Politics
Whitmer Shows How Democrats Are Playing With Fire in Cozying Up to Trump
Gov. Gretchen Whitmer of Michigan stood glumly in the Oval Office, hoping no one would take her picture.
She had not expected to be there, standing in front of the cameras, as President Trump signed executive orders punishing those who opposed his 2020 election lies. Ms. Whitmer, a prominent Democrat seen as a possible 2028 presidential candidate, had come to the White House to discuss funding for an Air National Guard base near Detroit and aid for thousands of Michiganders who had just been hit by an ice storm.
Then Mr. Trump’s aides surprised her on Wednesday by ushering her into the Oval Office not for her scheduled one-on-one meeting with the president, but for a politically loaded appearance before the press corps. She found herself an unwilling participant in his unending reality show, with photos of her rocketing around group chats of Democratic strategists who wondered what on earth she was doing.
The episode was the result of a remarkable attempt at reconciliation between Ms. Whitmer and Mr. Trump, who dismissed her in 2020 as “that woman from Michigan” during a clash over his administration’s pandemic response.
The day after the inauguration, Ms. Whitmer penned a handwritten letter — which has not been previously reported — congratulating Mr. Trump, saying she looked forward to working together and praising his support for the auto industry in his first address, according to a person who relayed the text of the letter. Ms. Whitmer included her cellphone number and invited Mr. Trump to call her if she could be of any help to him.
The outreach worked for her, but it came at a cost.
Her whipsaw experience with Mr. Trump illustrates the political risks that Democratic governors face as a small group of them try to cultivate relationships with a president reviled by their party but in control of vast amounts of federal funding for states.
These governors — exemplified by Ms. Whitmer but also including Gavin Newsom of California, Phil Murphy of New Jersey and Kathy Hochul of New York — have met with the president in the Oval Office, fielded his phone calls and toned down their language toward him.
Many Democrats see Mr. Trump as a transactional politician who is susceptible to flattery and are acutely aware of how he has sought to punish liberal states and groups. He has aimed to cut off billions of dollars to universities in states with Democratic governors and threatened funding for local public education and public health, leaving state leaders scrambling to find alternative sources of cash or cut spending in other areas.
But Democratic governors also have their own political ambitions to consider. Many in the party see their state leaders as the best hope to win back the White House in 2028, and the liberal base increasingly wants elected officials to aggressively fight Mr. Trump’s actions.
That is why a second group of Democratic governors, led by JB Pritzker of Illinois, Josh Shapiro of Pennsylvania and Tim Walz of Minnesota, has been more publicly antagonistic toward Mr. Trump. Their tougher stance may reflect how they have one eye on their own re-election bids in 2026 and another on the 2028 Democratic presidential primary contest.
“Democrats from the center to the left believe Trump is an autocrat who represents an existential threat to democracy and our rights,” said Neera Tanden, the chief executive of the Center for American Progress, a top liberal think tank. “They expect their leaders to meet the moment by fighting his dictatorial attacks, not placate, negotiate or assuage because doing so makes him stronger and bully others more.”
In an interview on Friday, Ms. Whitmer said she had no regrets.
“Public service is about putting the people of Michigan before my own interest,” she said. “My job was to try to get help for people who were suffering as a result of the ice storm, to land more investment at Selfridge air base, to protect the Great Lakes and to fight for the auto industry. And that’s what I was doing.”
She added, “I’m always going to show up for the people of Michigan, and that’s probably why I got elected by double digits.”
‘I Listen a Lot’ to Trump
Former President Joseph R. Biden Jr. dealt with Republican governors much differently, barely speaking with them except about disaster relief.
But with Mr. Trump in office, Democratic governors have found more opportunities.
Several beyond Ms. Whitmer, including Ms. Hochul, Mr. Murphy and Mr. Newsom, have had one-on-one meetings with Mr. Trump in the Oval Office, with one of Ms. Hochul’s sessions lasting two hours.
The president also calls Democratic governors, and picks up calls from them, with some frequency. He has given several of them his cellphone number.
Mr. Murphy has a longstanding relationship with Mr. Trump, forged during the pandemic and bolstered by the president’s frequent trips to his golf club in New Jersey. After the president was shot at a campaign rally in Butler, Pa., in July, Mr. Murphy and his wife, Tammy, visited him in Bedminster, N.J.
With Mr. Trump back in office, Mr. Murphy has sought to find common ground with him in opposing congestion pricing in New York City and fixing sinkholes on Interstate 80 in New Jersey.
When Mr. Murphy and his wife were at the White House in February for a National Governors Association dinner, the New Jersey governor invited Mr. Trump to an upcoming ribbon-cutting for the new Portal North Bridge over the Hackensack River. Ms. Murphy also invited Mr. Trump to come to an Ultimate Fighting Championship event in June in Newark.
Mr. Trump expressed interest — but the governor’s outreach has not spared him the Trump administration’s ire. The top federal prosecutor in New Jersey, a Trump ally, said on Friday that she planned to investigate Mr. Murphy over immigration policy.
In December, before Mr. Trump was inaugurated, Mr. Newsom talked himself up as a leading figure in the Democratic opposition to Mr. Trump. But his posture changed after fires ravaged greater Los Angeles in January, leaving the California governor in need of nearly $40 billion in federal aid.
When Mr. Trump and his wife, Melania, arrived to review damage from the blazes, Mr. Newsom met them at the airport and kissed Mrs. Trump on the cheek. Shortly after, he traveled to Washington for a 90-minute meeting in the Oval Office. Mr. Newsom has also hosted Trump allies including Charlie Kirk and Stephen K. Bannon on his new podcast.
Ms. Hochul has had two Oval Office meetings with Mr. Trump and is in regular contact with him. She said in an interview that he had called her occasionally to check up on New York projects that interested him. Last week, on the day he announced far-reaching tariffs, she recalled, Mr. Trump phoned her to ask questions about Penn Station and Amtrak.
Asked to describe their lengthy conversations, Ms. Hochul replied, “I listen a lot.”
She went on: “I’m always willing to engage and talk and listen and find out areas where I can do what I have to do, which is, No. 1, to protect New York State. When you challenge our values or our policies, then we have a fight. But I can also be adversarial without being acrimonious, and work toward common areas.”
Steven Cheung, the White House communications director, said in a statement: “It’s no surprise every elected official in America — Republican or Democrat — wants a productive working relationship with President Trump. Because President Trump is the president of all Americans, he continues to work with anyone that is willing to help advance policies that benefit the American people.”
Tensions and an ‘Emergency Cocktail Hour’
Plenty of other Democratic governors have kept their distance from Mr. Trump.
Aides to Gov. Maura Healey of Massachusetts, Gov. Michelle Lujan Grisham of New Mexico, Mr. Pritzker, Mr. Shapiro and Mr. Walz, among others, said each politician had yet to have a one-on-one meeting or phone call with Mr. Trump since he returned to power.
Mr. Shapiro, Mr. Pritzker and Mr. Walz, who are seen as some of the party’s most ambitious leaders, have been among the more forceful voices pushing back against Mr. Trump.
And despite Mr. Trump’s more conciliatory approach with some Democratic governors, he has still lashed out at others, especially when it serves his political agenda.
In February, he hosted a bipartisan group of governors at the White House as part of a weekend of events coordinated by the National Governors Association. During the meeting, Mr. Trump attacked Gov. Janet Mills of Maine, a Democrat, over her state’s policies on transgender athletes’ participation in sports.
After the dust-up, Ms. Healey convened what three people with knowledge of the planning called “an emergency cocktail hour” to discuss how to respond. Ms. Healey urged fellow governors to skip a dinner at the White House that night in protest.
“It was appalling and shocking what happened to Governor Mills and the way she was treated during that business meeting,” Ms. Healey said in an interview on Friday. “I think there was a feeling coming out of it shared by a lot of us that was just really wrong and we needed to come together and process some of that.”
But many Democrats attended anyway — and after the dinner, Mr. Trump led a bipartisan group of governors and their spouses on a nearly hourlong, impromptu tour of the White House. The president took them through the residence, showing off the Lincoln Bedroom and the Yellow Oval Room while regaling the group with historical facts, and finished the jaunt in the Oval Office.
By John Ismay, Gilad Thaler, Nikolay Nikolov, Rafaela Balster, Stephanie Swart and Whitney Shefte
June 19, 2026
Politics
Reporter’s Notebook: How Trump’s surprise move on DNI confirmation upended key Senate deal on FISA
NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!
They didn’t know what to do.
Just before 4 a.m. ET on Wednesday, President Trump blindsided everyone in the U.S. Senate. In a post on Truth Social, the president declared he was “cancelling the Senate hearing” for his Director of National Intelligence nominee Jay Clayton. Moreover, the President said he would withhold Clayton’s nomination from “going forward until Jamie McDonald is approved to be U.S. Attorney.”
If confirmed, Clayton would vacate his post as U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of New York. That’s the slot for which the President is nominating McDonald.
TRUMP SAYS SENATE HEARING ON DNI NOMINEE IS CANCELED UNTIL US ATTORNEY REPLACEMENT CONFIRMED
Jay Clayton, U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of New York, speaks next to Jessica S. Tisch, New York Police Department commissioner, during a press conference at NYPD headquarters following the arrest of suspects charged with igniting IEDs near Gracie Mansion, the home of New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani, in New York City on March 9, 2026. (REUTERS/Brendan McDermid)
So what would happen with the hearing?
Lawmakers and aides scrambled as they woke to the news Wednesday morning. After all, Trump is the president. He doesn’t have the authority to cancel a Senate hearing.
“Yeah. I don’t think that’s his call,” said Sen. Martin Heinrich, D-N.M., a member of the Intelligence Committee.
One senior source told Fox News they presumed that Clayton’s confirmation hearing would forge ahead. Another told Fox the fate of the hearing was “undetermined.”
On one hand, lawmakers and aides had to first digest what was happening. Was the President withdrawing Clayton’s nomination? Was he saying he just wasn’t allowing Clayton to testify? Did the head of the executive branch really believe he could bigfoot a congressional hearing? Or was this the president flexing his political muscle, testing Senate Republicans to see how compliant they might be with his intimation — and potentially cancel the hearing on their own?
So was Clayton’s hearing on or off?
“Are we going to have an Intelligence Committee confirmation hearing today?” yours truly asked panel Chairman Tom Cotton, R-Ark., as he slid behind a backdoor to a hearing in the Dirksen Senate Office Building.
Silence from Cotton.
SCOOP: TOP GOP SEN. COTTON TO MEET WITH EMBATTLED TRUMP DEFENSE NOMINEE AS DOUBTS SWIRL
Sen. Tom Cotton, R-Ark., arrives for a vote in the U.S. Capitol on April 30, 2025, stating the war with Iran will continue for weeks as the U.S. limits their offensive capabilities. (Bill Clark/CQ-Roll Call, Inc via Getty Images)
“Do you know the answer?” I followed up.
“Do you think the President overstepped his bounds, saying he was canceling the hearing?” I continued.
By that point, Cotton was well behind the doorway and it closed.
“I have never seen anything quite like this,” said Sen. Ron Wyden, D-Ore., one of the longest-serving members on the Intelligence Committee in Senate history. “Everybody else is going to have to keep guessing for a while.”
It was Washington whiplash.
“Things change around here pretty quick, Chad,” quipped Sen. John Hoeven, R-N.D.
But a bit later, Cotton finally weighed-in when he posted on X that the hearing would proceed. The Arkansas Republican then materialized again in the hallway, heading for an elevator bank.
“To be clear, you will proceed with the hearing and you expect Jay Clayton to be there despite what the President said?” I asked.
A steel-faced Cotton stared straight ahead at the green elevator door.
“Chad, you have our statement,” said a terse Cotton.
But an hour later, Cotton ditched the hearing after the President blocked Clayton from testifying.
“It’s regrettable that the President has directed Jay Clayton not to appear at his confirmation hearing today,” said Cotton in a new statement on X. “While today’s hearing is now unfortunately postponed, I look forward to proceeding with his confirmation in the near future.”
The stunning reversal left everyone trying to grasp what happened. And what might be next.
SPRINT TO CONFIRM TRUMP NOMINEES KICKS OFF IN JANUARY
U.S. President Donald Trump attends a morning work meeting to “revive balanced, inclusive, and sustainable economic growth for the benefit of all” in the presence of the G7 countries, partner countries, the International Monetary Fund, and the OECD, as part of the G7 summit, in Evian, eastern France, on June 17, 2026. (Ludovic MARIN / AFP via Getty Images)
“I am not sure whether Jay Clayton has simply been postponed or withdrawn,” mused Sen. Mark Warner, D-Va., the Vice Chairman of the Intelligence Committee. “I wonder whether Jay Clayton knows whether he has been postponed or withdrawn.”
Democrats and Republicans brokered a fragile agreement weeks ago to renew FISA Section 702. The intelligence community argues that program is the powerful tool in the American arsenal to track and combat potential terrorism. Congress repeatedly punted a full renewal for months.
But with both bodies on the precipice of reauthorizing the program, President Trump announced he would install housing czar Bill Pulte as interim DNI. Democrats balked at Pulte, noting he had no intelligence experience. Plus, they viewed him as a political hack who would run roughshod over America’s intelligence apparatus.
So Democrats pulled their support from the FISA compromise.
Most Republicans weren’t exactly enamored with Pulte, either. And those worried about the nation’s security pushed to block Pulte from entering the DNI’s office. That’s why Cotton scheduled Clayton’s confirmation hearing so quickly. It was thought that the Senate might be able to pivot after the hearing and confirm Clayton on the floor late this week or early next.
Rapid confirmation of Clayton was essential. Such a scenario would unlock Democrats’ votes to reauthorize FISA Section 702 after the program’s congressional blessing expired a week ago.
That was the plan. At least until the president initiated the firestorm over Clayton’s confirmation hearing this week.
“Another Trump victory gets upended by an impulse,” vented Sen. Kevin Cramer, R-N.D. “It’s frustrating.”
WHY TRUMP PICKED BILL PULTE TO LEAD US INTELLIGENCE AS CRITICS QUESTION HIS QUALIFICATIONS
Sen. Kevin Cramer, R-N.D., spoke to reporters at the U.S. Capitol in Washington, D.C., on April 1, 2025, before the weekly Republican Senate policy luncheon. (Kayla Bartkowski/Getty Images)
But wait. There’s more.
President Trump inserted another chestnut — or hot potato — into his pre-dawn Truth Social screed. Especially if you thought the president was going to make it easy for Congress to hastily re-up FISA as soon as the Senate confirmed Clayton.
“To add a slight bit of intrigue but, for the Good of the Nation, and the People of our Country, I will not approve FISA without THE SAVE AMERICA ACT going along with it,” Trump said.
He added that his plan was for Pulte to “remain as the Acting Director of National Intelligence” and declared that “Republicans fell into a trap.”
The SAVE America Act is the touchstone of President Trump’s 2026 legislative agenda. It requires proof of citizenship to vote. However, the bill has never garnered even 50 yeas in the Senate on two previous test votes.
“We’ve got to pass the SAVE America Act and conditioning passage of FISA on the prior passage of SAVE America would be a great thing,” said Sen. Mike Lee, R-Utah.
Other Senate Republicans were more realistic, based on the legislative history of the SAVE America Act.
“You can’t always get what you want,” said Sen. John Kennedy, R-La. “I mean, I want a Porsche for my birthday. I’m not going to get it.”
TRUMP, THUNE CLASH ON VOTER ID ULTIMATUM AS GOP REMAINS DIVIDED ON PATH FORWARD
Sen. John Kennedy, R-La., said a classified briefing reinforced his view that Iran’s leaders would use a nuclear weapon if they obtained one during a Senate Judiciary subcommittee hearing in Washington, D.C. (Elizabeth Frantz / Reuters)
Democrats seethed about national security as Republicans squirmed.
“We had a path forward as of yesterday (on FISA) and today we don’t,” said Sen. Mark Kelly, D-Ariz. “This has become a complete debacle and now it’s up to the White House to figure out a path forward here.”
CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP
No one knows what’s next for Clayton. Or McDonald. Or FISA. And there’s high skepticism anything happens on the SAVE America Act. So it’s all in a cryogenic Congressional freeze.
Regardless, Clayton’s confirmation hearing never happened. Such hearings are the responsibility of the legislative branch. But by the end of the day, there was no question who canceled it.
WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court ruled for gun rights and against drug laws on Thursday, striking down part of a federal law that made it a crime for an “unlawful user” of an illegal drug like marijuana to own firearms.
All nine justices agreed the law was too broad and overly harsh.
They left open the possibility that “addicts” and “unusually dangerous” people who were impaired by drugs could be denied guns.
The Trump administration had urged the court to uphold the prosecution of Ali Hemani, a Texas man who was investigated for alleged terrorist ties and admitted to being a regular user of marijuana.
Since 1968, federal law has prohibited gun possession by felons, fugitives and any other person who is “an unlawful user of or addicted to any controlled substance.”
In defense of the law, Solicitor Gen. D. John Sauer argued that “habitual” drug users were akin to “habitual drunkards” in early American history, and could therefore be denied the gun rights protected by the 2nd Amendment.
But that historical argument fell flat, including with the court’s conservatives.
Justice Neil M. Gorsuch is a skeptic of laws that give prosecutors broad and unchecked power.
“The law automatically bans an individual from possessing a gun from the moment he becomes an unlawful user of any controlled substance until he ceases being one,” he wrote in U.S. vs. Hemani. “It doesn’t matter what controlled substance an individual uses, in what amounts he does so, or whether his drug use has ever made him a danger to himself or others.”
The government’s view “suggests that the millions of Americans who now regularly use marijuana are categorically and unusually dangerous.”
And a conviction can lead to a 15-year prison term, he added.
The American Civil Liberties Union welcomed the ruling.
“The court has sent a strong message that the government cannot criminalize the conduct of large numbers of people by making categorical and unfounded assumptions about whether they are dangerous,” said Cecillia Wang, legal director at the ACLU. “With nearly half of Americans reporting marijuana use at some point in their lives, this ruling protects the rights of millions and curbs the government’s ability to impose arbitrary and discriminatory penalties.”
Some defenders of gun regulation opposed the ruling.
“We disagree with the Supreme Court’s ruling in Hemani,” said Janet Carter, managing director of 2nd Amendment litigation at Everytown Law. “That said, the court has stressed that its decision is limited — rightly recognizing that drugs and guns can make for a dangerous mix, and leaving open the possibility of prosecuting someone with proof that their drug use renders their gun possession dangerous to themselves or others.”
Two years ago, Hunter Biden, the president’s son, was charged and convicted under the gun law for making a false statement when he applied for a gun permit. He denied being a drug user at a time when prosecutors said he was addicted to crack cocaine.
Then-President Biden gave him a full pardon in December 2024.
Hemani was investigated by the FBI for suspected ties to terrorists but was not charged with such a crime.
In 2020, he and his parents “traveled to Iran to participate in a celebration of the life of Qasem [Suleimani], an Iranian general and terrorist who had been killed by an American drone strike the month before,” the administration told the court last year.
The FBI obtained a warrant to search Hemani’s family home. Agents found a Glock 9-millimeter pistol, 60 grams of marijuana and 4.7 grams of cocaine.
When questioned, Hemani said he used marijuana about every other day.
A federal grand jury in Texas charged him with possessing a firearm as an unlawful habitual user of marijuana.
But the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled this restriction on guns violated the 2nd Amendment. It said that “there is no historical justification for disarming a sober citizen not presently under an impairing influence.”
Appealing to the Supreme Court, the Trump administration urged the justices to uphold the law.
“Habitual illegal drug users with firearms present unique dangers to society — especially because they pose a grave risk of armed, hostile encounters with police officers while impaired,” the solicitor general said.
But the justices affirmed the 5th Circuit’s decision.
Still pending before the court is a 2nd Amendment challenge to new laws in Hawaii and California that would prohibit carrying guns into private businesses unless the owner or manager had given their express approval.
Gun rights advocates said such laws, if enforced, are intended to deny their rights to carry concealed weapons when they leave home. The case is Wolford vs. Lopez.
The justices will issue decisions next week on Tuesday and Thursday.
-
Los Angeles, Ca2 minutes agoVictims sought after man allegedly points gun at passing cars in Santa Clarita Valley
-
Detroit, MI25 minutes agoBest barbershop in Metro Detroit: Finalists for this year’s Vote 4 The Best
-
San Francisco, CA35 minutes agoHow to watch San Francisco Giants vs. Miami Marlins
-
Dallas, TX40 minutes agoDrivers in North Texas struggle with Friday floods
-
Miami, FL47 minutes agoThree wildfires burn more than 20,000 acres in Miami-Dade, force road closures
-
Boston, MA50 minutes agoMBTA, state transportation chief apologizes for ‘insensitive’ employee hair-pulling incident
-
Denver, CO55 minutes agoMan arrested on suspicion of murder in Denver shooting near South Park Hill, Hale
-
Seattle, WA1 hour agoSeattle fans pack waterfront hours early as USA defeats Australia, advances in World Cup
