For Americans wondering about the future of China and its relationship with the West, the latest verdict in the Jimmy Lai case proves an ominous harbinger of Hong Kong’s continued slide towards authoritarianism. Lai, the self-made billionaire, media entrepreneur and pro-democracy activist, has been held prisoner of the Chinese Communist Party for five years under Hong Kong’s National Security Law. He was finally convicted Dec. 14 on trumped-up charges of sedition.    

This verdict, handed down in 855 pages of meaningless gobbledygook, is Lai’s second conviction during his state-sponsored persecution since Hong Kong’s 2019 pro-democracy protests. Lai was previously found guilty of lease violations in connection with Apple Daily, his popular former newspaper that was closed by the Chinese government in 2021, and sentenced to 69 months in prison. The latest charges, for which Lai will be sentenced in early January, carry a penalty of 10 years to life in prison.   

Of course, these nuances and timelines are meaningless; Lai has been imprisoned since December 2020, with his case delayed, extended, postponed, appealed and otherwise stage-managed in accordance with the wishes of the CCP. Lai was also denied the lawyers of his choice. Hong Kong will likely throw the book at him in January, and Lai – already in failing health due to the apparently inhumane conditions of his solitary confinement – will face eventual death in prison. It’s a grim birthday present for Lai, who turned 78 recently.  

How did we get here? Lai knows why, describing himself as a ‘troublemaker, but one with a good conscience.’ ‘The establishment hates my guts,’ Lai says, and you’d have to say he’s earned that hatred from a leadership in Beijing and now Hong Kong that doesn’t tolerate dissent. Having participated in Hong Kong’s pro-democracy protests in 2019, supported the Umbrella Movement in 2014, and expressed public concern in the aftermath of 1989’s Tiananmen Square massacre, Lai has long been a thorn in the side of the CCP.   

Lai’s irreverent, pro-free-speech publications, Apple Daily and Next Magazine, frequently reported unwelcome facts, challenged the status quo and asked hard questions of Chinese officialdom amid growing state censorship. It was Lai’s courageous, decades-long commitment to democratic values that led my organization, The Fund for American Studies, to honor him in 2022 with the Kenneth Y. Tomlinson Award for Courageous Journalism.

Among all his causes, Lai’s most dear was the protection of his adopted city, Hong Kong. Having escaped there as a child after growing up in 1950s mainland China, Lai knew firsthand that Communist regimes deprive their people of fundamental freedoms. Despite China’s treaty agreement with the U.K. and the CCP’s ‘one country, two systems’ commitment, which guaranteed Hong Kong’s autonomy until at least 2047, Lai foresaw that the CCP would accelerate its ultimate takeover of Hong Kong.   

The mainland’s creeping authoritarianism is why my organization ended its program at the University of Hong Kong after 2019. We foresaw the coming crackdown in Hong Kong, and this week’s verdict is one more nail in the coffin of Hong Kong’s once internationally respected legal system. In a chilling coincidence, Hong Kong’s Democratic Party, the city’s largest opposition group, also voted to disband on the eve of the verdict. Unfortunately, our worries (and Lai’s) about Hong Kong’s future have been proven true.

Where do we go from here? First, Western leaders must continue to seek Lai’s release on humanitarian grounds. U.K. Prime Minister Keir Starmer plans to visit China next month, and his government has said that freeing Lai (who is a British citizen) is a priority. This week, President Donald Trump also asked Chinese leader Xi Jinping to free Lai. With Lai’s formal conviction now public, it may open up space for a diplomatic resolution. Now is the time to ramp up the pressure for his release.  

Second, the West must remain vigilant in the face of China’s continued belligerence toward its neighbors and its suppression of values such as freedom of speech, religious liberty and press freedom. These are values under siege worldwide. Journalists, religious figures and democracy advocates have been killed or imprisoned for exercising these rights. Jimmy Lai is an example of incredible bravery and commitment to democratic values, but his imprisonment is also a sobering warning of the dangers of authoritarianism.  

If the Department of Justice (DOJ) wanted to release every Jeffrey Epstein-related document they had on file, they had the firepower to do so, a former assistant U.S. attorney argued.

The DOJ has faced bipartisan criticism over its initial release of heavily redacted Epstein files, which lawmakers argue fell short of the requirements of a recently passed transparency law.

‘The Department of Justice has all the resources in the world, right? I mean if they wanted to put 1,000 lawyers on this to review the documents and get them ready for the production, they could have,’ Sarah Krissoff said.

‘And they don’t appear to have done that,’ she added.

The DOJ did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

Krissoff, who worked as a prosecutor for almost 14 years in the Southern District of New York, described key differences between the Epstein Files and the normal redaction process that attorneys grapple with. Those distinctions make it unclear who would have had final say about the information the DOJ released on Friday as the agency attempted to follow through on the requirements laid out by the Epstein Files Transparency Act. 

That law, passed by Congress last month and signed by President Donald Trump on Nov. 19, gave the DOJ just 30 days to make its documentation of Epstein public. It included some exceptions for protecting the identity of victims.

Despite the thousands of files that became publicly available at the end of last week, the DOJ’s first trove sparked criticism from some lawmakers and viewers online outraged that the department hadn’t released them all at once.

‘They are hiding a lot of documents. That would be very helpful in our investigation,’ Rep. Suhas Subramanyam, D-Va., a member of the House Oversight Committee, told CNN on Monday morning. 

Although she remains skeptical of the department’s effort, Krissoff noted that what the DOJ’s been asked to do goes far outside the norm for disclosures.

‘There is no real mechanism in the law that the public can just access documents because they’re interested in them, right? In this case, this law is requiring the DOJ to make these things public because so many members of Congress are interested in this issue,’ Krissoff said.

In the cases she’s been a part of, Krissoff said redactions usually came down to meticulous negotiations between the prosecution and the defense. Sometimes deliberations drilled into individual sentences or words.

‘This situation is a little different because it’s unclear, you know, who is still working on this from the original case team. And so, the question is: who at the Department of Justice reviewed these in connection with the redactions here?’ Krissoff said.

She said whole case files rarely get released to the public beyond what shows up in court filings — and what’s there usually serves the narrow purposes of the prosecution. In Epstein’s case, the public’s interests extend beyond any potential conviction of Epstein himself. Epstein died in 2019 while incarcerated on suspicion of sex-trafficking minors. His death, ruled a suicide, cut short his prosecution and left behind questions about whether he facilitated illegal sexual encounters for his vast social network. 

Photos released by the DOJ last week lack context and do not, on their own, implicate anyone depicted in them of wrongdoing. 

‘The case file often implicates many other people that are not charged in the crimes. So, there may be 15 people charged in a drug ring. You’ve only charged one or two people; you don’t want to impugn those other people who have not been charged by releasing information showing their involvement in this drug ring,’ Krissoff said.

‘The last thing you want to do is put that neighbor’s information or his name or even his statement out there,’ Krissoff said.

She believes that there’s a danger in forcing disclosure of an ongoing case simply because of great public interest and setting a precedent for that to become a regular occurrence. In her view, it could disrupt ongoing investigations of the future that draw intense public interest.

The DOJ said it will continue to release its documents on Epstein on a rolling basis. It has not announced when they expect to continue their release of the Epstein files.

While next year’s midterms will determine whether Republicans can keep control of Congress after winning big in 2024, there are also a slate of gubernatorial elections, several that are toss-ups, which could have equally wide-ranging impacts.

Three states with Democratic Party governors, Arizona, Michigan and Wisconsin, are currently listed as ‘toss up’ races across multiple high-profile election polling groups, such as The Cook Political Report and Sabato’s Crystal Ball. Meanwhile, Republicans will have to defend the governorship in Georgia and Nevada, two other races considered a ‘toss up’ by some, while others are giving Republicans a slight advantage. For example, Nevada and Georgia are considered a ‘toss up’ in The Cook Political Report’s latest polling that came out Dec. 20, but they are listed as ‘lean Republican’ by Sabato’s Crystal Ball. 

‘Whether it’s Aaron Ford vacationing instead of doing his job in Nevada, Katie Hobbs tanking Arizona’s economy, or Jocelyn Benson letting non-residents vote in Michigan, Democrats are not sending their best to gubernatorial races next year,’ Regional Communications Director Delanie Bomar told Fox News Digital. ‘Republicans have a track record of winning these states and we will do so again next year.’

In Arizona, Democrat Governor Katie Hobbs will have to maintain her seat against long-time House Reps. Andy Biggs, R-Ariz., and David Schweikert, R-Ariz., as well as attorney Karrin Taylor Robson, who lost to Kari Lake in the GOP primary for governor in 2022.

In 2024, Hobbs was investigated for involvement in an alleged ‘pay-for-play’ scheme after a report revealed a group home business that looks after vulnerable children was approved for a rate hike after it donated big to her inauguration and the Arizona Democratic Party. However, Hobbs has pushed back against the allegations, arguing she was not personally involved in the rate decision. The controversy is still under criminal investigation by both the Arizona attorney general and the Maricopa County attorney, and the Arizona House also launched its own inquiry last month into the matter. Hobbs, who has had a lengthy political career dating back to 2010, has been criticized for how she treats her staff and who she hires, but also has a history of being able to rake in campaign funds and run successful elections. 

In Michigan, Democratic Party Gov. Gretchen Whitmer will be term-limited out. Her secretary of State, Jocelyn Benson, is among the front-runners to take over Whitmer’s seat. Earlier this year, Fox News Digital reported about Benson’s attendance at a ‘unity’ dinner that featured decor threatening to assassinate President Donald Trump and equating his supporters with Nazis. Republican Michigan lawmakers have called on the Trump Justice Department to monitor Michigan’s 2026 elections, arguing there is an ‘inherent’ conflict associated with Benson, who is Michigan’s top election official, running while overseeing the state’s elections.  

Wisconsin’s Democratic Party Gov. Tony Evers announced his retirement in July, indicating he will not seek a third term under the state’s unlimited term limit rules. As a result, the seat is up for grabs, with House Rep. Tom Tiffany, R-Wisc., and Wisconsin County Executive Josh Schoemann among the GOP front-runners. On the Democrat side, former Lt. Gov. Mandela Barnes, current Lt. Gov. Sara Rodriguez and Wisconsin County Executive David Crowley find themselves at the top of the heap.

Courtney Alexander, a spokesperson for the Republican Governor’s Association, pointed out how voters view governors’ races ‘through a unique prism’ following Trump’s first year of his second term. ‘They see that Republican-led states are more affordable and safer, while Democrat-led states are among the most expensive and have allowed their cities to become hellscapes of crime and homelessness,’ Alexander told Fox News Digital. ‘Americans have already voted with their feet, and that tells us everything we need to know about what to expect in 2026 — Democrats running at the gubernatorial level have records they cannot defend.’

Georgia and Nevada will have to be defended by Republicans if they hope to add to their GOP gubernatorial headcount. Georgia, which historically has been a Republican stronghold, has seen Democratic Party wins in the last several years, making it a place for hard-fought elections. Current Republican Gov. Brian Kemp is being term-limited. It was being mulled he might go to the U.S. Senate, but Kemp later waved off the rumors.

In 2026, there will be a total of 36 gubernatorial elections held on Nov. 3, 2026. The primaries for these races will be held at various times ahead of the scheduled general election date.  

While not seen as a tough race for Republicans, Florida’s primary race has the ingredients for something interesting. The Sunshine State’s current GOP governor, Ron DeSantis, will be term-limited, and it is unclear who DeSantis desires to be his replacement after President Donald Trump endorsed GOP Rep. Byron Donalds, R-Fla. Thus far, DeSantis has not embraced Donalds as the best person to take over his office, like Trump. Rather, DeSantis has publicly hinted his wife, Casey DeSantis, could be a formidable contender. ‘She would do better than me,’ DeSantis told reporters earlier this year while discussing speculation about Florida’s first lady succeeding him. ‘There’s no question about that.’

Fox News Digital’s Michael Dorgan contributed to this report.

PHOENIX, Ariz. – While it is true that Erika Kirk is head of one of the nation’s leading conservative groups, at one point this weekend at Turning Point USA’s AmericaFest, she made it clear that she holds an even more important title: mother.

After two days of infighting at the conference between some of its top stars, Kirk smiled on stage Friday night and said, ‘Well, say what you want about AmFest, but it’s definitely not boring. Feels like a Thanksgiving dinner where your family’s hashing out the family business.’

This is the best and most positive way to look at the squabbling in Phoenix between Ben Shapiro, Tucker Carlson, Megyn Kelly and other right-wing celebrities. It has been mostly over Israel, and it was a sideshow few attendees expected or particularly wanted.

Brent, in his 50s and from Oklahoma City, came to AmFest with his two sons.

‘I was in there the night Ben and Tucker went at each other, at one point, I told my wife, I’m going out for some air, I just felt like I needed to escape to the real world, you know?’ he told me over a smoke.

I did know. 

Along with sniping over Israel and antisemitism, the question of what a ‘heritage American’ is, or if it is a thing at all, also spurred division. Ohio gubernatorial candidate Vivek Ramaswamy told the crowd, ‘I think the idea of a heritage American is about as loony as anything the woke left has actually put up,’ adding ‘There is no American who is more American than somebody else.… It is binary. Either you’re an American or you’re not.’

This would have been Civics 101, even for conservatives, not long ago, but Ramaswamy is right to mention wokeness, because proponents of the concept that a genealogy that leads back to nation’s founding is something special is mainly driven by such people being told for decades now that it is actually the only lineage that is not special, or something to be proud of.

I asked Dennis, who is the fourth-generation owner of a farm in South Dakota, which sounds pretty heritage-y to me, what he made of it all.

‘I don’t think much about that,’ he said. ‘If you love the country and follow the laws, you can be an American.’

Dennis was much more interested in, and comfortable talking about soybeans and sugar beets. I asked how the tariffs were affecting him, and he told me, ‘It’s hurt, but I look at the big picture and I think it will be good in the long run.’

It was tempting after speaking, not just with Dennis, but with many attendees, old and young, who are most focused on prices, to think, ‘It’s the economy, stupid, knock it off with the identity politics stuff.’ But Erika Kirk made a good point: These might be fights the right needs to have before settling into next year’s midterm elections.

TPUSA spokesman Andrew Kolvet posted on X with this very message.

‘If we force conformity without uncomfortable debates, there can be no winning consensus,’ he wrote. ‘There’s no civil war. This is the necessary work of a conservative coalition defining its dominant center ahead of the coming battles. We’re not hive-minded commies. Let it play out.’

It should also be noted how much better hashing all of this out at an actual live event is than endless sniping on social media where nobody is ever really forced to contend with ideas they oppose. The mere act of shaking hands with someone you disagree with can be a powerful calming influence.

On Sunday, the big finale of AmFest will be Vice President JD Vance’s speech to the assembled. As of 4 a.m., there was already a line for it.

Sarah, a college freshman told me, ‘I wasn’t old enough to vote for Trump, but I will get to vote for Vance, and I’m excited about that.’ This is good news for Vance, but it’s also a lot of pressure. Can he be the force that mends the wounds opening this weekend at AmFest? 

Erika Kirk is right, families sometimes fight. In fact, sometimes they have to. But the question is always what happens after the blowup, after the tears and recriminations?

Rep. Anna Paulina Luna, R-Fla., told the crowd this weekend, ‘You may not like Tucker Carlson, Ben Shapiro, Steve Bannon or me. Guess what: If the radical left wins, we all hang together.’

This seems correct, and even after AmFest’s nasty internecine fighting, it is still a goal well within reach of TPUSA and the conservative movement. It is also almost certainly what Charlie Kirk would have wanted.

Erika Kirk welcomed rapper Nicki Minaj as the surprise guest for a Q&A at Turning Point USA’s AmericaFest on Sunday.

The ‘Beez in the Trap’ singer previously teamed up with the Trump White House, speaking at the United Nations in November to raise awareness about persecution against Christians in Nigeria. Rumors had grown that Minaj would make an appearance at AmericaFest, but it was not confirmed until she went on stage Sunday.

‘I’m honored to be here. I’m honored to be here,’ Minaj said after Kirk welcomed her to the stage.

She went on to praise both President Donald Trump and Vice President JD Vance, saying they are politicians who have an ‘uncanny’ ability to relate to the American people.

‘I love both of them,’ she said of the two leaders.

Despite previously supporting Democrats like Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton, Minaj has increasingly shown support for Trump lately.

On Nov. 1, Minaj posted a screenshot of a Trump Truth Social post where he said, ‘Christianity is facing an existential threat in Nigeria.’

She wrote, ‘Reading this made me feel a deep sense of gratitude. We live in a country where we can freely worship God. No group should ever be persecuted for practicing their religion.’

Minaj continued, ‘We don’t have to share the same beliefs in order for us to respect each other. Numerous countries all around the world are being affected by this horror & it’s dangerous to pretend we don’t notice.’

She thanked the ‘President & his team for taking this seriously. God bless every persecuted Christian. Let’s remember to lift them up in prayer.’

She has also repeatedly attacked California Gov. Gavin Newsom over his stance on transgender children.

Kirk has stepped in as the chairwoman and CEO of Turning Point USA since the murder of her husband, late Turning Point USA CEO Charlie Kirk, in September.

Kirk spoke at the conservative AmFest on Thursday, telling the crowd, ‘Here’s what I’ve learned the most in these last three months is that my husband, he deeply mattered on a multitude of levels, so much so that it proved even more once he was assassinated, how much of a peacemaker he was and how much of a coalition builder he was.’

She added that both her husband and she would choose fight mode over flight in any situation. 

‘You don’t retreat,’ she said. ‘Charlie would go wherever he needed to go, and I’m the same exact way … And you’ll learn that about me the more you get to know me. I know I’m new here, I’m new here, but you’ll learn.’

The U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) said Sunday it restored a photo featuring President Donald Trump to its latest release of Jeffrey Epstein–related documents after a review determined the image did not depict any Epstein victims.

In a post on X, the DOJ said the photo was initially taken down ‘out of an abundance of caution’ after the Southern District of New York flagged it for additional review to protect potential victims.

Following a review, officials concluded no Epstein victims were shown in the photograph, and it was reposted without ‘alteration or redaction,’ according to the DOJ.

‘The Southern District of New York flagged an image of President Trump for potential further action to protect victims,’ the DOJ wrote. ‘Out of an abundance of caution, the Department of Justice temporarily removed the image for further review. After the review, it was determined there is no evidence that any Epstein victims are depicted in the photograph, and it has been reposted without any alteration or redaction.’

Earlier Sunday, Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche said the removal of the photo had ‘nothing to do with President Trump’ and was instead driven by concerns for the women depicted, he said during an appearance on NBC’s ‘Meet the Press.’

The explanation came after reports that at least 16 files had disappeared from the DOJ’s Epstein-related public webpage less than a day after they were posted on Friday, without public notice or an initial explanation, The Associated Press reported.

The missing files included one that showed a series of photos displayed on a cabinet and inside a drawer. In the drawer, there was a photo of Donald Trump pictured alongside Melania Trump, Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell, AP reported.

On Saturday, Democrats on the House Oversight Committee criticized the removal of the photo, writing, ‘We need transparency for the American public.’

‘This photo, file 468, from the Epstein files that includes Donald Trump has apparently now been removed from the DOJ release,’ Democrats on the House Oversight Committee posted on X. ‘[Attorney General Pam Bondi] is this true? What else is being covered up? We need transparency for the American public.’

The DOJ released the trove of files after The Epstein Files Transparency Act, signed by President Trump on Nov. 19, 2025, required AG Pam Bondi to release all unclassified records, communications and investigative materials related to Epstein within 30 days.

The agency posted thousands of pages on a government website Friday related to Epstein’s and Maxwell’s sex-trafficking cases. The files were released as the result of a deadline imposed by the Epstein Files Transparency Act.

Fox News Digital’s Lori Bashian contributed to this report.

The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) is disputing reports that acting Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA) Director Madhu Gottumukkala failed a polygraph after seeking access to highly sensitive intelligence, as an internal investigation and the suspension of multiple career cybersecurity officials deepen turmoil inside the agency, according to a report.

Politico reported that Gottumukkala pushed for access to a tightly restricted intelligence program that required a counter-intelligence polygraph and that at least six career staffers were later placed on paid administrative leave for allegedly misleading leadership about the requirement, an assertion DHS strongly denies.

The outlet said its reporting was based on interviews with four former and eight current cybersecurity officials, including multiple Trump administration appointees who worked with Gottumukkala or had knowledge of the polygraph examination and the events that followed. All 12 were granted anonymity over concerns about retaliation, according to Politico.

DHS pushed back on the reporting, saying the polygraph at issue was not authorized and that disciplinary action against career staff complied with department policy.

‘Acting Director Madhu Gottumukkala did not fail a sanctioned polygraph test. An unsanctioned polygraph test was coordinated by staff, misleading incoming CISA leadership,’ DHS Assistant Secretary Tricia McLaughlin said in a statement provided to Fox News Digital. ‘The employees in question were placed on administrative leave, pending conclusion of an investigation.’

‘We expect and require the highest standards of performance from our employees and hold them directly accountable to uphold all policies and procedures,’ she continued. ‘Acting Director Gottumukkala has the complete and full support of the Secretary and is laser focused on returning the agency to its statutory mission.’

Politico also reported that Gottumukkala failed a polygraph during the final week of July, citing five current officials and one former official.

The test was administered to determine whether he would be eligible to review one of the most sensitive intelligence programs shared with CISA by another U.S. spy agency, according to the outlet.

That intelligence was part of a controlled access program with strict distribution limits, and the originating agency required any CISA personnel granted need-to-know access to first pass a counter-intelligence polygraph, according to four current officials and one former official cited by Politico.

As a civilian agency, most CISA employees do not require access to such highly classified material or a polygraph to be hired, though polygraphs are commonly used across the Pentagon and U.S. intelligence community to protect the government’s most sensitive information.

Politico reported that senior staff raised questions on at least two occasions about whether Gottumukkala needed access to the intelligence, but said he continued pressing for it even if it meant taking a polygraph, citing four current officials.

The outlet also reported that an initial access request in early June, signed by mid-level CISA staff, was denied by a senior agency official who determined there was no urgent need-to-know and noted that the agency’s previous deputy director had not viewed the program.

That senior official was later placed on administrative leave for unrelated reasons in late June, and a second access request signed by Gottumukkala was approved in early July after the official was no longer in the role, according to current officials cited by Politico.

Despite being advised that access to the most sensitive material was not essential to his job and that lower-classification alternatives were available, Gottumukkala continued to pursue access, officials told the outlet.

Officials interviewed by Politico said they could not definitively explain why Gottumukkala did not pass the July polygraph and cautioned that failures can occur for innocuous reasons such as anxiety or technical errors, noting that polygraph results are generally not admissible in U.S. courts.

On Aug. 1, shortly after the polygraph, at least six career staff involved in scheduling and approving the test were notified in letters from then–acting DHS Chief Security Officer Michael Boyajian that their access to classified national security information was being temporarily suspended for potentially misleading Gottumukkala, according to officials and a letter reviewed by Politico.

‘This action is being taken due to information received by this office that you may have participated in providing false information to the acting head of the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA) regarding the existence of a requirement for a polygraph examination prior to accessing certain programs,’ the letter said. ‘The above allegation shows deliberate or negligent failure to follow policies that protect government information, which raises concerns regarding an individual’s trustworthiness, judgment, reliability or willingness and ability to safeguard classified information.’

In a separate letter dated Aug. 4, the suspended employees were informed by Acting CISA Chief Human Capital Officer Kevin Diana that they had been placed on paid administrative leave pending an investigation, according to current and former officials and a copy reviewed by Politico.

Gottumukkala was appointed CISA deputy director in May and previously served as commissioner and chief information officer for South Dakota’s Bureau of Information and Technology, which oversees statewide technology and cybersecurity initiatives.

CISA said in a May press release that Gottumukkala has more than two decades of experience in information technology and cybersecurity across the public and private sectors.

: President Donald Trump’s Department of Interior announced on Monday that, effective immediately, leases for all large-scale offshore wind projects being constructed in the United States will be paused.

In a press release, DOI wrote that the pause is due to ‘national security risks’ identified by the Department of War in ‘recently completed classified reports.’

In a press release, DOI says the pause will ‘give the Department, along with the Department of War and other relevant government agencies, time to work with leaseholders and state partners to assess the possibility of mitigating the national security risks posed by these projects.’

‘The prime duty of the United States government is to protect the American people,’ Secretary of the Interior Doug Burgum, said in the press release.

‘Today’s action addresses emerging national security risks, including the rapid evolution of the relevant adversary technologies, and the vulnerabilities created by large-scale offshore wind projects with proximity near our east coast population centers. The Trump administration will always prioritize the security of the American people.’

The Department of Interior listed five leases that will be paused: Vineyard Wind1, Revolution Wind, CVOW, Sunrise Wind, and Empire Wind.

The department highlighted unclassified reports from the U.S. government in the past that have ‘long found’ that massive turbine blades in large-scale offshore wind projects can create radar interference called ‘clutter’ that can obscure legitimate moving targets and generate false targets. 

In 2024, a Department of Energy report found that while the radar threshold for false alarm detection can be increased to reduce some of that ‘clutter,’ the radar can ‘miss actual targets’ when that threshold is increased.

‘Today’s action ensures that national security risks posed by offshore wind projects are appropriately addressed and that the United States government retains its ability to effectively defend the American people,’ the press release states.

Senate Democrats are gearing up for court challenges and investigations following the Department of Justice’s (DOJ) dump of hundreds of thousands of documents related to Jeffrey Epstein.

They argue that Attorney General Pam Bondi and the DOJ didn’t follow the law, which Congress passed nearly unanimously out of both chambers last month.

Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., who forced a successful vote in the Senate on the Epstein Files Transparency Act, argued that the ‘heavily redacted documents released by the Department of Justice today is just a fraction of the whole body of evidence.’

‘Simply releasing a mountain of blacked-out pages violates the spirit of transparency and the letter of the law,’ Schumer said in a statement. ‘For example, all 119 pages of one document were completely blacked out. We need answers as to why.’

‘Senate Democrats are working to assess the documents that have been released to determine what actions must be taken to hold the Trump administration accountable,’ he continued. ‘We will pursue every option to make sure the truth comes out.’

The law required that the DOJ release all unclassified records related to Epstein, his accomplice Ghislaine Maxwell, known associates and entities linked to Epstein and Maxwell, internal DOJ decision-making on the Epstein case, records on destroying or tampering with documents, and all documents on his detention and death.

There were narrow exceptions to what the government could opt against releasing, including materials that reveal victims’ identities or medical files, child sex abuse materials, information that could jeopardize active investigations, images of graphic death or injury, or classified national security information.

Schumer and congressional Democrats, along with some congressional Republicans, were already peeved that the DOJ wasn’t going to dump every document in its possession by Friday’s deadline.

Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche announced that day that the agency would be taking a phased approach and said he expected ‘that we’re going to release more documents over the next couple of weeks,’ as the DOJ worked to comb through every document to ensure ‘every victim, their name, their identity, their story, to the extent it needs to be protected, is completely protected.’

But it was the inclusion of several heavily redacted documents without explanation as to why they were blacked out that raised lawmakers’ eyebrows.

Senate Minority Whip Dick Durbin, D-Ill., who also is the top Democrat on the Senate Judiciary Committee, said that Friday’s release ‘could have been a win for survivors, accountability, and transparency to the public. It wasn’t.’

He accused the Trump administration of breaking the law with how it handled the document dump and vowed that the Judiciary Committee would investigate.

‘Senate Judiciary Democrats will investigate this violation of law and make sure the American people know about it,’ Durbin said in a statement. ‘The survivors deserve better. It’s clear Donald Trump and his Republican enablers are working for the rich and powerful elites — and not you.’

A bipartisan Obamacare fix remains out of reach in the Senate, for now, and lawmakers can’t agree on who is at fault. 

While many agree that the forthcoming healthcare cliff will cause financial pain, the partisan divide quickly devolved into pointing the finger across the aisle at who owns the looming healthcare premium spikes that Americans who use the healthcare exchange will face. 

Part of the finger-pointing has yielded another surprising agreement: Lawmakers don’t see the fast-approaching expiration of the Biden-era enhanced Obamacare subsidies as Congress failing to act in time.

‘Obviously, it’s not a failure of Congress to act,’ Sen. Chris Murphy, D-Conn., told Fox News Digital. ‘It’s a failure of Republicans to act. Democrats are united and wanting to expand subsidies. Republicans want premium increases to go up.’

Senate Republicans and Democrats both tried, and failed, to advance their own partisan plans to replace or extend the subsidies earlier this month. And since then, no action has been taken to deal with the fast-approaching issue, guaranteeing that the subsidies will lapse at the end of the year.

A report published last month by Kaiser Family Foundation, a nonprofit healthcare think tank, found that Americans who use the credits will see an average increase of 114% in their premium costs.

The increase can vary depending on how high above the poverty level a person is. The original premium subsidies set a cap at 400% above the poverty level, while the enhanced subsidies, which were passed during the COVID-19 pandemic, torched the cap.

For example, a person 60 years or older making 401% of the poverty level, or about $62,000 per year, would on average see their premium prices double. That number can skyrocket depending on the state. Wyoming clocks in at the highest spike at 421%.

In Murphy’s home state of Connecticut, premiums under the same parameters would hike in price by 316%.

‘When these do lapse, people are going to die,’ Murphy said. ‘I mean, I was talking to a couple a few months ago who have two parents, both with chronic, potentially life-threatening illnesses, and they will only be able to afford insurance for one of them. So they’re talking about which parent is going to survive to raise their three kids. The stakes are life and death.’

Both sides hold opposing views on the solution. Senate Republicans argue that the credits effectively subsidize insurance companies, not patients, by funneling money directly to them, and that the program is rife with fraud.

Senate Democrats want to extend the subsidies as they are, and are willing to negotiate fixes down the line. But for the GOP, they want to see some immediate reforms, like income caps, anti-fraud measures and more stringent anti-abortion language tied to the subsidies.

Sen. Rick Scott, R-Fla., who produced his own healthcare plan that would convert subsidies into health savings accounts (HSAs), argued that congressional Democrats ‘set this up to expire.’

But he doesn’t share the view that the subsidies’ expected expiration is a life-or-death situation.

‘I’m not taxing somebody who makes 20 bucks an hour to pay for healthcare for somebody who makes half a million dollars a year, that’s what they did,’ he told Fox News Digital. ‘All they did was mask the increase in healthcare costs. That’s all they did with it.’

Sen. Jim Banks, R-Ind., similarly scoffed at the notion, and told Fox News Digital, ‘The Democrat plan to extend COVID-era Obamacare subsidies might help less than half a percent of the American population.’

‘The Republican plan brings down healthcare costs for 100% of Americans,’ he said. ‘More competition, expands health savings accounts. That needs to be the focus.’

Democrats are also not hiding their disdain for the partisan divide between their approaches to healthcare.

Sen. Brian Schatz, D-Hawaii, told Fox News Digital that the idea that this ‘is a congressional failure and not a Republican policy is preposterous.’

‘They’ve hated the Affordable Care Act since its inception and tried to repeal it at every possible opportunity,’ he said, referring to Obamacare. ‘The president hates ACA, speaker hates ACA, majority leader hates ACA, rank-and-file hate ACA. And so this is not some failure of bipartisanship.’

While the partisan rancor runs deep on the matter of Obamacare, there are Republicans and Democrats working together to build a new plan. Still, it wouldn’t deal with the rapidly approaching Dec. 31 deadline to extend the subsidies.

Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D., predicted that the Senate would have a long road to travel before a bipartisan plan came together in the new year, but he didn’t rule it out.

‘It’s the Christmas season. It would take a Christmas miracle to execute on actually getting something done there,’ he said. ‘But, you know, I think there’s a potential path, but it’ll be heavy lift.’