Connect with us

Politics

'More liberal than Gavin Newsom': Haley and DeSantis clash in first one-on-one debate

Published

on

'More liberal than Gavin Newsom': Haley and DeSantis clash in first one-on-one debate

Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis and former U.N. Ambassador Nikki Haley called each other liars and attacked each other’s leadership abilities Wednesday in their first one-on-one debate — and last opportunity to impress voters before Monday’s Iowa caucuses.

Each thinks they have the best chance to snatch the Republican nomination from former President Trump, who has a commanding lead in the polls and has refused to participate in the debates.

Monday’s caucuses kick off a series of nominating contests that will determine the GOP standard-bearer. New Hampshire holds its first-in-the-nation primary Jan. 23, Nevadans and South Carolinians vote next month, and Super Tuesday — when more than a dozen states, including California, hold caucuses or primaries — is less than eight weeks away. Despite facing 91 felony charges and attempting to overturn the 2020 election, Trump remains the front-runner in polling for the GOP nomination.

Haley and DeSantis clashed about foreign policy, entitlement changes and their respective gubernatorial records. But mostly they clashed over who was the bigger liar.

Advertisement

“She has a record, she makes statements,” DeSantis said about Haley, South Carolina’s former governor. “And I think part of the problem with her candidacy is now that she’s getting scrutiny: She’s got this problem with ballistic podiatry, shooting herself in the foot every other day.”

Haley repeatedly call DeSantis “desperate” and rolled her eyes when he attacked her. She also repeatedly called attention to the Florida governor’s high campaign spending and middling poll numbers.

“If you can’t manage a campaign, how are you going to manage a country?” she said, noting that DeSantis had spent more on private planes than on television ads. “If leadership is about getting things done, how did you blow through $150 million in your campaign and go down in the polls?”

Here are some key takeaways from the two-hour debate, which took place at Drake University in Des Moines and was broadcast on CNN:

Haley and DeSantis take on each other — and DeSantis bashes Newsom’s California

Advertisement

The debate was likely DeSantis and Haley’s last major opportunity to sway Republicans in the Hawkeye State before voters gather in subzero temperatures Monday to pick their nominee. New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie quit the race just a few hours before the debate began, allowing his supporters a chance to reassess his two former rivals.

The candidates kicked off the debate by repeatedly calling each other liars.

Haley unveiled a new campaign website that chronicled inaccurate statements she said DeSantis had made about her, a theme she continued Wednesday night.

“Every time he lies, Drake University, don’t turn this into a drinking game because you will be overserved by the end of the night,” she said.

DeSantis then compared Haley to California Gov. Gavin Newsom, whom he debated in November.

Advertisement

“I thought he lied a lot. Man, Nikki Haley may give him a run for his money, and she may even be more liberal than Gavin Newsom is,” DeSantis said.

DeSantis also attacked California’s policies during an exchange about immigration, saying the state gives free health insurance to any undocumented person who lives in the state. (The state expanded eligibility for its Medi-Cal program to any Californian — with or without papers — whose income is low enough to qualify.)

“We should not let states provide these benefits,” he said.

Although no single moment in the debate seems likely to substantially alter the course of the race, debates can buoy or sink candidacies. Haley’s recent surge is largely driven by strong debate performances. In a 2011 presidential debate, then-Texas Gov. Rick Perry’s campaign suffered after he failed to recall one of the three federal agencies he said he would eliminate.

But unless many of Trump’s current supporters change their preferences, he will be the GOP nominee.

Advertisement

Trump takes some hits for Jan. 6 and threats to suspend the Constitution

The candidates have spent much of the election avoiding direct hits on Trump’s character and his efforts to overturn the election, fearing they will alienate his loyal base of voters. But it’s made it harder for them to catch him in the polls.

Haley repeated her refrain that Trump was the right president for the right time, but took criticism of him a step further Wednesday, calling his attorney’s argument that he is immune from criminal prosecution “ridiculous,” and criticizing his false claims that he won the 2020 election rather than Joe Biden.

“He said that Jan. 6 was a beautiful day,” Haley said. “I think Jan. 6 was a terrible day. And we should never want to see that happen again.”

Despite those critiques, Haley has not ruled out serving as Trump’s running mate.

Advertisement

DeSantis was not quite as forceful but took issue with Trump’s call on social media recently to terminate the Constitution.

“You can’t just terminate the Constitution,” DeSantis said before adding that Trump is prone to “word-vomit from time to time on social media.”

But the crux of DeSantis’ argument was about Trump’s electability, asserting that a general election with Trump as the nominee would focus on Jan. 6 and Trump’s legal cases.

“Democrats and the media would love to run with that,” he said.

Once again, the elephant in the room was not in the room

Advertisement

At a town hall just two miles away at the Iowa Events Center, Trump batted away any suggestion that the two candidates would overcome him in the Iowa caucuses or New Hampshire primary. He told Fox News anchors Martha MacCallum and Bret Baier that in his first days in office, he would prioritize closing the border and drilling for oil.

“We have millions and millions of people here. It is not sustainable,” Trump said. “We are going to have the largest deportation effort in the history of our country. We’re bringing everybody back to where they came from. We have no choice.”

In response to a voter’s question if he would “protect all life,” Trump took credit for the abortion restrictions that swept across the country in the wake of the Supreme Court — with three Trump-appointed justices — overturning Roe vs. Wade.

“If it weren’t for me with Roe v. Wade, you wouldn’t be asking these questions,” he told her.

Trump also bragged about defeating Islamic State and said his tax cuts, which disproportionately benefited rich people and corporations, juiced the economy. He also rejected suggestions that he was to blame for a rise in political violence and said he’d be open to “mending fences” with former allies turned foes.

Advertisement

“Now I’ve gotten to know Washington, I’ve gotten to know the people,” he said. “I know the smart ones, the dumb ones, the weak ones, the strong ones.”

He repeated his refrain that the multiple criminal charges against him constitute “a witch hunt.”

Iowa: A winnower or a decider?

Iowans take deep pride in playing host to the nation’s first nominating contest. Haley recently drew their criticism by saying that although they go first in the nominating contests, New Hampshire “corrects” them and then “my sweet state of South Carolina brings it home.” She made the remarks at a town hall in New Hampshire, drawing laughter from the crowd.

Asked about the remark at an event and an interview in Iowa, she responded that she was joking. Not everyone is buying Haley’s explanation. Some in the crowd at the Des Moines town hall booed. DeSantis is airing television ads in Iowa attacking her over the flap.

Advertisement

“Iowans know when you’re telling a joke,” Haley said after DeSantis raised the quote in the first moments of the debate, before adding that the Florida governor’s campaign is largely confined to Iowa, not a winning strategy for winning the White House.

Haley is right that the candidate who wins Iowa does not always secure the party’s nomination. The last three GOP winners of competitive Iowa caucuses — Texas Sen. Ted Cruz, former Pennsylvania Sen. Rick Santorum and former Arkansas Gov Mike Huckabee — all failed in their efforts to be their party’s nominee. But then-Sen. Barack Obama’s victory in the 2008 Iowa caucuses was foundational to his successful campaign to beat front-runner Hillary Clinton for the Democratic nomination and ultimately win the White House.

Haley stands up for the establishment on Ukraine funding

Foreign policy is the area where Haley differs most from Trump. She argued Wednesday that continued funding for Ukraine is essential for protecting allies and preventing China from invading Taiwan. Opponents of helping Kyiv are misleading voters about the costs, which can be covered with cuts to Biden’s green agenda, she argued.

“This is about preventing war,” she said Wednesday. “This is about keeping our military men and women from having to fight a war, and you only do that when you focus on national security.”

Advertisement

DeSantis, a pro-Ukraine hawk when he served in Congress, has joined other Trumpist Republicans in repudiating aid, arguing that it’s too costly and Haley’s policy “is basically a carbon copy” of Biden’s.

“You can take the ambassador out of the United Nations, but you can’t take the United Nations out of the ambassador,” he said of Haley.

Mehta reported from Des Moines and Bierman from Washington. Times staff writer Faith E. Pinho in Los Angeles contributed to this report.

Advertisement

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

Politics

ICE blasts Washington mayor over directive restricting immigration enforcement

Published

on

ICE blasts Washington mayor over directive restricting immigration enforcement

NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!

U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) accused Everett, Washington, Mayor Cassie Franklin of escalating tensions with federal authorities after she issued a directive limiting immigration enforcement in the city.

Franklin issued a mayoral directive this week establishing citywide protocols for staff, including law enforcement, that restrict federal immigration agents from entering non-public areas of city buildings without a judicial warrant.

“We’ve heard directly from residents who are afraid to leave their houses because of the concerning immigration activity happening locally and across our country. It’s heartbreaking to see the impacts on Everett families and businesses,” Franklin said in a statement. 

“With this directive, we are setting clear protocols, protecting access to services and reinforcing our commitment to serving the entire community.”

Advertisement

ICE blasted the directive Friday, writing on X it “escalates tension and directs city law enforcement to intervene with ICE operations at their own discretion,” thereby “putting everyone at greater risk.”

Mayor Cassie Franklin said her new citywide immigration enforcement protocols are intended to protect residents and ensure access to services, while ICE accused her of escalating tensions with federal authorities. (Google Maps)

ICE said Franklin was directing city workers to “impede ICE operations and expose the location of ICE officers and agents.”

“Working AGAINST ICE forces federal teams into the community searching for criminal illegal aliens released from local jails — INCREASING THE FEDERAL PRESENCE,” the agency said. “Working with ICE reduces the federal presence.”

“If Mayor Franklin wanted to protect the people she claims to serve, she’d empower the city police with an ICE 287g partnership — instead she serves criminal illegal aliens,” ICE added.

Advertisement

DHS, WHITE HOUSE MOCK CHICAGO’S LAWSUIT OVER ICE: ‘MIRACULOUSLY REDISCOVERED THE 10TH AMENDMENT’

U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement blasted Everett’s mayor after she issued a directive restricting federal agents from accessing non-public areas of city facilities without a warrant.  (Victor J. Blue/Bloomberg via Getty Images)

During a city council meeting where she announced the policy, Franklin said “federal immigration enforcement is causing real fear for Everett residents.”

“It’s been heartbreaking to see the racial profiling that’s having an impact on Everett families and businesses,” she said. “We know there are kids staying home from school, people not going to work or people not going about their day, dining out or shopping for essentials.”

The mayor’s directive covers four main areas, including restricting federal immigration agents from accessing non-public areas of city buildings without a warrant, requiring immediate reporting of enforcement activity on city property and mandating clear signage to enforce access limits.

Advertisement

BLOCKING ICE COOPERATION FUELED MINNESOTA UNREST, OFFICIALS WARN AS VIRGINIA REVERSES COURSE

Everett, Wash., Mayor Cassie Franklin said her new directive is aimed at protecting residents amid heightened immigration enforcement activity. (iStock)

It also calls for an internal policy review and staff training, including the creation of an Interdepartmental Response Team and updated immigration enforcement protocols to ensure compliance with state law.

Franklin directed city staff to expand partnerships with community leaders, advocacy groups and regional governments to coordinate responses to immigration enforcement, while promoting immigrant-owned businesses and providing workplace protections and “know your rights” resources.

The mayor also reaffirmed a commitment to “constitutional policing and best practices,” stating that the police department will comply with state law barring participation in civil immigration enforcement. The directive outlines protocols for documenting interactions with federal officials, reviewing records requests and strengthening privacy safeguards and technology audits.

Advertisement

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

Everett, Wash., Mayor Cassie Franklin issued a directive limiting federal immigration enforcement in city facilities. (iStock)

“We want everyone in the city of Everett to feel safe calling 911 when they need help and to know that Everett Police will not ask about your immigration status,” Franklin said during the council meeting.
”I also expect our officers to intervene if it’s safe to do so to protect our residents when they witness federal officers using unnecessary force.”

Fox News Digital has reached out to Mayor Franklin’s office and ICE for comment.

Advertisement

Related Article

White House slams Democrat governor for urging public to track ICE agents with new video portal
Continue Reading

Politics

Power, politics and a $2.8-billion exit: How Paramount topped Netflix to win Warner Bros.

Published

on

Power, politics and a .8-billion exit: How Paramount topped Netflix to win Warner Bros.

The morning after Netflix clinched its deal to buy Warner Bros., Paramount Skydance Chairman David Ellison assembled a war room of trusted advisors, including his billionaire father, Larry Ellison.

Furious at Warner Bros. Discovery Chief David Zaslav for ending the auction, the Ellisons and their team began plotting their comeback on that crisp December day.

To rattle Warner Bros. Discovery and its investors, they launched a three-front campaign: a lawsuit, a hostile takeover bid and direct lobbying of the Trump administration and Republicans in Congress.

“There was a master battle plan — and it was extremely disciplined,” said one auction insider who was not authorized to comment publicly.

Netflix stunned the industry late Thursday by pulling out of the bidding, clearing the way for Paramount to claim the company that owns HBO, HBO Max, CNN, TBS, Food Network and the Warner Bros. film and television studios in Burbank. The deal was valued at more than $111 billion.

Advertisement

The streaming giant’s reversal came just hours after co-Chief Executive Ted Sarandos met with Atty Gen. Pam Bondi and a deputy at the White House. It was a cordial session, but the Trump officials told Sarandos that his deal was facing significant hurdles in Washington, according to a person close to the administration who was not authorized to comment publicly.

Even before that meeting, the tide had turned for Paramount in a swell of power, politics and brinkmanship.

“Netflix played their cards well; however, Paramount played their cards perfectly,” said Jonathan Miller, chief executive of Integrated Media Co. “They did exactly what they had to do and when they had to do it — which was at the very last moment.”

Key to victory was Larry Ellison, his $200-billion fortune and his connections to President Trump and congressional Republicans.

Paramount also hired Trump’s former antitrust chief, attorney Makan Delrahim, to quarterback the firm’s legal and regulatory action.

Advertisement

Republicans during a Senate hearing this month piled onto Sarandos with complaints about potential monopolistic practices and “woke” programming.

David Ellison skipped that hearing. This week, however, he attended Trump’s State of the Union address in the Capitol chambers, a guest of Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.). The two men posed, grinning and giving a thumbs-up, for a photo that was posted to Graham’s X account.

David Ellison, the chairman and chief executive of Paramount Skydance Corp., walks through Statuary Hall to the State of the Union address at the U.S. Capitol on Feb. 24, 2026.

(Anna Moneymaker / Getty Images)

Advertisement

On Friday, Netflix said it had received a $2.8-billion payment — a termination fee Paramount agreed to pay to send Netflix on its way.

Long before David Ellison and his family acquired Paramount and CBS last summer, the 43-year-old tech scion and aircraft pilot already had his sights set on Warner Bros. Discovery.

Paramount’s assets, including MTV, Nickelodeon and the Melrose Avenue movie studio, have been fading. Ellison recognized he needed the more robust company — Warner Bros. Discovery — to achieve his ambitions.

“From the very beginning, our pursuit of Warner Bros. Discovery has been guided by a clear purpose: to honor the legacy of two iconic companies while accelerating our vision of building a next-generation media and entertainment company,” David Ellison said in a Friday statement. “We couldn’t be more excited for what’s ahead.”

Warner’s chief, Zaslav, who had initially opposed the Paramount bid, added: “We look forward to working with Paramount to complete this historic transaction.”

Advertisement

Netflix, in a separate statement, said it was unwilling to go beyond its $82.7-billion proposal that Warner board members accepted Dec. 4.

“We believe we would have been strong stewards of Warner Bros.’ iconic brands, and that our deal would have strengthened the entertainment industry and preserved and created more production jobs,” Sarandos and co-Chief Executive Greg Peters said in a statement.

“But this transaction was always a ‘nice to have’ at the right price, not a ‘must have’ at any price,” the Netflix chiefs said.

Netflix may have miscalculated the Ellison family’s determination when it agreed Feb. 16 to allow Paramount back into the bidding.

The Los Gatos, Calif.-based company already had prevailed in the auction, and had an agreement in hand. Its next step was a shareholder vote.

Advertisement

“They didn’t need to let Paramount back in, but there was a lot of pressure on them to make sure the process wouldn’t be challenged,” Miller said.

In addition, Netflix’s stock had also been pummeled — the company had lost a quarter of its value — since investors learned the company was making a Warner run.

Upon news that Netflix had withdrawn, its shares soared Friday nearly 14% to $96.24.

Netflix Co-CEO Ted Sarandos arrives at the White House

Netflix Chief Executive Ted Sarandos arrives at the White House on Feb. 26, 2026.

(Andrew Leyden / Getty Images)

Advertisement

Invited back into the auction room, Paramount unveiled a much stronger proposal than the one it submitted in December.

The elder Ellison had pledged to personally guarantee the deal, including $45.7 billion in equity required to close the transaction. And if bankers became worried that Paramount was too leveraged, the tech mogul agreed to put in more money in order to secure the bank financing.

That promise assuaged Warner Bros. Discovery board members who had fretted for weeks that they weren’t sure Ellison would sign on the dotted line, according to two people close to the auction who were not authorized to comment.

Paramount’s pressure campaign had been relentless, first winning over theater owners, who expressed alarm over Netflix’s business model that encourages consumers to watch movies in their homes.

During the last two weeks, Sarandos got dragged into two ugly controversies.

Advertisement

First, famed filmmaker James Cameron endorsed Paramount, saying a Netflix takeover would lead to massive job losses in the entertainment industry, which is already reeling from a production slowdown in Southern California that has disrupted the lives of thousands of film industry workers.

Then, a week ago, Trump took aim at Netflix board member Susan Rice, a former high-level Obama and Biden administration official. In a social media post, Trump called Rice a “no talent … political hack,” and said that Netflix must fire her or “pay the consequences.”

The threat underscored the dicey environment for Netflix.

Additionally, Paramount had sowed doubts about Netflix among lawmakers, regulators, Warner investors and ultimately the Warner board.

Paramount assured Warner board members that it had a clear path to win regulatory approval so the deal would quickly be finalized. In a show of confidence, Delrahim filed to win the Justice Department’s blessing in December — even though Paramount didn’t have a deal.

Advertisement

This month, a deadline for the Justice Department to raise issues with Paramount’s proposed Warner takeover passed without comment from the Trump regulators.

“Analysts believe the deal is likely to close,” TD Cowen analysts said in a Friday report. “While Paramount-WBD does present material antitrust risks (higher pay TV prices, lower pay for TV/movie workers), analysts also see a key pro-competitive effect: improved competition in streaming, with Paramount+ and HBO Max representing a materially stronger counterweight to #1 Netflix.”

Throughout the battle, David Ellison relied on support from his father, attorney Delrahim, and three key board members: Oracle Executive Vice Chair Safra A. Catz; RedBird Capital Partners founder Gerry Cardinale; and Justin Hamill, managing director of tech investment firm Silver Lake.

In the final days, David Ellison led an effort to flip Warner board members who had firmly supported Netflix. With Paramount’s improved offer, several began leaning toward the Paramount deal.

On Tuesday, Warner announced that Paramount’s deal was promising.

Advertisement

On Thursday, Warner’s board determined Paramount’s deal had topped Netflix. That’s when Netflix surrendered.

“Paramount had a fulsome, 360-degree approach,” Miller said. “They approached it financially. … They understood the regulatory environment here and abroad in the EU. And they had a game plan for every aspect.”

On Friday, Paramount shares rose 21% to $13.51.

It was a reversal of fortunes for David Ellison, who appeared on CNBC just three days after that war room meeting in December.

“We put the company in play,” David Ellison told the CNBC anchor that day. “We’re really here to finish what we started.”

Advertisement

Times staff writer Ana Cabellos and Business Editor Richard Verrier contributed to this report.

Continue Reading

Trending