Connect with us

Politics

Meeting With Biden, British Leader Hints at Ukraine Weapon Decision Soon

Published

on

Meeting With Biden, British Leader Hints at Ukraine Weapon Decision Soon

President Biden’s deliberations with Prime Minister Keir Starmer of Britain about whether to allow Ukraine to attack Russia with long-range Western weapons were fresh evidence that the president remains deeply fearful of setting off a dangerous, wider conflict.

But the decision now facing Mr. Biden after Friday’s closed-door meeting at the White House — whether to sign off on the use of long-range missiles made by Britain and France — could be far more consequential than previous concessions by the president that delivered largely defensive weapons to Ukraine during the past two and a half years.

In remarks at the start of his meeting with Mr. Starmer, the president underscored his support for helping Ukraine defend itself but did not say whether he was willing to do more to allow for long-range strikes deep into Russia.

“We’re going to discuss that now,” the president told reporters.

For his part, the prime minister noted that “the next few weeks and months could be crucial — very, very important that we support Ukraine in this vital war of freedom.”

Advertisement

European officials said earlier in the week that Mr. Biden appeared ready to approve the use of British and French long-range missiles, a move that Mr. Starmer and officials in France have said they want to provide a united front in the conflict with Russia. But Mr. Biden has hesitated to allow Ukraine to use arms provided by the United States in the same way over fears that President Vladimir V. Putin of Russia would see it as a major escalation.

On Thursday, Mr. Putin responded to reports that America and its allies were considering such a move by declaring that it would “mean that NATO countries — the United States and European countries — are at war with Russia,” according to a report by the Kremlin.

Mr. Biden and Mr. Starmer offered little insight on Friday into the actions they planned to take. But officials on both sides of the Atlantic said they did not expect any announcement immediately after the White House meeting. In the past, Western countries have begun providing new military equipment to Ukraine without announcing the decision publicly.

“This wasn’t about a particular decision that we’ll obviously pick up again in UNGA in just a few days’ time with a wider group of individuals,” Mr. Starmer told reporters after the meeting, referring to the annual meeting in New York of the United Nations General Assembly at the end of the month.

But he also hinted that he expected a decision about the missiles to come soon.

Advertisement

“I think if you look at both the Ukrainian situation and the Middle East, it is obvious that in the coming weeks and months there are really important potential developments, whatever timetable is going on in other countries,” he said.

John F. Kirby, the national security spokesman at the White House, said Friday that the Biden administration takes Mr. Putin’s threats seriously because he has proved himself capable of “aggression” and “escalation.” But Mr. Kirby added that there had been no change in Mr. Biden’s opposition to letting Ukraine use U.S. missiles to strike deep inside Russia.

“There is no change to our view on the provision of long-range strike capabilities for Ukraine to use inside Russia, and I wouldn’t expect any sort of major announcement in that regard coming out of the discussions, certainly not from our side,” he said.

Mr. Kirby’s comments came just hours before the two leaders met for their first lengthy conversation since Mr. Starmer became prime minister in early July.

The question of whether to let Ukraine use the long-range weapons that can travel 150 to 200 miles has been a rare point of disagreement between British and American officials, who have largely been in lock step on strategy over the past 30 months of fighting.

Advertisement

British officials have argued that Ukraine cannot be expected to fight effectively unless it can attack the military sites that Russia is using to shoot missiles or the airplanes that deliver “glide bombs.” And they believe that Mr. Putin, for all his nuclear threats warning that war between Russia and European forces could be coming, is largely bluffing. Mr. Putin, they say, has shown he does not want to bring NATO directly into the fighting.

Mr. Biden’s view has been far more cautious.

He has hesitated at every major decision point, starting with shipping HIMARS artillery, then through debates on whether to send M1 Abrams tanks, F-16 fighters, and short- and long-range ATACMS, a missile system critical to American preparations to defend both Europe and the Korean Peninsula.

But those decisions have primarily helped Ukraine’s military defend its territory and try to repel the Russian invasion. Over time, his aides say, they have discovered that Mr. Putin was less sensitive to the introduction of new weapons into the battlefield than they had thought. So they have gradually approved more capable, longer-range arms for Ukraine.

The questions of how Mr. Putin would react to the use of American weapons by Ukraine to strike deep inside Russian territory, officials say, could lead to a very different outcome.

Advertisement

“When he starts brandishing the nuclear sword, for instance, yeah, we take that seriously, and we constantly monitor that kind of activity,” Mr. Kirby said. “We have our own calculus for what we decide to provide to Ukraine and what not.”

The American concerns are twofold. The first has been rooted in Mr. Biden’s concern that the war not escalate; time and again he has told members of his staff that their No. 1 priority was to “avoid World War III.”

The second American concern is a practical one: Pentagon officials do not believe Ukraine has enough of the ATACMS, the British Storm Shadow and the French SCALP missiles to make a strategic difference on the battlefield. The reach of the missiles, they note, is well known — and Russia has already moved its most valuable aircraft beyond the range the missiles can fly.

Moreover, the U.S. officials say, they simply cannot supply many more to Ukraine. The Pentagon has warned that it must keep a healthy reserve of weapons in case of an outbreak of fighting in either Europe or Asia. And the missiles are so expensive that they contend Ukraine could get more firepower putting that money into drones.

So in the American telling of events, the decisions being debated by Mr. Biden and Mr. Starmer are more symbolic than substantive.

Advertisement

Looming over this is the American election.

In the debate against Vice President Kamala Harris on Tuesday, former President Donald J. Trump declined several opportunities to say he was committed to Ukraine’s victory. Instead, he talked of striking a deal, one that Ukraine may be coerced to sign.

While Ms. Harris is likely to continue the outlines of the American strategy, providing more arms and aid to Ukraine as long as Congress keeps the spigot open, Mr. Trump has made clear he is uninterested in continuing to spend heavily. And while Europe has stepped up, it does not have enough of an arsenal to make much of a difference.

Politics

DHS responds after reports CISA chief allegedly failed polygraph for classified intel access

Published

on

DHS responds after reports CISA chief allegedly failed polygraph for classified intel access

NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!

The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) is disputing reports that acting Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA) Director Madhu Gottumukkala failed a polygraph after seeking access to highly sensitive intelligence, as an internal investigation and the suspension of multiple career cybersecurity officials deepen turmoil inside the agency, according to a report.

Politico reported that Gottumukkala pushed for access to a tightly restricted intelligence program that required a counter-intelligence polygraph and that at least six career staffers were later placed on paid administrative leave for allegedly misleading leadership about the requirement, an assertion DHS strongly denies.

The outlet said its reporting was based on interviews with four former and eight current cybersecurity officials, including multiple Trump administration appointees who worked with Gottumukkala or had knowledge of the polygraph examination and the events that followed. All 12 were granted anonymity over concerns about retaliation, according to Politico.

DHS pushed back on the reporting, saying the polygraph at issue was not authorized and that disciplinary action against career staff complied with department policy.

Advertisement

KRISTI NOEM SAYS BIDEN USED DHS ‘TO INVADE THE COUNTRY WITH TERRORISTS’

DHS disputes reports that acting CISA Director Madhu Gottumukkala failed a polygraph as staff are suspended amid an internal investigation and intel access dispute. (CISA Facebook)

“Acting Director Madhu Gottumukkala did not fail a sanctioned polygraph test. An unsanctioned polygraph test was coordinated by staff, misleading incoming CISA leadership,” DHS Assistant Secretary Tricia McLaughlin said in a statement provided to Fox News Digital. “The employees in question were placed on administrative leave, pending conclusion of an investigation.”

“We expect and require the highest standards of performance from our employees and hold them directly accountable to uphold all policies and procedures,” she continued. “Acting Director Gottumukkala has the complete and full support of the Secretary and is laser focused on returning the agency to its statutory mission.”

Politico also reported that Gottumukkala failed a polygraph during the final week of July, citing five current officials and one former official.

Advertisement

WHITE HOUSE CALLS REPORT ABOUT TRUMP CONSIDERING FIRING NOEM ‘TOTAL FAKE NEWS’

DHS disputes reports that acting CISA Director Madhu Gottumukkala failed a polygraph as staff are suspended amid an internal investigation and intel access dispute. (CISA Facebook)

The test was administered to determine whether he would be eligible to review one of the most sensitive intelligence programs shared with CISA by another U.S. spy agency, according to the outlet.

That intelligence was part of a controlled access program with strict distribution limits, and the originating agency required any CISA personnel granted need-to-know access to first pass a counter-intelligence polygraph, according to four current officials and one former official cited by Politico.

As a civilian agency, most CISA employees do not require access to such highly classified material or a polygraph to be hired, though polygraphs are commonly used across the Pentagon and U.S. intelligence community to protect the government’s most sensitive information.

Advertisement

ICE LEADERSHIP SHAKEUP EXPOSES GROWING DHS FRICTION OVER DEPORTATION TACTICS, PRIORITIES

A person administers a polygraph test.  (Getty Images)

Politico reported that senior staff raised questions on at least two occasions about whether Gottumukkala needed access to the intelligence, but said he continued pressing for it even if it meant taking a polygraph, citing four current officials.

The outlet also reported that an initial access request in early June, signed by mid-level CISA staff, was denied by a senior agency official who determined there was no urgent need-to-know and noted that the agency’s previous deputy director had not viewed the program.

That senior official was later placed on administrative leave for unrelated reasons in late June, and a second access request signed by Gottumukkala was approved in early July after the official was no longer in the role, according to current officials cited by Politico.

Advertisement

KRISTI NOEM FACES FIRST MAJOR HOMELAND SECURITY GRILLING AS LAWMAKERS PRESS HER ON TERROR THREATS

DHS disputes reports that acting CISA Director Madhu Gottumukkala failed a polygraph as staff are suspended amid an internal investigation and intel access dispute. (Celal Gunes/Anadolu Agency via Getty Images)

Despite being advised that access to the most sensitive material was not essential to his job and that lower-classification alternatives were available, Gottumukkala continued to pursue access, officials told the outlet.

Officials interviewed by Politico said they could not definitively explain why Gottumukkala did not pass the July polygraph and cautioned that failures can occur for innocuous reasons such as anxiety or technical errors, noting that polygraph results are generally not admissible in U.S. courts.

On Aug. 1, shortly after the polygraph, at least six career staff involved in scheduling and approving the test were notified in letters from then–acting DHS Chief Security Officer Michael Boyajian that their access to classified national security information was being temporarily suspended for potentially misleading Gottumukkala, according to officials and a letter reviewed by Politico.

Advertisement

NOEM HITS BACK AT FEMA CRITICS, REVEALS VISION FOR DISASTER RELIEF AGENCY

“This action is being taken due to information received by this office that you may have participated in providing false information to the acting head of the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA) regarding the existence of a requirement for a polygraph examination prior to accessing certain programs,” the letter said. “The above allegation shows deliberate or negligent failure to follow policies that protect government information, which raises concerns regarding an individual’s trustworthiness, judgment, reliability or willingness and ability to safeguard classified information.”

In a separate letter dated Aug. 4, the suspended employees were informed by Acting CISA Chief Human Capital Officer Kevin Diana that they had been placed on paid administrative leave pending an investigation, according to current and former officials and a copy reviewed by Politico.

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

Gottumukkala was appointed CISA deputy director in May and previously served as commissioner and chief information officer for South Dakota’s Bureau of Information and Technology, which oversees statewide technology and cybersecurity initiatives.

Advertisement

CISA said in a May press release that Gottumukkala has more than two decades of experience in information technology and cybersecurity across the public and private sectors.

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Politics

News Analysis: Trump’s math problem: Rising prices, falling approval ratings

Published

on

News Analysis: Trump’s math problem: Rising prices, falling approval ratings

President Trump made dozens of promises when he campaigned to retake the White House last year, from boosting economic growth to banning transgender athletes from girls’ sports.

But one pledge stood out as the most important in many voters’ eyes: Trump said he would not only bring inflation under control, but push grocery and energy prices back down.

“Starting the day I take the oath of office, I will rapidly drive prices down, and we will make America affordable again,” he said in 2024. “Your prices are going to come tumbling down, your gasoline is going to come tumbling down, and your heating bills and cooling bills are going to be coming down.”

He hasn’t delivered. Gasoline and eggs are cheaper than they were a year ago, but most other prices are still rising, including groceries and electricity. The Labor Department estimated Thursday that inflation is running at 2.7%, only a little better than the 3% Trump inherited from Joe Biden; electricity was up 6.9%.

And that has given the president a major political problem: Many of the voters who backed him last year are losing faith.

Advertisement

“I voted for Trump in 2024 because he was promising America first … and he was promising a better economy,” Ebyad, a nurse in Texas, said on a Focus Group podcast hosted by Bulwark publisher Sarah Longwell. “It feels like all those promises have been broken.”

Since Inauguration Day, the president’s job approval has declined from 52% to 43% in the polling average calculated by statistician Nate Silver. Approval for Trump’s performance on the economy, once one of his strongest points, has sunk even lower to 39%.

That’s dangerous territory for a president who hopes to help his party keep its narrow majority in elections for the House of Representatives next year.

To Republican pollsters and strategists, the reasons for Trump’s slump are clear: He overpromised last year and he’s under-performing now.

“The most important reasons he won in 2024 were his promises to bring inflation down and juice the economy,” Republican pollster Whit Ayres said. “That’s the reason he won so many voters who traditionally had supported Democrats, including Hispanics. … But he hasn’t been able to deliver. Inflation has moderated, but it hasn’t gone backward.”

Advertisement

Last week, after deriding complaints about affordability as “a Democrat hoax,” Trump belatedly launched a campaign to convince voters that he’s at work fixing the problem.

But at his first stop, a rally in Pennsylvania, he continued arguing that the economy is already in great shape.

“Our prices are coming down tremendously,” he insisted.

“You’re doing better than you’ve ever done,” he said, implicitly dismissing voters’ concerns.

He urged families to cope with high tariffs by cutting back: “You know, you can give up certain products,” he said. “You don’t need 37 dolls for your daughter. Two or three is nice, but you don’t need 37 dolls.”

Advertisement

Earlier, in an interview with Politico, Trump was asked what grade he would give the economy. “A-plus-plus-plus-plus-plus,” he said.

On Wednesday, the president took another swing at the issue in a nationally televised speech, but his message was basically the same.

“One year ago, our country was dead. We were absolutely dead,” he said. “Now we’re the hottest country anywhere in the world. … Inflation is stopped, wages are up, prices are down.”

Republican pollster David Winston, who has advised GOP members of Congress, said the president has more work to do to win back voters who supported him in 2024 but are now disenchanted.

“When families are paying the price for hamburger that they used to pay for steak, there’s a problem, and there’s no sugarcoating it,” he said. “The president’s statements that ‘we have no inflation’ and ‘our groceries are down’ have flown in the face of voters’ reality.”

Advertisement

Another problem for Trump, pollsters said, is that many voters believe his tariffs are pushing prices higher — making the president part of the problem, not part of the solution. A YouGov poll in November found that 77% of voters believe tariffs contribute to inflationary pressures.

Trump’s popularity hasn’t dropped through the floor; he still has the allegiance of his fiercely loyal base. “He is at his lowest point of his second term so far, but he is well within the range of his job approval in the first term,” Ayres noted.

Still, he has lost significant chunks of his support among independent voters, young people and Latinos, three of the “swing voter” groups who put him over the top in 2024.

Inflation isn’t the only issue that has dented his standing.

He promised to lead the economy into “a golden age,” but growth has been uneven. Unemployment rose in November to 4.6%, the highest level in more than four years.

Advertisement

He promised massive tax cuts for the middle class, but most voters say they don’t believe his tax cut bill brought them any benefit. “It’s hard to convince people that they got a tax break when nobody’s tax rates were actually cut,” Ayres noted.

He kept his promise to launch the largest deportation campaign in U.S. history — but many voters complain that he has broken his promise to focus on violent criminals. In Silver’s average, approval of his immigration policies dropped from 52% in January to 45% now.

A Pew Research Center survey in October found that 53% of adults, including 71% of Latinos, think the administration has ordered too many deportations. However, most voters approve of Trump’s measures on border security.

Republican pollsters and strategists say they believe Trump can reverse his downward momentum before November’s congressional election, but it may not be easy.

“You look at what voters care about most, and you offer policies to address those issues,” GOP strategist Alex Conant suggested. “That starts with prices. So you talk about permitting reform, energy prices, AI [artificial intelligence] … and legislation to address healthcare, housing and tax cuts. You could call it the Affordability Act.”

Advertisement

“A laser focus on the economy and the cost of living is job one,” GOP pollster Winston said. “His policies on regulation, energy and taxes should have a positive impact, but the White House needs to emphasize them on a more consistent basis.”

“People voted for change in 2024,” he warned. “If they don’t get it — if inflation doesn’t begin to recede — they may vote for change again in 2026.”

Continue Reading

Politics

DNI Gabbard warns ‘Islamist ideology’ threatens Western freedom at AmFest

Published

on

DNI Gabbard warns ‘Islamist ideology’ threatens Western freedom at AmFest

NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!

Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard delivered a blunt warning about “Islamist ideology” at a high-profile conservative gathering Saturday, casting the threat as fundamentally incompatible with Western freedom.

“The threats from this Islamist ideology come in many forms,” Gabbard told an audience at Turning Point USA’s (TPUSA) annual AmericaFest conference.

RIFT IN MAGA MOVEMENT ON FULL DISPLAY AT TPUSA’S AMERICAFEST

Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard oversees the nation’s 18 intelligence agencies. (Ross D. Franklin/AP)

Advertisement

“As we approach Christmas, right now in Germany they are canceling Christmas markets because of this threat.”

Gabbard, who oversees the nation’s 18 intelligence agencies, said the ideology stands in direct conflict with American liberty.

“When we talk about the threat of Islamism, this political ideology, there is no such thing as individual freedom or liberty,” she said.

Gabbard’s remarks were notable given her role overseeing the nation’s intelligence community, a position that traditionally avoids overt ideological framing in public remarks, particularly at partisan political events.

TPUSA BEGAN AS A SCRAPPY CAMPUS GROUP AND GREW INTO A NATIONAL, MULTIMILLION-DOLLAR POLITICAL FORCE

Advertisement

AmericaFest 2025, hosted by Turning Point USA, is taking place in Phoenix, Arizona. (Jon Cherry/AP)

Turning Point USA’s AmericaFest has become a marquee gathering for conservative activists, lawmakers and influencers, where national security, immigration and cultural issues are increasingly framed as part of a broader ideological struggle.

The Office of the Director of National Intelligence did not immediately respond to a request for comment clarifying whether Gabbard’s remarks reflected official U.S. intelligence assessments or her personal views.

TPUSA founder Charlie Kirk positioned the organization as a hub for conservative youth activism, frequently hosting high-profile figures who frame political and security debates in ideological terms.

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

Advertisement

Charlie Kirk, who founded Turning Point USA, was killed on Sept. 10 while speaking at an event at Utah Valley University. (Joe Raedle/Getty Images)

Kirk carried that influence onto college campuses nationwide, drawing large crowds for live, unscripted debates on religion, Islamism, free speech, immigration and American culture. It was at an event at Utah Valley University where he was fielding open-mic questions from thousands on Sept. 10 where he was shot and killed.

The charged nature of modern political activism has also raised alarms about political violence, with authorities increasingly warning of threats tied to large public gatherings.

European security officials have raised security alerts around holiday events in recent years following a series of Islamist-inspired attacks, including deadly incidents in Germany, France and Belgium, prompting heightened police presence or temporary cancellations at some Christmas markets.

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Trending