Connect with us

Politics

DOGE Staff Marches Into U.S. Institute of Peace and Evicts Its Officials

Published

on

DOGE Staff Marches Into U.S. Institute of Peace and Evicts Its Officials

A simmering dispute between the Department of Government Efficiency and an independent agency dedicated to promoting peace broke into an open standoff involving the police on Monday, as Elon Musk’s government cutters marched into the agency’s headquarters and evicted its officials.

The dramatic scene played out in Washington on Monday afternoon as Mr. Musk’s team was rebuffed from the U.S. Institute of Peace, an agency that President Trump has ordered dismantled, then entered it with law enforcement officers. Agency officials say that because the institute is a congressionally chartered nonprofit that is not part of the executive branch, Mr. Trump and Mr. Musk do not have the authority to gut its operations.

“DOGE just came into the building — they’re inside the building — they’re bringing the F.B.I. and brought a bunch of D.C. police,” Sophia Lin, a lawyer for the institute, said by telephone as she and other officials were being escorted out.

George Moose, who was fired as the institute’s acting president last week but is challenging his dismissal, accused Mr. Musk’s team of breaking in. “Our statute is very clear about the status of this building and this institute,” he told reporters. “So what has happened here today is an illegal takeover by elements of the executive branch of a private nonprofit corporation.”

The standoff quickly became one of the most visible points of resistance to Mr. Musk’s effort to fire federal workers and dismantle whole agencies. And it underscored Mr. Trump’s willingness to push the legal limits of his authority in his drive to reshape the federal government and put even entities that have traditionally been independent under his thumb.

Advertisement

A spokesman for Mr. Musk’s team directed an inquiry to the White House. An administration official blamed the institute for not complying with an executive order signed by Mr. Trump in February, which listed the institute as one of four governmental entities to be “eliminated to the maximum extent consistent with applicable law” and directed them to “reduce the performance” to the minimum required by law within 14 days.

The institute was created by Congress in 1984 and works to prevent and end conflict, deploying specialists to work with U.S. allies, training peace negotiators and diplomats and briefing Congress. Since the February executive order, its website was updated with additional references to the “cost-effective” nature of its work, a likely bid to win the favor of Mr. Musk’s team.

It did not work. Institute leaders and the Department of Government Efficiency had been butting heads since at least Friday afternoon, when the White House sent all but three of the institute’s board members an email telling them they had been terminated.

The remaining board members — Secretary of State Marco Rubio, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth and Peter A. Garvin, the president of the National Defense University — later replaced Mr. Moose as acting president with Kenneth Jackson, a State Department official who was involved in the dismantling of the U.S. Agency for International Development.

Ms. Lin said the institute was preparing to sue the administration over the removal of the board. Officials at the institute have refused to recognize those terminations.

Advertisement

Department of Government Efficiency officials first tried to gain access to the agency’s headquarters, just off the National Mall, on Friday afternoon, but representatives for the institute turned them away.

Mr. Musk’s team showed up again around 7 p.m. on Friday, accompanied by two F.B.I. agents, and showed the institute a document signed by the remaining board members that removed the institute’s acting president. But they left after a lawyer for the institute told them it was an independent agency outside the executive branch, Gonzo Gallegos, an institute spokesman, said in a statement on Saturday.

Over the weekend, the F.B.I. threatened institute employees over the lack of access to the building, Ms. Lin said.

She also said that Jonathan Hornok, the new chief of the criminal division of the U.S. attorney’s office for the District of Columbia, called George Foote, another lawyer for the institute, on Sunday night and made requests on behalf of Mr. Rubio and Mr. Hegseth to gain access to the institute’s “books and records.” When the institute resisted, he threatened a criminal investigation, she said. A spokeswoman for the U.S. attorney’s office did not respond to requests for comment.

By Monday afternoon, signs newly posted to the doors of the building warned against trespassing and appeared to have been hastily created. One informed readers that the building was “closed until furthr notice.”

Advertisement

Musk representatives arrived on Monday afternoon in a black SUV with government plates and were escorted by what appeared to be private security who arrived in separate vehicles and were dressed in street clothing.

They tried one entrance, but could not seem to find a way inside and instead circled the building before getting back into the SUV.

After several minutes, two lawyers for the institute emerged from the building and approached the vehicle. What followed was a windowside negotiation: Mr. Musk’s representatives in the car, including a man who identified himself as Mr. Jackson, the State Department official and newly installed agency president, appeared to ask the lawyers to get in.

“I mean, I don’t know where you’re going to take us,” Ms. Lin said, declining.

“We don’t want to sit in here,” added Mr. Foote, the second lawyer for the institute, in a mellow, coaxing voice. “We can take a walk. We’ll take a walk, come on. It’s a nice day.”

Advertisement

Behind the car’s tinted windows, that offer appeared to be declined, and negotiations continued as rush hour traffic backed up behind the stalled vehicle and drivers laid on their horns. The parties appeared to agree to a hold a meeting over a video call.

Mr. Musk’s team did not get into the building until officers from Washington’s Metropolitan Police Department showed up, Ms. Lin said. Institute officials had called the police to report that Department of Government Efficiency members were trespassing, she said, but the police instead cleared institute leaders from the building.

A police spokesman, Tom Lynch, said that officers were called to the scene on a report of an unlawful entry and said the police left after the people who were seeking unlawful entry had left. He did not say who those people were or provide more information on what happened at the scene aside from the fact that no arrests had been made.

Two of the men, Nate Cavanaugh and Justin Aimonetti, a lawyer, were the same Musk officials who this month forced entry to the African Development Foundation, one of the government entities mentioned in the February executive order. They did not respond to shouted questions.

Late on Monday night, members of the Musk team, who are said to work around the clock, were still at the institute. Mr. Jackson could be seen working in the office of the president. They had dinner delivered: Sweetgreen and six pizzas.

Advertisement

Eric Lee and Kent Nishimura contributed reporting.

Politics

Video: Trump Says ‘Only Time Will Tell’ How Long U.S. Controls Venezuela

Published

on

Video: Trump Says ‘Only Time Will Tell’ How Long U.S. Controls Venezuela

new video loaded: Trump Says ‘Only Time Will Tell’ How Long U.S. Controls Venezuela

transcript

transcript

Trump Says ‘Only Time Will Tell’ How Long U.S. Controls Venezuela

President Trump did not say exactly how long the the United states would control Venezuela, but said that it could last years.

“How Long do you think you’ll be running Venezuela?” “Only time will tell. Like three months. six months, a year, longer?” “I would say much longer than that.” “Much longer, and, and —” “We have to rebuild. You have to rebuild the country, and we will rebuild it in a very profitable way. We’re going to be using oil, and we’re going to be taking oil. We’re getting oil prices down, and we’re going to be giving money to Venezuela, which they desperately need. I would love to go, yeah. I think at some point, it will be safe.” “What would trigger a decision to send ground troops into Venezuela?” “I wouldn’t want to tell you that because I can’t, I can’t give up information like that to a reporter. As good as you may be, I just can’t talk about that.” “Would you do it if you couldn’t get at the oil? Would you do it —” “If they’re treating us with great respect. As you know, we’re getting along very well with the administration that is there right now.” “Have you spoken to Delcy Rodríguez?” “I don’t want to comment on that, but Marco speaks to her all the time.”

Advertisement
President Trump did not say exactly how long the the United states would control Venezuela, but said that it could last years.

January 8, 2026

Continue Reading

Politics

Trump calls for $1.5T defense budget to build ‘dream military’

Published

on

Trump calls for .5T defense budget to build ‘dream military’

NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!

President Donald Trump called for defense spending to be raised to $1.5 trillion, a 50% increase over this year’s budget. 

“After long and difficult negotiations with Senators, Congressmen, Secretaries, and other Political Representatives, I have determined that, for the Good of our Country, especially in these very troubled and dangerous times, our Military Budget for the year 2027 should not be $1 Trillion Dollars, but rather $1.5 Trillion Dollars,” Trump wrote on Truth Social on Thursday evening. 

“This will allow us to build the “Dream Military” that we have long been entitled to and, more importantly, that will keep us SAFE and SECURE, regardless of foe.” 

The president said he came up with the number after tariff revenues created a surplus of cash. He claimed the levies were bringing in enough money to pay for both a major boost to the defense budget “easily,” pay down the national debt, which is over $38 trillion, and offer “a substantial dividend to moderate income patriots.”

Advertisement

SENATE SENDS $901B DEFENSE BILL TO TRUMP AFTER CLASHES OVER BOAT STRIKE, DC AIRSPACE

President Donald Trump called for defense spending to be raised to $1.5 trillion, a 50% increase over this year’s record budget.  (AP Photo/Evan Vucci)

The boost likely reflects efforts to fund Trump’s ambitious military plans, from the Golden Dome homeland missile defense shield to a new ‘Trump class’ of battleships.

The Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget found that the increased budget would cost about $5 trillion from 2027 to 2035, or $5.7 trillion with interest. Tariff revenues, the group found, would cover about half the cost – $2.5 trillion or $3 trillion with interest. 

The Supreme Court is expected to rule in a major case Friday that will determine the legality of Trump’s sweeping tariff strategy.

Advertisement

CONGRESS UNVEILS $900B DEFENSE BILL TARGETING CHINA WITH TECH BANS, INVESTMENT CRACKDOWN, US TROOP PAY RAISE

This year the defense budget is expected to breach $1 trillion for the first time thanks to a $150 billion reconciliation bill Congress passed to boost the expected $900 billion defense spending legislation for fiscal year 2026. Congress has yet to pass a full-year defense budget for 2026.

Some Republicans have long called for a major increase to defense spending to bring the topline total to 5% of GDP, as the $1.5 trillion budget would do, up from the current 3.5%.

The boost likely reflects efforts to fund Trump’s ambitious military plans, from the Golden Dome homeland missile defense shield to a new ‘Trump class’ of battleships. (Lockheed Martin via Reuters)

Trump has ramped up pressure on Europe to increase its national security spending to 5% of GDP – 3.5% on core military requirements and 1.5% on defense-related areas like cybersecurity and critical infrastructure.

Advertisement

Trump’s budget announcement came hours after defense stocks took a dip when he condemned the performance rates of major defense contractors. In a separate Truth Social post he announced he would not allow defense firms to buy back their own stocks, offer large salaries to executives or issue dividends to shareholders. 

“Executive Pay Packages in the Defense Industry are exorbitant and unjustifiable given how slowly these Companies are delivering vital Equipment to our Military, and our Allies,” he said. 

“​Defense Companies are not producing our Great Military Equipment rapidly enough and, once produced, not maintaining it properly or quickly.”

U.S. Army soldiers stand near an armored military vehicle on the outskirts of Rumaylan in Syria’s northeastern Hasakeh province, bordering Turkey, on March 27, 2023.  (Delil Souleiman/AFP via Getty Images)

He said that executives would not be allowed to make above $5 million until they build new production plants.

Advertisement

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

Stock buybacks, dividends and executive compensation are generally governed by securities law, state corporate law and private contracts, and cannot be broadly restricted without congressional action.

An executive order the White House released Wednesday frames the restrictions as conditions on future defense contracts, rather than a blanket prohibition. The order directs the secretary of war to ensure that new contracts include provisions barring stock buybacks and corporate distributions during periods of underperformance, non-compliance or inadequate production, as determined by the Pentagon.

Continue Reading

Politics

Newsom moves to reshape who runs California’s schools under budget plan

Published

on

Newsom moves to reshape who runs California’s schools under budget plan

Gov. Gavin Newsom on Thursday unveiled a sweeping proposal to overhaul how California’s education system is governed, calling for structural changes that he said would shift oversight of the Department of Education and redefine the role of the state’s elected schools chief.

The proposal, which is part of Newsom’s state budget plan that will be released Friday, would unify the policymaking State Board of Education with the department, which is responsible for carrying out those policies. The governor said the change would better align education efforts from early childhood through college.

“California can no longer postpone reforms that have been recommended regularly for a century,” Newsom said in a statement. “These critical reforms will bring greater accountability, clarity, and coherence to how we serve our students and schools.”

Few details were provided about how the role of the state superintendent of public instruction would change, beyond a greater focus on fostering coordination and aligning education policy.

The changes would require approval from state lawmakers, who will be in the state Capitol on Thursday for Newsom’s last State of the State speech in his final year as governor.

Advertisement

The proposal would implement recommendations from a 2002 report by the state Legislature, titled “California’s Master Plan for Education,” which described the state’s K-12 governance as fragmented and “with overlapping roles that sometimes operate in conflict with one another, to the detriment of the educational services offered to students.” Newsom’s office said similar concerns have been raised repeatedly since 1920 and were echoed again in a December 2025 report by research center Policy Analysis for California Education.

“The sobering reality of California’s education system is that too few schools can now provide the conditions in which the State can fairly ask students to learn to the highest standards, let alone prepare themselves to meet their future learning needs,” the Legislature’s 2002 report stated. Those most harmed are often low-income students and students of color, the report added.

“California’s education governance system is complex and too often creates challenges for school leaders,” Edgar Zazueta, executive director of the Assn. of California School Administrators, said in a statement provided by Newsom’s office. “As responsibilities and demands on schools continue to increase, educators need governance systems that are designed to better support positive student outcomes.”

The current budget allocated $137.6 billion for education from transitional kindergarten through the 12th grade — the highest per-pupil funding level in state history — and Newsom’s office said his proposal is intended to ensure those investments translate into more consistent support and improved outcomes statewide.

“For decades the fragmented and inefficient structure overseeing our public education system has hindered our students’ ability to succeed and thrive,” Ted Lempert, president of advocacy group Children Now, said in a statement provided by the governor’s office. “Major reform is essential, and we’re thrilled that the Governor is tackling this issue to improve our kids’ education.”

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Trending