 conservative majority in that petition appeared ready to rule for the president when it involves semi-autonomous agencies like the FTC.
But in the Federal Reserve dispute, the high court clearly indicated this institution was different.
In the Cook case, lower courts ruled she did not receive due process when the president tried to fire her.
The current posture of the case is whether Trump can remove Cook -- at least temporarily -- while the dispute continues to play out on the merits.
The "for cause" removal restriction's constitutionality is not directly before the justices, but nevertheless played a key role in the oral argument session.
The Supreme Court could go ahead and settle the competing issues now -- which seems unlikely -- or leave it to the lower courts to continue hearing the appeal, with guidance on how to proceed.
Though its leaders are appointed by the president and confirmed by the Senate, the seven-member board is considered an independent government agency, since its monetary policy decisions do not need presidential or legislative approval. But the agency does provide Congress with regular reports on its work.
It also does not receive any federal funding, and the terms of the members of the board of governors span multiple presidential and congressional terms.
Under law, the Federal Reserve's leadership has a three-fold mandate: "maximum employment, stable prices, and moderate long-term interest rates."
The 12 Federal Reserve Banks are not part of the federal government, but set up like private corporations, and regionally located across the country.
In arguments, most justices agreed Cook deserved some chance to make her case that a dismissal would be improper.
"Why are you afraid of a hearing?" asked Justice Amy Coney Barrett, at one point.
Justice Neil Gorsuch asked: "Let's, just suppose with me, hypothetically, for the moment, that the court read the act to require notice and a hearing ... What would that hearing look like?"
Gorsuch asked if the president could just call Cook into the White House Roosevelt Room. "So just a meeting across a conference table, finish with 'you're fired?'"
But Chief Justice John Roberts repeatedly said a hearing on the allegations would serve little use if her only defense is she made an "inadvertent error" on her mortgage application.
The public session also focused extensively on the standards of "cause" that would permit Cook's dismissal. Several justices suggested the mortgage fraud claims against Cook were not serious enough to trigger emergency action requested by the government to remove her at least temporarily.
Existing statutory removal protections include the so-called "INM standard" -- "inefficiency, neglect of malfeasance."
"The question becomes, is it grossly negligent to make a mistake on a mortgage application?" said Justice Sonia Sotomayor.
Justice Samuel Alito also asked why the case was handled "in such a hurried manner," suggesting concern the allegations against Cook have not been properly adjudicated, either by the courts or by the president himself.
In a statement after the hearing ended, Cook said her case is "about whether the Federal Reserve will set key interest rates guided by evidence and independent judgment or will succumb to political pressure."
The Federal Reserve Act (FRA) says the president can only remove members of the Fed board and FOMC "for cause." The exact parameters of that standard were not spelled out in the original law, and never fully tested in the courts.
Cook -- appointed for a 14-year term by former President Joe Biden in 2023 -- will remain on the job at least until the court decides the current legal questions.
SUPREME COURT TEMPORARILY GREENLIGHTS FIRING OF BIDEN-APPOINTED FTC COMMISSIONER
No president has fired a sitting Fed governor in the law’s 112-year history.
She strongly denies accusations of falsely claiming two homes in Georgia and Michigan as her primary residence to secure better mortgage terms. She has not been charged with any crime.
Cook sued the administration last August in a bid to keep her job.
Just after the court arguments ended, Cook released a statement saying her case is "about whether the Federal Reserve will set key interest rates guided by evidence and independent judgment or will succumb to political pressure."
The next Federal Open Market Committee (FOMC) meeting is scheduled for January 27 and 28, with an expected interest rate decision. Both Powell and Cook are each set to participate.
Financial markets, private banks, businesses, and investors will be closely watching what the Supreme Court does in the Federal Reserve dispute, and a separate pending appeal over Trump's sweeping reciprocal global tariffs.
A written ruling in that import tax case, which was argued by the justices in November, could come at any time.
The Fed case is Trump v. Cook (25a312). A decision there could come relatively quickly within weeks, or potentially as late as June or early July.