Former special counsel Jack Smith will testify in a hearing before the House Judiciary Committee next week, giving Republican and Democratic lawmakers on the panel a chance to grill him in a public setting on his prosecutions of President Donald Trump.

Smith will appear before the committee on Jan. 22, one month after he sat for a closed-door deposition with the committee and testified for eight hours about his special counsel work, a source familiar told Fox News Digital.

Smith had long said he wanted to speak to the committee publicly, and although Chairman Jim Jordan, R-Ohio, first demanded the deposition, the chairman also said an open hearing was on the table.

Smith investigated Trump and brought two indictments against him over the 2020 election and alleged retention of classified documents. Trump pleaded not guilty and aggressively fought the charges, and Smith dropped both cases when Trump won the 2024 election, citing a Department of Justice policy that discourages prosecuting sitting presidents.

In a public hearing, House lawmakers will be able to question Smith in five-minute increments, whereas in the deposition, each party questioned Smith in one-hour sessions. Politico first reported that Smith would appear for a hearing sometime this month.

Smith gave little new information during his initial meeting with the committee and defended his work.

‘I made my decisions in the investigation without regard to President Trump’s political association, activities, beliefs, or candidacy in the 2024 presidential election,’ Smith said, according to a transcript of the deposition. ‘We took actions based on what the facts, and the law required, the very lesson I learned early in my career as a prosecutor.’

Smith said he followed DOJ policy when his team made the controversial decision to subpoena numerous Republican senators’ and House members’ phone records as part of his 2020 election probe. Smith noted the subpoenas sought a narrow set of data.

‘If Donald Trump had chosen to call a number of Democratic senators [to delay the election certification proceedings], we would have gotten toll records for Democratic senators. So responsibility for why these records, why we collected them, that’s — that lies with Donald Trump,’ Smith said.

The Republicans have said the subpoenas were unconstitutional violations of the speech or debate clause, and they have broadly said the Biden DOJ abused its authority by bringing, in their view, politicized criminal charges against a former president and presidential candidate.

Trump, who has long decried Smith as a ‘thug’ and said he belongs in jail, has said he welcomes Smith at a public hearing.

Asked about Smith’s appearance next week, a representative for Smith provided a statement from one of his lawyers, Lanny Breuer.

‘Jack has been clear for months he is ready and willing to answer questions in a public hearing about his investigations into President Trump’s alleged unlawful efforts to overturn the 2020 election and his mishandling of classified documents,’ Breuer said.

A bipartisan group of lawmakers is introducing a bill aimed at restricting any unauthorized military action by President Donald Trump, amid growing debate over his comments about acquiring Greenland ‘one way or the other.’

Rep. Bill Keating, D-Mass., is leading the legislation along with Reps. Steny Hoyer, D-Md., Brendan Boyle, D-Pa., and Don Bacon, R-Neb., according to POLITICO.

‘This is about our fundamental shared goals and our fundamental security, not just in Europe, but in the United States itself,’ Keating said in a statement to the outlet.

The group involved in the effort is soliciting broader support for the legislation and say they hope additional Republicans will back the effort to restrict funding for any unauthorized military action against U.S. allies.

In a letter to colleagues, Keating said ‘this legislation takes a clear stand against such action and further supports NATO allies and partners,’ according to POLITICO.

While the measure does not specifically name any specific countries, it is clearly in response to Trump’s repeated threats against Greenland.

Keating said the decision to omit Greenland’s name was meant to broaden the legislation’s focus. He said he met with the Danish Ambassador and the head of Greenland representation.

‘This isn’t just about Greenland. This is about our security,’ Keating said.

Keating also said he believes slashing funding is the most impactful way to disincentivize Trump administration officials from taking action.

‘War powers are important, but we’ve seen with Democratic and Republican presidents that that’s not as effective,’ he said. ‘It’s hard to get around having no funds or not allowing personnel to do it.’

This comes after the Senate advanced a bipartisan resolution last week that would limit Trump’s ability to conduct further attacks against Venezuela after the U.S. military’s recent move to strike the country and capture its president, Nicolás Maduro. The Upper Chamber could pass the measure later this week, although its future in the House remains uncertain despite some support from Republicans.

On Greenland, administration officials are openly weighing options such as military force to take the Danish territory, a move that would violate NATO’s Article V, which states that an attack on one member is an attack on all of them and could end the alliance of more than 75 years.

‘We are going to do something on Greenland, whether they like it or not,’ Trump said on Friday. ‘Because if we don’t do it, Russia or China will take over Greenland, and we’re not going to have Russia or China as a neighbor.’

Greenland Prime Minister Jens-Frederik Nielsen and four party leaders reaffirmed last week that the self-governing island has no interest in becoming part of the U.S.

‘We don’t want to be Americans, we don’t want to be Danes, we want to be Greenlanders,’ the leaders said, adding that Greenland’s ‘future must be decided by the Greenlandic people.’

Danish Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen, French President Emmanuel Macron, German Chancellor Friedrich Merz, British Prime Minister Keir Starmer, as well as the leaders of Italy, Spain and Poland, also signed a letter stating: ‘Greenland belongs to its people. It is for Denmark and Greenland, and them only, to decide on matters concerning Denmark and Greenland.’

The chance of expanding U.S. control over Greenland has drawn mixed reactions from Congress. While most Democrats have opposed the idea, some Republicans have voiced support for pursuing closer ties with the territory.

Rep. Randy Fine, R-Fla., who introduced legislation to make it the 51st U.S. state, although he said the best way to acquire Greenland is voluntarily.

‘I think it is in the world’s interest for the United States to exert sovereignty over Greenland,’ Fine told Fox News Digital.

As protests spread across Iran and the government responds with lethal force, amid increasing reports claiming thousands have been killed, a growing question is being debated by analysts and Iranians alike: Is the Islamic Republic facing its most serious threat since the 1979 revolution, or does it still retain enough coercive power to survive?

For Mehdi Ghadimi, an Iranian journalist who spent decades protesting the regime before being forced to leave the country, this moment feels fundamentally different from anything that came before.

‘From 1999, when I was about fifteen, until 2024, when I was forced to leave Iran, I took part in every street protest against the Islamic Republic,’ Ghadimi told Fox News Digital. ‘For roughly half of those years, I supported the reformist movement. But after 2010, we became certain that the Islamic Republic is not reformable, that changing its factions is a fiction.’

According to Ghadimi, that realization gradually spread across Iranian society, culminating in what he describes as a decisive shift in the current unrest.

‘For the first time in the 47 years of struggle by the Iranian people against the Islamic Republic, the idea of returning to the period before January 1979 became the sole demand and the central point of unity among the people,’ he said. ‘As a result, we witnessed the most widespread presence of people from all cities and villages of Iran in the streets, on a scale unprecedented in any previous protests.’

Ghadimi claimed the chants on the streets reflected that shift. Instead of demanding economic relief or changes to dress codes, protesters openly called for the fall of the Islamic Republic and the return of the Pahlavi dynasty.

‘At that point, it no longer seemed that we were merely protesting,’ he said. ‘We were, in fact, carrying out a revolution.’

Still, Ghadimi was clear about what he believes is preventing the regime’s collapse.

‘The answer is very clear,’ he said. ‘The government sets no limit for itself when it comes to killing its own people.’

He added that Tehran appears reassured by the lack of consequences for its actions. ‘It has also been reassured by the behavior of other countries that if it manages to survive, it will not be punished for these blatant crimes against humanity,’ he said. ‘The doors of diplomacy will always remain open to them, even if their hands are stained with blood.’

Ghadimi described how the regime cut off internet access to disrupt coordination between protesters and opposition leadership abroad. He said that once connectivity was severed, the reach of video messages from the exiled Prince Reza Pahlavi dropped dramatically.

While Iranian voices describe a revolutionary moment, security and policy experts caution that structural realities still favor the regime.

Javed Ali, an associate professor at the Gerald R. Ford School of Public Policy, said the Islamic Republic is facing far more serious threats to its grip on power than in years past, driven by a convergence of military, regional, economic and diplomatic pressures.

‘The IRGC is in a much weaker position following the 12-day war with Israel last summer,’ Ali said, citing ‘leadership removals, ballistic missile and drone capabilities that were used or damaged, and an air and radar defense network that has been significantly degraded.’

Ali said Iran’s regional deterrence has also eroded sharply. ‘The so-called Axis of Resistance has been significantly weakened across the region,’ he said, pointing to setbacks suffered by Hamas, Hezbollah, the Houthis and Shiite militias allied with Tehran.

Internally, Ali said demographic pressure is intensifying the challenge. ‘Iran’s younger population is even more frustrated than before with deteriorating economic conditions, ongoing social and cultural restrictions and repeated violent crackdowns on dissent,’ he said.

Ali also pointed to shifting external dynamics that are limiting Tehran’s room to maneuver, including what he described as a stronger U.S.-Israel relationship tied to the Netanyahu-Trump alliance. He added that there are ‘possible joint operations already underway to support the protest movement inside Iran.’

Israeli security sources, speaking on background, said Israel has no such interest in intervening in a way that would allow Tehran to redirect domestic unrest outward.

‘Everyone understands it is better to sit and wait quietly and not attract the fire toward Israel,’ one source said. ‘The regime would like to make this about Israel and the Zionist enemy and start another war to repress internal protests.’

‘It is not Israel against Iran,’ the source added. ‘We recognize that the regime has an interest in provoking us, and we do not want to contribute to that.’

The source said a collapse of the Islamic Republic would have far-reaching consequences. ‘If the regime falls, it will affect the entire Middle East,’ the official said. ‘It could open a new era.’

Ali said Iran is increasingly isolated diplomatically. ‘There is growing isolation from Gulf monarchies, the fall of Assad in Syria and only muted support from China and Russia,’ he said.

Despite those pressures, Ali cautioned that Iran’s coercive institutions remain loyal.

‘I think the IRGC, including Basiji paramilitary elements, along with the Ministry of Intelligence, are still loyal to the regime out of a mix of ideology, religion, and self-interest,’ he said, citing ‘power, money and influence.’

Whether fear of collapse could drive insiders to defect remains unclear. ‘Whether there are insiders willing to flip because of a sense of imminent collapse of the clerical structure is hard to know,’ Ali said.

He placed the probability of an internal regime collapse at ‘25% or less,’ calling it ‘possible, but far less probable.’

For now, Iran appears caught between two realities: a population increasingly unified around the rejection of the Islamic Republic, and a security apparatus still willing to use overwhelming force to preserve it.

As Ali noted, pressure alone does not bring regimes down. The decisive moment comes only when those ordered to enforce repression decide it is no longer in their interest to do so.

Despite the scale of unrest, Ghadimi cautioned that the outcome remains uncertain.

‘After these four hellish days, without even knowing the fate of our friends and loved ones who went into the streets, or whether they were alive or not, it is truly difficult for me to give you a clear assessment and say whether our revolution is now moving toward victory or not,’ he said.

He recalled a message he heard repeatedly before leaving Iran, across cities and social classes.

‘The only thing I consistently heard was this: ‘We have nothing left to lose, and even at the cost of our lives, we will not retreat one step from our demand for the fall of the Islamic Republic,’’ Ghadimi said. ‘They asked me to promise that now that I am outside Iran, I would be their voice.’

‘That spirit is what still gives my heart hope for victory,’ he added. ‘But my mind tells me that when mass killing carries no punishment, and when the government possesses enough bullets, guns and determination to suppress it, even if it means killing millions, then victory would require a miracle.’

Former President Bill Clinton has been summoned to appear on Capitol Hill Tuesday morning, as Republicans threaten a possible criminal referral if the ex-commander-in-chief skips out.

He and former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton have both been subpoenaed to appear before the House Oversight Committee for separate closed-door depositions for the panel’s investigation into Jeffrey Epstein.

Clinton was scheduled to appear Tuesday morning at 10 a.m., but it’s not clear whether he will do so. The deposition is expected to move forward regardless.

A spokeswoman for the committee told Fox News Digital on Friday that neither had confirmed their scheduled dates at that point.

‘The Clintons have not confirmed their appearances for their subpoenaed depositions. They are obligated under the law to appear, and we expect them to do so. If the Clintons do not appear at their depositions, the House Oversight Committee will initiate contempt of Congress proceedings,’ the spokeswoman said.

Both Clintons were originally scheduled to appear before the committee in October, but their deposition dates were postponed while the panel was in talks with their attorneys.

Their deposition dates were delayed again when House Oversight Committee Chairman James Comer, R-Ky., was informed the former first couple would be attending a funeral.

‘They’re saying now that he’s going to a funeral on that day, so we’ve been going back and forth with the lawyer,’ Comer told Fox News Digital in December. ‘We’re going to hold him in contempt if he doesn’t show up for his deposition.’

The House Oversight Committee would need to advance a contempt resolution before it’s considered by the entire chamber. If a simple majority votes to hold someone in contempt of Congress, a criminal referral is then traditionally made to the Department of Justice.

A criminal contempt of Congress charge is a misdemeanor that carries a punishment of up to one year in jail and a maximum $100,000 fine if convicted.

In the absence of mutually agreed-upon new dates, new subpoenas were issued for Bill and Hillary Clinton to appear on Jan. 13 and Jan. 14, respectively.

They were two of 10 people who Comer initially subpoenaed in the House’s Epstein investigation after a unanimous bipartisan vote directed him to do so last year.

Clinton was known to be friendly with the late pedophile before his federal charges but was never implicated in any wrongdoing related to him.

Fox News Digital reached out to the Clintons’ lawyer and Bill Clinton’s spokesperson to ask whether he would appear Tuesday, but did not receive a response.

The U.S. Virtual Embassy Iran is telling American citizens who are still in the country to leave immediately. 

The warning Tuesday comes as more than 600 people have been killed in the ongoing anti-government demonstrations, according to an activist group. The U.S.-based Human Rights Activists News Agency said 512 of the dead were protesters and 134 were members of Iran’s security forces, The Associated Press reported. 

‘Leave Iran now. Have a plan for departing Iran that does not rely on U.S. government help,’ the U.S. Virtual Embassy Iran said on its website, suggesting land crossings into Armenia or Turkey if it is ‘safe to do so.’ 

‘If you cannot leave, find a secure location within your residence or another safe building. Have a supply of food, water, medications, and other essential items,’ it added.

‘Protests across Iran are escalating and may turn violent, resulting in arrests and injuries. Increased security measures, road closures, public transportation disruptions, and internet blockages are ongoing,’ the embassy also said. ‘The Government of Iran has restricted access to mobile, landline, and national internet networks. Airlines continue to limit or cancel flights to and from Iran, with several suspending service until Friday, January 16.’ 

The protests began late last month with shopkeepers and bazaar merchants demonstrating against accelerating inflation and the collapse of the rial, which lost about half its value against the dollar last year. Inflation topped 40% in December.  

The unrest soon spread to universities and provincial cities, with young men clashing with security forces.   

‘U.S.-Iranian dual nationals must exit Iran on Iranian passports. The Iranian government does not recognize dual nationality and will treat U.S.-Iranian dual nationals solely as Iranian citizens,’ according to the embassy. ‘U.S. nationals are at significant risk of questioning, arrest, and detention in Iran. Showing a U.S. passport or demonstrating connections to the United States can be reason enough for Iranian authorities to detain someone.’

The embassy also said, ‘Turkmenistan’s land borders are open, but U.S. citizens need special authorization from the Government of Turkmenistan before approaching the border,’ and that, ‘U.S. citizens with an urgent need to depart Iran via Azerbaijan should be aware that entry into Azerbaijan from Iran has been restricted for U.S. citizens during periods of heightened tension, such as the June 2025 conflict between Iran and Israel.’ 

‘The U.S. government does not have diplomatic or consular relations with the Islamic Republic of Iran,’ the U.S. Virtual Embassy Iran continued. ‘The Swiss government, acting through its embassy in Tehran, serves as the protecting power for U.S. interests in Iran.’

Prior to the ongoing protests, the State Department issued a ‘Level 4 – Do not travel’ advisory for the Islamic Republic of Iran in December. 

At the time, it urged Americans not to visit the country, ‘due to the risk of terrorism, unrest, kidnapping, arbitrary arrest of U.S. citizens, and wrongful detention. ‘

Fox News’ Efrat Lachter contributed to this report.

Australia’s ambassador to the U.S. who criticized President Donald Trump is leaving his post early. The announcement comes just a few weeks after the U.S. president made a cutting remark about the diplomat.

‘It is with deep appreciation for his tireless contribution to our national interests over the last three years in Washington that we today announce the Hon Dr. Kevin Rudd AC will conclude his posting as Australia’s Ambassador to the United States at the end of March 2026,’ a joint statement issued by Australian Prime Minister Anthony Albanese MP and Australian Minister of Foreign Affairs Penny Wong read.

In their statement, Albanese and Wong seemed to defend the work that the Hon. Dr. Kevin Rudd AC had done in his position. In what could be seen as a swipe at the Trump administration, the two said that Rudd ‘delivered concrete outcomes for Australia – during both Democrat and Republican Administrations – in collaboration with our closest ally and principal strategic partner.’ 

They also highlighted his knowledge of U.S.-China relations, which is particularly relevant as he takes the helm of the Asia Society, a nonprofit headquartered in New York, which aims to foster relationships between the U.S. and Asia.

Rudd, who previously served as Australia’s prime minister, thanked Albanese and Wong for their ‘kind remarks’ ahead of his departure and gave some insight into his new role.

‘I will be remaining in America working between New York and Washington on the future of U.S.-China relations, which I have always believed to be the core question for the future stability of our region and the world,’ Rudd wrote in an X post from his unofficial account.

On his official X account, Rudd said that ‘It has been an honor to serve as Australia’s Ambassador to the United States over the last three years. I thank the Prime Minister and the Foreign Minister for their kind remarks today.’

Rudd is no stranger to Asia Society, as he served as the organization’s president and CEO 2021-2023. He was also the inaugural President of the Asia Society Policy Institute (ASPI) for nearly 10 years, holding the position from 2015 until 2023. Now, he is set to serve as the president and CEO of the organization and will hold a leading role in the ASPI’s Center for China Analysis, which he established in 2022, according to Asia Society.

In October, when Albanese visited the U.S., Trump was asked about Rudd’s remarks, with one reporter wondering if the comments were the reason why the meeting in Washington was so late in the year. Trump said that he did not know what the ambassador had said before asking Albanese if Rudd was still working for him. In response, Albanese pointed at Rudd who seemed to stumble as he tried to explain the remarks he made, first clarifying that he said them before he took the position as ambassador to the U.S. However, Trump quickly cut him off, saying, ‘I don’t like you either. I don’t and I probably never will.’

Rudd made headlines in November 2024 when he deleted a series of tweets that were critical of Trump after the U.S. president won his second term. Rudd had described Trump in a 2020 post as ‘the most destructive president in history,’ according to reporting from NDTV. Rudd made the comments while serving as the chair of the ASPI. Rudd’s office said that the posts were deleted to prevent others from taking them as remarks made in his capacity as ambassador

‘This has been done to eliminate the possibility of such comments being misconstrued as reflecting his positions as ambassador and, by extension, the views of the Australian Government. Ambassador Rudd looks forward to working with President Trump and his team to continue strengthening the US-Australia alliance,’ a statement from Rudd’s office that was shared with Fox News Digital in November 2024 read.

It is not immediately clear whether these past remarks played a role in Rudd’s departure. However, a Trump administration official told Fox News Digital that Rudd ‘worked well with President Trump and the administration.’ The official added that ‘We wish him well.’

Fox News Digital reached out to Rudd and the White House for comment.

As Iran weakens, a power vacuum is emerging across the Middle East — and Saudi Arabia is moving to fill it by recalibrating relations with former rivals, hedging global partnerships and asserting a more independent foreign policy, according to several experts.

Javed Ali, former senior official at the National Security Council and professor at the University of Michigan, told Fox News Digital that ‘Since Iran’s 1979 revolution, both Saudi Arabia and Iran have vied for influence across the broader Muslim world. Mohammed bin Salman’s consolidation of power in the kingdom has also introduced a markedly different vision from that of his predecessors.’

Riyadh’s recent moves, from Yemen to Turkey, are fueling debate over whether Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman’s expanding regional role still aligns with U.S. interests. As part of that recalibration, Bloomberg reported on Jan. 9 that Turkey is seeking entry into the Saudi–Pakistan mutual defense pact signed four months earlier, according to people familiar with the talks.

Michael Rubin, a senior fellow at the American Enterprise Institute, said Saudi Arabia’s current trajectory must be viewed through years of accumulated frustration with U.S. policy.

‘To be fair to MBS, previous U.S. administrations did not uphold their end of the bargain either,’ Rubin told Fox News Digital, pointing to repeated Houthi attacks on Saudi territory. ‘The Houthis launched hundreds of drones and rockets that the Obama administration ignored.’

Rubin said tensions deepened as Mohammed bin Salman pursued reforms long urged by U.S. policymakers, only to face sharp criticism from Washington. He cited the Biden administration’s decision to remove the Houthis’ terror designation.

‘By no objective measure should Secretary of State Antony Blinken have removed the terror designation from the Houthis,’ Rubin said, calling the move ‘pure spite directed at MBS and Donald Trump.’

Rubin said that decision marked a turning point. ‘MBS calculated that if the United States did not have his back, he would need to embrace a Plan B,’ he said, describing outreach to Russia and China as tactical signaling rather than ideological realignment.

Saudi geopolitical researcher Salman Al-Ansari rejects claims that Riyadh is drifting ideologically or embracing Islamist movements, framing Saudi policy as interest-driven.

‘Saudi Arabia does not base its foreign policy on ideological alignment, but on pragmatic considerations aimed at stability and development,’ Al-Ansari told Fox News Digital. He said outreach to Turkey reflects an effort to de-escalate rivalries. ‘The rapprochement with Turkey reflects this diplomatic approach, which seeks to transform the Middle East from a region of chronic conflict into one of greater stability.’

Al-Ansari said the shift has already delivered results. ‘This shift has given Riyadh increased flexibility in engaging regional powers, a change Ankara quickly recognized and that has translated into expanding economic cooperation.’

He rejected claims of alignment with the Muslim Brotherhood. ‘Saudi Arabia designated the group as a terrorist organization in 2014, and this position remains unchanged,’ he said.

Those competing interpretations of Saudi intent are now colliding most visibly in Yemen where the Saudi-Emirati alliance originally formed to counter Iran’s Houthi proxy. While both entered the war to roll back Iranian influence, their strategies diverged. Riyadh backs a unified Yemeni state under the internationally recognized government, arguing fragmentation strengthens Iran. The UAE has supported southern separatists, including the Southern Transitional Council, prioritizing control over ports and security corridors.

In the last few days, Saudi and Yemeni government forces have largely recaptured southern and eastern Yemen from the UAE-backed Southern Transitional Council (STC), and the STC’s leader reportedly fled to the UAE amid the group’s reported dissolution, highlighting a sharp rift involving Emirati support for separatists

Rubin called Yemen the clearest warning sign. ‘This is best seen in Yemen, where he has been supporting the Muslim Brotherhood faction militarily and attacking the more secular Southern Forces in a way that only empowers al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula and the Houthis,’ he said.

Al-Ansari countered that ‘differences with the UAE stem from its backing of separatist armed actors in Yemen, which complicates the political process, fragments the anti-Houthi front, and ultimately benefits the Iranian-backed Houthi militia.’

Rubin warned of long-term consequences. ‘By ‘blowback’ I mean the same Islamists MBS cultivates today will end up targeting Saudi Arabia in the future,’ he said.

With Iran weakened and regional power shifting, Washington now faces a central question: whether Saudi Arabia’s expanding role will reinforce U.S.-backed stability, or redefine the balance of power in ways that test the limits of the long-standing partnership.

Cuban President Miguel Díaz-Canel Bermúdez declared Sunday that the island nation would defend itself ‘to the last drop of blood,’ responding to pressure from U.S. President Donald Trump to strike a deal with Washington. 

President Trump had spoken about Cuba in a Truth Social post earlier in the day, urging that ‘they make a deal, BEFORE IT IS TOO LATE.’

‘Those who blame the Revolution for the severe economic shortages we suffer should hold their tongues out of shame. Because they know it and acknowledge it: they are the fruit of the draconian measures of extreme strangulation that the U.S. has been applying to us for six decades and now threatens to surpass,’ the Cuban wrote on X, according to a translation of the Spanish-language post. 

‘#Cuba is a free, independent, and sovereign nation. No one dictates what we do. Cuba does not aggress; it is aggressed upon by the United States for 66 years, and it does not threaten; it prepares, ready to defend the Homeland to the last drop of blood,’ he wrote in another post, according to the translation.

U.S. Rep. Carlos Gimenez, R-Fla., who was born in Cuba, responded to the foreign figure’s post.

‘You dictators, henchmen, and executioners of the Cuban nation think you own the island. You don’t have much time left,’ he declared, according to the translation of his post, also written in Spanish.

Trump declared in a Truth Social post on Sunday, ‘Cuba lived, for many years, on large amounts of OIL and MONEY from Venezuela. In return, Cuba provided ‘Security Services’ for the last two Venezuelan dictators, BUT NOT ANYMORE! Most of those Cubans are DEAD from last weeks U.S.A. attack, and Venezuela doesn’t need protection anymore from the thugs and extortionists who held them hostage for so many years.

‘Venezuela now has the United States of America, the most powerful military in the World (by far!), to protect them, and protect them we will. THERE WILL BE NO MORE OIL OR MONEY GOING TO CUBA – ZERO! I strongly suggest they make a deal, BEFORE IT IS TOO LATE,’ he warned.

Rep. Gimenez thanked the president.

‘I was born in Cuba & forced from home shortly after the Communist takeover. Today, I represent my community in Congress. Thank you, President Trump, first Venezuela & next is Cuba. We will be forever grateful. Our hemisphere must be the hemisphere of liberty,’ the lawmaker wrote in a post on X.

Normally, the Supreme Court hears cases that deal with matters of law. 

But on Tuesday, Jan. 13, the justices will also be dealing with basic science. Not only that, they’ll be debating fundamental truth, as I can personally testify. 

The stakes couldn’t be higher in the case, West Virginia v. B.P.J. The specific question facing the court is simple: Should transgender boys be allowed to compete on girls’ sports teams? But you can’t really answer this question without asking a more important one: Can a young boy or a girl actually change genders? 

I asked this question myself, starting at age 12. I gave the wrong answer.

I was a classic tomboy — a girl who didn’t act and dress the way other girls did. I never felt like I fit in. But instead of realizing that I was in a normal phase of life, I got sucked into the world of social media and video games. That’s where I met people who told me that no, I wasn’t actually a girl. They told me I was a boy. That I should change my body to reflect who I ‘really was inside.’ 

I believed them. I went to doctors who gave me puberty blockers, blocking my normal development. Soon after, they started me on cross-sex hormones, so that I’d start to look more like a boy. Then, at age 15, the doctors gave me a double mastectomy. I figured that without a girl’s chest, I’d finally be happy. As a boy, why would I want to keep my breasts? 

By age 16, I realized how wrong I was. But I couldn’t go back. The puberty blockers and hormones changed my body, to the point that I no longer recognized myself in the mirror. And the chest surgery — how do you undo that? I’m now in my early 20s, and to this day, I have bandages where my breasts used to be. 

I know the truth now: I’m a girl. I always have been. I always will be. I can’t change that — because it’s scientifically and biologically impossible. No matter how many drugs or surgeries they get, kids who think they’re transgender really aren’t. They’re just confused. And in their confusion, doctors and activists are pushing them down a road of even more confusion. It’s also a road of unspeakable grief, worse than anything I ever experienced when I was 12 and felt like I didn’t fit in.

These deeply confused kids are at the center of the case before the Supreme Court. We’re talking about boys who are competing against girls, which is deeply and obviously unfair. Even a boy who’s taken puberty blockers and hormones is going to have an advantage over girls. It’s basic science, written into their biology. No medical treatment can change who they are. Sex-change treatments just cover up the truth under a veneer of self-deception and socially acceptable lies. 

The justices must see through it all. No doubt, the lawyers on the transgender side will try to trick them with arguments about equal treatment and human rights. But this isn’t about rights — it’s about the deep and profound wrong that is child transgenderism.

The only rights that are being violated are girls’ rights to compete fairly, without being forced to go up against boys. And states have a right — and a duty — to protect girls. For that matter, states have a duty to protect all children from transgender treatments of any kind. The Supreme Court has already given states the green light to keep kids safe from radical activism masquerading as medicine. Now the justices should extend that logic by protecting girls’ sports. 

Because at the end of the day, this isn’t just about law. It’s about science and truth. And that’s why the Supreme Court must reject the transgender lie. 

The U.S. military launched strikes against Venezuela and captured its dictator, Nicolás Maduro, on Jan. 3 — emerging from the operation largely unscathed as it handicapped Venezuela’s defense systems and potentially conducted cyber operations against Caracas. 

Altogether, more than 150 aircraft — including U.S. bombers and fighter jets — were involved in the operation, successfully completing a ‘large-scale strike’ against Venezuela, according to President Donald Trump. Additionally, Caracas, Venezuela, suffered power outages early Jan. 3 — an indication of a potential cyber operation. 

Trump signaled that the U.S. may have been behind the blackout in Venezuela but did not provide details regarding the nature of a possible cyber operation targeting Venezuela’s civilian infrastructure. 

‘The lights of Caracas were largely turned off due to a certain expertise that we have,’ Trump said. 

Mark Cancian, a senior adviser with the Center for Strategic & International Studies’ defense and security department, said that while it’s unclear what exactly U.S. Cyber Command (CYBERCOM) and Space Command (SPACECOM) contributed to the operation, they may have penetrated some of Venezuela’s infrastructure.

‘We don’t really know what cyber did, some of the lights did go out, and Caine did talk about it,’ Cancian told Fox News Digital Wednesday. ‘It’s possible that (they) got into some of their command and control systems.’ 

Gen. Dan Caine, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, said that as U.S. helicopters with the extraction force and other law enforcement assets started to approach Venezuela’s shores, the U.S. ‘began layering different effects provided by SPACECOM, CYBERCOM, and other members of the inter-agency to create a pathway.’ 

According to Caine, U.S. aircraft involved in the operation included F-22, F-35, F/A-18 and EA-18 fighter jets, E-2 airborne early warning aircraft, B-1 bombers and ‘other support aircraft, as well as numerous remotely piloted drones.’ 

‘As the force began to approach Caracas, the joint air component began dismantling and disabling the air defense systems in Venezuela, employing weapons to ensure the safe passage of the helicopters into the target area,’ Caine told reporters. 

​​These aircraft involved in the mission also likely employed weapons including the AGM-88 HARM, or high-speed anti-radiation missile, which neutralizes radar-equipped enemy air defense systems and other air-to-ground munitions to take out Venezuela’s air defense systems, according to Cancian. 

A spokesperson for SPACECOM said that the command could not comment on the specific details of support SPACECOM provided to Operation Absolute Resolve, due to operational security concerns. But the spokesperson added that space-based capabilities including positioning, navigation and timing (PNT) that the military uses to support electronic warfare, in addition to other things, as well as satellite communications are ‘foundational to all modern military activities.’ 

‘To protect the Joint Force from space-enabled attack and ensure their freedom of movement, U.S. Space Command possesses the means and willingness to employ combat-credible capabilities that deter and counter our opponents and project power in all warfighting domains,’ the spokesperson said in a statement to Fox News Digital Friday.

CYBERCOM did not immediately respond to a request for comment from Fox News Digital. 

Other factors that contributed to the U.S. military’s success undermining Venezuela’s defenses were that CIA assets had been on the ground leading up to the raid, according to Cancian. Trump confirmed in October 2025 that he had authorized the CIA to conduct covert operations in Venezuela. 

‘They gave detailed descriptions of Maduro’s headquarters, and I’m sure located all of the air defense batteries around Caracas,’ Cancian said. ‘So we had an excellent sense about where everything was, combining that with overhead surveillance and also electromagnetic intelligence.’

Although Venezuela ‘on paper’ has powerful air defense systems, Cancian said that success pulling off the operation stemmed from solid efforts from the U.S. military to destroy and disrupt Venezuela’s air defense system, in conjunction with poor training for Venezuela’s military. 

Venezuela is equipped with Russian S-300 long-range surface-to-air missile systems, as well as Buk-M2E and Pechora-2M medium-range surface-to-air missile systems, according to the Modern War Institute at West Point. 

Of the more than 150 U.S. aircraft involved in the operation, only one was hit, and zero were shot down. An administration official told Fox News Digital that seven U.S. service members were injured during the operation, but were ‘well on their way to recovery.’

‘Seems those Russian air defenses didn’t quite work so well, did they?’ Secretary of War Pete Hegseth told reporters in Newport News, Virginia. 

Trump announced that U.S. special forces conducted a strike against Caracas, Venezuela, and seized Maduro and his wife, Cilia Flores. The two were taken to New York and appeared in a Manhattan federal court Jan. 5 on drug charges. Both pleaded not guilty.

The raid came after months of pressure on Venezuela amid a series of strikes in Latin American waters targeting alleged drug traffickers in alignment with Trump’s effort to crack down on the influx of drugs into the U.S.

The Trump administration repeatedly stated that it did not recognize Maduro as a legitimate head of state and insisted he was the leader of a drug cartel. Trump also said in December he thought it would be ‘smart’ for Maduro to step down. 

The Trump administration has since claimed that its actions seizing Maduro were justified as a ‘law enforcement’ operation, and Secretary of State Marco Rubio said congressional approval wasn’t necessary since the operation didn’t amount to an ‘invasion.’

Even so, lawmakers primarily on the left have questioned the legality of the operation in Venezuela, which was conducted without Congress’ approval.

‘This has been a profound constitutional failure,’ the top Democrat on the Senate Armed Services Committee, Sen. Jack Reed, D-R.I., said in a statement Jan. 3. ‘Congress — not the President — has the sole power to authorize war. Pursuing regime change without the consent of the American people is a reckless overreach and an abuse of power.’ 

‘The question now is not whether Maduro deserved removal. It is what precedent the United States has just set and what comes next.’

Fox News’ Morgan Phillips contributed to this report.