President Trump is calling on House Republicans to vote to release files related to disgraced financier Jeffrey Epstein, insisting he has ‘nothing to hide’ and accusing Democrats of using the case as a distraction from GOP accomplishments.

In a Truth Social post on Sunday, Trump urged House Republicans to vote in favor of releasing the documents, describing the controversy as a ‘Democrat hoax perpetrated by radical left lunatics.’

‘As I said on Friday night aboard Air Force One to the Fake News Media, House Republicans should vote to release the Epstein files, because we have nothing to hide, and it’s time to move on from this Democrat Hoax perpetrated by Radical Left Lunatics in order to deflect from the Great Success of the Republican Party, including our recent Victory on the Democrat ‘Shutdown,” Trump wrote.

Trump pointed to the Department of Justice’s (DOJ) previous release of thousands of pages of Epstein-related documents. 

He also noted that the agency is investigating possible ties between Epstein and ‘Democrat operatives’ including former President Bill Clinton, LinkedIn co-founder Reid Hoffman and former Treasury Secretary Larry Summers.

‘The House Oversight Committee can have whatever they are legally entitled to, I DON’T CARE!’ Trump said.

He added, ‘All I do care about is that Republicans get BACK ON POINT, which is the Economy, ‘Affordability’ (where we are winning BIG!), our Victory on reducing Inflation from the highest level in History to practically nothing, bringing down prices for the American People, delivering Historic Tax Cuts, gaining Trillions of Dollars of Investment into America (A RECORD!), the rebuilding of our Military, securing our Border, deporting Criminal Illegal Aliens, ending Men in Women’s Sports, stopping Transgender for Everyone, and so much more!’

Trump also argued that if the Democrats ‘had anything,’ it would have surfaced prior to last year’s presidential election.

‘Nobody cared about Jeffrey Epstein when he was alive and, if the Democrats had anything, they would have released it before our Landslide Election Victory,’ Trump said. ‘Some ‘members’ of the Republican Party are being ‘used,’ and we can’t let that happen. Let’s start talking about the Republican Party’s Record Setting Achievements, and not fall into the Epstein ‘TRAP,’ which is actually a curse on the Democrats, not us. MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN!’

Attorney General Pam Bondi announced Friday the DOJ would probe prominent Democrats after new emails revealed ties to Epstein.

In an X post Friday afternoon, Bondi said Jay Clayton, U.S. attorney for the Southern District of New York, would take the lead on the investigation.

‘Clayton is one of the most capable and trusted prosecutors in the country,’ Bondi wrote in the post. ‘As with all matters, the Department will pursue this with urgency and integrity to deliver answers to the American people.’

Fox News Digital has reached out to the White House, Bill Clinton, Reid Hoffman and Larry Summers for comment.

Fox News Digital’s Alexandra Koch contributed to this report.

Americans have delivered the same message in the last two elections: make life affordable again. 

They are tired of working harder for less, while the cost of everything — from housing to education to insurance — keeps rising. The affordability crisis touches every household, and its biggest driver is the one Washington refuses to tackle seriously: healthcare. 

Healthcare now consumes nearly one-fifth of our economy. It is the largest single cost for employers, the fastest-growing burden on families, and the quietest drain on national growth. Every dollar businesses spend on bloated health costs is a dollar not available for higher wages, new jobs or investment. Every dollar families spend on premiums or out-of-pocket costs is a dollar they can’t use for savings, housing or opportunity. Until we fix healthcare, we can’t fix affordability. 

It’s not that Washington ignores healthcare — it’s that it thinks about it too narrowly. Politicians obsess over temporary subsidies, tax credits and program expansions that make insurance more expensive to subsidize but never make care itself more affordable. The current fight over extending COVID-era insurance subsidies is a perfect example. Even supporters of Obamacare now admit that the ‘Affordable’ Care Act turned out to be unaffordable. Their answer is to borrow more money to prop up a system that keeps getting worse. That is not reform — it’s surrender.

There are three truths both parties must face. 

First, the system is already too expensive and locked in a pattern that guarantees it will grow more unaffordable every year. 

Second, 60 years of bureaucratic control — public and private — have utterly failed to contain costs.

Third, we must build a new model that relies on patients, doctors and employers — not massive government and insurance-company bureaucracies — to achieve the change Americans want. 

That model is not theoretical — it already works in the rest of our economy. When people have access to clear prices and quality information before making decisions, competition drives innovation, choice and lower costs. Technology has made this possible in every industry, from travel to retail to manufacturing. If the same principles applied to healthcare, we could unleash that same power to lower costs and improve quality. 

Instead, our opaque, bureaucratic system hides prices and multiplies middlemen. The average family of four now spends roughly $27,000 a year on health insurance — about the cost of a new Chevrolet or Toyota every 12 months. Most families don’t see the full bill because their employer or the government pays much of it, but that just means their wages are smaller. Paying the equivalent of a new car every year just for coverage is why Americans list affordability as their top economic concern.

Worse, nobody knows what anything costs — not patients, not families, not even the self-funded employers who pay the claims for their plan members. Bills arrive months after care, after passing through a maze of third-party administrators, repricers and billing vendors. That secrecy fuels waste, fraud and frustration. It’s estimated that 30% to 50% of all healthcare spending is administrative rather than medical. In short, America’s healthcare system has more middlemen than medicine. 

And who benefits? Powerful interest groups, insurers, consultants and bureaucracies that profit from complexity and confusion. As Tom Cruise shouted in ‘Jerry Maguire’: ‘Show me the money.’ Behind the speeches and lobbyists defending this broken system are people determined to protect their share of a bankrupting status quo. 

Second, 60 years of bureaucratic control — public and private — have utterly failed to contain costs.

Politicians can’t fight every entrenched interest group — but millions of patients and doctors armed with real price and quality information can. Transparency gives power back to those who actually deliver and receive care. When they can see what things cost, they can make smarter choices, reward efficiency and hold wasteful players accountable. Transparency doesn’t just lower prices — it changes who holds the power.

That’s why President Donald Trump’s price-transparency executive order in his first administration was a genuine breakthrough. It required hospitals and insurers to publish negotiated prices and, through the No Surprises Act, directed officials to create Advance Explanations of Benefits (AEOBs) so Americans could know their costs before receiving care. Trump started the transparency revolution. Under the Biden administration, enforcement stalled, and patients never saw the full benefit. 

Now Trump has the chance to finish what he began — and make transparency permanent. 

The administration has the authority to act right now under his ‘radical transparency’ executive order issued earlier this year, the No Surprises Act, and existing Employee Retirement Income Security Act authority. The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services should immediately issue and enforce AEOB rules. The Department of Labor should guarantee employers access to complete claims and pricing data while protecting patient privacy. If the administration moves quickly, Americans could begin receiving AEOBs in 2026 — and Trump could rightfully claim a historic victory for transparency, competition and higher wages before the midterms. 

Congress should reinforce this effort by passing the bipartisan Patients Deserve Price Tags Act, led by Kansas Republican Sen. Roger Marshall and Colorado Democrat Sen. John Hickenlooper. The bill secures employer access to data and ensures no third-party administrator can hide prices from the people who pay the bills. The executive branch can act today; Congress should make it permanent.

When every patient and employer can see prices, markets will clean out waste on their own. Transparency gives employers the power to negotiate directly with providers and patients the ability to choose wisely. Prices in the open create competition that middlemen can’t survive and costs they can’t hide. The ripple effect — lower costs, higher wages, more investment — will strengthen every part of the economy. 

If America truly wants to make life affordable again, healthcare transparency is where we start.

It’s bold. It’s achievable. And it’s the single biggest step we can take to restore prosperity for working families.   

Disclaimer: Gingrich 360 has consulting clients in the healthcare industry which may be impacted by changes to healthcare laws. 

President Donald Trump is set to host Saudi Arabia’s ambitious and influential Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman at the White House this week for high-level talks aimed at deepening economic and defense ties.

‘We’re more than meeting,’ Trump said on Friday en route to Florida for the weekend. ‘We’re honoring Saudi Arabia, the crown prince.’

While not formally a state visit, the plans include a welcome ceremony with military bands, a bilateral meeting in the Oval Office and a black-tie dinner in the evening.

Prince Mohammed bin Salman serves as the kingdom’s powerful understudy to his 89-year-old father, King Salman. Widely regarded as Saudi Arabia’s de facto ruler, he manages nearly all daily affairs of state and frequently represents the kingdom in international summits and diplomatic meetings.

Tuesday’s meetings will mark Prince Mohammed bin Salman’s first visit to the White House in more than seven years. Trump said last week that he plans to discuss strengthening ties with the Saudi leader and hopes the kingdom will move toward formally recognizing Israel.

‘The Abraham Accords will be a part we’re going to be discussing,’ Trump told reporters Friday. ‘I hope that Saudi Arabia will be joining the Abraham Accords fairly soon.’

Such a move would build on Trump’s signature foreign-policy initiative, the Abraham Accords, which normalized relations between Israel and several Arab nations during his presidency.

The crown prince last visited the White House in 2018, just months before Jamal Khashoggi, a dissident journalist and critic of the kingdom, was murdered at a Saudi consulate in Turkey. 

A subsequent CIA assessment concluded the prince had likely ordered the killing, though he has consistently denied involvement. Even so, Trump’s relationship with the crown prince appeared largely undeterred during his first term.

Trump last met the crown prince during his first state visit of his second term to Riyadh in May, where he was welcomed with a fighter jet escort, an honor guard wielding golden swords and a parade of Arabian horses flanking his limousine.

The Trump administration is also expected to finalize an agreement with bin Salman to allow Riyadh to purchase F-35 stealth fighter jets, Bloomberg reported Friday, citing a White House official.

The two leaders are expected to sign several other economic and defense agreements during the crown prince’s visit to the White House on Tuesday, the report added.

Attorney General Pam Bondi announced Saturday that the suspect wanted in connection to the attack on U.S. Attorney Alina Habba’s office in New Jersey this week has been taken into custody.

The FBI had identified the suspect Friday night as Keith Michael Lisa. 

Bondi said in an X post on Saturday morning that thanks to the FBI, the U.S. Marshals Service and Homeland Security Investigations, the suspect wanted in the attack on Habba’s office ‘is now in custody.’

‘No one will get away with threatening or intimidating our great U.S. Attorneys or the destruction of their offices,’ Bondi wrote.

‘We got him. This Justice Department under Attorney General Pam Bondi and our federal partners will not tolerate any acts of intimidation or violence toward law enforcement,’ Habba wrote on X on Saturday in reaction to the arrest. ‘Now justice will handle him.’

The FBI said Lisa was wanted for allegedly entering the Peter W. Rodino Federal Building in Newark, New Jersey, on Nov. 12, 2025, while in possession of a bat.

‘After being denied entry, he discarded the bat and returned,’ the FBI said. ‘Once inside the building, he proceeded to the U.S. Attorney’s Office where he damaged government property.’

A federal arrest warrant was issued for Lisa on Thursday in the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey in Newark after he was charged with possession of a dangerous weapon in a federal facility and depredation of federal property, the FBI added.

Bondi had announced Thursday that an individual attempted to confront Habba on Wednesday night, ‘destroyed property in her office’ and then ‘fled the scene.’

‘Thankfully, Alina is ok,’ Bondi added. ‘Any violence or threats of violence against any federal officer will not be tolerated. Period. This is unfortunately becoming a trend as radicals continue to attack law enforcement agents around the country.’

Habba said following the incident that, ‘I will not be intimidated by radical lunatics for doing my job.’

Lisa, 51, was described by authorities as being around 6 feet 3 inches tall and weighing between 200 and 230 pounds.

The FBI said Lisa has ties to New York City and Mahwah, N.J., and ‘should be considered dangerous.’

On its website, the Justice Department said that as Acting U.S. Attorney and Special Attorney to the United States Attorney General, Habba ‘is responsible for overseeing all federal criminal prosecutions and the litigation of all civil matters in New Jersey in which the federal government has an interest.’

‘Including the offices in Newark, Camden, and Trenton, Ms. Habba supervises a staff of approximately 155 federal prosecutors and approximately 130 support personnel,’ the Justice Department said.

In his iconic dissent in Morrison v. Olson (1988), the late, great Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia brilliantly articulated why the Independent Counsel Statute unconstitutionally intruded upon the Executive Branch. This dissent laid the groundwork for the Supreme Court’s current constitutionalist majority to restore sanity to separation-of-powers jurisprudence by returning power to its rightful place: the Executive Branch, all of whose power is vested in the President of the United States who is elected by all Americans.

Leftists and other anti-democratic big-government types call this view the ‘unitary executive theory.’ In reality, it is just Article II of the United States Constitution. We The People loan executive power to our duly-elected President; we do not divvy it up among unelected, leftist federal bureaucrats. Scalia’s most famous line in the Morrison dissent was his characterization of the statute as ‘a wolf in wolf’s clothing,’ a play on the idiom of ‘a wolf in sheep’s clothing.’ Scalia was illustrating how the violation of the separation of powers was unambiguous.

Former U.S. District Judge Mark Wolf of Massachusetts is another wolf in wolf’s clothing, despite his effort–aided by the leftist media–to package himself otherwise. Wolf was appointed to the bench by President Reagan in 1985, but he is no judicial conservative. Wolf received the stamp of approval from the most leftist home-state duo in Senate history: Ted Kennedy and John Kerry. The reason the approval of these radical senators was necessary lies in a century-old Senate tradition called the blue slip. Home-state senators can veto nominations of U.S. district judges, U.S. attorneys, and U.S. marshals. Nominees will not move forward without the return of blue slips from both home-state senators. Senators will not relinquish this extraordinary power because they are power-hungry and self-serving. They want to hand-select the federal prosecutor who could indict them, the federal judge who could try them, and the federal marshal who could escort them to prison.

Recently, Wolf resigned from his lifetime appointment. He had assumed senior status (a form of semi-retirement) during the Obama administration, allowing Obama—instead of the next Republican president–to appoint a leftist to replace Wolf in full-time judicial service. According to Wolf, President Trump has disregarded the rule of law in innumerable ways. Wolf wants to speak out about it and serve as a self-appointed spokesman for sitting judges who cannot. Wolf also has blasted the Supreme Court, claiming that the constitutionalist majority has enabled President Trump. Wolf has whined the Court has ruled 17 out of 20 times in the Trump administration’s favor on its emergency docket. Wolf has compared this success rate to that of players like Barry Bonds, Mark McGuire, and Sammy Sosa during Major League Baseball’s steroid era.

Wolf’s claim is absurd. The administration has succeeded so much at the Supreme Court thanks to its stellar team of legal all-stars, headed by Attorney General Pam Bondi and Solicitor General John Sauer. Many other brilliant attorneys also deserve credit for the administration’s sterling Supreme Court performance.

Moreover, the rulings by Wolf’s fellow activist judges are clearly partisan and lawless. How many cases does Wolf think the administration should have won before the Court? Eight out of 20? Ten? Twelve? His statistical conspiracy gibberish is devoid of even a scintilla of legal analysis. Wolf is only interested in peddling nonsense to bash justices he plainly detests. Wolf also conveniently ignores the other side of the statistical coin. According to analysis from former top Senate counsel Michael Fragoso, district judges in Massachusetts ruled against the Trump administration on 27 out of 29 temporary restraining orders and preliminary injunctions. Wolf apparently has no issue with this disparity; rather, he seems to view these rulings as coming from beacons of judicial integrity.

Wolf has a history of conspiracy hogwash. For over a decade, he pursued a baseless case against Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas, history’s greatest justice. According to Wolf, Thomas had wilfully failed to make required disclosures. The Judicial Conference categorically rejected Wolf’s theory. Yet, over a decade after the case had been closed, Wolf testified before a Senate Judiciary Committee subcommittee chaired by U.S. Senator Sheldon Whitehouse of Rhode Island, another partisan and deranged conspiracy theorist. During one exchange, Wolf told a U.S. senator that former Reagan Solicitor General Rex Lee would have been disturbed by, as Wolf saw it, unethical behavior of Thomas. That senator was Mike Lee of Utah, and Solicitor General Lee was his deceased father. Sen. Lee rightfully erupted at Wolf’s despicable statement.

Sitting judges cannot speak out against President Trump according to the Code of Conduct for United States Judges. They cannot use Wolf as their mouthpiece, either. The House and Senate Judiciary Committees need to subpoena Wolf to determine which judges are trashing President Trump through Wolf. If Wolf refuses to divulge the information, he should face contempt of Congress charges just like Trump allies Steve Bannon and Peter Navarro did.

If the identities of judges who speak through Wolf to bash President Trump become public, every one of those judges must face impeachment proceedings. No matter how difficult conviction by a two-thirds Senate supermajority will be, these rogue judges must suffer through the impeachment process to deter them and other judicial embarrassments from engaging in blatantly unethical behavior. These radical judges are illegally and dangerously subverting the will of American voters.

Wolf is a Sheldon Whitehouse, not a Ronald Reagan. Wolf plans to serve as the vehicle by which sitting judges can attempt to circumvent ethical constraints. He has spouted risible conspiracy tripe to denigrate the Supreme Court in general and Thomas in particular. He even has stooped to the all-time low of bringing up a senator’s deceased father in a pathetic attempt to score a few cheap political points. In short, Wolf is a disgrace to the federal judiciary, and his resignation is welcome news. Good riddance to this wolf in wolf’s clothing.

Former first lady Michelle Obama said Americans are ‘not ready’ to elect a woman to the White House, citing former Vice President Kamala Harris’ 2024 presidential election loss to President Donald Trump.

Obama made the comments to a crowd of women at the Brooklyn Academy of Music while promoting her new book, ‘The Look.’

‘As we saw in this past election, sadly, we ain’t ready,’ she said on Friday.

‘That’s why I’m like, don’t even look at me about running, because you all are lying. You’re not ready for a woman. You are not,’ she continued.

The former first lady went on to say that she does not believe men in America are comfortable with a woman leading them.

‘You know, we’ve got a lot of growing up to do, and there’s still, sadly, a lot of men who do not feel like they can be led by a woman, and we saw it,’ Obama said.

In her book, which was released on Nov. 4, Obama touches on her journey with fashion, hair and beauty, as well as her time in the White House as the first Black woman to serve as first lady. She wrote that women in politics are often judged based on their physical appearance instead of their ability to lead.

‘During our family’s time in the White House, the way I looked was constantly being dissected — what I wore, how my hair was styled. For a while now, I’ve been wanting to reclaim more of that story, to share it in my own way. I’m thankful to be at a stage in life where I feel comfortable expressing myself freely — wearing what I love and doing what feels true to me. And I’m excited to share some of what I’ve learned along the way,’ Obama wrote on Facebook in June while promoting her book ahead of its release.

”The Look’ is about more than fashion. It’s about confidence. It’s about identity. It’s about the power of authenticity. My hope is that this book sparks conversation and reflection about the ways we see ourselves — and the way our society defines beauty,’ she added.

From new stealth bombers to AI-enabled drones, the U.S. and China are reshaping airpower for a Pacific showdown — each betting its technology can keep the other out of the skies.

The U.S. is charging ahead with its next-generation F-47 fighter, while China scrambles to catch up with jets designed to match the F-35 and F-22.

After a brief program pause in 2024, the Air Force awarded Boeing the contract in March for the F-47, a manned sixth-generation fighter meant to anchor America’s next air superiority fleet. The first flight is expected in 2028.

At the same time, the B-21 Raider, the stealth successor to the B-2, is deep into testing at Edwards Air Force Base. The Air Force plans to buy at least 100 Raiders — each built to survive inside heavily defended Chinese airspace.

The Pentagon is also betting on Collaborative Combat Aircraft, or CCAs — drones designed to fly alongside fighters as ‘loyal wingmen.’ Prototypes from Anduril and General Atomics are already in the air. Officials say CCAs will let one pilot control several drones at once.

China outpaces the rest of the world in the commercial drone market, but that doesn’t necessarily give it the advantage from a military perspective. 

‘I’m not sure that’s really true. In terms of high-end military drones that are really important to this fight, the U.S. still has a pretty significant edge.’ said Eric Heginbotham, a research scientist at MIT’s Center for International Studies. 

He pointed to the Air Force’s stealth reconnaissance platforms — the RQ-170 and RQ-180 — and upcoming ‘loyal wingman’ drones designed to fly with fighters as proof that the U.S. still leads in advanced integration and stealth technology.

China’s leap forward

China’s airpower modernization has accelerated as the U.S. reshapes its force. Beijing has zeroed in on three priorities — stealth, engines, and carriers — the areas that long held its military back.

The Chengdu J-20, China’s flagship stealth fighter, is being fitted with the new WS-15 engine, a home-built powerplant meant to rival U.S. engines.

‘It took them a while to get out of the blocks on fifth generation, especially to get performance anywhere near where U.S. fifth gen was,’ Heginbotham said. ‘The J-20 really does not have a lot of the performance features that even the F-22 does, and we’ve had the F-22 for a long time.’

Meanwhile, China’s third aircraft carrier, the Fujian, was commissioned this fall — the first with electromagnetic catapults similar to U.S. Ford-class carriers. The move signals Beijing’s ambition to launch stealth jets from sea and project power well beyond its coast.

Together, the J-20, the carrier-based J-35, and the Fujian give China a layered airpower network — stealth jets on land and at sea backed by growing missile coverage.

Chinese military writings identify airfields as critical vulnerabilities. PLA campaign manuals call for striking runways early in a conflict to paralyze enemy air operations before they can begin. Analysts believe a few days of concentrated missile fire could cripple U.S. bases across Japan, Okinawa, and Guam.

‘The U.S. bases that are forward deployed—particularly on Okinawa, but also on the Japanese mainland and on Guam—are exposed to Chinese missile attack,’ said Mark Cancian, a retired Marine colonel and senior advisor at the Center for Strategic and International Studies. ‘In our war games, the Chinese would periodically sweep these air bases with missiles and destroy dozens, in some cases even hundreds, of U.S. aircraft.’

Heginbotham said that missile-heavy strategy grew directly out of China’s early airpower weakness.

‘They didn’t think that they could gain air superiority in a straight-up air-to-air fight,’ he said. ‘So you need another way to get missiles out — and that another way is by building a lot of ground launchers.’

Different strategies, same goal

The two militaries are taking different paths to the same target: air dominance over the Pacific.

The U.S. approach relies on smaller numbers of highly advanced aircraft linked by sensors and artificial intelligence. The goal: strike first, from long range, and survive in contested skies.

China’s model depends on volume — mass-producing fighters, missiles, and carrier sorties to overwhelm U.S. defenses and logistics.

‘U.S. fighter aircraft—F-35s, F-15s, F-22s—are relatively short-legged, so they have to get close to Taiwan if they’re going to be part of the fight,’ Cancian said. ‘They can’t fight from Guam, and they certainly can’t fight from further away. So if they’re going to fight, they have to be inside that Chinese defensive bubble.’

Both sides face the same challenge: surviving inside that bubble. China’s expanding missile range is pushing U.S. aircraft farther from the fight, while American bombers and drones are designed to break back in.

The fight to survive

Heginbotham said survivability — not dogfighting — will define the next decade of air competition.

‘We keep talking about aircraft as if it’s going to be like World War II — they go up, they fight each other. That’s not really our problem,’ he said. ‘Our problem is the air bases themselves and the fact that aircraft can be destroyed on the air base.’

China, he warned, is preparing for that reality while the U.S. is not.

‘They practice runway strikes in exercises, they’re modeling this stuff constantly,’ Heginbotham said. ‘Unlike the United States, China is hardening its air bases. The U.S. is criminally negligent in its refusal to harden its air bases.’

Cancian’s war-game findings echo that vulnerability. He said U.S. surface ships and aircraft would likely have to fall back under missile fire in the opening days of a conflict.

‘At the initial stages of a conflict, China would have a distinct advantage,’ Cancian said. ‘Now, over time, the U.S. would be able to reinforce its forces, and that would change.’

Looking ahead

The Pentagon’s fiscal 2026–27 budget will determine how fast the U.S. can build out its F-47s, B-21s, and CCAs — systems that will shape American airpower through the 2030s.

China’s rapid modernization is closing what was once a wide gap, but the U.S. still holds advantages in stealth integration, combat experience, and autonomous systems.

‘The ability to protect our aircraft, whatever form those aircraft take, on the ground is going to be central to our ability to fight in the Asia theater,’ Heginbotham said.

‘Survivability is going to be key … The ability to protect and disperse your firepower is going to be central to whether we can really stay in this game.’

For decades, U.S. air dominance was taken for granted. In the Pacific, that advantage is no longer guaranteed. 

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy announced new efforts to ‘clean up’ the nation’s energy sector amid a corruption scandal and near-constant attacks from Russia.

Zelenskyy met with Ukrainian Prime Minister Yulia Svyrydenko on Sunday morning, saying he called on lawmakers to revamp the leadership at the State Nuclear Regulatory Inspectorate and the State Energy Supervision Inspectorate, in addition to other efforts to expunge Russian influence in the sector.

‘In full coordination with law enforcement and anti-corruption bodies, ensure the renewal of the Asset Recovery and Management Agency and to promptly complete the competition for the position of Head of ARMA so that the new Head of the Agency can be selected by the end of this year,’ Zelenskyy wrote on X.

He further called on lawmakers to ‘promptly conduct an audit and prepare for sale the assets and shares in assets that belonged to Russian entities and to collaborators who fled to Russia. All such assets must operate one hundred percent in Ukraine’s interests – to support our defense and to contribute to Ukraine’s budget.’

The new energy initiative also comes after a former associate of Zelenskyy’s was accused of being the mastermind behind a $100 million embezzlement scheme involving nuclear energy.

Tymur Mindich, who was once Zelenskyy’s business partner, was identified by Ukraine’s anti-corruption watchdogs as being the orchestrator of a scheme involving top officials and Ukraine’s state nuclear power company. Prior to the scandal, some feared Mindich’s growing influence over Ukraine’s lucrative industries that he had access to because of his ties to Zelenskyy.

Mindich allegedly exerted control over loyalists who then pressured contractors for Energoatom, Ukraine’s state-owned nuclear power company, demanding kickbacks to bypass bureaucratic obstacles. The requested kickbacks were reportedly as high as 15%.

Zelenskyy himself was not implicated in the investigation.

The new effort comes as Zelenskyy says that his team is ‘working to ensure another start to negotiations’ on ending the war with Russia.

‘We are also counting on the resumption of POW exchanges – many meetings, negotiations, and calls are currently taking place to ensure this. I thank everyone who is helping. Thank you to everybody who stands with Ukraine,’ Zelenskyy wrote.

Ukraine’s president further said that he is preparing for a full week of diplomacy with Greece, France and Spain, as well as renewed negotiations over prisoner of war exchanges with Russia.

Zelenskyy will meet with officials in Greece on Sunday to discuss natural gas imports, while talks with France on Monday and Spain on Tuesday will center on bolstering Ukrainian air defenses.

Fox News’ Rachel Wolf contributed to this report.

Homeownership has long been part of the American dream, but that dream has been deferred.

Households in their 30s have an ownership rate of just 42% — more than 20 points lower than the national average.

The median age of all home buyers is a record-breaking 59, and the age of a first-time buyer is 40 — up from 29 in 1981.

As a solution, the Trump administration is floating a 50-year mortgage.

Though I disagree with that specific idea, I am heartened that they are brainstorming ways to tackle the problem.

We need a Marshall Plan for housing, a collection of broad initiatives to make homes more affordable and put the dream back on track.

The federal government can use its bully pulpit to get changes to red tape and regulations that are holding back building, and encourage policies that would increase housing and decrease costs.

To start, the White House and Fannie Mae should instead promote shorter, 20-year mortgages.

As Ed Pinto of the American Enterprise Institute has argued, a 20-year loan can be paid off ‘when the 30-year-term loan leaves most homeowners saddled with another decade or more of mortgage payments, the cash flow freed up from a paid-off shorter-term loan is available to fund a child’s post-secondary-education needs and later turbocharge one’s own retirement.’

The 20-year loan could be incentivized with a first-time buyer tax credit.

The decline in homeownership is a problem that must be addressed federally and locally.

This would be especially important today when the vast majority of taxpayers no longer itemize their tax returns — which means they cannot avail themselves of the deduction for mortgage interest.

That deduction always favored wealthy buyers of high-end homes anyway — so a targeted tax credit would help those who actually need it far more.

It’s time, as well, for the Trump White House to roll back one of the key initiatives of Elizabeth Warren’s pet project, the Consumer Protection Financial Agency.

The CPFC has pressured banks to limit mortgages to ‘plain vanilla’ mortgages, premised on its rules or what consumers can afford.

Adjustable rate loans and other ‘mortgage products’ can be right for some buyers — who should have a choice of how much risk they want to take in exchange for getting into the home market.

Even a low down payment might be hard to come up with, however, for those who can’t take advantage of generous in-laws.

Those without rich parents might turn to a ‘housing saving account’ — akin to the popular health savings accounts initiated by George W. Bush and which hold some $59 billion and are sheltered from taxation.

The new housing accounts should be tailored only for down payments, however — not long-term maintenance and other homeowner needs.

Buyers also are allowed today to take out $10,000 from their 401(k) penalty-free to go to a downpayment on a home.

Perhaps it’s time to raise that ceiling.

Of course, it goes almost without saying that even the most creative financing and incentives will fall short of addressing our housing needs without the most important problem: Supply.

There are many reasons why there aren’t enough starter homes.

Regulation in many cities makes construction difficult.

More retiring Boomers own second homes.

Banks have increasingly bought real estate as an investment and drive up prices.

Low turnover is another reason Gen X buyers have so much trouble breaking into the market.

During COVID, mortgage rates hit record lows and many refinanced.

These owners have a strong incentive not to trade a 3% mortgage for a new home and a much-higher rate.

Another key reason: more and more of us are living in small households or even alone.

The Census Bureau reports that, between 2019 and 2021, the number of households increased by more than 2 million a year.

That means we not only need more housing but more types of housing — many smaller units especially, rather than the two-acre, one house lots common in so many suburbs.

Here is where the limits of Washington’s hard power is reached.

Much of US housing policy is set at the hyper-local level, by planning boards and zoning boards.

That’s why outgoing New York City Mayor Eric Adams deserves so much credit for his ‘City of Yes’ rezoning in New York, which will permit safe basement apartments and ‘accessory dwelling units’ in parts of the city.

Accessory units — or ‘granny flats’ — can also be the means for older couples to sell the homes to younger households and downsize.

As part of a federal push, though, the Marshall Plan for Housing could encourage these same changes nationwide: Changing zoning to allow more housing; or taking undeveloped state land and providing tax incentives to build on them.

It’s the 18,000 municipalities across the country that are often standing in the way of what might be called naturally occurring affordable housing — small homes on small lots, like those of the original Levittown, where houses were just 750 square feet of living space.

Housing and Urban Development Secretary Scott Turner should urge localities to permit private, unsubsidized, small homes and apartment buildings, or what AEI’s Pinto terms ‘light-touch density.’

It’s far more likely to gain local approval than the subsidized, low-income housing Democrats have long favored, starting with the public housing the socialist Zohran Mamdani wants to revive.

Private building is also less costly; new housing units in California subsidized through the low income housing tax credit can cost upwards of $800,000 per units, a bonanza for developers but not many tenants.

Building costs for any housing, however, will inevitably go up as a result of another Trump policy: his 10% tariff on plentiful Canadian lumber and timber products and a 25% tariff on kitchen cabinets and furniture.

The de facto taxes are causing what the National Association of Home Builders calls ‘headwinds’ holding back new construction.

As a builder himself, he should rethink these tariffs.

Homeownership is a virtuous conspiracy making the nation better.

Owners are more likely to maintain neighborhoods than renters, more likely to improve schools and services by getting involved in local government — the essence of American federalism.

The decline in homeownership is a problem that must be addressed federally and locally.

But the Trump administration can take the lead, with tax breaks and the encouragement of construction.

The president can bring the dream alive again.

Several weeks into the government shutdown, the notion of reopening seemed impossible. 

Both Senate Republicans and Democrats were deeply entrenched in their positions for 41 days and 40 nights, and neither side wanted to appear to be caving to the other. 

Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., and his caucus wanted a guaranteed deal on expiring Obamacare subsidies, while Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D., argued that the government needed to reopen first. 

But an explosion of bipartisan talks, pushed by external pressures of federal workers going unpaid, federal food benefits in jeopardy, and air travel grinding to a standstill, invigorated a working group of senators to build an off-ramp out of the historic closure.

The result was a bipartisan deal that included a trio of spending bills meant to jump-start the government funding process, an extension of the original House-passed continuing resolution (CR) to Jan. 30, 2026, to provide time to fund the government the old-fashioned way, and a renewed guarantee that Senate Democrats would get their vote on expiring Obamacare subsidies. 

In the end, the shutdown dragged on for 43 days, with the climactic vote to end it and send the package to the White House unfolding in the House on Wednesday. 

House Appropriations Committee Chairman Tom Cole, R-Okla., who was part of crafting the final spending deal, said discussions on those three bills had begun ‘long before’ the shutdown. 

‘We certainly had some knotty issues, a hemp issue, disagreements on funding levels and all that. But for the most part, we worked those through. And I would tell you from our side and I would assume from the other, the three big players were the Cardinals themselves,’ Cole said, referring to the three House Republican subcommittee chairs who led discussions on the three individual bills.

‘Our Democratic colleagues that voted against the bills had plenty of input in the bills. The real question will be in the next package — can you guys bring any votes? If you’re not going to bring any votes, our negotiation will be a waste of time, and we’ll be required to construct a coalition that’s all Republican.’ 

Nevertheless, most of the eight Senate Democrats that crossed the aisle viewed the guarantee of a vote on Obamacare as the turning point, though it lacked the guaranteed outcome that Schumer and the majority of the caucus sought. 

‘There was no vote that we were going to get on the Affordable Care Act premium tax credits,’ Sen. Jeanne Shaheen, D-N.H., said on Sunday, referring to Obamacare. ‘We have a guaranteed vote by a guaranteed date on a bill that we will write, not that the Republicans will write.’

For Sen. Tim Kaine, D-Va., who proved the decisive Democratic vote that sealed the deal on the proposal in the Senate, it was provisions that would rehire and protect workers fired by the Trump administration. 

Kaine recalled that it was just hours before the Senate was set to take a key test vote on the CR that he changed his mind. Up to that point, the White House had not wanted to include language that would have reversed the reductions in force (RIFs) that had been ordered at the start of the shutdown. 

But it was through Sen. Katie Britt, R-Ala., who was a key negotiator in the Senate, that Kaine got the White House on board. 

‘I said, I’m a no if you don’t do that, I’m a no, and you know that it was 4:45 p.m. in the afternoon on Sunday when they told me they would do that,’ he said.

Kaine noted that with 320,000 federal workers in Virginia and 2 million nationally, he recognized it was a big ask. 

‘And I told her, and when I explained it to her, she said, that’s a reasonable ask, but that the White House didn’t want to do it,’ he said. ‘And she was a little bit of a go-between and helping me.’