The Senate inched closer to striking a compromise on a Homeland Security (DHS) funding deal as the partial government shutdown entered its fourth day Tuesday.

Whether Senate Democrats and the White House can reach a deal this week while lawmakers are out of town remains an open question.

Negotiations between the Trump administration and Senate Democrats were seemingly at an impasse through much of Monday after little activity over the weekend. The White House provided a counteroffer to Democrats’ list of demands midway through last week, which they summarily rejected and, in turn, blocked attempts to fund DHS.

But that changed when Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer’s, D-N.Y., office announced that Senate Democrats had sent their counterproposal to the White House late Monday night. 

Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D., was wary of whether Schumer and his caucus would actually put forth a response, but remained hopeful that negotiations would continue. 

‘We’ll see if they are at all serious about actually getting a solution to this, or whether they just want to play political games with these really important agencies,’ Thune told Fox News Digital. 

He also noted that lawmakers went through the same exercise last year when Senate Democrats slow-walked negotiations during the 43-day shutdown.  

‘It’s wrong, in my view, for Democrats to use these folks as collateral in yet another harmful government shutdown,’ Thune said.

The administration wants to keep the dialogue going, a White House official told Fox News Digital.

‘The Trump administration remains interested in having good-faith conversations with Democrats,’ the White House official said.

The official noted that Senate Democrats’ refusal to extend DHS funding is affecting several key functions under the agency’s umbrella, including the Transportation Security Administration (TSA), the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), the U.S. Coast Guard and the U.S. Secret Service.

‘President Trump has been clear — he wants the government open,’ the official said.

The partial government shutdown, which went into effect over the weekend, stems from Schumer and Senate Democrats’ demands for reforms to Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE).

ICE operations are unlikely to be significantly affected by the lapse in DHS funding, as legislation backed by President Donald Trump allocates billions of dollars to immigration enforcement.

Both sides remain at odds over how far those changes should go. Senate Republicans have signaled willingness to cede some ground but have drawn a red line on certain demands, such as requiring ICE agents to obtain judicial warrants or prohibiting them from wearing face coverings during enforcement actions.

Senate Democrats, however, describe their 10 demands as straightforward reforms designed to ensure federal immigration agents adhere to standards similar to those governing local and state police.

‘There’s not much we need to figure out,’ Sen. Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass., told Fox News Digital. ‘Either you think ICE agents are special, and they get to own our streets with no accountability, or that ICE agents should follow the same rules as everyone else — that’s all Democrats are asking for.’

The State Department’s allegation that China conducted a yield-producing nuclear test in 2020 is reigniting debate in Washington over whether the United States can continue its decades-long moratorium on nuclear weapons testing. 

U.S. officials warned that Beijing may be preparing tests in the ‘hundreds of tons’ range — a scale that underscores China’s accelerating nuclear modernization and complicates efforts to draw Beijing into arms control talks.

Under Secretary of State for Arms Control and International Security Thomas DiNanno said recently that the United States has evidence China conducted an explosive nuclear test at its Lop Nur site.

‘I can reveal that the U.S. government is aware that China has conducted nuclear explosive tests, including preparing for tests with designated yields in the hundreds of tons,’ DiNanno said during remarks at the United Nations Conference on Disarmament.

He added that ‘China conducted one such yield-producing nuclear test on June 22 of 2020.’

DiNanno also accused Beijing of using ‘decoupling’ — detonating devices in ways that dampen seismic signals — to ‘hide its activities from the world.’

China’s foreign ministry has denied the allegations, accusing Washington of politicizing nuclear issues and reiterating that Beijing maintains a voluntary moratorium on nuclear testing.

But the accusation has sharpened questions about verification, deterrence and whether the U.S. stockpile stewardship program — which relies on advanced simulations rather than live detonations — remains sufficient in an era of renewed great-power nuclear competition.

Why small nuclear tests are hard to detect

Detecting small underground nuclear tests has long been one of the thorniest problems in arms control.

Unlike the massive atmospheric detonations of the Cold War, modern nuclear tests are conducted deep underground. If a country uses so-called ‘decoupling’ techniques — detonating a device inside a large underground cavity to muffle the seismic shock — the resulting signal can be significantly reduced, making it harder to distinguish from natural seismic activity.

That vulnerability has been debated for decades in discussions over the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty, which China signed but never ratified. Even a relatively small underground detonation can provide valuable weapons data while remaining difficult to detect.

‘If you detonate a device inside a large underground cavity, you can significantly attenuate the seismic signature,’ said Chuck DeVore, chief national initiatives officer at the Texas Public Policy Foundation and a former Pentagon official. ‘That makes it much harder to detect with confidence.’

Are simulations enough?

China signed the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty in 1996 but has not ratified it, and the treaty has never entered into force. It has maintained a voluntary testing moratorium — a commitment that a yield-producing detonation would contradict.

As China expands its nuclear arsenal and major arms control frameworks falter, the Cold War principle of ‘trust but verify’ is under growing strain.

‘The arms control community should feel thoroughly discredited at this point,’ DeVore said, arguing that policymakers should not assume Western restraint will be reciprocated by Beijing.

For decades, the U.S. has relied on the Stockpile Stewardship Program — advanced computer modeling and simulations — to ensure its weapons remain reliable without explosive testing. DeVore warned that this approach may no longer be sufficient if competitors are conducting live detonations.

‘The question presupposes that we only live in a technical world,’ he told Fox News, arguing that relying solely on simulations while rivals ‘cheat at every treaty they’ve ever signed’ risks leaving the United States behind.

DeVore also pointed to what he described as a growing institutional challenge.

‘Virtually everyone who had direct experience with live testing is now retired,’ he said. ‘Rebuilding that expertise would take years.’

But not all nuclear experts agree that resuming testing is the answer.

Henry Sokolski, executive director of the Nonproliferation Policy Education Center, cautioned that a return to live detonations would be far more complex and costly than critics of the current system suggest.

‘Yield testing isn’t a magic switch,’ Sokolski said. ‘If you want meaningful reliability data, you don’t do one test — you do many.’

He noted that the United States conducted more than 1,000 nuclear tests during the Cold War, building a deep database that now underpins the program. Restarting that process, he argued, would likely require years of preparation and significant funding before yielding strategic benefits.

‘The debate isn’t pro-nuclear weapon versus anti-nuclear weapon,’ Sokolski said. ‘It’s about what’s technically necessary and what’s economical.’

A debate inside the weapons complex

Sokolski said the disagreement extends even within the U.S. nuclear weapons complex.

‘Certainly at one of our major labs that likes using calculations — that’s Livermore — they would say you’re home,’ he said, referring to confidence in advanced simulations and hydrodynamic modeling.

Others place greater weight on empirical validation and preserving the option of live testing.

The dispute, he said, is not ideological but technical — centered on confidence levels, cost and long-term strategic planning.

Allies and the credibility question

The implications extend beyond Washington and Beijing. 

Sokolski warned that the credibility of ‘extended deterrence’ — the U.S. commitment to defend allies under its nuclear umbrella — could come under strain if doubts grow about American resolve or capability.

‘Do they think you’re going to come to their defense?’ Sokolski said. ‘If they don’t, it doesn’t matter how reliable your weapons are, extended deterrence isn’t going to work very well.’

Allies such as Japan and South Korea long have relied on U.S. nuclear guarantees rather than pursuing independent arsenals. Any perception that the balance is shifting could complicate regional stability and long-standing nonproliferation efforts.

The policy crossroads

For now, U.S. lab directors continue to certify that the American arsenal remains safe, secure and reliable without explosive testing. But Heather Williams, director of the Project on Nuclear Issues at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, said sustained testing by competitors — particularly absent transparency — could alter that calculus.

‘If Russia and China continue their nuclear testing activities without providing some sort of transparency, then the technical community might make a different assessment,’ she said.

The debate confronting U.S. policymakers is not simply whether to test, but under what conditions testing would meaningfully strengthen deterrence rather than accelerate competition.

Trump previously has suggested the U.S. should ensure testing ‘on an equal basis’ with competitors, though his administration has not formally announced a policy shift.

Trump in October 2025 suggested the U.S. should consider resuming nuclear weapons testing ‘on an equal basis’ with other powers, and at one point said that if others were testing, ‘I guess we have to test.’ 

The president did not clarify whether he meant full nuclear explosive detonations, which the U.S. has not conducted since 1992,  or other forms of testing such as delivery system evaluations that do not involve nuclear explosions. Any return to explosive testing would represent a significant shift in U.S. policy.

The White House did not immediately return a request for comment. 

Secretary of State Marco Rubio and New York Democrat Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez are both hopeful about becoming their party’s presidential nominee in 2028. They both have a shot. Odds-makers place the New York congresswoman second only to California Gov. Gavin Newsom in the race to be the Democratic nominee, while President Trump, asked whether Vice President JD Vance is his chosen successor, has more than once suggested that Rubio is also in the running.

Recently, both spoke at the Munich Security Conference. While Secretary of State Rubio earned well-deserved applause from policymakers at home and abroad for his speech, Rep. Ocasio-Cortez showed she was not ready for prime time — not even close.

In what may prove a preview of the presidential race two years from now, Rubio and Ocasio-Cortez squared off on geopolitics. For Rubio, the occasion was another opportunity to articulate President Trump’s foreign policy vision — one that embraces American leadership powered by a strong military, a forceful trade agenda, energy independence and a robust economy. And, as we have seen, the Trump White House is not shy about using that military.

Trump has also declined to surrender national sovereignty to global treaties such as the Paris Climate Accord or institutions such as the United Nations and the World Health Organization — bodies he has deemed anti-American. In the case of the United Nations, the recent elevation of Abbas Tajik, Iran’s representative to the United Nations, to serve as vice chair of the 65th Session of the Commission for Social Development — a group purportedly ‘tasked with promoting democracy, gender equality, tolerance and non-violence,’ as one critic described it — proves once again the debasement of the institution’s integrity. Iran, which only recently crushed protests and slaughtered tens of thousands of its own innocent, unarmed citizens, should be thrown out of the U.N., not rewarded. And certainly not congratulated by U.N. Secretary-General António Guterres on the anniversary of the 1979 Islamic Revolution — which he did even as his own Human Rights Council passed a resolution condemning the mass murders.

Rubio’s speech was challenging, calling out European allies for succumbing to climate zealotry, encouraging mass migration, exporting industrial self-sufficiency and investing ‘in massive welfare states at the cost of maintaining the ability to defend themselves.’ But it was also conciliatory, emphasizing that ‘we are connected spiritually and we are connected culturally,’ and reviewing the many bonds that link the United States and Europe. It was an inspiring call for unity and progress, assuring the appreciative audience that ‘our destiny is and will always be intertwined with yours.’

The Wall Street Journal Editorial Board described Rubio’s speech as drawn from Ronald Reagan’s playbook, arguing that Trump’s ‘greatest failure as president is that he won’t, or can’t, articulate his larger principles.’ I would argue that Trump is putting those principles into action, coherently and consistently, and that Rubio brilliantly summarized the Trump doctrine.

Meanwhile, Rep. Ocasio-Cortez delivered remarks at a forum on the sidelines of the Munich conference and reminded us why she should not be allowed anywhere near the Oval Office. Former Vice President Kamala Harris introduced Americans to the magic of word salads — the endless spewing of language that says nothing while helpfully obscuring vast pits of ignorace — but AOC has perfected the art.

Ocasio-Cortez is known as a fierce critic of Israel but otherwise is not known for her geopolitical views, having largely spent her career railing against corporations and the evil rich. But if she wants to run for president, it is important for her to demonstrate some basic foreign policy chops. Hence, the trip to Munich. Unhappily for her, the foray into the world of diplomacy did not go well. Even The New York Times had to admit that she had some ‘shaky moments.’

Asked whether the United States should come to Taiwan’s aid if China attempted to seize the island, Ocasio-Cortez hesitated for several uncomfortable minutes. Even the  description from anti-Trump left-wing Bloomberg, whose reporter had posed the question, said the response was ‘flubbed,’  and wrote: ‘Normally quick to respond, Ocasio-Cortez was at a loss for words, saying, ‘this is such a, a, you know, I think that, this is a, um, this is of course, a, ah, a very longstanding, um, policy of the United States.’’ Hilariously, the piece added that AOC regrouped with what it called a ‘cogent response,’ saying the United States should ‘avoid any such confrontation and for that question to even arise.’ That’s cogent?

The Times, too, admitted the Munich outing ‘demonstrated the relative foreign policy inexperience of Ms. Ocasio-Cortez’, and that she ‘struggled at times to formulate succinct answers’. But the Times excused her incapacity, describing the questions posed as ‘probing and specific.’ Asking her policy vis-à-vis Taiwan is hardly ‘probing’; this issue is, along with our relationship with Israel, fundamental.

Ocasio-Cortez also mixed up the trans-Atlantic partnership, referring to it as the ‘Trans-Pacific Partnership,’ and scoffed at Rubio’s claim that American cowboy culture came from Spain. (It did.) But the corker was another response she gave, enthusiastically endorsed by the Times, about President Trump’s foreign policy, ‘They are looking to withdraw the United States from the entire world so that we can turn into an age of authoritarians that can carve out a world where Donald Trump can command the Western Hemisphere and Latin America as his personal sandbox, where Putin can saber-rattle around Europe.’

Yes, AOC, Trump is withdrawing the U.S. from the ‘entire world’ by trying to end the war between Ukraine and Russia, deliver the people of Iran, Venezuela and Cuba from authoritarian regimes, confront China, protect Christians in Nigeria, strengthen Western defense capabilities and pursue peace in the Middle East. Former President Joe Biden declared that ‘America is back,’ but did nothing to protect our interests around the globe.

Under President Trump, the U.S. is not only ‘back,’ it is also in the lead and moving persuasively forward.

The Rev. Jesse Jackson, a longtime civil rights leader, two-time Democratic presidential candidate and founder of the Rainbow PUSH Coalition, died Tuesday morning at the age of 84, his family said in a statement.

‘It is with profound sadness that we announce the passing of civil rights leader and founder of the Rainbow PUSH Coalition, the Honorable Reverend Jesse Louis Jackson Sr. He died peacefully on Tuesday morning, surrounded by his family,’ the statement said.

‘Our father was a servant leader — not only to our family, but to the oppressed, the voiceless, and the overlooked around the world,’ the Jackson family said. ‘We shared him with the world, and in return, the world became part of our extended family. His unwavering belief in justice, equality, and love uplifted millions.’

A cause of death was not mentioned, but Jackson had suffered from multiple health problems in recent years. In 2017, Jackson revealed that he had been diagnosed with Parkinson’s disease. He was also treated for progressive supranuclear palsy, a rare degenerative neurological disorder. Despite health setbacks that weakened his voice and mobility, he continued advocating for civil rights and was arrested twice in 2021 while protesting the Senate filibuster rule.

Born Oct. 8, 1941, in Greenville, South Carolina, Jackson grew up in a segregated community. As a teenager, he excelled academically and earned a football scholarship to the University of Illinois before transferring to North Carolina Agricultural and Technical College, where he graduated in 1964.

He became involved in civil rights activism as a teenager and was arrested at 18 for participating in a sit-in at a segregated public library. The protest marked the beginning of his rise in the student-led movement challenging segregation across the South.

After graduation, Jackson left his studies at Chicago Theological Seminary to join the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. in Selma, Alabama, and later became a key figure in the Southern Christian Leadership Conference. With King’s support, he led Operation Breadbasket in Chicago, a campaign aimed at expanding economic opportunities for Black Americans.

Jackson was in Memphis in 1968 when King was assassinated. In the years that followed, Jackson founded what became the Rainbow/PUSH Coalition, an organization focused on civil rights, voter registration and economic empowerment. Over decades of activism, he received dozens of honorary degrees and was awarded the Presidential Medal of Freedom in 2000 by President Bill Clinton.

Jackson ran for the Democratic presidential nomination in 1984 and 1988. In 1984, he won 18% of the primary vote. His campaign faced controversy over an antisemitic remark he made about New York’s Jewish community.

In 1988, Jackson won nearly 7 million votes — about 29% of the total — and finished first or second in multiple Super Tuesday contests. Massachusetts Gov. Michael Dukakis ultimately secured the nomination.

Though he never held elected office, Jackson remained an influential political figure, advocating for expanded voter registration, lobbying for Washington, D.C., statehood, and at times serving as a diplomatic envoy, including efforts to secure the release of Americans held overseas.

In 2001, Jackson publicly acknowledged that he had fathered a daughter, Ashley, with a woman affiliated with his advocacy organization. He later apologized.

Jackson is survived by his wife of more than 60 years, Jacqueline; their children — Santita, Jesse Jr., Jonathan, Yusef and Jacqueline — daughter Ashley Jackson; and grandchildren.

Public observances will be held in Chicago with final funeral arrangements yet to be announced. 

Médecins Sans Frontières (MSF), commonly known as Doctors Without Borders, suspended noncritical medical operations at Gaza’s Nasser Hospital in Khan Younis, citing security concerns.

MSF said it made the decision, as of Jan. 20, due to concerns about the management of the hospital and what it described as a pattern of unacceptable incidents within the compound. 

The suspension had not been widely reported at the time, and it was not immediately clear when the decision was first publicly posted.

MSF’s frequently asked questions page, where the update appears, shows it was last revised on Feb. 11.

In recent months, the international medical humanitarian aid group said staff and patients have reported the presence of armed and sometimes masked men, intimidation, arbitrary arrests of patients and the suspected movement of weapons on hospital grounds.

‘While none of these incidents occurred in parts of the hospital compound where MSF works, they pose serious security threats to our teams and patients,’ MSF wrote on its website.

‘MSF formally expressed its strong concern to relevant authorities and emphasized the incompatibility of such violations with our medical mission. Hospitals must remain neutral, civilian spaces, free from military presence or activity, to ensure the safe and impartial delivery of medical care,’ the group continued. ‘MSF calls on all armed groups, Hamas, and Israeli forces to respect medical facilities and ensure the protection of civilians.’

In a statement issued Saturday, Nasser Hospital rejected what it called ‘false, unsubstantiated, and misleading allegations’ by MSF regarding the presence of weapons or armed groups inside the facility.

‘These allegations are factually incorrect, irresponsible, and pose a serious risk to a protected civilian medical facility. The Gaza Strip is under an extreme and prolonged state of emergency resulting from systematic attacks on civilian institutions,’ it said. ‘Under these conditions, isolated unlawful actions by uncontrolled individuals and groups have occurred across society, including attempts by some to carry weapons.’

Hospital officials said a civilian police presence had been arranged to help safeguard patients, staff and infrastructure and called on MSF to retract its claims and reaffirm its commitment to medical neutrality.

The Israel Defense Forces (IDF) said Sunday on X that it has intelligence indicating Hamas is using Nasser Hospital as a headquarters and military post, reiterating long-standing allegations that the militant group embeds operations within civilian facilities in Gaza.

‘For over two years, the IDF and the defense establishment has warned about the cynical use by terrorist organizations in Gaza of hospitals and humanitarian shelters as human shields to conceal terrorist activity,’ it wrote.  

Hamas has previously denied using hospitals or other civilian facilities for military purposes.

A rather interesting foursome teed off for a round of golf in Florida this weekend: President Donald Trump was joined by college football coaching legends Urban Meyer and Nick Saban, and perhaps more importantly, a former rival by the name of Gov. Ron DeSantis.

It would go too far to say that Trump and DeSantis have had bad blood, but there has been a rift since the Florida governor’s 2023 primary challenge to Trump, which petered out in New Hampshire before primary votes had even been cast.

To see Trump and DeSantis spending a few hours engaged in what Mark Twain once called a ‘good walk spoiled’ leads to an interesting question: After the ace Florida governor leaves office next year, could he be a hole in one for the Trump administration?

DeSantis is the kind of guy who Trump could put in charge of basically anything in the federal government and fully expect not just his signature competence, but his calm and no-nonsense manner.

In recent weeks, calm is something the administration has been thirsting for.

After DeSantis dropped out in early 2024, the schism in the conservative commentariat more or less was cleaved, notwithstanding some fairly bitter vitriol that had consumed the previous year, and the governor can still be an important buttress to GOP unity.

There has been a frustration, especially from former DeSantis supporters, of late, that the White House has been too tolerant of extreme views from figures in its orbit. The best answer to that is not to cancel supposed cancers but to bolster the administration’s credibility.

I don’t know what DeSantis’s middle name is, but I would not be surprised to find that it is ‘crediblity.’ With the possible exception of Georgia Gov. Brian Kemp, no leader in America, maybe the world, handled COVID better.

The knock on DeSantis is that, credible though he may be, he’s not particularly compelling. He does not, in the parlance of entertainment, chew up the scenery. I remember spending much of the spring of 2023 thinking, as he geared up for the presidential run, ‘Less talking, more throwing the baseball around.’

But, to be frank, the Trump administration has a sufficient current supply of colorful characters.It needs more competence, more Lee Zeldins and Scott Bessents.

In a column for the Washington Examiner this week, Byron York asked whether it is time for Trump to shake up his cabinet. Wherever one stands on that interesting political question, you do have to ask, who could the Senate confirm as a new member?

Let’s say Attorney General Pam Bondi, or Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem, who have been lightning rods for criticism, leave their positions. I’m not advocating for that, but should it happen, DeSantis is one of a few prominent Republicans who could sail through Senate confirmation.

The subtext to all of this, including the round of golf that I’m just going to go ahead and assume Trump won, is the 2028 presidential election, in which DeSantis is one of only a handful of figures who rate among the public.

The polls, early though they are, show Vice President JD VanceJD Vance with a big lead, especially given that Secretary of State Marco Rubio has all but endorsed him. But for now, DeSantis is the most viable GOP option who is not already in the administration or related to Trump.

While politically this may be a reason for the Florida governor to eschew an administration position, to remain the Republican who isn’t seen in the Oval Office day after day fawning over Trump, a national position could be great for him, and for the party.

And honestly, where is DeSantis supposed to go after leaving office, if not Washington?

Whether the 19th hole of this golf outing with Trump and football royalty turns out to be a position in the administration or not, Republicans should rejoice to see these two conservative leaders hanging out.

Unity must be the watchword for Republicans both in this year’s midterms and in the presidential race of 2028. In both cases, DeSantis can be a voice for common sense, competence and American values.

America needs all the good leadership it can get in Washington, and DeSantis is the poster child for it. Trump should seriously consider giving him a prominent national platform.

Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., vowed Sunday that Senate Democrats will block the latest GOP-backed effort to require proof of citizenship to vote.

‘We will not let it pass in the Senate,’ Schumer told CNN’s Jake Tapper. ‘We are fighting it tooth and nail. It’s an outrageous proposal that is, you know, that shows the sort of political bias of the MAGA right. They don’t want poor people to vote. They don’t want people of color to vote because they often don’t vote for them.’

Schumer’s comments came after Tapper pressed him on his opposition, noting that polling shows roughly 83% of Americans support some form of voter identification. That figure comes from a Pew Research poll published last year that found 71% of Democratic voters surveyed supported presenting an ID to vote.

Still, Schumer and most Senate Democrats have criticized the Safeguarding American Voter Eligibility (SAVE) America Act, which passed the House last week and is expected to face a vote in the Senate.

The bill would require proof of citizenship to register to vote and would establish a system for state election officials to share information with federal authorities to verify voter rolls. It would also allow the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) to pursue immigration cases if noncitizens are found listed as eligible voters.

Schumer and his caucus have panned the bill as voter suppression targeting poorer Americans and minority groups.

‘What they are proposing in this so-called SAVE Act is like Jim Crow 2.0,’ Schumer said. ‘They make it so hard to get any kind of voter ID that more than 20 million legitimate people, mainly poorer people and people of color, will not be able to vote under this law.’

Without support from Senate Democrats — save for a possible defection from Sen. John Fetterman, D-Pa. — the bill is likely to fail.

The only way around that would be eliminating the Senate’s 60-vote filibuster threshold — a move Republicans oppose — or forcing a so-called talking filibuster that could require hours of debate and stall other Senate business.

Schumer also pushed back on comments from DHS Secretary Kristi Noem, who earlier this week said elections ‘may be one of the most important things that we need to make sure we trust, is reliable, and that when it gets to Election Day that we’ve been proactive to make sure that we have the right people voting, electing the right leaders to lead this country.’

The comments come as Senate Democrats and the White House negotiate funding for DHS, which has been shut down since midnight Friday.

Part of those negotiations includes Democrats’ demand that Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents be kept away from several areas, including schools and polling places.

‘That’s a load of bull,’ Schumer said. ‘They show no evidence of voter fraud. They show there’s so little in the country. And to have ICE agents, these thugs, be by the polling places, that just flies in the face of how democracy works, of how we’ve had elections for hundreds of years, very successfully.’

Former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton clashed with a Czech political leader at the Munich Security Conference in Germany on Saturday.

Clinton was speaking during a panel on the state of the West where she heavily criticized President Donald Trump for his dealings with Europe. Petr Macinka, a Czech deputy prime minister, defended the Trump administration as Clinton repeatedly mocked his statements and tried to speak over him.

‘First, I think you really don’t like him,’ Macinka said as he began to respond to Clinton’s Trump-bashing.

‘You know, that is absolutely true,’ Clinton said. ‘But not only do I not like him, but I don’t like what he’s actually doing to the United States and the world, and I think you should take a hard look at it if you think there is something good that will come of it.’

‘Well, what Trump is doing in America, I think that it is a reaction. Reaction for some policies that really went too far, too far from the regular people,’ Macinka said as Clinton interjected to ask for examples.

Macinka referenced ‘woke’ ideologies, gender theories and cancel culture that ran rampant throughout the U.S. in recent years.

Clinton then mocked him, suggesting he was opposed to ‘women getting their rights.’

Macinka then rebuffed her hostility, saying he can tell he was making her ‘nervous.’

The exchange came during the same panel where Clinton discussed immigration in the U.S., admitting that it had gone ‘too far.’

‘It went too far, it’s been disruptive and destabilizing, and it needs to be fixed in a humane way with secure borders that don’t torture and kill people and how we’re going to have a strong family structure because it is at the base of civilization,’ she added.

Clinton acknowledged that there are places where a physical barrier is appropriate but opposed large-scale expansion of a border wall during her 2016 presidential campaign.

At the time, she supported then-President Barack Obama’s executive actions that deferred immigration enforcement against millions of children and parents in the country illegally and wanted to end the practice of family detention.

Clinton also planned on continuing Obama’s policy of deporting violent criminals, but wanted to scale back immigration raids, which she said at the time produced ‘unnecessary fear and disruption in communities,’ Fox News Digital previously reported.

Fox News’ Ashley DiMella contributed to this report.

The Trump administration is weighing involvement in the case of a protester who was fined for burning a Quran outside the Turkish Consulate in London, as U.K. prosecutors look to reinstate his overturned conviction, according to reports.

Officials are said to be discussing granting 51-year-old Hamit Coskun refugee status if the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) wins its appeal, with a senior U.S. administration official telling The Telegraph the case is one of several ‘the administration has made note of.’

Coskun, of Armenian-Kurdish descent, had initially sought asylum in the U.K. from Turkey, where he says Islamic extremists ‘destroyed’ his family’s life and where he was jailed for protesting Islamist governance.

On Feb. 13, 2025, he traveled to the Turkish Consulate in London and set fire to a copy of the Quran while shouting slogans including ‘Islam is [the] religion of terrorism’ and ‘f— Islam.’

There he was attacked by Moussa Kadri, a passerby who chased him with a knife, kicked him and spat on him.

Kadri later received a suspended prison sentence after being convicted of assault and having a bladed article in a public place.

Initially charged with harassing the ‘religious institution of Islam,’ Coskun’s case drew intervention from the National Secular Society and the Free Speech Union, who argued prosecutors were effectively reviving blasphemy laws already abolished in 2008.

Coskun was convicted of a religiously aggravated public order offense and fined in June 2025.

That October, Coskun’s conviction was overturned when a judge ruled that while burning a Quran was ‘desperately upsetting and offensive’ to many Muslims, the right to free expression ‘must include the right to express views that offend, shock or disturb.’

The CPS is now seeking to reverse that decision at London’s High Court, with Coskun telling The Telegraph that if the appeal goes against him, he may be forced ‘to flee’ the country.

‘For me, as the victim of Islamic terrorism, I cannot remain silent. I may be forced to flee the UK and move to the USA, where President Trump has stood for free speech and against Islamic extremism,’ he told the outlet.

‘If I have to do so, then, to me, the UK will have effectively fallen to Islamism and the speech codes that it wishes to impose on the non-Muslim world,’ he added.

President Donald Trump and the U.S. administration have already criticized the U.K. and European governments over increased restrictions on expression.

In 2025, Trump slammed the U.K.’s laws around online speech, saying ‘strange things are happening’ there and that it was ‘not a good thing.’

At the Munich Security Conference in 2025, Vice President JD Vance also said, ‘In Britain and across Europe, free speech, I fear, is in retreat.’

Fox News Digital has reached out to the Department of State for comment.

Iran claims it is open to compromise with the U.S. on a nuclear deal if the administration is willing to discuss lifting sanctions, a senior Iranian official said Sunday.

Majid Takht-Ravanchi, Iran’s deputy foreign minister, also said in an interview that the ball was ‘in America’s court to prove that they want to do a deal,’ adding: ‘If they are sincere, I’m sure we will be on the road to an agreement.’

‘We are ready to discuss this and other issues related to our program if they are ready to talk about sanctions,’ Takht-Ravanchi told the BBC.

Takht-Ravanchi’s comments came as Iran’s top diplomat traveled to Geneva for a second round of indirect talks with the U.S. delegation.

Abbas Araghchi left for the Swiss city following an initial round of negotiations last week with Oman again mediating the next round of talks, according to Iranian state media and the Associated Press.

U.S. officials, however, have emphasized that Iran — not the U.S. — is holding up progress in negotiations.

Secretary of State Marco Rubio said Feb. 14 that President Donald Trump would prefer to reach an agreement but warned it was ‘very hard to do’ one with Iran.

Past diplomatic efforts had collapsed in 2025 after Israel launched what became a 12-day war with Iran and U.S. strikes on Iranian nuclear sites.

But on Sunday, Takht-Ravanchi pointed to Tehran’s offer to dilute its stockpile of uranium enriched to 60% purity as evidence of its willingness to compromise, the BBC reported.

Asked whether Iran would ship its stockpile of more than 400 kilograms of highly enriched uranium abroad, as it did under the 2015 deal, Takht-Ravanchi said it was ‘too early to say what will happen in the course of negotiations.’

One of Iran’s main demands is that talks focus on the nuclear issue. ‘Our understanding is that they have come to the conclusion that if you want to have a deal you have to focus on the nuclear issue,’ Takht-Ravanchi said.

Takht-Ravanchi also said the ‘issue of zero enrichment is not an issue anymore and as far as Iran is concerned, it is not on the table anymore.’

Trump has since threatened further military action if a deal to curb Iran’s nuclear program cannot be reached.

The U.S. has also reinforced its military presence in the region amid heightened tensions and after spiraling protests across the country in December left thousands reportedly dead at the hands of the clerical regime.