Connect with us

Politics

What Candidates in Tight House Races Are Saying About Abortion

Published

on

What Candidates in Tight House Races Are Saying About Abortion

22 Democrats say

restore Roe v. Wade.

4 Democrats say

it’s no place for government.

9 Democrats say

it’s between a woman and her doctor.

21 Republicans say

no federal ban.

10 Republicans say

it’s best left up to the states.

Advertisement

5 Republicans say

they’re pro-life.

Josh Riley, the Democratic challenger running for Congress in New York’s 19th District, has a clear message on abortion: “I believe that women’s health care decisions are women’s health care decisions and that politicians should stay the hell out of it.”

And his Republican opponent, the incumbent Representative Marc Molinaro, is saying nearly the same thing: “I believe health care decisions should be between a woman and her doctor, not Washington.”

Across the country’s most competitive House races, Republicans have spent months trying to redefine themselves on abortion, going so far as to borrow language that would not feel out of place at a rally of Vice President Kamala Harris. Many Republicans who until recently backed federal abortion restrictions are now saying the issue should be left to the states.

At least a half-dozen Republican candidates have put out direct-to-camera ads declaring their opposition to a federal abortion ban. Instead, they say, they support exceptions to existing state laws and back protections for reproductive health care, such as I.V.F.

Advertisement

Republican candidates address abortion head-on in campaign videos

Click on any video in the grid to play it.

Anthony D’Esposito

Republican, N.Y. 4

Advertisement

Mike Lawler

Republican, N.Y. 17

Advertisement

Marc Molinaro

Republican, N.Y. 19

Joe Kent

Advertisement

Republican, Wash. 3

Michelle Steel

Republican, C.A. 45

Advertisement

Juan Ciscomani

Republican, Ariz. 6

Advertisement

Democrats have raised the possibility of a nationwide abortion ban should Republicans win in November, and they are framing the campaign as another referendum on the Supreme Court’s Dobbs decision, which overturned Roe v. Wade. They are hoping to continue their run of electoral successes since the 2022 decision to win back control of the House.

Any new federal legislation on abortion would have to pass both the House and the Senate and be signed by the president to become law. But whichever party emerges with a majority in the House will have the ability to dictate the legislative agenda, including whether measures to restrict or expand abortion access have the chance to pass.

Republicans in California and New York in particular, who are running in swing districts in blue states that favor abortion rights, have felt the most pressure to address the issue directly. “If we don’t talk about the issue, we become whatever the Democrats say we are,” said Will Reinert, the press secretary for the National Republican Congressional Committee.

Advertisement

To better understand how abortion is playing a role in these campaigns, The New York Times surveyed candidates from both parties in the most competitive House races about their support for federal limits on abortion. The Times also looked at voting records, issues listed on campaign websites, debate and media coverage, and endorsements from major abortion rights and anti-abortion groups.

The Times survey showed that while Republicans are notably focused on what they will not do on abortion at the federal level, their Democratic opponents are talking about what they will do to protect abortion rights. Nearly all the Democratic candidates said they supported restoring the protections of Roe v. Wade, which would allow access to abortion until fetal viability, or around 24 weeks, in every state.

In attack ads, Democrats are pointing to their opponents’ voting records or past statements as evidence of extremism — despite what they may be saying now.

Democratic candidates highlight Republicans’ records on abortion in campaign videos

Click on any video in the grid to play it.

Advertisement

Josh Riley campaign

Democrat, N.Y. 19

Will Rollins campaign

Advertisement

Democrat, Calif. 41

More broadly, abortion rights groups said Republicans are misleading voters by claiming they do not support an outright abortion “ban,” when they might support a federal “limit” or “standard,” such as the 15-week proposal put forward by Senator Lindsey Graham in 2022.

Advertisement

“They are playing around with the semantics; they are clearly testing out different framing and messaging in an attempt to try and deceive voters because they realize how politically unpopular their policy stances are,” said Jessica Arons, a director of policy and government affairs at the American Civil Liberties Union.

Republicans in the Times survey almost universally declined to answer questions about gestational limits. Only one, Representative Don Bacon of Nebraska, said he supported a specific federal limit, in the third trimester.

What Republican candidates are saying about abortion

I do not support a federal abortion ban. The Dobbs decision decided this was an issue left to the states and that’s where I believe policy on the issue should be decided.

David Valadao Republican, Calif. 22

Advertisement

At the federal level, I would only support legislation to outlaw late-term abortion, with protections for the three exceptions. Otherwise, states must vote on this issue.

Don Bacon Republican, Neb. 2

I am pro-life, believe abortion stops a beating heart, and oppose taxpayer funded abortion. Since the U.S. Supreme Court has returned this issue to the states, I will not vote for a national abortion ban.

Gabe Evans Republican, Colo. 8

Advertisement

The Republican shift away from publicly supporting a federal ban follows the lead of former President Donald J. Trump, who has changed his own language on the issue after seeing the electoral backlash to the Dobbs decision.

As recently as 2021, a majority of House Republicans — including seven incumbents in this year’s tossup races — co-sponsored the Life at Conception Act, a bill that would have amounted to a nationwide abortion ban. This year, Representative Scott Perry of Pennsylvania’s 10th District was the only incumbent in a competitive race to stay on as a co-sponsor.

Two Republican incumbents who now say they oppose a national ban — Representatives Ken Calvert and David Valadao in California — voted in favor of a 20-week ban that passed the House in 2017. Representative Mariannette Miller-Meeks, an Iowa Republican, co-sponsored a 15-week ban on abortion in 2022. She did not respond to questions about whether she still supports it.

Other Republicans described themselves as personally “pro-life” but said they accepted the abortion laws in place in their states. Rob Bresnahan Jr., a challenger in Pennsylvania’s 8th District, said he supported the state’s current law, which allows abortion until 24 weeks.

Democrats, when they were not attacking Republicans, leaned into language about personal freedom, with many in the survey saying the government should not be involved in medical decisions.

Advertisement

Another common refrain was that the decision to have an abortion should be “between a woman and her doctor.” Two Democrats used similar language rather than explicitly calling for federal abortion protections.

What Democratic candidates are saying about abortion

Abortion is health care. This is not a place for government interference. I trust every person I know and love, and any New Mexican to make that decision for themselves.

Gabe Vasquez Democrat, N.M. 2

I have always believed that this decision should be left between a woman, her doctor and within her own faith.

Advertisement

Rudy Salas Democrat, Calif. 22

I believe the decisions a woman makes for her body and her family are deeply personal and politicians have no place telling her what she can and cannot do.

Tony Vargas Democrat, Neb. 2

By appearing to moderate their stance on abortion, candidates have risked losing the backing of prominent advocacy groups. Only three Republicans in the tossup races received an endorsement from Susan B. Anthony Pro-Life America, and seven received one from National Right to Life.

Advertisement

Two major abortion rights groups, by contrast, endorsed nearly all the Democratic candidates. Planned Parenthood — whose political action fund is pouring $40 million into the campaign — endorsed all but six candidates, while Reproductive Freedom for All endorsed all but four.

Endorsements from major anti-abortion groups

Candidate District Susan B. Anthony Pro-Life America National Right to Life

Anderson

Va. 7

Va. 7

Bacon*

Advertisement

Neb. 2

Neb. 2

Buckhout

N.C. 1

N.C. 1

Begich

Alaska At-Large

Advertisement
Alaska At-Large

Ciscomani*

Ariz. 6

Ariz. 6

Miller-Meeks*

Iowa 1

Iowa 1

Nunn*

Advertisement

Iowa 3

Iowa 3

Perry*

Pa. 10

Pa. 10

Schweikert*

Ariz. 1

Advertisement
Ariz. 1

Barrett

Mich. 7

Mich. 7

Bresnahan Jr.

Pa. 8

Pa. 8

Calvert*

Advertisement

Calif. 41

Calif. 41

Chavez-DeRemer*

Ore. 5

Ore. 5

Coughlin

Ohio 13

Advertisement
Ohio 13

D’Esposito*

N.Y. 4

N.Y. 4

Duarte*

Calif. 13

Calif. 13

Evans

Advertisement

Colo. 8

Colo. 8

Garcia*

Calif. 27

Calif. 27

Herrell

N.M. 2

Advertisement
N.M. 2

Junge

Mich. 8

Mich. 8

Kean Jr.*

N.J. 7

N.J. 7

Kent

Advertisement

Wash. 3

Wash. 3

Lawler*

N.Y. 17

N.Y. 17

Mackenzie

Pa. 7

Advertisement
Pa. 7

Molinaro*

N.Y. 19

N.Y. 19

Steel*

Calif. 45

Calif. 45

Theriault

Advertisement

Maine 2

Maine 2

Valadao*

Calif. 22

Calif. 22

Advertisement

Endorsements from major abortion rights groups

Candidate District Planned Parenthood Repro. Freedom for All

Altman

N.J. 7

N.J. 7

Baccam

Iowa 3

Advertisement
Iowa 3

Bohannan

Iowa 1

Iowa 1

Bynum

Ore. 5

Ore. 5

Caraveo*

Advertisement

Colo. 8

Colo. 8

Cartwright*

Pa. 8

Pa. 8

Davis*

N.C. 1

Advertisement
N.C. 1

Engel

Ariz. 6

Ariz. 6

Gillen

N.Y. 4

N.Y. 4

Gluesenkamp Perez*

Advertisement

Wash. 3

Wash. 3

Golden*

Maine 2

Maine 2

Gray

Calif. 13

Advertisement
Calif. 13

Hertel

Mich. 7

Mich. 7

Jones

N.Y. 17

N.Y. 17

McDonald Rivet

Advertisement

Mich. 8

Mich. 8

Peltola*

Alaska At-Large

Alaska At-Large

Riley

N.Y. 19

Advertisement
N.Y. 19

Rollins

Calif. 41

Calif. 41

Salas

Calif. 22

Calif. 22

Shah

Advertisement

Ariz. 1

Ariz. 1

Stelson

Pa. 10

Pa. 10

Sykes*

Ohio 13

Advertisement
Ohio 13

Tran

Calif. 45

Calif. 45

Vargas

Neb. 2

Neb. 2

Vasquez*

Advertisement

N.M. 2

N.M. 2

Vindman

Va. 7

Va. 7

Whitesides

Calif. 27

Advertisement
Calif. 27

Wild*

Pa. 7

Pa. 7

Representative Jared Golden, the Democratic incumbent in Maine’s 2nd Congressional District — an area Mr. Trump won by six points in 2020 — did not get Planned Parenthood’s endorsement this year. He said the reason was his vote for the 2024 defense policy bill, which included an amendment blocking reimbursement for abortion travel costs for service members.

Mr. Golden said he was not concerned about the lack of support from the group, pointing instead to his co-sponsorship of the Women’s Health Protection Act, a bill to restore the protections of Roe.

“I’m quite confident that voters in Maine know where I stand,” he said.

Advertisement

Compare statements from House candidates on abortion policy

The New York Times asked candidates and their campaigns about support for a federal minimum standard on abortion. Statements have been lightly edited for length and clarity.

District

Dem. position

Rep. position

Alaska At‑Large

Advertisement

Alaska At‑Large

Mary Peltola*

No response to survey.

“Roe v. Wade set a precedent that was the law of the land for 50 years. She believes that standard was the right one — furthermore we know the importance of having strong exceptions for rape, incest, life of mother and health of mother throughout.”

Advertisement

Nick Begich

No response to survey.

“While I strongly support efforts that defend the rights of those not yet born, the courts have made it clear, abortion is a state issue and not an issue for the federal government to decide.”

Ariz. 1

Advertisement

Ariz. 1

Amish Shah

No response to survey.

“As a doctor, I understand that these personal decisions should be made by women and their physicians. That’s why we need to codify Roe v. Wade and give women across the country the right to control their own bodies and health care.”

Advertisement

David Schweikert*

No response to survey.

“It’s pretty clear that it belongs to the states,” via Business Insider.

Ariz. 6

Advertisement

Ariz. 6

Kirsten Engel

No response to survey.

“Protecting women’s reproductive freedoms at the federal level will be one of my top priorities when elected to Congress. Women had those protections for over 50 years when Roe v. Wade was the law of the land, and that is what I will advocate for us to return to.”

Advertisement

Juan Ciscomani*

No response to survey.

“I’m pro-life, I reject the extremes, and I trust women. I’m against a federal ban on abortion. I’m for timetables and exceptions, including for rape, incest and the life of the mother,” via campaign site.

Calif. 13

Advertisement

Calif. 13

Adam Gray

No response to survey.

“What I support and will vote for is restoring Roe v. Wade into federal law so that women regain the federal rights they had for generations.”

Advertisement

John Duarte*

No response to survey.

“Congressman Duarte opposes federal abortion restrictions.”

Calif. 22

Advertisement

Calif. 22

Rudy Salas

No response to survey.

“I have always believed that this decision should be left between a woman, her doctor and within her own faith. Women should have the freedom to choose what happens with their own bodies and to determine their own health care.”

Advertisement

David Valadao*

No response to survey.

“I do not support a federal abortion ban. The Dobbs decision decided this was an issue left to the states and that’s where I believe policy on the issue should be decided.”

Calif. 27

Advertisement

Calif. 27

George Whitesides

No response to survey.

“I strongly support a woman’s right to make her own health care decisions, and if elected to Congress, I will vote to codify Roe v. Wade to ensure reproductive freedom for all Americans.”

Advertisement

Mike Garcia*

No response to survey.

“I oppose a national abortion ban — California’s law on abortion stays the law — and I support exceptions for rape, incest and life of the mother.”

Calif. 41

Advertisement

Calif. 41

Will Rollins

No response to survey.

“I support a federal minimum standard for abortion. In Congress, I will advocate for legislation that restores Roe v. Wade, which prohibits states from banning abortions before fetal viability. It’s critical that we protect a woman’s right to choose nationwide.”

Advertisement

Ken Calvert*

No response to survey.

“Congressman Calvert does not support a federal abortion ban and supports the right of Californians to determine this for themselves.”

Calif. 45

Advertisement

Calif. 45

Derek Tran

No response to survey.

“Derek Tran supports enshrining reproductive rights into law as California voters did through Proposition 1 in 2022.”

Advertisement

Michelle Steel*

No response to survey.

“Michelle’s position has always been, and remains, that this issue is best left up to the states, and she does not support a national ban on abortion.”

Colo. 8

Advertisement

Colo. 8

Yadira Caraveo*

No response to survey.

“Rep. Caraveo believes we need to codify Roe v. Wade. This was the law of the land for decades, and since the Dobbs decision, the lives of far too many women have been at risk.”

Advertisement

Gabe Evans

No response to survey.

“I am pro-life, believe abortion stops a beating heart, and oppose taxpayer-funded abortion. Since the U.S. Supreme Court has returned this issue to the states, I will not vote for a national abortion ban.”

Iowa 1

Advertisement

Iowa 1

Christina Bohannan

No response to survey.

“On Day 1 in Congress, I will work to codify Roe v. Wade and ensure women in Iowa and across the country once again have the freedom to make their own health care decisions.”

Advertisement

Mariannette Miller-Meeks*

No response to survey.

“The congresswoman has been clear that she is pro-life with the exceptions of rape, incest, and life of the mother.”

Iowa 3

Advertisement

Iowa 3

Lanon Baccam

No response to survey.

“It’s more important than ever to restore the protections of Roe v. Wade, and that’s why I’ll support the Women’s Health Protection Act in Congress. I believe women’s health care decisions should be between her and her doctor — not politicians.”

Advertisement

Zach Nunn*

No response to survey.

“He is pro-life, but has voted for exceptions. He opposes a national abortion ban.”

Maine 2

Advertisement

Maine 2

Jared Golden*

No response to survey.

“I’m a cosponsor of the Women’s Health Protection Act, to restore Roe, and I would vote for it if it came to the floor again.”

Advertisement

Austin Theriault

No response to survey.

“Austin opposes and will vote against a national abortion ban.”

Mich. 7

Advertisement

Mich. 7

Curtis Hertel

No response to survey.

“When Roe was overturned and abortion rights came under attack in our state, I worked across the aisle to get rid of the 1931 abortion ban and fought to enshrine abortion rights in Michigan’s constitution. I’m running to make Roe the law of the land and protect reproductive freedom.”

Advertisement

Tom Barrett

No response to survey.

“Tom does not support a federal ban. He has consistently argued this is a decision for the states and while he disagrees with Prop. 3, Michigan voters have made that decision.”

Mich. 8

Advertisement

Mich. 8

Kristen McDonald Rivet

No response to survey.

“After Roe was overturned, I protected abortion rights in Michigan by helping to repeal our state’s 1931 ban without exceptions for rape or incest. In Congress, I’ll fight for a federal law restoring the Roe standard across America.”

Advertisement

Paul Junge

No response to survey.

“I would never and have never supported a national abortion ban.”

Neb. 2

Advertisement

Neb. 2

Tony Vargas

No response to survey.

“I believe the decisions a woman makes for her body, and her family, are deeply personal and politicians have no place telling her what she can and cannot do. In Congress, I’ll vote to codify the protections earned from the Roe v. Wade decision into federal law.”

Advertisement

Don Bacon*

No response to survey.

“I support the Nebraska law that puts a reasonable three-month restriction on abortions with exceptions for rape, incest and the health of the mother. At the federal level, I would only support legislation to outlaw late-term abortion, with protections for the three exceptions. Otherwise, states must vote on this issue.”

N.M. 2

Advertisement

N.M. 2

Gabe Vasquez*

No response to survey.

“Abortion is health care. This is not a place for government interference. I trust every person I know and love, and any New Mexican, to make that decision for themselves.”

Advertisement

Yvette Herrell

No response to survey.

“Yvette has been clear that since the Dobbs decision returned abortion policy to the states, she does not support a federal ban.”

N.J. 7

Advertisement

N.J. 7

Sue Altman

No response to survey.

“Sue will work to protect access to contraception, reproductive choice, and women’s health,” via campaign site.

Advertisement

Thomas Kean Jr.*

No response to survey.

“Tom is opposed to a national abortion ban. He has voted to protect access to mifepristone and believes any legislation should be left to the voters of each state to advocate for their positions to their legislatures.”

N.Y. 17

Advertisement

N.Y. 17

Mondaire Jones

No response to survey.

“We must enshrine protections for abortion into federal law.”

Advertisement

Mike Lawler*

No response to survey.

“He does not and never will support a national abortion ban.”

N.Y. 19

Advertisement

N.Y. 19

Josh Riley

No response to survey.

“I believe that women’s health care decisions are women’s health care decisions and that politicians should stay the hell out of it. In Congress, I will codify the right to abortion as it existed under Roe v. Wade into law.”

Advertisement

Marc Molinaro*

No response to survey.

“I believe health care decisions should be between a woman and her doctor, not Washington. I kept my promise to reject a national abortion ban — keeping New York’s laws in place.”

N.Y. 4

Advertisement

N.Y. 4

Laura Gillen

No response to survey.

“The standard should be the same as it was the day before the disastrous Dobbs decision. It worked for a half a century, and we should return to it.”

Advertisement

Anthony D’Esposito*

No response to survey.

“Congressman D’Esposito does not support a nationwide abortion ban and believes legislating on abortion should fall under the purview of state governments.”

N.C. 1

Advertisement

N.C. 1

Don Davis*

No response to survey.

“Congress must take action and codify Roe v. Wade. He firmly believes that a woman’s health decisions should remain private between her and her doctor,” via campaign site.

Advertisement

Laurie Buckhout

No response to survey.

“As the only candidate to be endorsed by the pro-life SBA (Susan B. Anthony) List, I believe every life is precious and would vote to preserve life, including the mother’s,” via The Perquimans Weekly.

Ohio 13

Advertisement

Ohio 13

Emilia Sykes*

No response to survey.

“Congresswoman Sykes has a strong record of supporting the protections provided under Roe that give women across the country the right to make decisions about what is best for their bodies.”

Advertisement

Kevin Coughlin

No response to survey.

“Issues related to abortion are best left to the states, and there should be no federal ban.”

Ore. 5

Advertisement

Ore. 5

Janelle Bynum

No response to survey.

“Rep. Bynum supports codifying Roe v. Wade into federal law so that women across the country can have those rights back. This is a decision that should be kept between a woman and her doctors.”

Advertisement

Lori Chavez-DeRemer*

No response to survey.

“The congresswoman doesn’t support any federal standard limiting Oregonians’ access to abortion.”

Pa. 7

Advertisement

Pa. 7

Susan Wild*

No response to survey.

“I have always believed that private medical decisions, including whether or not to receive abortion care, should be made by a woman, her doctor, her partner and her faith if she so chooses.”

Advertisement

Ryan Mackenzie

No response to survey.

“He’s opposed to a national abortion ban; he supports exceptions for rape, incest, and life of the mother.”

Pa. 8

Advertisement

Pa. 8

Matt Cartwright*

No response to survey.

“I strongly support the Women’s Health Protection Act, which would restore Roe’s protections into federal law. We should trust women with their health care decisions, not politicians.”

Advertisement

Rob Bresnahan Jr.

No response to survey.

“Rob Bresnahan does not support a national abortion ban and does support the current Pennsylvania protections of 24 weeks and exceptions for rape, incest, and the life of the mother. ”

Pa. 10

Advertisement

Pa. 10

Janelle Stelson

No response to survey.

“I think these most intimate health care decisions should be made by women and their doctors … If elected, I will put those decisions back in the hands of women, where they belong.”

Advertisement

Scott Perry*

No response to survey.

“Scott Perry believes firmly in the sanctity of Life — period. He makes exceptions for circumstances that involve rape, incest and danger to the life of the mother,” via campaign site.

Va. 7

Advertisement

Va. 7

Eugene Vindman

No response to survey.

“In Congress, I will fight to make sure that the rights of women and girls in Virginia are never dependent on politicians in Richmond or Washington by voting to restore the protections of Roe nationwide.”

Advertisement

Derrick Anderson

No response to survey.

“Derrick opposes and would vote against a national abortion ban.”

Wash. 3

Advertisement

Wash. 3

Marie Gluesenkamp Perez*

No response to survey.

“Marie is an original co-sponsor of the Women’s Health Protection Act and supports codifying the abortion protections of Roe v. Wade in federal law, as well as ensuring women have continued access to contraception and I.V.F.”

Advertisement

Joe Kent

No response to survey.

“Following the Supreme Court decision that made abortion a state issue, Joe Kent opposes any new federal legislation on the issue.”

Methodology

Advertisement

The New York Times survey asked candidates or their campaigns two questions: 1) Do you support any federal minimum standard on abortion? 2) If so, until how many weeks in pregnancy (i.e. 6 weeks, 15 weeks, viability, etc.)?

Those surveyed were major-party candidates for the U.S. House of Representatives whose races were rated “tossups” by the Cook Political Report at any point in October 2024. Alaska’s at-large congressional district includes four candidates and will be decided by ranked-choice voting; the two candidates who received the most votes in the primary were included in the survey. All but six candidates responded to emailed requests for comment. In these cases, position summaries were taken from campaign websites or from other public statements.

Note: Counts of candidate statements in the top graphic were taken from survey responses only.

Additional work by June Kim.

Advertisement

Politics

Iran fires missiles at US bases across Middle East after American strikes on nuclear, IRGC sites

Published

on

Iran fires missiles at US bases across Middle East after American strikes on nuclear, IRGC sites

NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!

Iran launched missile and drone strikes targeting U.S. military facilities in multiple Middle Eastern countries Friday, retaliating after coordinated U.S.–Israeli strikes on Iranian military and nuclear-linked sites.

Explosions were reported in or near areas hosting American forces in Bahrain, Qatar, the United Arab Emirates, Kuwait and Jordan, according to regional officials and state media accounts. Several of those governments said their air defense systems intercepted incoming projectiles.

It remains unclear whether any U.S. service members were killed or injured, and the extent of potential damage to American facilities has not yet been confirmed. U.S. officials have not publicly released casualty figures or formal damage assessments.

Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) described the operation as a direct response to what Tehran called “aggression” against Iranian territory earlier in the day. Iranian officials claimed they targeted U.S. military infrastructure and command facilities.

Advertisement

Explosions were reported in or near areas hosting American forces in Bahrain, pictured above. (Photo by Petty Officer 2nd Class Adelola Tinubu/U.S. Naval Forces Central Command/U.S. 5th Fleet )

The United States military earlier carried out strikes against what officials described as high-value Iranian targets, including IRGC facilities, naval assets and underground sites believed to be associated with Iran’s nuclear program. One U.S. official told Fox News that American forces had “suppressed” Iranian air defenses in the initial wave of strikes.

Tomahawk cruise missiles were used in the opening phase of the U.S. operation, according to a U.S. official. The campaign was described as a multi-geographic operation designed to overwhelm Iran’s defensive capabilities and could continue for multiple days. Officials also indicated the U.S. employed one-way attack drones in combat for the first time.

IF KHAMENEI FALLS, WHO TAKES IRAN? STRIKES WILL EXPOSE POWER VACUUM — AND THE IRGC’S GRIP

Smoke rises after reported Iranian missile attacks, following strikes by the United States and Israel against Iran, in Manama, Bahrain, Feb. 28, 2026. (Reuters)

Advertisement

Iran’s retaliatory barrage targeted countries that host American forces, including Bahrain — home to the U.S. Navy’s Fifth Fleet — as well as Qatar’s Al Udeid Air Base and the UAE’s Al Dhafra Air Base. Authorities in those nations reported intercepting many of the incoming missiles. At least one civilian was killed in the UAE by falling debris, according to local authorities.

Iranian officials characterized their response as proportionate and warned of additional action if strikes continue. A senior U.S. official described the Iranian retaliation as “ineffective,” though independent assessments of the overall impact are still developing.

Smoke rises over the city after the Israeli army launched a second wave of airstrikes on Iran in Tehran on Feb. 28, 2026. (Fatemeh Bahrami/Anadolu via Getty Images)

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

Regional governments condemned the strikes on their territory as violations of sovereignty, raising the risk that additional countries could become directly involved if escalation continues.

Advertisement

The situation remains fluid, with military and diplomatic channels active across the region. Pentagon officials are expected to provide further updates as damage assessments and casualty reviews are completed.

Fox News’ Jennifer Griffin contributed to this report. 

Related Article

Iraq War flashbacks? Experts say Trump’s Iran buildup signals pressure campaign, not regime change
Continue Reading

Politics

Why Iran resists giving up its nuclear program, even as Trump threatens strikes

Published

on

Why Iran resists giving up its nuclear program, even as Trump threatens strikes

Embassy staffers and dependents evacuating, airlines suspending service, eyes in Iran warily turning skyward for signs of an attack.

The prospects of a showdown between the U.S. and Iran loom ever higher, as massive American naval and air power lies in wait off Iran’s shores and land borders.

Yet little of that urgency is felt in Iran’s government. Rather than quickly acquiescing to President Trump’s demands, Iranian diplomats persist in the kind of torturously slow diplomatic dance that marked previous discussions with the U.S., a pace that prompted Trump to declare on Friday that the Iranians were not negotiating in “good faith.”

But For Iran’s leadership, Iranian experts say, concessions of the sort Trump are asking for about nuclear power and the country’s role in the Middle East undermine the very ethos of the Islamic Republic and the decades-old project it has created.

“As an Islamic theocracy, Iran serves as a role model for the Islamic world. And as a role model, we cannot capitulate,” said Hamid Reza Taraghi, who heads international affairs for Iran’s Islamic Coalition Party, or Hezb-e Motalefeh Eslami.

Advertisement

Besides, he added, “militarily we are strong enough to fight back and make any enemy regret attacking us.”

Even as another round of negotiations ended with no resolution this week, the U.S. has completed a buildup involving more than 150 aircraft into the region, along with roughly a third of all active U.S. ships.

Observers say those forces remain insufficient for anything beyond a short campaign of a few weeks or a high-intensity kinetic strike.

Iran would be sure to retaliate, perhaps against an aircraft carrier or the many U.S. military bases arrayed in the region. Though such an attack is unlikely to destroy its target, it could damage or at least disrupt operations, demonstrating that “American power is not untouchable,” said Hooshang Talé, a former Iranian parliamentarian.

Tehran could also mobilize paramilitary groups it cultivated in the region, including Iraqi militias and Yemen’s Houthis, Talé added. Other U.S. rivals, such as Russia and China, may seize the opportunity to launch their own campaigns elsewhere in the world while the U.S. remains preoccupied in the Middle East, he said.

Advertisement

“From this perspective, Iran would not be acting entirely alone,” Tale said. “Indirect alignment among U.S. adversaries — even without a formal alliance — would create a cascading effect.”

We’re not exactly happy with the way they’re negotiating and, again, they cannot have nuclear weapons

— President Trump

The U.S. demands Iran give up all nuclear enrichment and relinquish existing stockpiles of enriched uranium so as to stop any path to developing a bomb. Iran has repeatedly stated it does not want to build a nuclear weapon and that nuclear enrichment would be for exclusively peaceful purposes.

Advertisement

The Trump administration has also talked about curtailing Iran’s ballistic missile program and its support to proxy groups, such as Hezbollah, in the region, though those have not been consistent demands. Tehran insists the talks should be limited to the nuclear issue.

After indirect negotiations on Thursday, Oman’s Foreign Minister Badr al-Busaidi — the mediator for the talks in Geneva — lauded what he said was “significant progress.” Iranian Foreign Ministry spokesman Esmail Baghaei said there had been “constructive proposals.”

Trump, however, struck a frustrated tone when speaking to reporters on Friday.

“We’re not exactly happy with the way they’re negotiating and, again, they cannot have nuclear weapons,” he said.

Trump also downplayed concerns that an attack could escalate into a longer conflict.

Advertisement

This frame grab from footage circulating on social media shows protesters dancing and cheering around a bonfire during an anti-government protest in Tehran, Iran, on Jan. 9.

(Uncredited / Associated Press)

“I guess you could say there’s always a risk. You know, when there’s war, there’s a risk in anything, both good and bad,” Trump said.

Three days earlier, in his State of the Union address Tuesday, said, “My preference is to solve this problem through diplomacy. But one thing is certain, I will never allow the world’s number one sponsor of terror, which they are by far, to have a nuclear weapon — can’t let that happen.”

Advertisement

There are other signs an attack could be imminent.

On Friday, the U.S. Embassy in Israel allowed staff to leave the country if they wished. That followed an earlier move this week to evacuate dependents in the embassy in Lebanon. Other countries have followed suit, including the U.K, which pulled its embassy staff in Tehran. Meanwhile, several airlines have suspended service to Israel and Iran.

A U.S. military campaign would come at a sensitive time for Iran’s leadership.

The country’s armed forces are still recovering from the June war with Israel and the U.S, which left more than 1,200 people dead and more than 6,000 injured in Iran. In Israel, 28 people were killed and dozens injured.

Unrest in January — when security forces killed anywhere from 3,000 to 30,000 protesters (estimates range wildly) — means the government has no shortage of domestic enemies. Meanwhile, long-term sanctions have hobbled Iran’s economy and left most Iranians desperately poor.

Advertisement

Despite those vulnerabilities, observers say the U.S. buildup is likely to make Iran dig in its heels, especially because it would not want to set the precedent of giving up positions at the barrel of a U.S. gun.

Other U.S. demands would constitute red lines. Its missile arsenal, for example, counts as its main counter to the U.S. and Israel, said Rose Kelanic, Director of the Middle East Program at the Defense Priorities think tank.

“Iran’s deterrence policy is defense by attrition. They act like a porcupine so the bear will drop them… The missiles are the quills,” she said, adding that the strategy means Iran cannot fully defend against the U.S., but could inflict pain.

At the same time, although mechanisms to monitor nuclear enrichment exist, reining in Tehran’s support for proxy groups would be a much harder matter to verify.

But the larger issue is that Iran doesn’t trust Trump to follow through on whatever the negotiations reach.

Advertisement

After all, it was Trump who withdrew from an Obama-era deal designed to curb Iran’s nuclear ambitions, despite widespread consensus Iran was in compliance.

Trump and numerous other critics complained Iran was not constrained in its other “malign activities,” such as support for militant groups in the Middle East and development of ballistic missiles. The Trump administration embarked on a policy of “maximum pressure” hoping to bring Iran to its knees, but it was met with what Iran watchers called maximum resistance.

In June, he joined Israel in attacking Iran’s nuclear facilities, a move that didn’t result in the Islamic Republic returning to negotiations and accepting Trump’s terms. And he has waxed wistfully about regime change.

“Trump has worked very hard to make U.S. threats credible by amassing this huge military force offshore, and they’re extremely credible at this point,” Kelanic said.

“But he also has to make his assurances credible that if Iran agrees to U.S. demands, that the U.S. won’t attack Iran anyway.”

Advertisement

Talé, the former parliamentarian, put it differently.

“If Iranian diplomats demonstrate flexibility, Trump will be more emboldened,” he said. “That’s why Iran, as a sovereign nation, must not capitulate to any foreign power, including America.”

Continue Reading

Politics

Video: Bill Clinton Says He ‘Did Nothing Wrong’ in House Epstein Inquiry

Published

on

Video: Bill Clinton Says He ‘Did Nothing Wrong’ in House Epstein Inquiry

new video loaded: Bill Clinton Says He ‘Did Nothing Wrong’ in House Epstein Inquiry

transcript

transcript

Bill Clinton Says He ‘Did Nothing Wrong’ in House Epstein Inquiry

Former President Bill Clinton told members of the House Oversight Committee in a closed-door deposition that he “saw nothing” and had done nothing wrong when he associated with Jeffrey Epstein decades ago.

“Cause we don’t know when the video will be out. I don’t know when the transcript will be out. We’ve asked that they be out as quickly as possible.” “I don’t like seeing him deposed, but they certainly went after me a lot more than that.” “Republicans have now set a new precedent, which is to bring in presidents and former presidents to testify. So we’re once again going to make that call that we did yesterday. We are now asking and demanding that President Trump officially come in and testify in front of the Oversight Committee.” “Ranking Member Garcia asked President Clinton, quote, ‘Should President Trump be called to answer questions from this committee?’ And President Clinton said, that’s for you to decide. And the president went on to say that the President Trump has never said anything to me to make me think he was involved. “The way Chairman Comer described it, I don’t think is a complete, accurate description of what actually was said. So let’s release the full transcript.”

Advertisement
Former President Bill Clinton told members of the House Oversight Committee in a closed-door deposition that he “saw nothing” and had done nothing wrong when he associated with Jeffrey Epstein decades ago.

By Jackeline Luna

February 27, 2026

Continue Reading

Trending