Breaking
Supperious.com
Author

admin

Browsing
World News

Dalai Lama says his successor will be born outside China

The Dalai Lama’s successor will be born outside China, the spiritual leader of Tibetan Buddhism says in a new book, raising the stakes in a dispute with Beijing over control of the Himalayan region he fled more than six decades ago.

Tibetans worldwide want the institution of the Dalai Lama to continue after the 89-year-old’s death, he writes in “Voice for the Voiceless,” which was reviewed by Reuters and is being released on Tuesday.

He had previously said the line of spiritual leaders might end with him.

His book marks the first time the Dalai Lama has specified that his successor would be born in the “free world,” which he describes as outside China. He has previously said only that he could reincarnate outside Tibet, possibly in India where he lives in exile.

“Since the purpose of a reincarnation is to carry on the work of the predecessor, the new Dalai Lama will be born in the free world so that the traditional mission of the Dalai Lama – that is, to be the voice for universal compassion, the spiritual leader of Tibetan Buddhism, and the symbol of Tibet embodying the aspirations of the Tibetan people – will continue,” the Dalai Lama writes.

Tenzin Gyatso, the 14th Dalai Lama, fled at the age of 23 to India with thousands of other Tibetans in 1959 after a failed uprising against the rule of Mao Zedong’s Communists.

Beijing insists it will choose his successor, but the Dalai Lama has said any successor named by China would not be respected.

China brands the Dalai Lama, who won the Nobel Peace Prize in 1989 for keeping alive the Tibetan cause, as a “separatist.”

When asked about the book at a press briefing on Monday, a spokesperson for China’s foreign ministry said the Dalai Lama “is a political exile who is engaged in anti-China separatist activities under the cloak of religion.

“On the Tibet issue, China’s position is consistent and clear. What the Dalai Lama says and does cannot change the objective fact of Tibet’s prosperity and development.”

‘Increasingly unlikely’ to return to Tibet

Beijing said last month it hoped the Dalai Lama would “return to the right path” and that it was open to discussing his future if he met such conditions as recognizing that Tibet and Taiwan are inalienable parts of China, whose sole legal government is that of the People’s Republic of China. That proposal has been rejected by the Tibetan parliament-in-exile in India.

Supporters of the Dalai Lama and the Tibetan cause include Richard Gere, a follower of Tibetan Buddhism, and Nancy Pelosi, the former speaker of the US House of Representatives.

His followers have been worried about his health, especially after knee surgery last year. He told Reuters in December that he might live to be 110.

In his book, the Dalai Lama says he has received numerous petitions for more than a decade from a wide spectrum of Tibetan people, including senior monks and Tibetans living in Tibet and outside, “uniformly asking me to ensure that the Dalai Lama lineage be continued.”

Tibetan tradition holds that the soul of a senior Buddhist monk is reincarnated in the body of a child on his death. The current Dalai Lama was identified as the reincarnation of his predecessor when he was two.

The book, which the Dalai Lama calls an account of his dealings with Chinese leaders over seven decades, is being published on Tuesday in the United States by William Morrow and in Britain by HarperNonFiction, with HarperCollins publications to follow in India and other countries.

The Dalai Lama, who has said he will release details about his succession around his 90th birthday in July, writes that his homeland remains “in the grip of repressive Communist Chinese rule” and that the campaign for the freedom of the Tibetan people will continue “no matter what,” even after his death.

He expressed faith in the Tibetan government and parliament-in-exile, based with him in India’s Himalayan city of Dharamshala, to carry on the political work for the Tibetan cause.

“The right of the Tibetan people to be the custodians of their own homeland cannot be indefinitely denied, nor can their aspiration for freedom be crushed forever through oppression,” he writes. “One clear lesson we know from history is this: if you keep people permanently unhappy, you cannot have a stable society.”

Given his advanced age, he writes, his hopes of going back to Tibet look “increasingly unlikely.”

This post appeared first on cnn.com

Keep Reading
By
World News

Greenland is about to hold elections in which Trump has increased the stakes

Elections in Greenland, an island home to about 57,000 people, are usually a local affair.

There is little opinion polling, with only two newspapers in the Danish autonomous territory. Greenlanders mull over politics in private Facebook groups, with key issues in the past centering on the economy, mining, fishing law and of course, its relationship and history with Denmark.

But as Greenlanders head to the polls on Tuesday, US President Donald Trump’s idea to annex the nation has thrown this year’s elections into the international spotlight.

Speaking about Greenland in his speech to Congress last week, Trump said, “I think we’re going to get it one way or the other” – reigniting fears of the United States attempting to take the island by force or economic coercion.

Greenland’s pro-independence Prime Minister Mute Egede responded: “We are not for sale and cannot simply be taken.”

“We don’t want to be Americans, nor Danes; We are Kalaallit (Greenlanders),” Egede said. “The Americans and their leader must understand that.”

In fact, all five parties in Greenland’s parliament have said they do not want the territory to become part of the United States. Their key divisions center more on economic, social and environmental policy than Trump’s pronouncements.

The dominant parties on Greenland’s political spectrum all agree on the desire for independence, with many parties, including Egede’s ruling democratic socialist party Inuit Ataqatigiit, viewing it as a long-term project, requiring years of negotiation with Denmark and further economic improvement.

Denmark ruled Greenland as a colony until 1953, when the island achieved greater powers of self-governance. Then, in 2009, it gained more powers pertaining to minerals, policing and courts of law. But Denmark still controls security, defense, foreign and monetary policy. Greenland also benefits from Denmark’s European Union and NATO memberships.

It is an open question what Greenland’s future security will look like if it votes to break away. Some politicians have floated establishing a post-independence defense treaty with Denmark, Canada, or even the United States, which already has a military base in the Arctic Circle in far northwest Greenland.

The island’s future security is especially important as Russia and China vie for greater influence in the Arctic.

Speeding up independence movement

In almost every election in recent years, politicians have promised to take steps to achieve autonomy. None of them have offered a concrete timeline, though.

But Trump’s aggressive stance has actually given the Arctic nation more bargaining power with Denmark, analysts say, and kicked the independence movement into high gear.

Independence isn’t on the ballot for Tuesday’s election, but the other partner in Greenland’s two-party government coalition, the Siumut party, has said it plans to hold a referendum on independence within the next election period. The main opposition party, Naleraq, has campaigned to sever ties with Denmark more quickly and wants to pursue a defense agreement with the US.

Greenland holds elections every four years, with 31 seats in parliament at stake.

Without reliable election polling, analysts hesitate to predict if Egede’s ruling left-wing coalition will win again.

“Whatever the outcome is going to be, there will be speed, there will be turbo on the issue of independence,” Noa Redington, an analyst and former adviser to previous Danish prime minister Helle Thorning-Schmidt, told Reuters news.

Greenlandic social media influencer and candidate for Naleraq, Qupanuk Olsen, told Reuters: “I strongly believe all this interest from Trump and the rest of the world is definitely speeding up our independence process times 100.”

Meanwhile, amid the influx of international attention, Greenland’s parliament last month outlawed political donations from foreign individuals and anonymous donors.

Danish intelligence services have announced they are actively monitoring attempts by foreign powers to interfere in the elections, citing China, Russia and the United States as potential tampering powers.

With multiple issues at play, “it has never been so important to mark a ballot,” wrote journalist Tôrtia Reimer-Johansen for the nation’s weekly newspaper Sermitsiaq.

‘Greenlanders have felt trapped’

A key issue is how full independence could be achieved and whether it’s economically viable, given that Greenland receives roughly 20% of its annual GDP from a Danish block grant every year – more than $500 million. That’s about half the island’s public budget.

Greenlanders also have Danish passports, healthcare and other Nordic welfare state benefits.

Analysts say any independence referendum would likely take years to implement and require lengthy exit-deal negotiations.

“Greenlanders have felt trapped, not just constitutionally, but also in terms of any kinds of relation, particularly economic relations,” said Ulrik Pram Gad, a senior researcher focused on Greenlandic-Danish relations at the Danish Institute for International Studies.

While Greenlandic politicians have repeatedly signaled that they’re uninterested in annexation, they are open to deals with the United States for rare earth mining, expanding tourism, stronger diplomatic connections and other investments.

Trump said in a social media post on Sunday: “We are ready to INVEST BILLIONS OF DOLLARS to create new jobs and MAKE YOU RICH,” he added, inviting Greenland to become “a part of” the United States.

Greenland is rich in oil and gas, as well as the rare earth metals in high demand for electric cars, wind turbines and manufacturing military equipment.

“They’re really eager to get someone digging, but they want to be sure to have a piece of the cake,” Gad added.

“Under the current Danish constitution and the self-government act, Greenland is in charge of minerals. They can dig up and export whatever that they want, but Denmark is in charge of security. That is kind of a stalemate, in the sense that, if you dig up something which is a security problem, who’s then to decide?” he said.

Security far from the only issue

Beyond security and foreign policy issues, Nuuk’s relationship with Copenhagen has also been fraught with allegations of historical misconduct and colonial oppression of the indigenous Inuit Greenlandic people.

The nation has been rocked in recent years by a birth control scandal, after it came to light that Denmark fitted many Greenlandic girls with an intrauterine device (IUD) in the 1960s and 70s without girls’ or their parents’ permission, as a means of population control. Prime Minister Egede recently called the birth control campaign “a genocide.”

And this election cycle has also exposed frustration over allegations that Denmark profited off a large cryolite mine on Greenland’s west coast from 1854 until 1987 – exploiting the area without benefiting locals.

A University of Greenland opinion survey conducted in spring 2024 – months before Trump floated ideas to control the island – found that more people saw the security threat as high compared to 2021. The survey also illuminated views on Greenland’s desire for greater international cooperation, with locals saying their preferred partners were Iceland, Canada and the Arctic Council.

Even still, people surveyed in 2024 said the biggest challenges for Greenland were the economic situation, cost of living and unemployment.

Those views have almost assuredly shifted in 2025, as Trump argues that controlling Greenland is vital for US national security and refuses to rule out using military force.

But the election is inherently unpredictable. The key issues on Greenlander’s minds may only become clear when results begin to trickle out of local polling stations in the early hours of Wednesday.

This post appeared first on cnn.com

Keep Reading
By
World News

A fiery collision in the North Sea has raised fears of an environmental disaster. Here’s what we know

Fears are mounting of a potential environmental disaster off the coast of Britain after a cargo ship carrying toxic chemicals smashed into an oil tanker transporting jet fuel for the US military.

The crash ignited a huge fire, which is still burning in the North Sea, about 10 miles off the coast of Hull, a busy port and fishing center.

Dozens of people were rescued, but one crew member is unaccounted for, according to British authorities.

Meanwhile, environmental groups have warned of potentially harmful consequences for marine life as questions swirl over how the collision could have occurred in broad daylight.

Here’s what we know.

What exactly happened?

The alarm was raised by the British coast guard at 9:48 a.m. Monday (5:48 a.m. ET) after the Solong, a Portugal-flagged container ship, careered into the Stena Immaculate, a US military-chartered oil tanker anchored in the North Sea.

Video showed black plumes of smoke billowing high into the air following an explosion caused by the crash.

At least one of the vessels was seen engulfed in flames, prompting a dramatic rescue mission involving Britain’s coast guard and Royal National Lifeboat Institution.

The Solong was en route from a port in Scotland to the Netherlands. All but one of its 14 crew members were brought safely to shore, the vessel’s owner Ernst Russ said in a statement.

By Monday evening, an “extensive” search for the missing crew member had ended, the coast guard said.

All 23 crew members aboard the Stena Immaculate were safe, according to a statement from Crowley, the US logistics firm that manages the vessel.

Maritime experts questioned how the collision could have happened despite the safety and navigation features common to such vessels.

“What we need to understand is that there are international regulations that dictate how ships can be maneuvered at sea,” said Matthew Schanck, an emergency response expert and founder of consultancy group International Maritime Search and Rescue.

Both ships should have had at least one crew member on duty in their respective control rooms, he said.

“Somebody should have been in charge of both vessels. And so, the fact that this has happened in quite a well-known area for traffic and shipping movements is quite extraordinary,” Schanck said.

What were the ships carrying?

The Solong was transporting an unknown quantity of alcohol and 15 containers of sodium cyanide, according to maritime intelligence company and shipping journal Lloyd’s List.

Sodium cyanide releases hydrogen cyanide gas, a highly toxic asphyxiant that can quickly prove fatal to those exposed, according to the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). The chemical can also turn into hydrogen cyanide on contact with water.

It remains unclear whether any cyanide has entered the sea.

As a fire precaution, the Solong would likely have carried its cargo at the front of the vessel, away from the accommodation block and engine rooms, Schanck said.

“The hope would be that these steel containers would protect (against) any spill of cargo,” he added.

The Stena Immaculate was carrying 220,000 barrels of jet fuel in 16 segregated cargo tanks, Crowley said in its statement. It is not clear what volume of fuel may have been released because of the incident, it added.

How hazardous are the chemicals?

Experts say jet fuel spills tend to impact the environment less than crude oil spills.

The jet fuel is “light oil” and “is in stark comparison to the images that we see sometimes of wildlife and the marine environment with thick black, crude oil,” said Schanck, who nevertheless warned of an environmental impact.

“The fire is burning off this jet fuel, which is highly flammable on the surface of the sea. (This) is good for the marine environment (but) not necessarily for the smoke that’s produced,” he said.

Mark Hartl, a marine ecotoxicologist from the Centre for Marine Biodiversity and Biotechnology at Heriot-Watt University in Edinburgh, said “most of the jet fuel will evaporate very quickly.”

“Whilst the images look worrying, from the perspective of the impact to the aquatic environment it’s less of a concern than if this had been crude oil,” he said.

However, advocacy groups including Greenpeace UK warned of potentially widespread damage to the environment and wildlife.

“We are extremely concerned about the multiple toxic hazards these chemicals could pose to marine life,” said Paul Johnston, a senior scientist at the Greenpeace Research Laboratories at Exeter University. “The jet fuel that entered the water close to a breeding ground for harbor porpoises is toxic to fish and other sea creatures.”

Oceana UK campaigns director Alyx Elliott said they are “keeping a close eye” on the incident.

The aviation fuel “can cause a huge amount of damage to wildlife as well as fish populations … it can impact breeding seal colonies of which there are many nearby,” she said. “The potential damage is huge.”

What happens next?

An investigation is likely to be carried out to determine what went wrong, according to Martyn Boyers, chief executive of the nearby Port of Grimsby East.

Meanwhile, an assessment of counter pollution response is being carried out by the Maritime and Coastguard agency, the coast guard said.

Crowley, the oil tanker manager, said it is supporting British authorities in their investigation of the incident.

This post appeared first on cnn.com

Keep Reading
By
Politics

DAVID MARCUS: Trump’s Canada tariffs take toll on would-be Conservative Prime Minister Pierre Poilievre

NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!

CALGARY, Alberta – The Calgary Petroleum Club is exactly what you would expect: dark wooden walls, fine decor, and rugged-looking wealthy men in jackets with no ties who can probably buy the whole West Virginia town where I live. This is where I met up with Gary Mar, a businessman and former government official, to see how President Donald Trump’s tariffs are impacting Canadian politics.

Mar served from 2007-2011 as minister-counselor of the Province of Alberta to the United States of America, and still has a hand in national politics.

I wanted to know about the surge in support that the Liberal Party, which chose Mark Carney as its new leader this week, has experienced since President Trump began launching tariffs, and how Conservative Party leader Pierre Poilievre can respond as the Canadian election heats up. 

‘There are two ballot issues,’ Mar said. ‘First, who is best able to deal with President Trump, and second, who is best able to run the economy?’ Obviously, the tariff situation, or as Canada calls it, the trade war, colors both of these issues.

Mar said the key is ‘to understand Trump’s motives for the tariffs,’ and he offered four possibilities: Increase U.S. manufacturing, generate revenue for tax cuts, balance the trade deficit, and/or create leverage for non-trade issues, in this case fentanyl coming over the Canadian border.

As a former diplomat, Gary found the fourth use of tariffs most objectionable, but what he was really asking was, what does Trump want or need from Canada to make this stop? In the absence of an answer to this question, Poilievre is in a dicey situation.

Ever since Conservative Party leader offered support to the anti-vaccine-mandate trucker protest in Ottawa in 2022, he has been viewed in Canada as aligned with Trump. But today, Trump is public enemy No. 1, and Poilievre’s party has bled 20 points in the polls in two months.

Carney and Liberals are already showering the Canadian airwaves with ads tying Poilievre to the U.S. president.

I asked Mar if Poilievre would be better off politically today if Trump were to praise or insult him. He didn’t even hesitate, saying ‘it would be better if Trump insulted him.’

Somehow, this Conservative leader and would-be prime minister has to find a way to be frenemies with Trump, like the younger brother who doesn’t take any guff from the older, to show he can work with Trump while also defending Canadian honor against a U.S. president threatening his proud nation’s sovereignty.

This is because everyone in Calgary, including Mar, has told me that Canadian nationalism, until recently almost an anachronism, is at levels they have never seen before. Trump’s constant trolling about making Canada the ’51st state’ is undoubtedly another factor.

The election, at soonest, will take place sometime in April. If the tariff issue is resolved quickly, it will free Poilievre up to campaign on the issues he wants to focus on, and I ran smack into one of them accidentally in Calgary on Sunday.

As I turned the corner amid a morning constitutional, I saw about 40 or 50 mostly women, with signs demanding Canada no longer allow biological men in women’s prisons. There I spoke with Heather Mason, who was incarcerated when the policy allowing men was introduced. 

Mason, and all of the other women there, had a clear message: ‘It has to stop.’ Poilievre agrees, and has publicly stated he will ban men from women’s prisons. 

These are the kinds of issues that conservatives in Canada, like their cousins to the south, want to focus on. But with tariffs sucking all the news oxygen out of the media, they can’t.

To be sure, Trump’s job is not to win elections for conservatives in Canada, it is to do what is in the best interest of the American people. But surely, on some level, America’s interest is tied to a good, functioning relationship with our closest trading partner to the north.

The scuttlebutt in the Great White North is that Liberals want a new election ASAP. They feel like they have the mojo, so the sooner, the better. Politically they want this trade war, as they put it, raging as Canadians cast their ballots.

‘There are two things that increase Canadian nationalism, war and sports, and we have both,’ Mar quipped, referring to the ‘trade war,’ and the USA vs Canada hockey rivalry’s revival.

In that kind of environment, Poilievre may need to punch back at Trump, but in a friendly way, the way brothers do. But that is a very fine line to walk. How he manages that challenge could define U.S. Canadian relations for a very long time to come.

This post appeared first on FOX NEWS

Keep Reading
By
Politics

Americans have clear opinions on Trump’s performance in his first 50 days

On the eve of his 50th day back in office, President Donald Trump is touting that America is ‘back.’

Trump, seven weeks into his second tour of duty in the White House, highlighted in an interview this weekend on Fox News’ ‘Sunday Morning Futures’ that he and his administration were moving ‘at a very rapid pace.’

’50 WINS IN 50 DAYS: President Trump Delivers for Americans,’ the White House touted in an email release on Monday, as it touted Trump’s accomplishments some of them controversial — since his Jan. 20 inauguration.

But the most recent national polls indicate Americans don’t have such a rosy view of the Trump presidency, and are divided on the job he’s done so far.

Trump’s approval ratings were underwater in three surveys – from Reuters/Ipsos, CNN and NPR/PBS/Marist – which were conducted ahead of the president’s address last week to a joint-session of Congress. It was the first major primetime speech of his second administration.

But Trump’s approval ratings were in positive territory in other new polls.

And Trump, who has long kept a close eye on public opinion polling, took to social media on Monday to showcase his ‘Highest Approval Ratings Since Inauguration.’

While Americans are split on Trump’s performance, the approval ratings for his second term are an improvement from his first tour of duty, when he started 2017 in negative territory and remained underwater throughout his four-year tenure in the White House.

But there’s been a bit of slippage.

An average of all the most recent national polls indicates that Trump’s approval ratings are just above water. However, Trump has seen his numbers edge down slightly since returning to the White House in late January, when an average of his polls indicated the president’s approval rating in the low 50s and his disapproval in the mid 40s.

‘Keep these numbers in perspective. The numbers he’s averaging right now are still higher than he was at any point during his first presidency,’ veteran Republican pollster Neil Newhouse told Fox News.

And Newhouse emphasized that Trump’s Republican ‘base is still strongly behind him.’

Daron Shaw, a politics professor and chair at the University of Texas, also pointed to Trump’s rock-solid GOP support.

‘He never had support among Democrats in the first administration, but he also had some trouble with Republicans,’ Shaw, who serves as a member of the Fox News Decision Team and is the Republican partner on the Fox News Poll, spotlighted. ‘That’s one acute difference between 2017 and 2025. The party’s completely solidified behind him.’

The president has been moving at warp speed during his opening seven weeks back in the White House with a flurry of executive orders and actions. His moves not only fulfilled some of his major campaign promises, but also allowed the returning president to flex his executive muscles, quickly putting his stamp on the federal government, making major cuts to the federal workforce and also settling some long-standing grievances.

Trump as of Monday had signed 89 executive orders since his inauguration, according to a count from Fox News, which far surpasses the rate of any recent presidential predecessors during their first weeks in office.

Those moves include a high-profile crackdown on immigration, slapping steep tariffs on major trading partners, including Canada and Mexico, and upending the nation’s foreign policy by freezing aid to Ukraine and clashing with that country’s president in the Oval Office.

‘He has flooded the zone with his policies and he’s thrown Democrats into disarray,’ Newhouse said.

And pointing to lackluster favorable ratings for the Democratic Party, Newhouse highlighted that Trump’s ‘numbers may be slightly slipping, but it sure as heck hasn’t gone to the Democrats.’

While he’s in a better polling position than during his first term, Trump’s approval ratings are lower seven weeks into his presidency than any of his recent predecessors in the White House.

Shaw noted that neither Trump nor former President Joe Biden ‘started out with overwhelming approval. This is not like the honeymoon period that we historically expect presidents to enjoy…. Historically, the other side gives you a little bit of leeway when you first come in. That just doesn’t happen anymore.’

Biden’s approval rating hovered in the low- to mid-50s during the first six months of his single term as president, with his disapproval in the upper 30s to the low- to-mid-40s. 

However, Biden’s numbers sank into negative territory in the late summer and autumn of 2021, in the wake of his much-criticized handling of the turbulent U.S. exit from Afghanistan, and amid soaring inflation and a surge of migrants crossing into the U.S. along the nation’s southern border with Mexico.

Biden’s approval ratings stayed underwater throughout the rest of his presidency.

‘He just got crippled and never recovered,’ Shaw said of Biden.

There are some warning signs for Trump.

The Reuters/Ipsos poll indicated that just one in three Americans gave the president a thumbs-up on his handling of the cost of living.

Shaw emphasized that inflation, the issue that helped propel Trump back into the White House, remains critical to the president’s political fortunes.

‘If prices remain high, he’s going to have trouble,’ Shaw warned.

This post appeared first on FOX NEWS

Keep Reading
By
Politics

Former Iraqi refugee living in Texas pleads guilty to conspiring to support ISIS

A former Iraqi refugee pleaded guilty to conspiring to provide material support to the Islamic State group, according to the Justice Department. 

Abdulrahman Mohammed Hafedh Alqaysi, 28, pleaded guilty to creating and developing logos for ISIS’ media wing, known as the Kalachnikov team, and sending hacking videos and instructions to ISIS members between 2015 and 2020, the Justice Department announced Friday. 

He also pleaded guilty to providing stolen credit card information and creating fraudulent identity documents for the designated terrorist group. 

Alqaysi, currently a legal permanent resident in Richmond, Texas, will remain in custody until his June 5 sentencing. He faces up to 20 years behind bars and up to $250,000 in fines. 

The guilty plea comes after the Trump administration has moved to crack down on the vetting of refugees. For example, President Donald Trump signed executive orders in January suspending the U.S. Refugee Admissions Program and ramping up vetting of refugees ‘to the maximum degree possible,’ particularly those ‘from regions or nations with identified security risks.’

One of the orders, known as the Realigning the United States Refugee Admissions Program, instructs Secretary of State Marco Rubio and Department of Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem to admit refugees to the U.S. on a ‘case by case basis’ if the alien does not pose a national security threat to the U.S.

Additionally, Vice President JD Vance voiced concerns about the vetting process for refugees in January, and said in an interview with CBS anchor Margaret Brennan that the U.S. shouldn’t ‘unleash thousands of unvetted people into our country.’ 

Specifically, Vance pointed to an Afghan national arrested in October 2024 on charges of conspiring to conduct a terrorist attack on Election Day on behalf of ISIS, according to the Justice Department. 

‘I don’t agree that all these immigrants, or all these refugees have been properly vetted,’ Vance told Brennan. ‘In fact, we know that there are cases of people who allegedly were properly vetted and then were literally planning terrorist attacks in our country. That happened during the campaign, if you may remember. So, clearly, not all of these foreign nationals have been properly vetted.’

A spokesperson for Vance did not immediately respond to a request for comment from Fox News Digital about Alqaysi’s guilty plea. 

Fox News’ Julia Johnson and Lindsay Kornick contributed to this report. 

This post appeared first on FOX NEWS

Keep Reading
By
Politics

Trump-backed plan to avert shutdown heads for House vote

A plan to avert a partial government shutdown backed by President Donald Trump is heading for a House-wide vote on Tuesday.

The House Rules Committee, the final gatekeeper before legislation hits the House of Representatives chamber, advanced the bill along party lines on Monday evening. 

Tuesday is expected to first see a vote to allow for lawmakers to debate the bill, known as a ‘rule vote,’ followed by a chamber-wide vote on the legislation itself later in the afternoon.

It’s a major test for Trump and Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., as they seek to corral a House GOP conference that’s been exceptionally fractured on the subject of government funding.

As of late Monday evening, the bill’s chances of passing are still uncertain, even despite Trump himself making calls to potential holdouts.

Two sources told Fox News Digital that Vice President JD Vance will be on Capitol Hill on Tuesday morning for House Republicans’ regular conference meeting, in an apparent bid to help push dissenters along.

In addition to one staunch opponent, there are at least four other House Republicans who are undecided or leaning against the bill.

With all lawmakers present, Johnson will likely only be able to lose two Republicans to pass a bill along party lines.

Rep. Tim Burchett, R-Tenn., told reporters he was ‘currently’ against the bill during the House’s 6 p.m. ET vote series.

‘I like the fact that it has less spending, but I hate the fact that they push it over to the war pimps at the Pentagon once again, and that’s kind of my hang-up,’ Burchett said, adding that he hadn’t heard from Trump at the time. 

Rep. Cory Mills, R-Fla., and Rep. Rich McCormick, R-Ga., signaled they were undecided, with the latter signaling he was leaning against the bill.

‘I refuse to paint myself in the corner. I don’t think that’s a smart thing to do. But as it stands right now, it doesn’t make sense to say anything is going to be different in September than it is right now,’ McCormick said.

The bill is a continuing resolution (CR), which is a rough extension of fiscal 2024 funding levels to keep the government open through the start of fiscal 2026 on Oct. 1.

Republicans are largely expected to shoulder the bill alone in the House, despite a significant number of GOP lawmakers who would normally be opposed to extending Biden administration-era funding levels. House GOP leaders are confident, however, that it will pass.

Democrats have outnumbered Republicans in anti-government shutdown votes in recent years, but this time their opposition Elon Musk’s Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) has many left-wing lawmakers signaling their opposition to the bill.

But what’s lending optimism to Johnson allies is the fact that two of the measure’s most vocal backers are the senior-most members of the hawkish House Freedom Caucus.

Rep. Chip Roy, R-Texas, the group’s policy chair, told Fox News Digital on Monday morning that a key part of conservatives’ pitch to fellow fiscal hawks is that Trump will likely still move to spend less money than the CR appropriates, including funding that he’s already blocked by executive order.

‘Step 1 is the CR freezes spending, guys, that’s a win; No. 2, no earmarks; No. 3, no giant omnibus; No. 4, we believe the president can impound,’ Roy said of his pitch.

Freedom Caucus Chair Andy Harris, R-Md., cited Republicans’ near-uniform vote on their Trump-backed federal budget bill last month.

‘There were a lot of people in Washington who said we would never pass a debt ceiling increase with only Republican votes, and we did in the House,’ Harris said. ‘I think, similarly, there’s some people who, including some of the Democrats, who think, ‘Well, they’re going to have to come to us, because they can never pass a continuing resolution with only Republican votes.’ And I think we’re going to see the same result [Tuesday].’

But with razor-thin margins, Johnson can afford precious little dissent to still pass the bill on party lines.

At least one Republican is already opposed: Rep. Thomas Massie, R-Ky., a staunch Johnson critic, wrote on X late Sunday, ‘Unless I get a lobotomy Monday that causes me to forget what I’ve witnessed the past 12 years, I’ll be a NO on the CR this week. It amazes me that my colleagues and many of the public fall for the lie that we will fight another day.’

The 99-page legislation was released over the weekend.

The bill allocates an additional $8 billion in defense spending to mitigate national security hawks’ concerns, while non-defense spending that Congress annually appropriates would decrease by about $13 billion.

There are also some added funds to help facilitate Immigrations and Customs Enforcement operations.

Cuts to non-defense discretionary spending would be found by eliminating some ‘side deals’ made during Fiscal Responsibility Act negotiations, House GOP leadership aides said. Lawmakers would also not be given an opportunity to request funding for special pet projects in their districts known as earmarks, another area that Republicans are classifying as savings.

It allows Republican leaders to claim a win on no meaningful government spending increases over fiscal 2025.

This post appeared first on FOX NEWS

Keep Reading
By
Politics

4 signs that show Trump’s foreign policy remains staunchly anti-Russian

NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!

Don’t let mainstream media’s reaction to President Donald Trump’s Oval Office meeting with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy misinform. If Trump’s first-term foreign policy serves as any indication of how ‘pro-NATO’ and ‘anti-Russian’ his second-term foreign policy will be, the record is overwhelmingly pro-NATO and anti-Russian. 

Regardless of criticism – mostly by perennial Donald Trump critics – the president is no friend to Russia and his first term substantively reflects that.

As a former military officer and diplomat who served in Eastern Europe during the majority of Trump’s first term, I witnessed first-hand the tangible, unrelenting and effective anti-Russian and pro-NATO policies he directed American diplomats to communicate, influence and implement. 

The following is a list of specific foreign policies I witnessed and supported under from 2017 to 2020. 

Increasing NATO countries’ military spending to greater than 2% GDP

This policy was of the highest priority for military diplomats serving in NATO countries. The quantifiable policy was customized based on the specific military modernization needs of each NATO country. In the country I served in, Bulgaria, the policy resulted in the Bulgarian parliament approving the purchase of eight U.S. F-16 jets to the price of more than $1.3 billion as Bulgaria’s Air Force required drastic modernization. 

A more modernized and capable NATO (steered by American diplomatic pressure) focused on increased military spending… not good for Russia.

Lethal aid to Ukraine

Under President Trump – and in stark contrast to President Barack Obama’s Ukrainian policy – the U.S. provided lethal aid to Ukraine in the form of Javelins, aka tank killers. Javelins enabled the Ukrainians to gain a fighting chance on the eastern front of the conflict where they were historically losing. Ukrainian military attaches, whom I befriended and worked closely with during my time in Bulgaria, often embraced me and said, ‘Thank you, brother, we finally have a chance on the eastern front.’ 

A more capable and modernized Ukrainian military armed with Javelins… not good for Russia.

Largest expulsion of Russian diplomats in U.S. history

Following the poisoning of Sergei and Yulia Skripal in Salisbury, United Kingdom, in 2018 by Russian agents, Prime Minister Theresa May implored President Trump to take a strong and symbolic diplomatic stance in support of Britian and in stern rebuke of Russia. Trump replied, ‘What can I do?’ 

In addition to 60 Russian diplomats being declared persona non grata and forced to leave the U.S., Trump ordered the permanent closure of the Russian Consulate in Seattle, Washington. On the international front, U.S. embassies all over the world further influenced local diplomatic action, resulting in several expulsions of Russian diplomats. 

Ordering the largest Russian diplomatic expulsion in U.S. history… not good for Russia.  

Sanctioned Russian gas pipeline Nord Stream 2

In December 2019, Trump formally sanctioned all companies involved with the construction of the Nord Stream 2 pipeline, which sought to transport Russian fuel directly from Russia into Germany via the Baltic Sea. 

Trump, in an overarching diplomatic strategy to weaken Russian influence in Europe, began shaping the issue during a NATO breakfast in Brussels in 2018 when he openly stated, ‘Germany is totally controlled by Russia,’ adding the construction of the pipeline was ‘bad for NATO.’ Ultimately the pipeline never became operational, and Nord Stream 2 declared bankruptcy in 2022, laying off all 106 employees. 

Spearheading the demise of Russian fuel expansion into Germany… not good for Russia.

Whenever I hear the baseless criticisms of Trump’s foreign policy – particularly the thoughtless pro-Russian accusations – I wonder if the critics have any inclination to educate themselves on his actual policies, which were anything but friendly to the Russian government. 

As the president accurately stated in his address to Congress, Democrats would not be happy if he found a cure for the deadliest disease; the same can be said of his foreign policy critics. Coincidentally, the only U.S. presidential term Putin has not invaded a foreign country, dating back to 2008, was during Trump’s first term.

President Trump… not good for Russia.

This post appeared first on FOX NEWS

Keep Reading
By
Politics

Abbey Gate terrorist, human smuggling ring leaders, cartel bosses among Bondi DOJ’s first-month successes

Attorney General Pam Bondi spent the first month at the Justice Department arresting ISIS-linked terrorists and violent illegal immigrants, dismantling drug cartels and more, telling Fox News Digital she will ‘continue working day in and day out to deliver on President Trump’s Make America Safe Agenda.’

The Justice Department’s core mission under Bondi’s leadership is focused on fighting violent crime while undertaking key initiatives to protect women’s sports; eliminate diversity, equity and inclusion; and fight antisemitism. 

Since taking her oath Feb. 5, under Bondi’s leadership the DOJ has arrested an ISIS-linked criminal in New York who allegedly financially supported ISIS; arrested the ISIS-K attack planner who allegedly orchestrated the attack at Abbey Gate in Afghanistan that led to the death of 13 U.S. service members; and arrested two illegal immigrants accused of running one of the largest human smuggling rings in the United States. 

In March, the DOJ also secured custody of 29 defendants from Mexico who are facing charges in districts around the country relating to racketeering, drug-trafficking, murder, illegal use of firearms, money laundering and other crimes in the U.S., including Mexican drug lord Rafael Caro Quintero, who had been wanted for and accused of torturing and murdering a Drug Enforcement Administration agent in 1985. This followed a bilateral meeting with Secretary of State Marco Rubio and counterparts in the government of Mexico.

‘This Department of Justice is arresting violent terrorists, dismantling cartel networks, and rooting DEI out of American institutions,’ Bondi told Fox News Digital. ‘We will continue working day in and day out to deliver on President Trump’s Make America Safe Agenda.’

Bondi also warned California, Maine and Minnesota to comply with the federal antidiscrimination laws that require them to keep boys out of women’s sports or face legal action. 

She also vowed that the DOJ will ‘hold accountable states and state entities that violate federal law.’ 

The Justice Department also sued Illinois and New York earlier in February for defying federal immigration laws, with Bondi warning others that they ‘stand ready to sue states and state entities that defy federal antidiscrimination laws.’ 

Meanwhile, earlier in March, ISIS-K member Mohammad Sharifullah — accused of plotting the 2021 Abbey Gate bombing that killed 13 U.S. military members and at least 160 civilians amid the chaotic Biden administration withdrawal from Afghanistan — was extradited to ‘face American justice,’ FBI Director Kash Patel said. 

‘3 and 1/2 years later, justice for our 13,’ Patel wrote on X. 

Sharifullah is charged with providing and conspiring to provide material support and resources to a designated foreign terrorist organization resulting in death and was expected to make his first federal court appearance in Virginia Wednesday.

‘This is just the beginning,’ a Justice Department spokesperson told Fox News Digital. ‘Attorney General Bondi is completely dedicated in her mission to refocus the Department of Justice on fighting crime, prosecuting dangerous criminals, holding rogue jurisdictions accountable for flouting federal law, and removing DEI from our institutions.’ 

The spokesperson added: ‘The DOJ has more to come on all those fronts and more.’ 

This post appeared first on FOX NEWS

Keep Reading
By
Politics

LIZ PEEK: Democrats are squealing over latest Trump plan to cut wasteful spending for one reason

NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!

Everyone supports cutting government spending, until someone actually begins to cut government spending. Then, all Hell breaks loose. 

Why? Because with a $6 trillion federal budget, far too many politicians and activists (and donors and universities and corporations) have their hands in the till. As Senator John Kennedy, R-La., has memorably said, when you start to cut the fat, the pigs will squeal.

On cue, Democrats are squealing. It turns out that they benefit from some of the wasteful spending being exposed by the Trump White House, as monies designated for addressing climate change, for instance, inappropriately flow to leftist think tanks and non-profits. 

Thanks to the work of Elon Musk’s Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), Americans are getting a quick education on the ‘soft’ corruption corroding our government. It is not pretty. In his address to Congress, President Trump listed several idiotic expenditures of government monies; studies on transgender mice (which CNN and others wrongly claimed didn’t exist) received a lot of attention, and rightly so. Those disclosures   may be why a new Rasmussen poll shows two-thirds of the country agree that it’s time to ‘drain the swamp.’  

Democrats disagree; in an effort to undermine Elon Musk and President Donald Trump, they are fearmongering, warning voters that DOGE or Republicans in Congress are going to slash Medicaid benefits. President Trump is on record saying his government will not cut that program, but will investigate fraudulent payments.

House Democratic Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries, recently said the GOP House spending bill would ‘set in motion the largest Medicaid cut in American history.’ New York Representative Mike Lawler disputed Jeffries’ claim, saying ‘show me where in the budget resolution it talks about specific cuts. It doesn’t.’ Lawler is correct, but Democrats insist that the plan’s $880 billion expected cut in spending from programs under the House Energy and Commerce Committee’s jurisdiction, like healthcare outlays, prove the program will be gutted. 

The truth is that simply rooting out fraudulent payments from Medicaid (and Medicare) would go a long way towards providing that sort of savings. Last year, the GAO reported ‘improper payments’ from federal Medicaid outlays amounted to $51.3 billion in 2023 (and Medicare’s improper payments totaled another $51 billion). The Medicaid figurewas significantly higher in prior years, and only fell because of ‘flexibilities granted to states during the COVID-19 public health emergency.’ In 2021, fraudulent payments totaled $103.4 billion and in 2022 totaled $83.1 billion. The GAO warns the improper payments rate is likely headed higher. 

Medicaid spending has more than doubled over the past decade, despite real median incomes expanding by 14% and the poverty rate plunging from 14% to 11.5%. There were 48.3 million Americans living in poverty in 2013 in the U.S.; by 2022 that number had dropped to 41.9 million. Given that Medicaid is mainly a program targeting low-income Americans, the numbers  do not make sense.

One reason that Medicaid has grown so rapidly is that President Obama and then President Joe Biden instituted changes that encouraged enrollment expansion. When Barack Obama took office in 2009, there were 51 million Americans receiving Medicaid; by the end of his presidency, there were 74 million, a rise of 45%. Obama encouraged greater participation by loosening work requirements for receiving Medicaid. President Trump allowed states to reimpose that demand during his first White House term; as a consequence, in part, the number of enrollees in Medicaid barely budged, rising from 74 to 76 million. Had it not been for the COVID outbreak, the number would likely have stagnated under Trump. 

President Biden, in the year before he expected to run for a second term, pushed through rules changes that significantly increased Medicaid’s enrollment and costs, according to the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid services. The CMS estimated the federal cost of Biden’s rules at between $68.5 billion and $134.8 billion over five years. One rule weakens the eligibility requirements of enrollees in part by mandating that state Medicaid programs discount pensions, annuities and retirement funds in determining income levels.

In addition, some states, like New York, have allowed illegal immigrants to receive Medicaid; that has boosted the numbers as well. 

Why do Democrats work to expand Medicaid? Because, like any other benefit, recipients often reward state officials for their supposed generosity, indifferent to the costs. Democrat-run New York, for example, spent $94.6 billion on Medicaid in fiscal 2023, or more than $4,800 for each resident; that was 82% above the national average. The state alone paid out $1,800 per capita on Medicaid, more than double the U.S. average of $835. 

Readying their opposition to trimming the program’s out-of-control outlays, Democrats invited Medicaid beneficiaries to attend Trump’s address to Congress, hoping to highlight their dependence on the program. During the speech, Democrats chanted and waved lollipop signs that said ‘SAVE MEDICAID;’ as it happened, their embarrassing shenanigans – and especially their sullen refusal to applaud a young cancer victim or a hostage brought home from Russia – drowned out their message.

They will not stop, however. Progressive mouthpiece Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, D-N.Y., said on Instagram after the speech: ‘Trump not mentioning Medicaid at the State of the Union is the game. He doesn’t talk about it, what he fears, and he knows it’s dynamite.’ 

It actually may turn out to be dynamite, an explosive issue favoring Republicans. A new survey by pollster Scott Rasmussen reveals that ‘71% of voters support reducing growth of Medicaid spending by removing illegal immigrants and requiring able-bodied recipients to work. 88% of Republicans and 51% of Democrats back the proposal.’ 

If even a majority of Democrats agrees that Medicaid spending has to be curtailed, the mandate for reform is stark.  My view: cut spending that nearly everyone agrees is ‘unsustainable’ and let them squeal.

This post appeared first on FOX NEWS

Keep Reading
By