Connect with us

Politics

Republicans unite to block White House and Schumer backed 'fake border bill'

Published

on

Republicans unite to block White House and Schumer backed 'fake border bill'

Republicans in both chambers of Congress are preparing to band together to block any hope of a Democrat-backed border bill getting to the finish line. 

In a letter to senators dated Sunday evening, Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., revealed his plan to bring an immigration bill to the floor once again after it was rejected primarily by Senate Republicans in February. 

“We are hopeful this bipartisan proposal will bring serious-minded Republicans back to the table to advance this bipartisan solution for our border,” he wrote. 

DUELING IVF BILLS TAKE CENTER STAGE AS PARTIES BUTT HEADS ON REPRODUCTIVE TECH REGULATION

Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer revealed his plan to bring back a Democrat-backed border bill, but Republicans are uniting to block the attempt. (Getty Images)

Advertisement

He noted that he doesn’t expect to get full support from either party, but described the border measure negotiated by Sens. Chris Murphy, D-Conn., Kyrsten Sinema, I-Ariz., and James Lankford, R-Okla., as “a tough, serious-minded, and – critically, bipartisan – proposal to secure our border.”

The White House promptly backed Schumer’s plan, with press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre calling on “every senator to put partisan politics aside and vote to secure the border.”

BALANCE OF POWER: VULNERABLE DEMS LOOK TO DIFFERENTIATE THEMSELVES FROM UNPOPULAR BIDEN

Sens. Lankford and Sinema were designated negotiators for the border bill. (Kevin Dietsch/Getty Images)

Republicans were quick to push back on the majority leader’s characterization of the bill. “The fake border bill will fail, again, because it does nothing to seriously secure the border – just cement outrageous levels of illegal immigration,” wrote Sen. Mike Lee, R-Utah on X, the platform formerly known as Twitter. 

Advertisement

“Ironically, some Democrats will vote against it, because even pretending to limit illegal immigration is a step too far for them,” he added. 

The bill failed a test vote in February, by a vote of 49-50, short of the 60 votes needed to proceed. 

Sen. Rick Scott, R-Fla., slammed Democrats reviving the bill as “political theatre.” 

“He thinks this vote will make you think Republicans are to blame for Biden’s border crisis,” he wrote on X. 

Sen. Eric Schmitt, R-Mo., similarly labeled Schumer’s plan as “kabuki theater.” 

Advertisement

Republicans were quick to reject the negotiated legislation after hearing some of the elements and seeing the bill text, which many described as weak and even counterproductive. 

SEN DURBIN DEMANDS JUSTICE ALITO RECUSE FROM TRUMP CASES AFTER FLYING UPSIDE-DOWN US FLAG

Immigration has become a top issue for voters going into the election. (James Breeden for New York Post/Mega)

Lankford, who notably helped craft the bill, denounced last week the then-speculation of Schumer bringing the measure back to the floor. “Listen, if we’re going to solve the border issues, it’s not going to by doing competing messaging bills. If we’re going to solve this, let’s sit down like adults and let’s figure out how we’re going to actually resolve this together,” he said in floor remarks.

Lankford was one of only four in his party to vote in favor of moving forward with the negotiated bill in February. It’s unclear if he would support it again. 

Advertisement

His fellow negotiator, Murphy, has led the charge to reconsider the bill. “Republicans don’t care about fixing the border,” he wrote Monday on X. “They want the border a mess because it helps them politically.”

It’s unlikely that the measure will be able to get 60 votes in order to move forward, spelling doom for the bill a second time. But if it were to get past the upper chamber, House Republican leadership made it clear it would be “dead on arrival” in its lower counterpart. 

AOC RIPS FETTERMAN FOR COMPARING HOUSE TO ‘JERRY SPRINGER’ SHOW: ‘I STAND UP TO BULLIES’

House leadership preemptively warned that the bill would be “dead on arrival.” (Getty Images)

In a statement, Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., Majority Leader Steve Scalise, R-La., Majority Whip Tom Emmer, R-Minn., and Republican conference Chairwoman Elise Stefanik, R-N.Y., said, “Leader Schumer is trying give his vulnerable members cover by bringing a vote on a bill which has already failed once in the Senate because it would actually codify many of the disastrous Biden open border policies that created this crisis in the first place.”

Advertisement

They further highlighted several tougher illegal immigration and border bills that have been passed by the Republican-majority House. “If Senate Democrats were actually serious about solving the problem and ending the border catastrophe, they would bring up H.R. 2 and pass it this week,” they said. 

H.R.2 includes nearly all Republican priorities and has been disregarded by Democratic leaders. Schumer previously remarked that the bill was full of “hard-right border policies” and said it would never be able to pass through Congress. 

Politics

‘Hunter Biden’ X account debuts with eyebrow-raising claim as GOP lawmakers pile on

Published

on

‘Hunter Biden’ X account debuts with eyebrow-raising claim as GOP lawmakers pile on

NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!

A newly active X account bearing former first son Hunter Biden’s name drew mockery from GOP lawmakers and prominent social media personalities after posting its first message Tuesday.

“Your laptop’s reputation precedes you,” Tennessee Sen. Marsha Blackburn wrote in response to the “@HunterBiden” account. 

Fox News Digital reached out to X and Hunter Biden’s art gallery to verify if the account belongs to the former president’s son, but did not receive confirmation. The account has garnered thousands of followers and interactions since Tuesday, when it launched its first message. 

“I’m Hunter Biden. You’ve never actually heard from me,” the account blaring the former first son’s name posted. 

Advertisement

The account’s profile reads: “Artist. Author. Recovery Advocate.”

HUNTER BIDEN HELPED MAKE CAMPAIGN DECISIONS, WAS MAJOR FIXTURE IN FATHER’S ORBIT, AUTHOR SAYS

Hunter Biden posts his first message on X and Substack. (Mandel Ngan/AFP)

Hunter, 56, has re-emerged in the public spotlight as he attempts to rebuild his image following years of controversy involving drug addiction, legal troubles and scrutiny surrounding his personal life. 

The X account, @HunterBiden, was first launched in 2013, according to a Fox News Digital review, but posted its first public message on Tuesday. Hunter Biden’s art gallery website is linked to the X account, while the art gallery’s website links to the X account, a YouTube page and a Substack account. 

Advertisement

The tweet sparked a wave of mockery aimed at the younger Biden, as well as a handful of accounts quipping that the former first son would allegedly launch a 2028 run. 

“We’ve heard plenty,” said Republican Indiana Sen. Jim Banks responded to the account. 

“Trust me, we’ve heard and seen ENOUGH from you,” Republican Missouri Rep. Jason Smith chimed in.

Other social media users quickly piled onto the alleged Hunter Biden post, resurfacing past controversies and even floating him as a potential political candidate.

“Oh this oughta be good,” said conservative commentator Nick Sortor in an X response.

Advertisement

“Very real chance he doesn’t remember that we have, in fact, heard from him in hours of podcasting before now,” said Fox News contributor Mary Katharine Ham.

“The 2028 Dark Horse Candidate,” wrote one X user, while another added “He’s running.”

MAMDANI’S WIFE’S ‘STUDENT SKETCHBOOK’ ART IS HUNTER BIDEN EFFECT ALL OVER AGAIN, SAYS US ARTIST

Hunter’s art gallery website links his X account, Youtube, as well as a newly formed Substack which posts the same message. (TheImageDirect.com)

Additionally, Candace Owens tagged the X account in a trailer for her upcoming interview with Hunter Biden, who is continuing a media tour following years of controversy while under the public spotlight. 

Advertisement

The @HunterBiden account reposted the video, writing, “She’s got questions. I’ve got answers. Thursday.”

JOE BIDEN POSES WITH HUNTER’S CHINESE BUSINESS ASSOCIATES IN NEWLY SURFACED PHOTOS: ‘INCREDIBLY DAMNING’

Hunter reportedly moved out of the United States amid mounting legal issues, just a year after his father left the presidential office in 2025.  (REUTERS/Kevin Lamarque)

HUNTER BIDEN’S FINANCIAL WOES REVEALED IN NEW MOTION TO DROP LAWSUIT: ‘SIGNIFICANT DEBT’

Hunter Biden has been involved in a string of controversies spanning his foreign business dealings, tax and gun charges, and scrutiny tied to his family’s political connections.

Advertisement

Hunter received a pardon from President Joe Biden for any offense he “has committed or may have committed” from Jan. 1, 2014, to Dec. 1, 2024, before his father left office.

In September 2024, Hunter Biden pleaded guilty to nine federal tax charges in California for a scheme evading over $1.4 million in taxes from 2016 to 2019. He was also convicted in Delaware in June 2024 for lying on a federal form about his drug use to purchase a firearm in 2018.

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

Hunter published a memoir titled “Beautiful Things: A Memoir” in 2021 which details his battle with severe substance abuse and family tragedies from his own perspective.

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Politics

Contributor: Trump has left himself only bad options on Iran

Published

on

Contributor: Trump has left himself only bad options on Iran

Nearly three months after the United States and Israel launched their large-scale bombing campaign against Iran and about six weeks since the April 8 ceasefire took effect, President Trump faces an inflection point. Does he return to war? Maintain the ceasefire and U.S. blockade on Iranian ports in the hope of cutting a deal on American terms? Or drop his maximalist negotiating stance?

Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.), an informal foreign policy advisor for the White House, continues to press for more aggressive U.S. military action. Trump’s political advisors would prefer that the war end as soon as possible to minimize political repercussions against the Republican Party in a midterm election year.

Trump seems conflicted. Despite weeks of U.S. bombardment and an ongoing naval blockade, Tehran is as protective of its nuclear program today as it was before the war began. “For Iran, the Clock is Ticking, and they better get moving, FAST, or there won’t be anything left of them,” Trump wrote on Truth Social over the weekend. A day later, Trump took to the social media platform again to announce he suspended planned U.S. attacks on Iran to give talks more time.

Unfortunately for Trump, he’s proved to be his own worst enemy on this subject. Iran’s stockpile of highly enriched uranium and Tehran’s effective control of the Strait of Hormuz, the regime’s two biggest cards, are a byproduct of Trump’s own policy decisions.

The first is a clear indictment of Trump’s first-term order to withdraw the United States from the Obama-era Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, a highly technical accord that put Iran’s nuclear work in a box by restricting the number and quality of centrifuges it could use, capped the amount of enriched uranium it could produce and compelled Tehran to ship 97% of its stockpile out of the country. When the Trump administration scrapped that hard-won deal, Iran responded by enriching more nuclear material at a faster pace and accumulating the very stockpile the Trump administration is now seeking to neutralize.

Advertisement

The Strait of Hormuz, Iran’s second card, would not even be an issue today if the Trump administration had refrained from going to war in the first place. On Feb. 27, the day before the conflict began, more than 150 tankers and vessels traveled through the strait. The international waterway was open for business.

Not so today. On Thursday, a grand total of three crossings were registered in the waterway. This collapse of commerce is a consequence of Iran’s ability to harass civilian tankers so much that shipping companies no longer view the journey as worth the cost. As Adm. Brad Cooper, the top U.S. commander in the Middle East, testified to the Senate Armed Services Committee on Thursday: “The Iranian capability to stop commerce has been dramatically depleted through the strait, but their voice is very loud. And those threats are clearly heard by the merchant industry and insurance industry.”

By virtue of his own actions, Trump is now left with a series of policy options that range from least bad to terrible. None of them are ideal, and all of them carry some risk.

For starters, Trump could resume the war. Any renewed U.S. bombing campaign would probably expand the U.S. military’s original set of targets to include a portion of Iran’s energy infrastructure, which Trump has threatened repeatedly to hit. A U.S. invasion of Kharg Island, where 90% of Iran’s oil processing takes place, might also be up for discussion. The aim would be to destroy Iran’s remaining military capabilities and further squeeze its oil revenue until Tehran’s strategic calculus on the war shifts to Washington’s liking.

Yet there are no guarantees that doubling down on military force will work. Trump’s entire strategy has relied on a baseline assumption: The more punitive the United States is, the more likely Tehran will be to cave. Yet that simply hasn’t occurred. If anything, Iran is more dug in now than it was in the opening days of the conflict. For the regime, capitulating to Trump is as dangerous as losing the war. Why would more bombing succeed where previous bombing failed?

Advertisement

The risks of additional U.S. military action are considerable as well. Before the ceasefire, Iran was launching ballistic missiles and attack drones across multiple gulf Arab states, hitting Qatar’s largest natural gas processing facility, Saudi Arabia’s east-west oil pipeline and Dubai’s luxurious high-rises. As the Iranians have stated, such attacks will not only resume if Trump orders a resumption of the war but will expand to new targets, including desalination facilities and nuclear power plants. Such strikes would raise global oil and gas prices to even more absurd levels, adding to the extra $40 billion the American people are already paying for fuel since the war began.

What about continuing the status quo? While this contingency would be less costly than another round of bombing or a U.S. ground invasion, it’s unclear whether it would help or hurt negotiations toward a settlement. There’s a possibility that extending the U.S. blockade of Iranian ports could merely reaffirm the regime’s earlier decision to preserve its own shutdown of the strait. Iran is now urging Washington to end its blockade before talks on the nuclear file can be held. And it’s a mystery whether Trump’s blockade is working anyway; the U.S. intelligence community assesses that Iran could withstand this pressure point for three to four more months, which may be too long for Trump to sustain given the oil disruptions that are bound to get worse.

Striking an agreement to end the war, return the strait to open traffic and restrict Iran’s nuclear program would be the most beneficial policy for the United States with the least amount of cost attached — not quite undoing the harm from Trump’s first-term decision to scrap the nuclear deal and his second-term decision to start a war. U.S. and Iranian negotiators are passing proposals back and forth as we speak. But as of now, Trump can’t stomach agreeing to a deal that covers some of Iran’s terms, including but not limited to a shorter suspension of enriched uranium and some kind of Iranian role in the management of the strait. Even if Trump did reassess his position, he would be forced to confront the hawks in his political coalition who would consider anything short of Iran’s total surrender a failure.

In short, Trump is in an unenviable position. He’s got nobody to blame but himself.

Daniel R. DePetris is a fellow at Defense Priorities and a syndicated foreign affairs columnist.

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Politics

Georgia Republicans head to runoff in secretary of state race defined by 2020 election claims

Published

on

Georgia Republicans head to runoff in secretary of state race defined by 2020 election claims

NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!

Vernon Jones and Tim Fleming are heading to a runoff after neither claimed at least 50% of the vote in Georgia’s Republican primary for secretary of state on Tuesday.

The Republican field included Jones, Fleming, Gabriel Sterling, Kelvin King and Ted Metz, while Democrats Cam Ashling, Dana Barrett, Adrian Consonery Jr. and Penny Brown Reynolds competed for their party’s nomination for Georgia’s top election officer.

The race underscored how disputes stemming from the 2020 presidential election, including claims from President Donald Trump that the contest was stolen, continue to shape debates over voting laws and election security years later.

2026 MIDTERMS: PRIMARIES, KEY RACES AND ELECTION RESULTS

Advertisement

The winner of the runoff on June 16 will advance to the general election in November, where control of the office overseeing voter registration, election certification and ballot administration is expected to remain a closely watched issue in one of the nation’s most competitive battleground states.

Sterling, Georgia’s former chief operating officer in the secretary of state’s office, entered the race with statewide name recognition after publicly defending Georgia’s handling of the 2020 election.

Jones, a former Democratic state lawmaker turned Trump ally, campaigned as a staunch supporter of the president and emerged as a fierce critic of the state’s election system.

REPORTER’S NOTEBOOK: DEMOCRATS SAY THEY CAN STILL FLIP THE HOUSE DESPITE GOP REDISTRICTING GAINS IN THE SOUTH

Vernon Jones, a former Democratic state lawmaker turned Republican ally of President Donald Trump, ran in Georgia’s GOP primary for secretary of state. (Elijah Nouvelage/Bloomberg/Getty Images)

Advertisement

King is a general contractor who previously ran for U.S. Senate and is married to State Election Board member and conservative commentator Janelle King.

Fleming previously worked in the secretary of state’s office when current Republican Gov. Brian Kemp held the position. The former chairman of the Georgia Republican Party pitched himself as a conservative focused on tightening election procedures.

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

Candidates in Georgia’s secretary of state race are competing to oversee elections in one of the nation’s most closely watched battleground states. (Dustin Chambers/Bloomberg/Getty Images)

Metz, the Libertarian Party’s 2022 gubernatorial nominee, also joined the GOP primary field.

Advertisement

Georgia Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger, a Republican who drew national attention after rejecting efforts to overturn the state’s 2020 presidential election results, is running for governor.

This is a developing story. Check back for the latest election results and updates.

Advertisement
Continue Reading
Advertisement

Trending