While the U.S. military has been conducting strikes against Iran-backed Houthi rebels, President Donald Trump and his White House have been engaging in a battle of their own, defending leaked texts detailing war plans about those very strikes in Yemen. 

This week, the Trump administration has fielded a litany of questions and criticism after the Atlantic published a story detailing how administration officials used a Signal group chat to discuss strikes in Yemen, and accidentally added a journalist to the group.  

The group chats included White House leaders, including Vice President JD Vance and National Security Advisor Mike Waltz, as well as other administration officials including Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth. Additionally, the chat included Atlantic editor-in-chief, Jeffrey Goldberg. 

While the White House said that classified information was not shared via the encrypted messaging service, the Atlantic published the full exchange of messages Wednesday. The messages included certain attack details, including specific aircraft and times of the strikes. 

White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt maintained Wednesday no classified information was shared. 

‘We have said all along that no classified material was sent on this messaging thread,’ Leavitt told reporters. ‘There were no locations, no sources or methods revealed, and there were certainly no war plans discussed.’

Meanwhile, the episode has prompted backlash from lawmakers. Senate Armed Service Committee leaders Sen. Roger Wicker, R-Miss., and Jack Reed, D-R.I., said they are requesting an inspector general investigation into the use of the Signal app and as a classified briefing with a top administration official on the matter. 

Additionally, several lawmakers including Rep. Raja Krishnamoorthi, D-Ill., from the House Intelligence Committee have called for Hegseth’s resignation.

Here’s what also happened this week: 

Trump pardons Devon Archer

Trump issued a pardon Tuesday for Devon Archer, former first son Hunter Biden’s prior business associate, who was convicted in 2018 for defrauding a Native American tribe in a plot to issue and sell fraudulent tribal bonds.

Archer faced a sentence of more than a year in prison, but his conviction was overturned before later being reinstated in 2020. His appeal to the Supreme Court was rejected, and so his prison sentence was up in the air prior to the pardon. 

‘Many people have asked me to do this,’ Trump said Tuesday ahead of signing the pardon. ‘They think he was treated very unfairly. And I looked at the records, studied the records. And he was a victim of a crime, as far as I’m concerned. So we’re going to undo that. … Congratulations, Devon.’ 

Declassification of Crossfire Hurricane Russia investigation docs

Trump signed an executive order Tuesday directing the FBI to immediately declassify files concerning the Crossfire Hurricane investigation, the agency probe launched in 2016 that sought information on whether Trump campaign members colluded with Russia during the presidential race. 

After signing the order, Trump said that now the media can review previously withheld files pertaining to the investigation — although he cast doubt on whether many journalists would do so.

‘You probably won’t bother because you’re not going to like what you see,’ Trump said. ‘But this was total weaponization. It’s a disgrace. It should have never happened in this country. But now you’ll be able to see for yourselves. All declassified.’

The FBI on July 31, 2016, opened a counterintelligence investigation into whether Trump, then a presidential candidate, or members of his campaign were colluding or coordinating with Russia to influence the 2016 election. That investigation was referred to inside the bureau as ‘Crossfire Hurricane.’

The extensive probe yielded no evidence of criminal conspiracy or coordination between the Trump campaign and Russia.

Vance visits Greenland

Vance and second lady Usha Vance, along with National Security Advisor Mike Waltz, visited Pituffik Space Base in Greenland Friday, the Department of Defense’s northernmost military installation. The base is home to the Space Force’s 821st Space Base Group to conduct missile warning, missile defense and space surveillance operations.

The Trump administration is seeking to acquire Greenland for national security purposes, and has accused Denmark of neglecting Greenland. 

But leaders in Denmark and Greenland remain unequivocally opposed to Greenland becoming part of the U.S., although Greenland’s prime minister has called for independence from Copenhagen. 

Meanwhile, Denmark has come under scrutiny for its treatment of indigenous people from Greenland. A group of indigenous women from Greenland sued the Danish government in May 2024 and accused Danish health officials of fitting them with intrauterine devices without their knowledge between the 1960s and 1970s. 

Denmark and Greenland launched an investigation into the matter in 2022, and the report is expected for release this year.

The Associated Press and Fox News’ Emma Colton and Brooke Singman contributed to this report. 

Mark Twain’s famous advice to ‘buy land, they aren’t making it anymore’ couldn’t have found a more receptive audience than President Donald Trump, a real estate man at heart who covets a certain piece of property to our north.

Vice President JD Vance and Second Lady Usha traveled to the Island nation this week, visiting a U.S. Space Force base, in the firmest message yet that Trump means business when he says he wants to make Greenland part of America.

Notice that when Trump talks about foreign countries he almost always references the properties he owns there, a golf course in Scotland or a hotel in Dubai. He’s not merely boasting. He’s saying that he has skin in the game and therefore understands the country.

This is not a president who puts much store in intangible multilateral defense agreements that allow the United States to pay for the protection of Danish Greenland. No, he wants the land, not some complicated leasing agreement.

And is it such a crazy notion? We are the nation that pushed Lewis and Clark across the Rockies. We have acquired Alaska and Hawaii, Guam and all the little micro-islands nobody has been to.

The last time the United States grew in territory was in 1947 with the addition of the Marshall Islands and some others, but these last 78 years have been an outlier. Prior to that, America’s appetite for land was almost insatiable. 

So why not Greenland?

The only reason that Greenland is Danish to begin with is that 1,000 years ago some Vikings bumped into it. Since then it’s been too cold for anyone else to bother with it.

And while it ultimately should be up to the Greenlandic people to decide their sovereignty, that is not the only consideration in a world where control of the Arctic could mean control of the globe.

Trump’s interests, which is to say America’s interests, may well be best served by possessing the strategic nation.

More than anything else, what is standing in the way of a big beautiful deal to buy Greenland, something the United States tried to do after occupying and protecting the large island in World War II while Denmark was under German rule, is the post-Cold-War order of the past 40 years.

Under the neo-liberal bromides of leaders with good hair, the West, led by the U.S., came to view newly-minted borders in Europe and elsewhere as sacrosanct, fixed as the firmament, immovable, which runs counter to all of human history, including America’s. 

It kind of worked for a while. There has been no third world war, but even by the mid-1990s, the former Yugoslavia was descending into violent chaos, there is no peace in the Middle East, and Russia has spent decades redrawing its border with Ukraine in blood.

To Trump, and to many Americans who think like him, if countries like Russia are expanding, if China has an eye towards doing so, then we cannot sit on the sidelines, especially if the defense of the free world is conducted on our dime.

In chess, the early 20th century saw the emergence of the hyper-modern style in which the conventional wisdom that pawns must physically occupy the all-important center of the board was tossed aside in favor of powerful pieces controlling the center from a distance.

But unlike chess, geopolitics does not have a firm and discrete set of rules. So one can see why Trump prefers the idea of physically holding space, rather than allowing it to be protected by a vague collection of Western interests.

Because we have been conditioned by the post-Cold War order, it sounds strange when Trump refers to borders as ‘artificial lines.’ But it’s absolutely true: Borders are negotiated, and you might even think of them as a kind of real estate deal.

Nobody wants to go to war over Greenland, but that is no reason not to pitch this deal to the 57,000 people who live there. America has a lot to offer, and maybe Trump can make them an offer too good to refuse.

In any event, as Americans we should not be shocked by or shy about the idea of expanding our territory. It’s not just what Trump has always done, it’s in America’s DNA. 

As federal judges exceed records with an onslaught of nationwide orders blocking President Donald Trump’s orders, some have revisited how each was confirmed, and whether Republicans could have foreseen their rulings or done anything more to block them. 

Sen. Josh Hawley, R-Mo., a member of the powerful Senate Judiciary Committee, told Fox News Digital in an interview, ‘This is why I think I voted against every Biden judge.’

He acknowledged that many of the judges in question were confirmed before his time, given he was first elected in 2018. 

‘People said to me, ‘Why don’t you ever vote for any of Biden’s judges?” he said. ‘This is why.’

‘Because if they’re not faithful to the rule of law, then you can bet they’ll just be looking for opportunities to intervene politically.’

Since Trump entered office, he has faced a slew of nationwide injunctions to halt actions of his administration, which exponentially outweighs the number his predecessors saw. So far in his new term, the courts have hit him with roughly 15 wide-ranging orders, more than former Presidents George W. Bush, Barack Obama and Joe Biden received during their entire tenures. 

Some of those who have ordered the Trump administration to halt certain actions are U.S. District Judges James Boasberg, Amir Ali, Loren AliKhan, William Alsup, Deborah Boardman, John Coughenour, Paul A. Engelmayer, Amy Berman Jackson, Angel Kelley, Brendan A. Hurson, Royce Lamberth, Joseph Laplante, John McConnell and Leo Sorokin. There are 94 districts in the U.S. and at least one district court in each state. These courts are where cases are first heard before potentially being appealed to higher courts. 

Several of these judges were confirmed in the Senate in a bipartisan manner, and some even prevailed with no opposition. There were others who were opposed by every Republican senator. 

One of the most controversial judges, Boasberg, known for blocking a key immigration action by the Trump administration, was confirmed by a roll call vote after being nominated by Obama in 2011. The vote was 96-0 and no Republicans opposed him. 

Former Trump attorney Jim Trusty told Fox News Digital, ‘I don’t think the Republicans ever expected quite the onslaught of lawfare that we’ve seen when President Trump is in office.’

‘The activist nature of some federal district court judges – issuing nationwide injunctions against the Executive Branch on a minute’s notice – is unfortunate and puts pressure on appellate courts, including SCOTUS, to fix these problems,’ he explained.

However, he said the real problem is ‘an army of lawyers’ who he said are trying to ‘bend and twist legal principles.’

‘They are spending their days devoted to stopping President Trump’s agenda even if it means siding with Venezuelan gang members who illegally entered the US,’ Trusty claimed. 

Andy McCarthy, a former assistant U.S. attorney and a Fox News contributor, told Fox News Digital, ‘Republicans could have done a much better job blocking Biden’s judicial appointments.’

He pointed to Biden’s recent time as a lame-duck president, specifically referring to nominees that ‘squeaked by’ due to Republican absences. 

‘Biden’s nominees were very radical and should have been opposed as vigorously as possible,’ he said. ‘These are lifetime appointments and the progressives filling these slots will be a thorn in the nation’s side for decades.’

However, former Deputy Assistant Attorney General John Yoo, made a point of saying, ‘There was no way to know how they would rule in future cases like these.’ 

He argued that senators can conduct their due diligence to the best of their abilities, but they can’t see into the future. 

‘The Senate has the right to reject nominees whom it thinks will interpret the Constitution incorrectly, but nominees also have an obligation not to promise how they might rule on cases once they join the bench,’ Yoo said. 

Thomas Jipping, senior legal fellow with the Edwin Meese III Center for Legal and Judicial Studies at the Heritage Foundation, noted to Fox News Digital that senators ‘can’t use the filibuster to defeat the judge,’ which makes blocking controversial nominees even more difficult. 

‘The only way to actually defeat someone’s confirmation is to have the majority of the votes,’ he explained. ‘If Republicans are in the minority, there has to be at least a few Democrats voting against the Democratic nominee to defeat someone.’

Fox News Digital reached out to former Republican Senate Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., and Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa, to comment on how these judges were able to get confirmed. 

The senators were asked if they were still happy with how the judges were confirmed and their individual votes. They were also asked whether there was anything alarming in the judges’ records and if Republicans did enough to block certain confirmations. 

McConnell’s office pointed Fox News Digital to comments he made over the legislative recess at a press conference in Kentucky. 

‘The way to look at all of these reorganization efforts by the Administration is what’s legal and what isn’t… they’ll be defined in the courts,’ he told reporters in response to the legality of potentially shutting down the Department of Education. ‘I can understand the desire to reduce government spending. Every Administration – some not quite as bold as this one – have tried to do that in one way or another. This is a different approach… and the courts will ultimately decide whether the president has the authority to take these various steps. Some may have different outcomes, I’m just going to wait – like all of us in effect are going to wait, and see whether this is permissible or not.’

Grassley’s office pointed to a previous statement from the senator’s spokesperson, Clare Slattery. 

‘The recent surge of sweeping decisions by district judges merits serious scrutiny. The Senate Judiciary Committee will be closely examining this topic in a hearing and exploring potential legislative solutions in the weeks ahead,’ she said. 

The committee has notably slated a hearing on nationwide injunctions for next week.