Politics
Trump Revokes Security Detail for Pompeo and Others, Despite Threats From Iran
President Trump revoked security protection for his former secretary of state, Mike Pompeo, and a former top aide, Brian Hook, despite warnings from the Biden administration that both men faced ongoing threats from Iran because of actions they took on Mr. Trump’s behalf, four people with knowledge of the matter said on Thursday.
Mr. Pompeo and Mr. Hook had been part of an aggressive posture against Iran during the first Trump presidency, most notably the drone strike that killed the powerful Iranian general Qassim Suleimani in early 2020.
Mr. Trump also remains under threat because of that action, and his advisers have regularly stressed the seriousness of the situation in the years between his two terms in office.
Mr. Pompeo and Mr. Hook had their security details, which were believed to be provided by the State Department, pulled on Tuesday, one of the people briefed on the matter said. A day before, Mr. Trump pulled the U.S. Secret Service detail of John R. Bolton, who was Mr. Trump’s third national security adviser and also faces threats.
Other than former presidents and their spouses, senior U.S. officials are not automatically granted ongoing protection. But the threat assessments from the intelligence community that the risk level remained for Mr. Pompeo, Mr. Hook and Mr. Bolton had been the basis for the Biden administration granting it to them. President Joseph R. Biden Jr. had his aides warn the Iranians that assassinating a former U.S. government official would be considered an act of war, a former senior administration official said.
Mr. Biden’s administration had privately briefed the new Trump administration about continued threats from Iran to former Trump officials, including Mr. Pompeo, Mr. Hook and Mr. Bolton, according to a person with knowledge of the matter.
Mr. Bolton said he was also personally notified about the threats by the Biden administration.
“As recently as the end of last week, two separate government representatives, two separate government agencies called,” he said in an interview on Wednesday. “They said our current assessment is that the threat level remains the same” as in 2022, when a member of Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps was charged with a murder plot against Mr. Bolton, he said.
A Trump spokesman and a State Department official did not immediately respond to requests for comment. A spokesman for Mr. Pompeo declined to comment. Mr. Hook declined to comment.
Mr. Bolton parted with the first Trump administration on bad terms, wrote a tell-all book about his tenure and has been deeply critical of Mr. Trump. But it is less clear why the president would order the removal of the security details for Mr. Pompeo and Mr. Hook, who have been supportive of him.
Mr. Trump has told people he does not want anyone working for him who worked under Mr. Pompeo in his first term. He removed Mr. Hook as a presidential appointee to the Wilson Center for Scholars via a social media post days ago.
On Thursday night, Dan Helmer received a shipment of boxes with 1,000 yard signs that read: “Dan Helmer for Congress.”
By late Friday morning, Mr. Helmer no longer had a seat to run for.
The whiplash for the Virginia Democrats running for Congress was swift and intense after the state Supreme Court struck down the new congressional map proposed in February to flip four Republican-held seats.
With the stroke of a pen in Richmond, some campaigns effectively went poof, other candidates suddenly were in far tougher districts and one went from on the verge of dropping out to gearing up for a long-shot battle in a deep-red part of the state.
Rarely have so many fully formed campaigns gone off the rails at once. The court’s shock decision on Friday dashed Democratic hopes of providing some balance to Republican-run states that have been eliminating Democratic seats since Texas kicked off a nationwide fight last year.
Mr. Helmer, a senior member of the House of Delegates, was an architect of Virginia’s redistricting gambit that began in October. His colleagues subsequently split up Northern Virginia and created a new lobster-shaped Democratic seat ideally suited for him. Barring a miracle from the Supreme Court, Mr. Helmer said his congressional campaign is most likely over.
“There’s no seat for me,” he said. His new yard signs “are probably not as useful as they were yesterday.”
Tom Perriello, a former congressman who later served as a diplomat in Africa during Barack Obama’s presidency, began his campaign in December with the expectation that new maps were coming.
He woke up Friday morning in his home near Charlottesville in a district that Vice President Kamala Harris carried by three percentage points in 2024. Once the court ruling came a few hours later, he lived in a district Mr. Trump won by 12 points.
Mr. Perriello said he would now run against Representative John McGuire, a first-term Republican whose district covers conservative Southside Virginia. He had planned to run in a district that stitched together small Democratic-leaning cities and college towns in the Shenandoah and Blue Ridge Mountains.
The situation is even more jarring for some Democratic voters, Mr. Perriello said.
“I just walked into a food pantry in the Shenandoah Valley and the African-American woman who runs it broke down in tears and said for the first time in her life she thought she was going to have representation,” Mr. Perriello recalled Friday. “This is what the last two months have been about, about hope for the first time for people.”
Some hope Democrats will gain seats even without the new maps.
Virginia Democrats now hold six of the state’s 11 House districts. President Trump won two of the other five by five points or less, making the Republican incumbents who represent them, Representatives Jen Kiggans and Rob Wittman, endangered given the headwinds the G.O.P. faces. Their Democratic opponents, former Representative Elaine Luria and Shannon Taylor, a local prosecutor, entered the race well before the redistricting push and remain top-tier challengers.
Representative Hakeem Jeffries of New York, the House minority leader, said in an interview Friday that “we’re going to pick up at least two seats” in Virginia under the existing maps.
Jeff Ryer, the chairman of the Republican Party of Virginia, said he had given the state Supreme Court case a 50-50 chance of succeeding. Democrats, he argued, have been overconfident in the state ever since Abigail Spanberger won last year’s governor’s election by more than 15 points.
Now, instead of a map designed to hand 10 of 11 seats to Democrats, Mr. Ryer said he expected multiple competitive campaigns this year. He allowed that it would not be easy defending the seats Mr. Trump narrowly won.
“These districts are designed to be compact and contiguous, and when you draw them that way you’re going to get some that are not competitive and some that are hotly contested,” Mr. Ryer said.
Some Democrats vowed to soldier on under difficult conditions.
Beth Macy, the best-selling author of books like “Dopesick,” about the struggles in Appalachia, started her campaign in November before the proposed Democratic maps drew her into a district with Mr. Perriello, who was far better known and had deeper connections in their shared region of Virginia.
Ms. Macy said on Friday that she had been considering conceding the primary and endorsing Mr. Perriello, but now would remain a candidate against Representative Ben Cline, a Republican whose district includes her hometown, Roanoke.
“I feel bad, but you know, we can’t just roll over,” Ms. Macy said. “Democrats have got to stop showing up to a knife fight with a spork.”
Ms. Macy, who is now running in a deep-red district Mr. Trump carried by 25 points, is not short on optimism. She predicted the backlash to Republican policies in Washington could lead to Virginia Democrats sweeping out G.O.P. incumbents across the state and perhaps reach the same end Democrats had hoped for with their maps.
“We have never been to where we are in this country,” she said. “It’s a national emergency.”
Politics
Hegseth says Pentagon will review Mark Kelly’s public statements about classified briefing amid ongoing feud
NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!
Secretary of War Pete Hegseth on Sunday suggested Sen. Mark Kelly, D-Ariz., may have violated his oath with comments he made to a news outlet following a classified briefing.
Kelly told Margaret Brennan on Face the Nation that it is “shocking how deep we have gone into these magazines” when asked if the Pentagon has updated lawmakers on the Iran war’s impact on U.S. weapons stockpiles.
The senator told Brennan the Tomahawks, Army Tactical Missile System (ATACMS), RIM-161 Standard Missile 3 (SM-3), Terminal High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD) rounds and Patriot rounds used to defend the U.S. have been hit hard, adding that it will take years to replenish those stockpiles, which could affect a hypothetical U.S. conflict with China.
In response, Hegseth questioned whether Kelly, a former Navy pilot, may have violated his oath and said the Pentagon’s legal counsel will review his comments.
FEDERAL JUDGE BLOCKS PENTAGON FROM DEMOTING MARK KELLY OVER CONTROVERSIAL MILITARY VIDEO
Pentagon chief Pete Hegseth suggested Sen. Mark Kelly may have violated his oath with comments he made following a classified briefing. (Aaron Schwartz/CNP/Bloomberg via Getty Images Tom Williams/CQ-Roll Call, Inc via Getty Images)
“‘Captain’ Mark Kelly strikes again,” Hegseth wrote on X.
“Now he’s blabbing on TV (falsely & dumbly) about a *CLASSIFIED* Pentagon briefing he received,” he continued. “Did he violate his oath… again? @DeptofWar legal counsel will review.”
The senator clapped back, saying Hegseth had revealed similar information at a recent hearing and that it was not classified.
“We had this conversation in a public hearing a week ago and you said it would take ‘years’ to replenish some of these stockpiles,” Kelly responded on X. “That’s not classified, it’s a quote from you. This war is coming at a serious cost and you and the president still haven’t explained to the American people what the goal is.”
This comes amid a months-long dispute between Hegseth and Kelly over the senator’s participation in a video with some of his Democratic colleagues in Congress urging U.S. military members to ignore “illegal” orders.
The DOJ has opened an investigation into the video posted online featuring six Democratic lawmakers calling on troops and members of the intelligence community to defy illegal orders from the federal government. The lawmakers all served in the military or at intelligence agencies.
In addition to Kelly, the other lawmakers in the video were Sens. Elissa Slotkin of Michigan, as well as Reps. Chris Deluzio and Chrissy Houlahan of Pennsylvania, Maggie Goodlander of New Hampshire and Jason Crow of Colorado.
GRAND JURY REJECTS DOJ EFFORT TO INDICT DEMOCRATIC LAWMAKERS WHO URGED MILITARY TO DEFY ILLEGAL ORDERS
Pentagon chief Hegseth said the Pentagon’s legal counsel will review Sen. Mark Kelly’s latest comments. (Joe Raedle/Getty Images)
“This administration is pitting our uniformed military and intelligence community professionals against American citizens,” the lawmakers said in the video. “Like us, you all swore an oath to protect and defend this Constitution. Right now, the threats coming to our Constitution aren’t just coming from abroad but from right here at home. Our laws are clear. You can refuse illegal orders. You must refuse illegal orders. No one has to carry out orders that violate the law or our Constitution.”
Grand jurors declined to sign off on charges against the lawmakers in February.
In November, the Pentagon launched an investigation into Kelly, pointing to a federal law that allows retired service members to be recalled to active duty on orders of the secretary for possible court-martial or other punishment.
Hegseth has censured Kelly and has attempted to retroactively demote him from his retired rank of captain over his participation in the video, which affirms that refusing unlawful orders is a standard part of military protocol.
But a federal court ruling blocked the Pentagon from demoting the lawmaker over the video. The court also found the Pentagon likely violated Kelly’s First Amendment rights, and those of “millions of military retirees,” when it formally censured him on Jan. 5.
Hegseth subsequently appealed that ruling.
Sen. Mark Kelly has repeatedly said he would not back down amid the Pentagon’s attempts to punish him over the video. (Graeme Sloan/Bloomberg via Getty Images)
CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP
Last week, a three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit heard oral arguments and appeared largely skeptical of Hegseth’s attempt to punish Kelly for the video.
“I will not back down from this fight,” Kelly said after the hearing.
President Donald Trump had accused the lawmakers of being “traitors” who engaged in “sedition at the highest level” and “should be in jail” after the video was posted last fall. He even suggested they should be executed over the video, although he later attempted to walk that comment back.
Slotkin, who previously worked at the CIA and Pentagon, was targeted with a bomb threat just days after the clip and Trump’s subsequent statements suggesting the Democrats be executed.
Voters in California may get a chance to remake the state’s open primary system in two years.
Political consultant Steve Maviglio filed an application Friday with state officials that seeks to alter California’s voting system by reverting to a traditional primary. Under the proposal, the top candidates from each party would advance to the general election in November.
The current system allows the top two candidates, regardless of party, to move on to the runoff. That has led to instances in which two Democrats or two Republicans have faced off in the general election.
The state’s gubernatorial election, for example, has prompted concern that two Republicans could shut out the Democratic candidates. Riverside County Sheriff Chad Bianco and former Fox News commentator Steve Hilton have polled high in various surveys and are facing a large field of Democrats.
Democratic voters vastly outnumber Republicans in California, yet some political consultants said they feared there were so many Democrats running that voters wouldn’t coalesce around one candidate and the field would be split. Those fears have eased somewhat in recent months as some Democratic candidates advance from the pack.
The state’s top-two primary system has been in place since California voters passed Proposition 14 in 2010. The state’s major political parties opposed the initiative, while Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger supported it.
The goal was to help end partisan gridlock in Sacramento and force candidates in primaries to appeal to a wider range of voters, rather than just those in their own party.
Proposition 14, as well as the state’s once-a-decade redistricting process, has led to some dramatic races, including the 2012 face-off between Democratic Reps. Brad Sherman and Howard Berman for a congressional seat in Los Angeles’ San Fernando Valley. Amid aspersions and attack ads, the pair nearly came to blows at a community debate.
Maviglio described the ballot measure as a simple repeal of Proposition 14, and said he was inspired by the governor’s race.
“It was extremely scary to envision the November ballot for governor with Republicans on it,” Maviglio said.
The New York Times first reported on the ballot measure proposal.
A news release from Maviglio states that the proposed repeal of Prop. 14 “is fueled by concerns that California’s primaries are disenfranchising a majority of California voters by limiting choice to candidates from one party.”
A website for the effort includes criticisms of the current primary system by Democratic Party Chair Rusty Hicks and Ron Nehring, former chairman of the California Republican Party.
Maviglio’s ballot initiative proposes to appear on the 2028 ballot and take effect in 2030.
Talk of changing Proposition 14 has been swirling in Sacramento for months.
Secretary of State Shirley Weber told reporters at an unrelated news conference last week that she had voted years ago against Proposition 14. She questioned whether it had actually succeeded in creating more diversity.
“I did not like the open primary,” Weber said. “I didn’t think it would solve any problems. They had a list of problems it would solve, and none of those have been solved.”
-
Politics6 minutes agoDemocratic Candidates Scramble in Virginia After Court Tosses Map
-
Business12 minutes agoWhy Some People Are Allergic to ‘Peanut Butter Raises’
-
Lifestyle42 minutes agoChaos Gardening: A Laid-Back Way to Garden
-
Technology54 minutes agoThe Bastl Kalimba is a wild synth that thinks it’s a thumb piano
-
World60 minutes agoRemains recovered of US soldier who went missing in military exercises in Morocco, 2nd soldier still missing
-
Politics1 hour agoHegseth says Pentagon will review Mark Kelly’s public statements about classified briefing amid ongoing feud
-
Health1 hour agoCruise ship linked to deadly Hantavirus outbreak arrives off Tenerife as passenger evacuation begins
-
Sports1 hour agoPacers president apologizes to fans after team’s ‘risk’ backfires in NBA Draft Lottery