When President Donald Trump announced ‘TrumpRx’ in early February, a weight I’ve carried my entire adult life suddenly lifted from my shoulders. The website offers life-saving medications at much lower prices than normal, based on the president’s promise to give Americans the same prescription drug costs as patients in other developed countries. I can personally attest that such equal treatment — a policy known as ‘most favored nation’ pricing — is urgently needed for people who struggle with chronic disease.

I’ve had debilitating asthma since I was a child. I’ve been able to manage it thanks to a prescription drug which blocks lung inflammation and keeps my airways open. The few times I’ve gone off the medication, I’ve ended up in the emergency room, unable to breathe. That nearly happened four years ago in what I thought was the worst possible place — on the other side of the world, unable to contact my doctors or go to my pharmacy.

My family and I were in Italy, on a trip to honor my mother. She had recently been diagnosed with cancer and my brother and I scheduled the trip in between her chemo treatments, when she would be well enough to travel. She had always wanted to go there with us. But in our rush to get two families and three little kids packed, I accidentally grabbed a nearly empty inhaler.

I realized my mistake a few days into the trip, when I looked at the inhaler and saw that I only had two doses left. I wasn’t just worried about my health, though, of course, that was paramount. I worried how I’d afford the drug if I even found it in Italy.

I’ve organized my professional life around access to insurance that covers my medication, given its longstanding retail price $600 for a month’s supply. For 25 years, I’ve grappled with denied coverage letters, premium tier prescription charts and the constant worry that we would have to cut back on necessities to get my medication. At the time, in Italy, I was already paying a few hundred dollars a month for the drug — a lot, but a bargain compared to its normal price.

But I had no choice. I had to get my medication. After a few minutes of searching, I found an Italian pharmacy across town. I walked there immediately, trying to control my racing thoughts of what might happen. I knew that if I couldn’t get the drug, I couldn’t get safely back to the U.S.

Fifteen minutes later, in tears I walked out, drug in hand. It cost me only 30 euros or about $35.

At first, I was both relieved and grateful. But by the end of the day, I was scratching my head. Why was it $600 in the U.S. while Italians could get it for next to nothing? In the days that followed, I discovered that the answer is beyond complicated.

It’s affected by everything from a lack of price transparency to the meddling of middlemen who jack up costs. It’s also true that foreign countries have been negotiating the prices of prescription drugs for decades, forcing Americans to cover the enormous cost of pharmaceutical development while they pay far below market prices.

Whatever the reason, the system doesn’t work for Americans. Brand name prescription prices in the U.S. are more than four times higher than prices in other wealthy countries. As many as 18 million Americans have struggled to buy the prescriptions they need in recent years.

I’m now using a generic version of the drug that costs significantly less. But that doesn’t change the fact that I, like many other Americans with chronic disease, have paid through the nose for decades on end, only to find the medication I needed in Italy for what seemed like pennies.

I wasn’t just worried about my health, though, of course, that was paramount. I worried how I’d afford the drug if I even found it in Italy.

Trump is fighting to fix this broken system. Before launching TrumpRx, he reached 16 deals with pharmaceutical companies to charge most-favored-nation prices. As a lifelong conservative, I’m typically uncomfortable with this kind of government intervention in the market. But other countries have already intervened and people like me have paid the price.

If pharmaceutical companies need the extra money, they should take it up with other countries that negotiated them down first. Then they could recoup their costs on the backs of others, not simply by charging more in the U.S. Bottom line, there’s no good reason why 340 million Americans should pay so much more than hundreds of millions of people who live in Europe and Asia.

I will always be grateful that my medication was so affordable in Italy back in 2022. It may very well have saved my life. But I’m even more grateful that President Trump is finally lowering prices for every American here at home.

Ex-Victoria’s Secret mogul Les Wexner’s lawyer was caught on a hot mic jokingly threatening to ‘kill’ him if he continued giving long answers to questions during his deposition on Jeffrey Epstein by the House Oversight Committee.

The moment was caught after the committee released its full, nearly five-hour deposition of 88-year-old Wexner as part of its ongoing probe into Jeffrey Epstein’s network.

Several hours into the deposition, while Wexner was giving a particularly long-winded answer, Wexner’s attorney leaned over to him and whispered in his ear, ‘I’m going to f—ing kill you if you answer another question with more than five words, okay?’

Both Wexner and his attorney laughed after this statement, indicating Wexner understood it as a joke. The lawyer proceeded to instruct Wexner to ‘answer the question,’ laughing more.

Shortly before this exchange, the attorney had urged Wexner to ‘answer the question,’ saying, ‘I’m sure we all appreciate the stories, we’re just trying to answer questions that they actually want answered,’ referring to the House committee.

The Oversight Committee heard from Wexner, a billionaire fashion mogul best known for his work in revolutionizing the Victoria’s Secret store chain, about his involvement with Epstein, whom Wexner characterized as strictly a business associate rather than a close friend.

Despite being named a co-conspirator in a recently uncovered FBI document from 2019, Wexner said that he has never been directly contacted by either the FBI or the Department of Justice. He maintained his total innocence during the deposition, saying, ‘I was naïve, foolish, and gullible to put any trust in Jeffrey Epstein. He was a con man. And while I was conned, I have done nothing wrong and have nothing to hide. I completely and irrevocably cut ties with Epstein nearly twenty years ago when I learned that he was an abuser, a crook, and a liar.’

The committee stated it was releasing the full deposition with ‘no spin,’ saying, ‘The American people deserve to see the testimony for themselves—transparency matters.’

Wexner is the founder of L Brands, formerly called The Limited, through which he acquired well-known companies Victoria’s Secret, Bath & Body Works, Express, and Abercrombie & Fitch, among others. He is no longer associated with Victoria’s Secret. He was one of Epstein’s first major clients as a financial advisor, with Epstein being granted power of attorney over Wexner’s vast wealth. Wexner also sold his Manhattan townhouse to Epstein, which was later discovered to be one of the locations where federal authorities accused Epstein of abusing young women and girls under 18.

Despite this, Wexner stated that he always kept his relationship with Epstein as strictly professional, saying, ‘I don’t think I ever went to lunch, or dinner, a movie or had a cup of coffee with Jeffrey,’ adding, ‘My focus was on my business and on community.’

Wexner said he severed ties with Epstein in 2007 after learning of an investigation and discovering that Epstein had misappropriated funds from him and his family. He said a substantial amount of the money was returned. 

Wexner also testified that he was not aware of Epstein ever staying at a guesthouse on his New Albany, Ohio, estate, where Maria Farmer is said to have been abused by Epstein and associate Ghislaine Maxwell. He maintained that he only had knowledge of Epstein staying at a nearby neighbor’s residence. Pressed on whether he denies Farmer’s testimony that she was abused on his property, he stated, ‘I never met her, didn’t know she was here, didn’t know she was abused.’

He categorically denied any knowledge of either Epstein or Maxwell arranging women for prominent individuals. He also categorically denied ever having a sexual encounter with anyone introduced by Maxwell and Epstein or having any sexual relationship with Epstein himself.

He further denied any sexual contact or knowledge of another prominent Epstein victim, Virginia Giuffre.

Wexner was also asked about his knowledge of Epstein and President Donald Trump’s relationship. He said that he does not think they were friends, but said Epstein ‘held him out as a friend.’

Committee members also questioned Wexner on a note he wrote in a birthday book to Epstein in which he drew breasts with the caption, ‘Dear Jeffrey, I wanted to get you what you want, so here it is … Your friend, Leslie.’

Wexner confirmed that he wrote the note but dismissed it, saying, ‘He was a bachelor, so I drew a pair of boobs as kind of a joke, offhandedly, I would say.’

Wexner is the fourth person appearing before the House Oversight Committee in its Epstein probe.

Fox News Digital’s Liz Elkind contributed to this report.

The Pentagon is deploying the USS Gerald R. Ford to the Middle East, creating a rare two-carrier presence in the region as tensions with Iran rise and questions swirl about possible U.S. military action.

The Ford will reinforce the USS Abraham Lincoln already operating in theater, significantly expanding American airpower at a moment of heightened regional uncertainty.

While officials have not announced imminent action, the dual-carrier presence increases the Pentagon’s flexibility — from deterrence patrols to sustained strike operations — should diplomacy falter.

The largest aircraft carrier in the world

The Gerald R. Ford is the largest and most advanced aircraft carrier ever built.

Commissioned in 2017, the nuclear-powered warship stretches more than 1,100 feet and displaces more than 100,000 tons of water. It serves as a floating air base that can operate in international waters without relying on host-nation approval — a key advantage in politically sensitive theaters.

Powered by two nuclear reactors, the ship has virtually unlimited range and endurance and is designed to serve for decades as the backbone of U.S. naval power projection.

How much airpower does it carry?

A typical air wing aboard the Ford includes roughly 75 aircraft, though the exact mix depends on mission requirements.

Those aircraft can include F/A-18 Super Hornets, stealth F-35C Joint Strike Fighters, EA-18G Growler electronic warfare jets, E-2D Hawkeye early warning aircraft and MH-60 helicopters.

In a potential conflict with Iran, several of those platforms would be central. 

The F-35C is designed to penetrate contested airspace and carry out precision strikes against heavily defended targets. The Growler specializes in jamming enemy radar and communications — a critical capability against Iran’s layered air defense systems. 

The E-2D extends surveillance hundreds of miles, helping coordinate air and missile defense.

Together, they give commanders options ranging from deterrence patrols to sustained strike operations.

Built for higher combat tempo

What separates the Ford from earlier carriers is its ability to generate more sorties over time.

Instead of traditional steam catapults, it uses an electromagnetic aircraft launch system, or EMALS, allowing aircraft to launch more smoothly and at a faster pace. The system is designed to reduce stress on jets and increase operational tempo.

The ship also features advanced arresting gear and a redesigned flight deck that allows more aircraft to be staged and cycled efficiently.

In a high-intensity scenario — particularly one involving missile launches or rapid escalation — the ability to launch and recover aircraft quickly can be decisive.

How it compares to the Lincoln

While both the Ford and the Abraham Lincoln are 100,000-ton, nuclear-powered supercarriers capable of carrying roughly 60 aircraft to 75 aircraft, they represent different generations of naval design.

The Lincoln is a Nimitz-class carrier commissioned in 1989 and part of a fleet that has supported decades of operations in the Middle East. The Ford is the Navy’s next-generation carrier and the lead ship of its class.

The key difference is efficiency and output. 

The Ford was built to generate a higher sustained sortie rate using its electromagnetic launch system, along with a redesigned flight deck and upgraded power systems. In practical terms, both ships bring substantial strike capability — but the Ford is designed to launch and recover aircraft faster over extended operations, giving commanders greater flexibility if tensions escalate.

How it defends itself

The Ford does not sail alone. It operates as the centerpiece of a carrier strike group that typically includes guided-missile destroyers, cruisers and attack submarines.

Those escort ships provide layered air and missile defense, anti-submarine protection and additional strike capability.

The carrier itself carries defensive systems including Evolved Sea Sparrow Missiles, Rolling Airframe Missiles and the Phalanx Close-In Weapon System — designed to intercept incoming threats at close range.

That defensive posture is especially relevant in the Middle East.

Iran has invested heavily in anti-ship ballistic missiles, cruise missiles, armed drones, naval mines and fast-attack craft operated by the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps. The Gulf region presents a dense and complex threat environment, even for advanced U.S. warships.

Why two carriers matter

With both the Ford and the Lincoln in theater, commanders gain more than just added firepower. Two carriers allow the U.S. to sustain a higher tempo of operations, distribute aircraft across multiple areas, or maintain continuous presence if one ship needs to reposition or resupply.

Dual-carrier deployments are relatively uncommon and typically coincide with periods of heightened regional tension.

The timing — as negotiations with Tehran continue — underscores the strategic message. Carriers are often deployed not only to fight wars, but to prevent them.

By positioning both ships in the region, Washington is signaling that if diplomacy falters, military options will already be in place.

Iran is rebuilding nuclear sites damaged in previous U.S. strikes and ‘preparing for war,’ despite engaging in talks with the Trump administration, according to a prominent Iranian opposition figure.

Alireza Jafarzadeh, deputy director of the Washington office of the National Council of Resistance of Iran (NCRI), said newly released satellite images also prove the regime has accelerated its efforts to restore its ‘$2 trillion’ uranium enrichment capabilities.

‘The regime has clearly stepped up efforts to rebuild its uranium enrichment capabilities,’ Jafarzadeh told Fox News Digital. ‘It is preparing itself for a possible war by trying to preserve its nuclear weapons program and ensure its protection.’

‘That said, the ongoing rebuilding of Iran’s uranium enrichment capabilities is particularly alarming as the regime is now engaged in nuclear talks with the United States,’ he added.

New satellite images released by Earth intelligence monitor, Planet Labs, show reconstruction activity appears to be underway at the Isfahan complex.

Isfahan is one of three Iranian uranium enrichment plants targeted in the U.S. military operation known as ‘Midnight Hammer.’

The June 22 operation involved coordinated Air Force and Navy strikes on the Fordow, Natanz and Isfahan facilities.

Despite the damage, the satellite images show Iran has buried entrances to a tunnel complex at the site, according to Reuters.

Similar steps were reportedly taken at the Natanz facility, which houses two additional enrichment plants.

‘These efforts in Isfahan involve rebuilding its centrifuge program and other activities related to uranium enrichment,’ Jafarzadeh said.

The renewed movements come as Iran participated in talks with the U.S. in Geneva.

On Thursday, President Donald Trump warned that ‘bad things’ would happen if Iran did not make a deal.

While the talks were aimed at curbing Iran’s nuclear program in exchange for sanctions relief, Jafarzadeh argues that for the regime, talks would be nothing more than a tactical delay.

‘Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei agreed to the nuclear talks as it would give the regime crucial time to avoid or limit the consequences of confrontation with the West,’ he said.

Jafarzadeh also described the regime spending at least ‘$2 trillion’ on nuclear capabilities, which he said ‘is higher than the entire oil revenue generated since the regime came to power in Iran in 1979.’ 

‘Tehran is trying to salvage whatever has remained of its nuclear weapons program and quickly rebuild it,’ he said. ‘It has heavily invested in the nuclear weapons program as a key tool for the survival of the regime.’

Jafarzadeh is best known for publicly revealing the existence of Iran’s Natanz nuclear site in 2002, which led to inspections by the International Atomic Energy Agency and intensified global scrutiny of Tehran’s nuclear ambitions.

‘The insistence of the Iranian regime during the nuclear talks on maintaining its uranium enrichment capabilities, while rebuilding its damaged sites, is a clear indication that Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei has no plans to abandon its nuclear weapons program,’ he said.

The National Council of Resistance of Iran, led by Maryam Rajavi, exposed for the first time the nuclear sites in Natanz, Arak, Fordow and more than 100 other sites and projects, Jafarzadeh said, ‘despite a massive crackdown by the regime on this movement.’