The Gaza Humanitarian Foundation (GHF) is facing a new threat as Hamas terrorists place bounties on the heads of its workers, including U.S. security personnel and local aid staff. According to GHF, Hamas is offering monetary rewards to anyone who kills or injures the organization’s workers.

‘We are aware of credible reports that Hamas is openly targeting the Gaza Humanitarian Foundation and those who work with us. According to these reports, Hamas has placed bounties on both our American security personnel and Palestinian aid workers—offering cash rewards to anyone who injures or kills them,’ GHF said in a statement provided exclusively to Fox News Digital.

‘The targets of Hamas’s brutality are heroes who are simply trying to feed the people of Gaza in the middle of a war.’

GHF also said that Hamas has positioned ‘armed operatives’ near humanitarian zones in an apparent attempt to ‘disrupt the only functioning aid delivery system in Gaza.’

Earlier this month, Hamas launched a deadly attack on GHF workers, leaving 12 dead. The organization said Hamas also tortured others. The victims were local workers, according to GHF.

U.S. Ambassador to Israel Mike Huckabee issued a statement on the bounties and criticized the United Nations’ silence on Hamas brutality.

‘Last month [President Trump] told us to get food to civilians in Gaza, but DON’T let Hamas steal it,’ Huckabee wrote on X. ‘NOT always pretty, but 800k+ unique recipients of food & 1ST TIME they [have] received food FREE since start of war. Hamas has stolen or taxed it & now w/ GHF they CAN’T! Hamas’ main tool to control Gaza is GONE. Hamas has put a bounty on the heads of everyone at GHF — Gazans [and] Americans. The UN remains SILENT.’

In response to Huckabee’s statement, GHF Executive Chairman Rev. Johnnie Moore wrote in his own post on X that reports of the Hamas bounties are based on ‘new and credible information received today.’

‘Hamas would be very unwise to test the resolve of [President Donald Trump],’ Moore wrote.

GHF is demanding the international community break its silence on Hamas’ treatment of the organization’s local workers and the American security personnel, many of whom are U.S. veterans.

‘Hamas, through these violent and escalating threats, is showing the world it prefers chaos and starvation to peace and aid,’ GHF wrote. ‘We call on international leaders and aid groups to stand with us and with the people of Gaza. The people of Gaza, who show up to our sites every day in defiance of Hamas’s threats and brutality, deserve it.’

GHF said it has been able to distribute approximately 49,915,822 meals so far. The organization recently received a funding boost after the U.S. State Department announced it had approved $30 million in funding for the group.

‘We call on other countries to also support the GHF, the Gaza Humanitarian Foundation, and its critical work,’ State Department Principal Deputy Spokesperson Tommy Piggot said in a briefing on June 26. 

‘From day one, we said we are open to creative solutions that securely provide aid to those in Gaza and protects Israel. The support is simply the latest iteration of President Trump’s and Secretary Rubio’s pursuit of peace in the region.’

A vulnerable Senate Republican put his foot down against President Donald Trump’s ‘big, beautiful bill’ over concerns of deep Medicaid cuts inside the megabill.

Sen. Thom Tillis, R-N.C., told Fox News Digital that he would not support the measure through a procedural hurdle necessary to kick off a marathon of debate and amendment voting that would eventually culminate in the measure’s final passage.

Tillis, who is up for reelection in 2026, said after exiting the Senate GOP’s closed-door lunch that he has a ‘great relationship’ with his colleagues, but that he couldn’t support the colossal bill.

‘We just have a disagreement,’ he said. ‘And, you know, my colleagues have done the analysis, and they’re comfortable with the impact on their states. I respect their choice. It’s not a good impact in my state, so I’m not going to vote on the motion to proceed.’

He also won’t support the bill during the final stretch. Tillis is part of a cohort of Senate Republicans who have expressed reservations over the Senate GOP’s changes to the Medicaid provider tax rate.

Tillis’ resistance to the bill is a bad sign for Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D., who can only afford to lose three votes. So far, Sen. Ron Johnson, R-Wis., has vowed to vote against the procedural test, and Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky., is expected to follow suit. 

Trump was meeting with Johnson and Sen. Rick Scott, R-Fl., another possible holdout, during the lunch. 

Lawmakers are expected to vote to advance the bill at 4 p.m. on Saturday. 

The mounting resistance could force Thune to go back to the drawing board. Further complicating matters is Collins, who is also up for reelection in 2026, who said that while she would support the bill through the first step, she was leaning against voting to pass the bill in the final stretch unless the legislation was ‘further changed.’

The latest version of the bill, which dropped near the stroke of midnight, included tweaks to the Senate’s offering that would push back the provider rate crackdown by one year, and also added another $25 billion for a rural hospital stabilization fund.

While others in the group, like Sens. Susan Collins, R-Maine, and Josh Hawley, R-Mo., are on board to at least see the legislation move through the first key procedural hurdle, Tillis has argued that his state would be harshly affected by the crackdown.

Indeed, during a closed-door lunch earlier this week, the lawmaker reportedly warned that North Carolina could lose as much as $40 billion in Medicaid funding if the changes were codified.

For now, Tillis is unlikely to budge, even after conversations with Trump. He is also planning to unveil further analysis on the impact of Medicaid cuts on his state that he said no one in the ‘administration or in this building’ has been able to refute.

‘The president I have talked, and I just told him that, ‘Look, if this works for the country, that’s great. And if my other colleagues have done extensive research and concluded it’s different in their states, I respect that,’’ he said. ‘We just have a disagreement based on the implementation in our respective states.’

A key New York Republican said he’s pleased with a tax provision in the Senate’s version of President Donald Trump’s ‘big, beautiful bill’ after weeks of tense back-and-forth over the matter.

‘I think it’s a very good deal. We were able to keep the House language intact,’ Rep. Mike Lawler, R-N.Y., told Fox News Digital, adding that he was pleased ‘we were able to solve’ differences on tax deductions for certain pass-through businesses, which are companies smaller than corporations whose taxes are ‘passed through’ the business owner’s personal returns.

‘I think at the end of the day, it’s a [four-times] increase on [state and local tax (SALT) deduction caps]. And despite the Senate’s best efforts to whittle down the language, we were able to keep it.’

Lawler is one of several blue state Republicans who threatened to sink the bill if it did not sufficiently raise SALT deduction caps.

SALT deductions are aimed at providing relief for people living in high-cost-of-living areas, primarily in big cities and their suburbs. 

There was no limit on SALT deductions until Trump’s 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (TCJA), which capped that federal tax benefit at $10,000 for both single filers and married couples.

The House’s bill raised that cap to $40,000 for 10 years, with households making up to $500,000 eligible for the full deduction.

Senate Republicans, who released their text of the bill just before midnight on Friday night, reduced the benefit window to five years instead of 10. 

After that, the maximum deduction would revert to $10,000 for the next five years.

‘Yes, the time was shortened, but at the end of the day, people are going to immediately be able to deduct them to $40,000, which is a massive win,’ Lawler told Fox News Digital.

‘Democrats promised to fix this when they had complete control in ’21 and ’22 and failed to deliver. We’re delivering on it. So you know to me this is a big win for New York. It’s a big win for taxpayers all across the country.’

Blue state Republicans, primarily those in New York and California, have pushed hard in favor of lifting that cap. They’ve painted it as an existential political issue in their districts, where Republican victories were critical to the GOP winning and keeping its House majority.

They’ve also argued that their states sending more money back to the federal government effectively subsidizes lower-tax states that do not bring in as much revenue.

But Republicans in more GOP-leaning states have dismissed SALT deductions as a reward for high-tax Democratic states to continue their own policies.

‘SALT deductions allow blue states to export their political mistakes (electing high-tax, crazy socialists), Americans shouldn’t subsidize,’ Rep. Chip Roy, R-Texas, wrote on X.

Lawler would not say if his support for the deal meant he would vote for the final bill – noting there were other provisions he had to read through in the 940-page legislation.

But he said he believed most of his Republican colleagues in the SALT Caucus would be supportive of the compromise.

‘I think there’s broad consensus among most of us about how important this is, and what a significant win it is,’ Lawler said.

Rep. Nicole Malliotakis, R-N.Y., the only member of the SALT Caucus who sits on the tax-writing House Ways & Means Committee, told Fox News Digital of the deal on Friday, ‘I can live with this but, quite frankly, the $30,000 over 10 years that I negotiated out of Ways & Means would’ve protected my constituents for a longer period of time.’

‘But alas, this is a group exercise and there are a lot of cooks in the kitchen,’ she said.

Not everyone is on board, however. Rep. Nick LaLota, R-N.Y., signaled to Fox News Digital that he is rejecting the deal.

‘While I support the president’s broader agenda, it would be hypocritical for me to back the same unfair $10k SALT cap I’ve spent years criticizing. A permanent $40k deduction cap with income thresholds of $225k for single filers and $450k for joint filers would earn my vote,’ he said in a written statement.

Rep. Young Kim, R-Calif., did not comment on the SALT deal itself but more broadly said her support for the bill is contingent on how decisions on SALT deduction caps, Medicaid measures, and small business taxes play out.

A source familiar with her thinking told Fox News Digital she would vote against the bill back in the House if the Senate’s more severe Medicaid cuts remained in place.

The Senate is aiming to begin considering the legislation on the floor late afternoon on Saturday, though the final vote could come in the early hours of Sunday, if not later.

The bill could also change between now and then, with various Republican lawmakers still expressing their concern.

Fox News Digital reached out to SALT Caucus co-chair Andrew Garbarino, R-N.Y., and Rep. Tom Kean, R-N.J. for comment.

A House Republican representing part of Southern California will oppose President Donald Trump’s ‘big, beautiful bill’ if it returns to her chamber without the House’s original language on Medicaid, a source familiar with her thinking told Fox News Digital.

Rep. Young Kim, R-Calif., is one of several moderates who are uneasy on Saturday after the Senate released updated text of the massive bill advancing Trump’s agenda on tax, immigration, defense, energy, and the national debt.

Two other sources told Fox News Digital that as many as 20 to 30 moderate Republicans are reaching out to Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., with serious concerns about the Senate’s bill.

The source familiar with Kim’s thinking said, ‘As she’s said throughout this process, ‘I will continue to make clear that a budget resolution that does not protect vital Medicaid services for the most vulnerable, provide tax relief for small businesses, and address the cap on state and local tax (SALT) deductions will not receive my vote.”

The Senate released the nearly 1,000-page bill minutes before midnight on Friday night.

It makes some notable modifications to the House’s version of the bill – which passed that chamber by just one vote in May – particularly on Medicaid and green energy credits.

Among their issues is the difference in provider tax rates and state-directed payments, both of which states use to help fund their share of Medicaid costs.

Whereas the House bill called for freezing provider taxes at their current rates and blocking new ones from being implemented, the Senate’s bill went a step further – forcing states to gradually phase down their provider tax rates to 3.5%, if they adopted the Affordable Care Act’s (ACA) Medicaid expansion.

That would include 40 states and Washington, D.C. The Senate’s most recent bill text shows that phase-down happening between 2028 and 2032.

Sixteen House GOP moderates wrote a letter to congressional leaders sounding the alarm on those Medicaid provisions earlier this week.

They said it ‘undermines the balanced approach taken to craft the Medicaid provisions in H.R. 1—particularly regarding provider taxes and state-directed payments.’

‘The Senate version treats expansion and non-expansion states unfairly, fails to preserve existing state programs, and imposes stricter limits that do not give hospitals sufficient time to adjust to new budgetary constraints or to identify alternative funding sources,’ the letter read.

To offset Senate Republicans’ concerns about their chamber’s proposed limits on state-directed payments and provider tax rates, the Senate Finance Committee included a $25 billion rural hospital fund in their legislation.

It was enough to sway Sen. Josh Hawley, R-Mo., who told reporters on Saturday that he would support the bill after expressing earlier concern about the Medicaid provisions’ impact on rural hospitals.

But in the House, sources are signaling to Fox News Digital that moderate Republicans could still need convincing if the bill passes the Senate this weekend.

It could pose problems for House GOP leaders given their thin three-vote majority, though it’s worth noting that the legislation could still change before it reaches the lower chamber.

But one senior House GOP aide told Fox News Digital they believe the moderates will ultimately fall in line, even if the text doesn’t change.

‘Moderate Republicans can plead and beg with House leadership all they want – the reforms to Medicaid made in the Senate are here to stay,’ the senior aide said. ‘And ultimately, these lawmakers will roll over and vote for the ‘Big, Beautiful Bill’ because the wrath of President Trump is far worse than a lower provider tax.’

Fox News Digital reached out to Speaker Mike Johnson’s office for comment.

For his part, Johnson, R-La., has publicly urged the Senate on multiple occasions to change the bill as little as possible – given the fragile unity that must be struck in the House to pass it.

President Donald Trump delivered a resounding endorsement of NATO this week, marking a sharp turnaround in his years-long, often contentious relationship with the alliance.

Once known for blasting allies over defense spending and even threatening to pull out of NATO altogether, Trump now appears to have had a change of heart. 

‘I left here differently. I left here saying that these people really love their countries,’ Trump said after the 2025 NATO summit in The Hague.

The pivot comes as NATO nations more than doubled their collective defense spending target – raising the bar from 2% to 5% of GDP.

From Hostile Rhetoric to Royal Receptions

The president’s renewed embrace of the alliance follows years of friction, high-profile clashes with world leaders and controversial comments. Yet at this year’s summit, the tone was strikingly different.

Trump was welcomed by Dutch royals, praised by the NATO secretary-general – who even referred to him as ‘daddy’ – and returned home lauding European allies for their patriotism. ‘It’s not a rip-off, and we’re here to help them,’ Trump told reporters.

The transformation is as dramatic as it is unexpected.

The Iran Factor: Military Action with Global Impact

Trump arrived at the NATO summit on a high note, following U.S. strikes that crippled Iran’s nuclear infrastructure. According to American and allied intelligence sources, the operation set back Tehran’s nuclear ambitions by several years.

The strike was widely seen as both a show of strength and a strategic warning – not just to Iran but to NATO adversaries like Russia and China.

‘He really came in from this power move,’ said Giedrimas Jeglinskas, a former NATO official and current chairman of Lithuania’s national security committee.

‘Among some, definitely Eastern Europe, Central Europe, Nordic Europe, this attack, the use of those really sophisticated weapons and bombers, was the rebuilding of the deterrence narrative of the West, not just of America.’

Timeline: Trump’s Rocky Road with NATO

2016 Campaign Trail

Trump repeatedly called NATO ‘obsolete,’ questioning its relevance and slamming allies for failing to pay their ‘fair share.’

‘It’s costing us too much money… We’re paying disproportionately. It’s too much,’ he said in March 2016.

He criticized NATO for lacking focus on terrorism, later taking credit when it created a chief intelligence post.

February 2017 – Early Presidency

Trump softened his tone after becoming president. 

‘We strongly support NATO,’ he said after visiting Central Command. ‘We only ask that all members make their full and proper financial contribution.’

He continued to push for members to meet the 2% target by 2024.

2018 Brussels Summit

Trump privately threatened to pull the U.S. from NATO unless allies increased spending.

‘Now we are in World War III protecting a country that wasn’t paying its bills,’ he warned.

Despite the posturing, he called NATO a ‘fine-tuned machine’ after extracting new spending commitments. He also accused Germany of being a ‘captive of Russia’ over the Nord Stream 2 pipeline.

2019 London Summit

The drama continued, this time with French President Emmanuel Macron calling NATO ‘brain-dead.’ 

‘NATO serves a great purpose. I think that’s very insulting,’ Trump responded.

He also clashed with Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau – calling him ‘two-faced’ after Trudeau was caught mocking Trump on camera.

2020 – Troop Withdrawal from Germany

Trump ordered 12,000 U.S. troops out of Germany, citing Berlin’s defense shortfalls.

February 2024 – Russia Controversy

Trump ignited backlash after suggesting he’d let Russia ‘do whatever the hell they want’ to NATO countries that failed to meet spending obligations.

The remark sparked urgent contingency talks among European leaders about the future of the alliance if the U.S. did not step up to its defense. 

June 2025: A Different Trump, a Different NATO

The 2025 summit in The Hague unfolded with surprising calm. Trump’s hosts rolled out the red carpet. ‘He’s the man of the hour and the most important man in the world,’ Jeglinskas said.

Jeglinskas credited Trump’s blunt diplomacy – however unorthodox – for helping drive real reform ‘He’s brought in tectonic change to the alliance’s capabilities by… being himself,’ he added. ‘It’s a gift for the alliance.’

Two Forces Behind NATO’s Revival: Russia and Trump

Experts agree NATO’s recent revitalization stems from two major catalysts: Russia’s 2022 invasion of Ukraine and Trump’s relentless pressure on allies to boost defense.

President Trump is riding high this week with two major foreign policy victories,’ said Matthew Kroenig, vice president at the Atlantic Council’s Scowcroft Center, referencing NATO and the recent U.S. strikes on Iran’s nuclear program. ‘It’s terrific. I hope he can keep it up.’

He added, ‘Every president since Eisenhower has complained that NATO allies aren’t doing their fair share.’

Now, Trump was the one who finally got them to listen, he said. 

U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio held his first official meeting in Washington, D.C., with the families of the hostages still held by Hamas in Gaza amid the terror group’s ongoing war with Israel.

Rubio reaffirmed the Trump administration’s commitment to securing the release of all 50 remaining hostages, according to a press release from The Hostages and Missing Families Forum.

The meeting featured Moshe Lavi, brother-in-law of hostage Omri Miran; Ilay David, brother of hostage Evyatar David; Tzur Goldin, brother of Lt. Hadar Goldin; and recently released hostage Iair Horn, whose brother Eitan Horn remains in captivity.

Rubio’s wife, Jeanette, and son, Anthony, were also at the meeting.

During the meeting, the secretary told the families that true victory in Gaza would only be realized when all the hostages returned home, according to the press release.

He also noted that the U.S. government has already demonstrated its ability to lead significant initiatives in the Middle East. He further argued that Israel has achieved victories in Iran and Lebanon and is capable of defeating Hamas.

The families stressed that this is a critical window of opportunity to bring the remaining hostages home in one comprehensive deal rather than phases or partial agreements as has been the case in Israel’s previous hostage deals with Hamas, the press release said.

They expressed trust in the Trump administration to act with urgency and determination to free the remaining people in Hamas’ captivity.

‘We’ve waited long enough,’ the families said. ‘It’s time to make brave decisions and bring all our loved ones back—all at once.’

Senate Republicans unveiled their long-awaited version of President Donald Trump’s ‘big, beautiful bill,’ but its survival is not guaranteed.

Senate Budget Committee Chair Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., revealed the stitched-together text of the colossal bill late Firday night.

The final product from the upper chamber is the culmination of a roughly month-long sprint to take the House GOP’s version of the bill and mold and change it. The colossal package includes separate pieces and parts from 10 Senate committees. With the introduction of the bill, a simple procedural hurdle must be passed in order to begin the countdown to final passage.

When that comes remains an open question. Senate Republicans left their daily lunch on Friday under the assumption that a vote could be teed up as early as noon on Saturday.

Sen. John Kennedy, R-La., told Fox News Digital that he had ‘strongly encouraged’ Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D., to put the bill on the floor for a vote Saturday afternoon. 

‘If you’re unhappy with that, you’re welcome to fill out a hurt feelings report, and we will review it carefully later,’ Kennedy said. ‘But in the meantime, it’s time to start voting.’

But Senate Republicans’ desire to impose their will on the package and make changes to already divisive policy tweaks in the House GOP’s offering could doom the bill and derail Thune’s ambitious timeline to get it on Trump’s desk by the July 4 deadline.

However, Thune has remained firm that lawmakers would stay on course and deliver the bill to Trump by Independence Day. 

When asked if he had the vote to move the package forward, Thune said ‘we’ll find out tomorrow.’

But it wasn’t just lawmakers who nearly derailed the bill. The Senate parliamentarian, the true final arbiter of the bill, ruled that numerous GOP-authored provisions did not pass muster with Senate rules.

Any item in the ‘big, beautiful bill’ must comport with the Byrd Rule, which governs the budget reconciliation process and allows for a party in power to ram legislation through the Senate while skirting the 60-vote filibuster threshold. 

That sent lawmakers back to the drawing board on a slew of policy tweaks, including the Senate’s changes to the Medicaid provider tax rate, cost-sharing for food benefits and others. 

Republican leaders, the White House and disparate factions within the Senate and House GOP have been meeting to find middle ground on other pain points, like tweaking the caps on state and local tax (SALT) deductions.

While the controversial Medicaid provider tax rate change remained largely the same, a $25 billion rural hospital stabilization fund was included in the bill to help attract possible holdouts that have raised concerns that the rate change would shutter rural hospitals throughout the country. 

On the SALT front, there appeared to be a breakthrough on Friday. A source told Fox News that the White House and House were on board with a new plan that would keep the $40,000 cap from the House’s bill and have it reduced back down to $10,000 after five years. 

But Senate Republicans are the ones that must accept it at this stage. Sen. Markwayne Mullin, R-Okla., has acted as the mediator in those negotiations, and said that he was unsure if any of his colleagues ‘love it.’ 

‘But I think, as I’ve said before, I want to make sure we have enough that people can vote for than to vote against,’ he said. 

Still, a laundry list of other pocket issues and concerns over just how deep spending cuts in the bill go have conservatives and moderates in the House GOP and Senate pounding their chests and vowing to vote against the bill.

Republican leaders remain adamant that they will finish the mammoth package and are gambling that some lawmakers standing against the bill will buckle under the pressure from the White House and the desire to leave Washington for a short break.

Once a motion to proceed is passed, which only requires a simple majority, then begins 20 hours of debate evenly divided between both sides of the aisle.

Democratic lawmakers are expected to spend the entirety of their 10 allotted hours, while Republicans will likely clock in well below their limit. From there starts the ‘vote-a-rama’ process, when lawmakers can submit a near-endless number of amendments to the bill. Democrats will likely try to extract as much pain as possible with messaging amendments that won’t actually pass but will add more and more time to the process.

Once that is complete, lawmakers will move to a final vote. If successful, the ‘big, beautiful bill’ will again make its way back to the House, where House Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., will again have to corral dissidents to support the legislation. It barely advanced last month, squeaking by on a one-vote margin. 

Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent hammered on the importance of passing Trump’s bill on time. He met with Senate Republicans during their closed-door lunch and spread the message that advancing the colossal tax package would go a long way to giving businesses more certainty in the wake of the president’s tariffs. 

‘We need certainty,’ he said. ‘With so much uncertainty, and having the bill on the president’s desk by July 4 will give us great tax certainty, and I believe, accelerate the economy in the third quarter of the year.’