Connect with us

Politics

Fresh off meetings with foreign allies, Schiff echoes alarm over Trump-style diplomacy

Published

on

Fresh off meetings with foreign allies, Schiff echoes alarm over Trump-style diplomacy

After days of meetings with European leaders, Israeli officials and other international security experts, Sen. Adam Schiff this week offered a blistering assessment of President Trump’s approach to foreign policy.

In an interview with The Times, the California Democrat accused Trump and other administration officials of abandoning Ukraine and other European allies, bowing to Russian President Vladimir Putin, sidling up to far-right extremists in Germany and framing Gaza in absurdly cruel terms as a future U.S.-owned resort space, purged entirely of Palestinians.

And he said he was echoing those concerns from a host of others he met during a bipartisan congressional trip to both Munich and Israel in recent days, including some of the nation’s most steadfast European allies.

“They’re terrified. They see a president who is betraying a Democratic ally at war, who is suddenly blaming Ukraine for its own invasion by the Kremlin dictator, who is casting doubt on the legitimacy of [Ukrainian President Volodymyr] Zelensky’s leadership in Ukraine, and who is essentially a mouthpiece for the Kremlin,” Schiff said. “They’re flabbergasted. I think they believe that the president is not just an unreliable partner, but a hostile partner.”

Schiff said Republican members of Congress on the same trip shared some of those views and voiced them in closed-door meetings. He said they told Zelensky the U.S. still has Ukraine’s back, and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu that Trump’s idea for Gaza was “a complete nonstarter,” with no support in the Senate for “investing American boots on the ground or resources into a U.S. occupation of Gaza or U.S. reconstruction of Gaza.”

Advertisement

Schiff’s assessment followed a stunning stretch of U.S. foreign diplomacy in the last two weeks, during which Trump and other top administration officials — including Vice President JD Vance, Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth and Secretary of State Marco Rubio — have repeatedly shocked the world with their pronouncements about the U.S. role in foreign relations moving forward.

In his first trip to NATO headquarters in Brussels on Feb. 12, Hegseth suggested the U.S. could no longer guarantee the safety of Europe and that Ukraine would have to give up massive concessions — including territory — to end Russia’s war against it.

Days later at the Munich Security Conference, Vance said little about Russia’s war, lectured European allies on what it means to be a democracy and met with leaders of Germany’s far-right party just days before an election there. And Rubio met with Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov to begin negotiations without any involvement from Ukraine.

Meanwhile, Trump praised Putin and repeatedly denigrated Zelensky. He blamed Ukraine for Russia’s invasion and called Zelensky a “dictator” who is ripping off the U.S. and who has “no cards to play” in ongoing negotiations with Russia.

He also kept suggesting Gaza could be a U.S.-owned “Riviera of the Middle East,” among other outlandish foreign policy positions — such as that Canada should be turned into the 51st U.S. state.

Advertisement

Several U.S. foreign policy experts said the administration’s actions, if taken at face value, reverse longstanding U.S. policy and break with diplomatic norms in massive and important ways.

Robert English, an expert on Russian and post-Soviet politics and director of Central European Studies at USC, called the administration’s moves on the international stage the “most upsetting rupture” in U.S. transatlantic relations since World War II and the creation of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, and a “sharp turn” by the U.S. with still unclear results.

California Sen. Adam Schiff had harsh words for the Trump administration after he attended the Munich Security Conference.

(Tom Williams / CQ-Roll Call Inc. via Getty Images)

Advertisement

But he and others also left open another possibility: The wave of startling pronouncements could represent a negotiating tactic to shock allies and opponents into making more moderate concessions to the U.S.

Benjamin Radd, a political scientist and senior fellow at UCLA’s Burkle Center for International Relations, said he believes Trump’s “bombastic positions” are indeed a tactic — and one that has worked.

As one example, he pointed to a Friday summit hurriedly called in the Saudi capital of Riyadh among leaders from Egypt, Jordan and other Gulf Arab states to discuss a path forward for Gaza, after Rubio suggested Trump’s remarks about the territory were in part a challenge to Arab nations to come up with their own plan.

However, Trump also has shown a propensity to follow through with outlandish ideas when nobody stands in his way, Radd said, so even his most wild pronouncements can’t be dismissed out of hand.

“It’s trolling until it isn’t,” Radd said. “If you do not get in front of it, he’ll be like, ‘Wait a minute, there’s nobody to actually stop me.’”

Advertisement

Schiff said he views Trump as irresponsible, dangerous and willing to go as far as others — both in the U.S and abroad — will let him. And he said it will be incredibly important for those who understand the important role the U.S. plays in maintaining world order to reestablish some guardrails and block his worst impulses.

Whether that will happen is unclear, he and the experts agreed.

Part of what will determine the administration’s next moves, English said, will be Europe’s ability to maintain a united front, including in its support for Ukraine.

“If he’s able to drive a wedge into European Union solidarity, then their resolve will fall apart,” he said.

Within the U.S., Schiff said, much of the work will fall to Republicans. Those in the Senate “clearly made a decision collectively” that they were not going to stand in the way of Trump’s Cabinet nominations, he said, but whether they will bend completely to his will on foreign affairs remains to be seen.

Advertisement

If they aren’t willing to stand up to Trump, Schiff said, “their own institution will be destroyed” and they “might as well go home, because we won’t be doing our jobs.” If they are willing to make a stand, there is plenty of work to do, he added.

Schiff said he couldn’t “get into the specifics” of the conversation he and other senators had with Zelensky, but that it was “fair to say” that Zelensky “was concerned about the U.S. commitment to Ukraine, to our fellow democracies and allies,” and “that, if not stopped in Ukraine, that Russia had territorial ambitions against our NATO allies.”

Zelensky also “raised concerns about being pressed on things like mineral rights without guarantees of our support for Ukraine’s sovereignty and territorial integrity, without security guarantees really of any kind,” Schiff said.

Senators had expressed bipartisan support for Ukraine and Zelensky, he said, and now it’s time they prove it. Schiff said senators still have power to isolate Trump in his criticisms of Ukraine, but have to go “beyond rhetorical support” for Ukraine and affirm it through votes ahead.

“I sure as hell hope they stand up to him for the sake of our country and our allies, our standing in the world, the whole international rules-based order we’ve had since World War II,” Schiff said.

Advertisement

Schiff said others in Munich, including NATO leaders, raised concerns with him about “how many people will suffer” and how the U.S. is “abandoning the field to the likes of China” by closing the U.S. Agency for International Development, which Trump and his billionaire advisor Elon Musk have sought to shutter.

U.S. officials must also push back against that effort, and make it clear to Trump that the agency does important work abroad that serves U.S. interests and must continue.

In Israel, Schiff said he and a bipartisan group of colleagues made clear to Netanyahu that Trump’s proposal for Gaza was unrealistic. They should be making the same clear publicly, he said — to force the administration to take a more responsible position that adheres to international law and protects the rights of Palestinians.

Schiff said he personally told Netanyahu and other Israeli leaders that a two-state solution must still be worked out for the long-term stability of the region and of Israel itself.

“I hope that ultimately it becomes a debate over the attributes of a Palestinian state, rather than whether one will exist,” he said.

Advertisement

The U.S. can remain a leader and a force for good, Schiff said — but it won’t be via Trump’s shock-and-awe approach, either overseas or domestically. And he urged people to step up and play their part in demanding a different path.

“We’re all going to have an important role to play now and over the next four years in the preservation of our democracy,” Schiff said. “It’s going to require those of us in office to be pushing back with every tool we have. It’s going to require the courts to play their historic role. But it’s going to require ordinary citizens also to speak out, to demonstrate — to not let the country go quietly into some kind of one-man rule.”

Politics

Video: President Fires Noem as Homeland Security Secretary

Published

on

Video: President Fires Noem as Homeland Security Secretary

new video loaded: President Fires Noem as Homeland Security Secretary

transcript

transcript

President Fires Noem as Homeland Security Secretary

President Trump fired Kristi Noem, his embattled homeland security secretary, on Thursday and announced his plans to replace her with Senator Markwayne Mullin of Oklahoma.

“The fact that you can’t admit to a mistake which looks like under investigation is going to prove that Ms. Good and Mr. Pretti probably should not have been shot in the face and in the back. Law enforcement needs to learn from that. You don’t protect them by not looking after the facts.” “Our greatness calls people to us for a chance to prosper, to live how they choose, to become part of something special. Anyone who searches for freedom can always find a home here. But that freedom is a precious thing, and we defend it vigorously. You crossed the border illegally — we’ll find you. Break our laws — we’ll punish you.” “Did you bid out those service contracts?” “Yes they did. They went out to a competitive bid.” “I’m asking you — sorry to interrupt — but the president approved ahead of time you spending $220 million running TV ads across the country in which you are featured prominently?” “Yes, sir. We went through the legal processes. Did it correctly —” Did the president know you were going to do this?” “Yes.” “I’m more excited about just ready to get started. There’s a lot of work we can do to get the Department of Homeland Security working for the American people.”

Advertisement
President Trump fired Kristi Noem, his embattled homeland security secretary, on Thursday and announced his plans to replace her with Senator Markwayne Mullin of Oklahoma.

By Jackeline Luna

March 5, 2026

Continue Reading

Politics

DOJ continues Biden autopen probe despite former president unlikely to face charges

Published

on

DOJ continues Biden autopen probe despite former president unlikely to face charges

NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!

The Department of Justice (DOJ) is continuing its investigation into former President Joe Biden’s use of an autopen in the final months of his administration — focusing on pardons and commutations — though a senior official said Biden is unlikely to face criminal exposure.

A senior DOJ official told Fox News the autopen investigation is ongoing and not closed, adding investigators are reviewing clemency actions taken in the final months of the Biden administration.

The official also pointed out, however, that the use of an autopen by a sitting president is “established law.”

The issue under review is whether the autopen was used in violation of the law, specifically, whether Biden personally approved each name included on pardon and commutation lists.

Advertisement

A framed portrait shows former President Joe Biden’s signature and an autopen along “The Presidential Walk of Fame” outside the Oval Office of the White House.  (Andrew Harnick/Getty Images)

“These types of cases are tough. Executive privilege issues come into play,” the official said.

What is also clear, the official indicated, is that the target of any potential prosecution would not likely be Biden.

“It’s hard to imagine how [Biden] could be criminally liable for pardon power,” the senior DOJ official said.

BIDEN’S AUTOPEN PARDONS DISTURBED DOJ BRASS, DOCS SHOW, RAISING QUESTIONS WHETHER THEY ARE LEGALLY BINDING

Advertisement

The use of the autopen by former President Joe Biden remains under investigation. (AP Photo)

The official noted that one reason the former president would be unlikely to face charges stems from a 2024 Supreme Court ruling that originally involved current President Donald Trump but would also apply to Biden.

“We conclude that under our constitutional structure of separated powers, the nature of Presidential power requires that a former President have some immunity from criminal prosecution for official acts during his tenure in office,” the Supreme Court ruled in Trump v. United States in 2024. 

“At least with respect to the President’s exercise of his core constitutional powers, this immunity must be absolute.”

Sources familiar with the matter told Fox News Digital that U.S. Attorney Jeanine Pirro’s team continues to review the Biden White House’s reliance on an autopen, contradicting a recent New York Times report that indicated the investigation had been paused.

Advertisement

DOJ SIGNALS IT’S STILL DIGGING INTO BIDEN AUTOPEN USE DESPITE REPORTS PROBE FIZZLED

President Donald Trump has pushed for consequences for former President Joe Biden’s alleged use of the autopen. (Julia Demaree Nikhinson/AP Photo)

Trump has pushed for consequences over the autopen controversy, alleging on social media that aides acted unlawfully in its use and raising the prospect of perjury charges against Biden.

Biden has rejected those claims, saying in a statement last year he personally directed the decisions in question.

“Let me be clear: I made the decisions during my presidency,” Biden said. “I made the decisions about the pardons, executive orders, legislation and proclamations. Any suggestion that I didn’t is ridiculous and false.”

Advertisement

The House Oversight Committee has homed in on Biden’s clemency actions, including five controversial pardons for family members in the final days of his presidency, citing what it described as a lack of “contemporaneous documentation” confirming that Biden directly ordered the pardons.

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

The committee asked the DOJ to investigate “all of former President Biden’s executive actions, particularly clemency actions, to assess whether legal action must be taken to void any action that the former president did not, in fact, take himself.”

Fox News Digital’s Ashley Oliver contributed to this report.

Advertisement

Related Article

Top Biden officials questioned and criticized how his team issued pardons, used autopen: report
Continue Reading

Politics

Anxiety grows among California Democrats as gubernatorial candidates rebuff calls to drop out

Published

on

Anxiety grows among California Democrats as gubernatorial candidates rebuff calls to drop out

Despite a plea from the head of the California Democratic Party for underperforming candidates to drop out of the governor’s race, all but one of the party’s top hopefuls spurned the request.

Party leaders fear the growing possibility that the crowded field will split the Democratic electorate in the state’s June top-two primary election and result in two Republicans advancing to the November ballot, ensuring a Republican governor being elected for the first time since 2006.

His advice largely unheeded, state party Chairman Rusty Hicks on Thursday said the fate of a Democratic victory now rests squarely on the gubernatorial candidates who flouted him.

“The candidates for Governor now have a chance to showcase a viable path to win,” Hicks said in a statement Thursday.

Eight top Democratic candidates filed the official paperwork to appear on the June ballot after Hicks released a letter on Tuesday urging those “who cannot show meaningful progress towards winning” to drop out. Friday is the deadline to file to appear on the primary election ballot. On March 21, the secretary of state’s office will formally announce who will appear on the June ballot.

Advertisement

“It sounded like someone who has his head in the sand,” former Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa said of Hicks’ open letter. “[Most] of us filed within 24 hours of getting that letter. It created some press but not much else. It didn’t impact [most] of the candidates and it certainly didn’t impact my candidacy.”

Democratic strategist Elizabeth Ashford said it was appropriate for Hicks and other Democratic leaders to make a public plea as opposed to keeping such discussions solely behind closed doors.

But the response showed the limited power of the modern-day party bosses.

“It’s definitely not Tammany Hall,” said Ashford, referring to the storied Democratic political machine that had a grip on New York City politics for nearly a century. “The party and Rusty are influential and they are helpful and that is their role. I don’t think anyone would be comfortable with outright public strong-arming of specific candidates.”

Ashford, who worked for former Govs. Jerry Brown and Arnold Schwarzenegger, along with former Vice President Kamala Harris when she served as state attorney general, added that the minimal power of the state GOP is likely a factor in the dynamics of Democrats’ decision to stay in the race. Democratic registered voters outnumber Republicans by almost a 2-to-1 margin in the state, and Democrats control every statewide elected office and hold supermajorities in both chambers of the California Legislature.

Advertisement

“If there were a strong viable opposition that existed, if the Republican Party was actually relevant in California, I think that would sort of force greater unity amongst Democrats,” she said.

Just one of the nine major Democrats did heed the party chair’s message. Ian Calderon, a former Los Angeles-area Assemblyman who consistently polled near the bottom of the field, withdrew from the race and endorsed Rep. Eric Swalwell (D-Dublin) on Thursday.

Candidates cannot withdraw their name from the ballot once they officially file to run for office, leading to some fears that even if other candidates drop out of the race, a crowded primary ballot could still split California’s liberal votes.

“I’m disappointed most of them will be on the ballot,” said Lorena Gonzalez, the head of the California Federation of Labor Unions, which will announce whether it endorses in the governor’s race on March 16. But “I do still think you can have people drop out of the race or become viable. I think that there are candidates who know viability is a real thing they have to show in coming weeks” before ballots start being mailed to voters.

Jodi Hicks, chief executive and president of Planned Parenthood Affiliates of California, said she is “still worried” about the prospect of two Republicans winning the top two spots in the June primary, shutting Democrats out of any chance of winning the governor’s office in November.

Advertisement

“I didn’t have any specifics of who I wanted to do what,” she said. “I’m just very, very concerned and the stakes are really high right now and seem to be getting worse by the day.”

Republican candidate Steve Hilton, a former Fox News host, said he is “confident that I’ll be in the top two” along with a Democratic candidate. “I find it very difficult to believe that the Democratic Party will just surrender California and allow two Republicans to be in the top two.”

Hilton made the comments Thursday after a gubernatorial forum in Sacramento hosted by the California Assn. of Realtors focused on housing and homeownership. Villaraigosa, former Health and Human Services Secretary Xavier Becerra, San Jose Mayor Matt Mahan and former Rep. Katie Porter also attended. Swalwell, who is currently in Washington, joined the panel virtually.

During the panel, candidates were in broad agreement about the need to reduce barriers and costs in order to build more housing in California, where the median single-family home costs more than $820,000. Many also endorsed proposals to disincentivize private investment firms from buying up homes as well as a $25-billion bond proposed by former Sen. Bob Hertzberg to help first-time homebuyers afford a down payment.

“This really isn’t a debate because we’re agreeing so much with each other,” Hilton said at one point during the event.

Advertisement

That political alignment on one of the most pressing issues facing California may explain why voters are having such a difficult time deciding who to support.

A recent poll of the Public Policy Institute of California found that the five candidates topping the crowded field were within 4 percentage points of one another: Porter, Swalwell, Hilton, Democratic hedge fund founder Tom Steyer and Republican Riverside County Sheriff Chad Bianco. Earlier polls had Hilton and Bianco leading the field, though many voters remained undecided.

Some candidates took issue with Hicks’ push to cull the field, noting that most of the lower-polling candidates he asked to drop out are people of color.

“Our political system is rigged, corrupted by the political elites, the wealthy and well connected,” state Supt. of Public Instruction Tony Thurmond, who is Black and Latino, said in a video posted on social media in response to the open letter. “The California Democratic Party is essentially telling every person of color in the race for Governor to drop out.”

Villaraigosa argued that enough voters remain undecided that it was too early for quality candidates to call it quits.

Advertisement

“Most people don’t even know who’s in the race,” said Villaraigosa. “It’s premature to be thinking about getting out of the race. I certainly am not considering it and I feel no pressure.”

Aside from the opinion polls, other indicators on who may emerge from the pack a candidates are slowly emerging.

Though it wasn’t enough to win the party’s endorsement, Swalwell won support from 24% of delegates at the state Democratic convention last month, the most of any party candidate.

While spending is no guarantee of success, Steyer has donated $47.4 million of his own wealth to his campaign. Mahan, who recently entered the race and is supported by Silicon Valley leaders, has quickly raised millions of dollars, as have two independent expenditures committees backing his bid.

Ashford said part of candidates’ decisions to remain in the race could have been driven by their lengthy political careers, as well as Democrats’ crushing November redistricting victory.

Advertisement

“In several cases, these are people who have won statewide office,” she said. “It’s tough to feel like there may not be a sequel to that.”

Nixon reported from Sacramento and Mehta from Los Angeles.

Continue Reading

Trending