President Donald Trump sent a warning to the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) ahead of Vice President JD Vance’s high-stakes meeting with Danish and Greenlandic officials.

‘The United States needs Greenland for the purpose of national security,’ Trump wrote in a Truth Social post on Wednesday. He added that the acquisition was ‘vital for the Golden Dome that we are building.’ The ‘Golden Dome’ is a cutting-edge missile defense system meant to intercept threats targeting the American homeland, similar to the Iron Dome used in Israel.

‘NATO should be leading the way for us to get it. IF WE DON’T, RUSSIA OR CHINA WILL, AND THAT IS NOT GOING TO HAPPEN! Militarily, without the vast power of the United States, much of which I built during my first term, and am now bringing to a new and even higher level, NATO would not be an effective force or deterrent — not even close! They know that, and so do I. NATO becomes far more formidable and effective with Greenland in the hands of the UNITED STATES. Anything less than that is unacceptable,’ Trump added.

Trump and his administration’s push for the U.S. to acquire Greenland has caused tension with NATO allies who assert that the semiautonomous Danish territory should determine its own future. 

The post comes ahead of Vance and Secretary of State Marco Rubio’s meeting with the Danish and Greenlandic foreign ministers at the White House on Wednesday morning. 

Vance and Rubio will be meeting with Denmark’s foreign minister Lars Løkke Rasmussen and his Greenlandic counterpart Vivian Motzfeldt.

In a follow-up post on Truth Social on Wednesday morning, Trump shared a report by Just The News stating that the Danish Defense Intelligence Service (DDIS) issued a warning regarding Russian and Chinese military ambitions toward and expansion around Greenland in a recent assessment.

‘NATO: Tell Denmark to get them out of here, NOW! Two dogsleds won’t do it! Only the USA can!!!’ Trump wrote. ‘Danish intel warned last year about Russian and Chinese military goals toward Greenland and Arctic.’ 

‘In recent years, the United States has significantly increased its security policy focus on the Arctic, while Russia continues its military build-up, and China continues to develop its capacity to operate both submarines and surface vessels in the region,’ DDIS reportedly said in its Intelligence Outlook 2025. The DDIS noted that, ‘Neither the war in Ukraine nor the increased US focus on Greenland and the Arctic has altered Russia’s long-term interests and objectives in the region.’

Greenland’s Prime Minister Jens-Frederik Nielsen told a news conference in Copenhagen on Tuesday that ‘if we have to choose between the United States and Denmark here and now, we choose Denmark. We choose NATO. We choose the Kingdom of Denmark. We choose the EU,’ the AP reported.

Trump later responded to Nielsen, saying ‘I disagree with him. I don’t know who he is. I don’t know anything about him. But, that’s going to be a big problem for him,’ according to the AP.

Vance’s office and the Embassy of Denmark in the U.S. did not immediately respond to Fox News Digital’s requests for comment.

The Associated Press contributed to this report.

Despite President Donald Trump’s warnings, Iran’s chief justice called for fast trials and executions of suspects detained in the ongoing anti-government demonstrations, a report said Wednesday. 

The remarks from Gholamhossein Mohseni-Ejei come as the death toll in the protests has risen to at least 2,571, the U.S.-based Human Rights Activists News Agency said. Other reports say the death toll is more than 3,000, with the real number likely to be even higher. 

‘If we want to do a job, we should do it now. If we want to do something, we have to do it quickly,’ Mohseni-Ejei said in a video shared by Iranian state television, according to The Associated Press. ‘If it becomes late, two months, three months later, it doesn’t have the same effect. If we want to do something, we have to do that fast.’ 

Trump warned Iran about executions in an interview with CBS News that aired on Tuesday.

‘We will take very strong action,’ Trump said. ‘If they do such a thing, we will take very strong action.’ 

‘We don’t want to see what’s happening in Iran happen. And you know, if they want to have protests, that’s one thing, when they start killing thousands of people, and now you’re telling me about hanging — we’ll see how that works out for them. It’s not going to work out good,’ the president added. 

Trump also vowed on Tuesday that those responsible for killing anti-regime demonstrators will ‘pay a big price.’ 

‘Iranian Patriots, KEEP PROTESTING — TAKE OVER YOUR INSTITUTIONS!’ Trump wrote on Truth Social. ‘Save the names of the killers and abusers. They will pay a big price.’

‘I have canceled all meetings with Iranian Officials until the senseless killing of protesters STOPS. HELP IS ON ITS WAY,’ he added. 

Fox News’ Anders Hagstrom and The Associated Press contributed to this report. 

Senate Republicans are mulling an arcane move that, if successful, would kill the bipartisan push to rein in President Donald Trump’s war authority in Venezuela.

The Senate is a chamber that lives and dies by procedure. It guides how bills are considered and how senators speak on the floor, and Republicans hope that a procedure once used by Senate Democrats will work in their favor to nullify Sen. Tim Kaine’s, D-Va., war powers resolution.

Republicans are considering making a point of order to table the resolution and argue that because there are no troops on the ground in Venezuela, nor active combat involving U.S. forces, Kaine’s bid is moot.

But whether Republicans can muster support to kill the resolution with the rare move remains to be seen. Five Senate Republicans broke ranks to advance the war powers push last week, and the point of order can pass or fail by a simple 50-vote majority.

When asked if the votes were there to effectively turn off the bipartisan push, Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D., said, ‘Uncertain.’

Still, Thune made the case that the resolution was likely not germane and able to be turned off, because no actual fighting was happening in Venezuela.

‘I think that it’s pretty clear, in my view at least, that there are no hostilities that exist today, which, as I’ve suggested before, to me at least means that shouldn’t be accorded privilege on the floor, that expedited consideration on the floor for something that doesn’t exist at the moment,’ Thune said. ‘But nevertheless it’s all about the votes.’

Senate Democrats made the same argument successfully in 2024 against a war powers resolution from Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas. That push was geared toward ending U.S. involvement with the operation of a floating pier off the coast of Gaza.

Kaine’s resolution is more forward-looking, however, and if passed, would require that Congress have oversight authority over future military action in Venezuela. The Trump administration has reiterated that there are no boots on the ground in the country and made assurances to several Senate Republicans that no future military action is planned after the success of Operation Absolute Resolve.

Whether Republicans can actually kill the resolution before it ever reaches a final vote and possibly a lengthy marathon amendment process known as a ‘vote-a-rama,’ will ultimately be a test of Senate GOP leadership’s and the White House’s lobbying abilities to flip the five Republicans who pushed back against Trump.

But Trump’s repeated attacks against the cohort of Republicans who sided with Senate Democrats could backfire and see the resolution pass.

Sens. Susan Collins, R-Maine, Lisa Murkowski, R-Alaska, Todd Young, R-Indiana, Josh Hawley, R-Mo., and Rand Paul, R-Ky., will all be under a microscope on Wednesday.

Collins reaffirmed on Tuesday that she was still in favor of the war powers resolution, and Paul, who is a co-sponsor of the legislation, is unlikely to budge.

A source told Fox News Digital that Hawley, however, flipped his position on the matter and would support the point of order after getting assurances from Trump officials that no boots would be on the ground in the country.

The House Judiciary Committee has opened an investigation into whether a climate law group is improperly influencing federal judges on environment-related cases.

Committee Chairman Jim Jordan, R-Ohio, and Rep. Darrell Issa, R-Calif., chairman of the panel’s subcommittee on Courts, sent four letters to varying judicial groups and lawyers asking for more information on communications with the Environmental Law Institute.

‘The Committee on the Judiciary is investigating allegations of improper attempts by the Environmental Law Institute (ELI) and its Climate Judiciary Project (CJP) to influence federal judges. Public reports have documented concerns around apparent efforts by ELI and CJP to influence judges who potentially may be presiding over lawsuits related to alleged climate change claims,’ the letter to the Judicial Conference of the United States (JCUS) read.

‘These efforts appear to have the underlying goal of predisposing federal judges in favor of plaintiffs alleging injuries from the manufacturing, marketing, use, or sale of fossil-fuel products.’

Jordan and Issa argued that existing JCUS policy acknowledged risks of allowing privately funded education programs to distribute material to courts, but that its policy was also ‘leaving the door open for groups like ELI and CJP to exert influence through program content and contact between judges and those who litigate before them.’

A separate letter to David Bookbinder, director of law and policy at the Environmental Integrity Project, alleged that ‘evidence has emerged that raises questions about whether ELI, CJP, or one or more of its ‘experts’ coordinated with you on judicial training materials while you simultaneously litigated climate-related cases pending before federal courts.’

Jordan and Issa charged that Bookbinder had ‘pre-publication access and provided peer review’ for documents prepared for ELI while he was representing the Boulder County, Colo., Board of County Commissioners in a climate change-related lawsuit. They noted that he’s no longer the board’s lawyer, however.

‘In other words, this document seems to suggest that at the same time you were representing a private party in climate-related litigation, you were also helping to develop climate-related training materials for federal (and state) judges,’ the letter said.

A third letter to the Federal Judicial Center noted that while both climate groups say they provide impartial information for judges, Republicans believe those materials ‘appear to be designed to bias judges in climate-related cases.’

‘The materials that ELI and CJP used at judicial seminars are generally not made public, which itself is a cause for concern,’ the third letter said. ‘The limited portions of CJP’s ‘Climate Science and Law for Judges Curriculum’ that are publicly available seem designed to improperly influence judges in favor of plaintiffs.’

ELI is a nonprofit promoting climate science-based policy across academic, public, and legal spheres.

CJP is a project within ELI specifically aimed at creating curricula for ‘judicial education,’ according to its website.

Fox News Digital reached out to ELI and the four letter recipients for comment.

Hillary and Bill Clinton are both now risking possible criminal charges after defying subpoenas to appear before the House Oversight Committee.

Hillary Clinton was compelled to sit for a sworn deposition behind closed doors on Wednesday morning as part of the House’s bipartisan probe into Jeffrey Epstein.

However, the former secretary of state refused to appear, and the House Oversight Committee will begin contempt of Congress proceedings, a source familiar told Fox News Digital.

She was expected to skip the meeting after her and former President Bill Clinton’s attorneys wrote to House Oversight Committee Chairman James Comer, R-Ky., arguing the subpoenas were not legally enforceable.

A committee aide said earlier that the committee would initiate contempt of Congress proceedings ‘in the coming days’ if she did not appear. Comer is already moving forward with contempt proceedings against Bill Clinton.

The lawyers’ letter argued Comer’s subpoenas were ‘invalid and legally unenforceable, untethered to a valid legislative purpose, unwarranted because they do not seek pertinent information, and an unprecedented infringement on the separation of powers.’

It also compared Comer’s leadership of the probe to Joseph McCarthy’s 1950s-era abuse of congressional power, while pointing out that President Donald Trump has publicly called for the federal government to look into Bill Clinton’s Epstein ties.

‘Mindful of these defects, we trust you will engage in good faith to de-escalate this dispute,’ the letter said.

Comer told reporters Tuesday that he read the letter but suggested his probe would be undeterred.

The former president similarly skipped his own scheduled deposition on Tuesday, prompting Comer to say his panel would move ahead with advancing a contempt of Congress resolution against him next week.

Such resolutions need to advance through the relevant committees before being considered in a House-wide vote.

It’s then up to the Department of Justice (DOJ) on whether to pursue the resulting criminal referral if a majority of House lawmakers vote to make it.

Contempt of Congress charges are a misdemeanor that carry up to a year in jail and a maximum fine of $100,000.

Former Trump advisors Steve Bannon and Peter Navarro were notably charged and convicted of contempt of Congress for defying subpoenas by the now-defunct select committee on the Jan. 6 Capitol attack.

The former first couple were two of 10 people subpoenaed by Comer as part of the panel’s investigation into Jeffrey Epstein. The subpoenas were issued following a bipartisan vote by an Oversight subcommittee panel during an unrelated hearing on illegal immigration.

The Senate is rumbling toward a likely successful vote on a package of three funding bills, but it’s what comes next that some lawmakers are worried about.

The upper chamber is expected to pass a three-bill funding package, known as a minibus, later this week. That would bring the total number of funding bills passed by Congress to six.

But it’s halfway to the magic dozen that are needed to fund the government, and one bill in particular is giving lawmakers heartburn on their quest to avoid another government shutdown.

Among the annual spending bills is the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) appropriations bill, which has become a political lightning rod in the wake of Renee Nicole Good’s death in an Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE)-related shooting.

Some Senate Democrats want to use it to leverage more oversight at DHS, specifically for ICE and Customs and Border Protection (CBP).

That sticky wicket could cause the bill to never actually come to the floor — it was nixed from a recently released spending package from the House earlier this week. That means it could land in a short-term funding extension, known as a continuing resolution (CR).

Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D., acknowledged just how difficult that bill was to advance, even under more typical circumstances, and predicted that it could lead to a CR to keep the government open.

‘Homeland is obviously the hardest one, and it’s possible that, if we can’t get agreement, that there could be some sort of a CR that funds some of these bills into next year,’ Thune said.

While Thune remained hopeful that, over the next three weeks, Congress could pass the remaining spending bills, the reality of the discourse regarding the DHS bill is now front and center in the simmering spending fight.

Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., has made clear that neither he nor Senate Democrats want to usher in another government shutdown. But when asked if there would be restrictions to DHS and ICE agents baked into the DHS funding bill, Schumer said, ‘The appropriators are working on that right now. The four corners are trying to come up with an agreement.’

‘As I said, that’s one of the major issues that the appropriators are confronting right now before the bill comes up,’ Schumer said.

There is also resistance to a CR among some Democrats, who argue that an extension would only benefit President Donald Trump, given that it would keep funding levels and priorities the same from the previous fiscal year without their thumbprints on updated appropriations.

Sen. Patty Murray, D-Wash., said on the Senate floor that a short-term funding extension was effectively a ‘slush fund’ for Trump and Office of Management and Budget Director Russ Vought to use and abuse, but lauded the efforts from both sides of the aisle to push forward with funding bills.

That’s because the bipartisan legislation in the upper chamber includes Democratic funding priorities, a key negotiating point after the administration slashed congressionally approved funding last year.

‘That is why, right now, it is so important that we end that slush fund authority and reassert our power as lawmakers by passing these full-year spending bills that specify exactly how funds are to be spent just as we had always done until last year,’ Murray said.

But, unlike in September, it appears that neither side is ready to careen the government into a shutdown once more.

Still, time is running out, and the Senate is set to leave Washington, D.C., for a weeklong recess by the end of this week while the House processes another smaller funding package. That two-bill effort still won’t be enough to keep the lights on, however.

‘I don’t think there’s going to be [a shutdown],’ Thune said, ‘And I say this because I think on both sides, I’ve said this before, not new information. I think government shutdowns are stupid. I don’t think anybody wins. And, I hope the Democrats share that view. And if they do, right now, at least the appropriations process is moving forward.’

Sen. Amy Klobuchar, D-Minn., has been criticized over her shifting stance on Venezuela and its fallen president Nicolás Maduro after she supported military action to take out Maduro and ‘delegitimizing’ the Venezuelan government in 2019, but condemned the Trump administration for trying ‘to ‘run’ another country.’

In 2019, when running for president, Klobuchar advocated for using the military to remove Maduro and help establish a democracy in Venezuela, saying, ‘I’m also glad that we’re trying to push Maduro out. But the answer here is to make sure that we are working with our allies, pushing for democracy and some kind of a negotiated agreement. Military should always be on the table.’

Meanwhile, on another occasion in 2019, Klobuchar again endorsed American involvement in bringing democracy to Venezuela, saying she, ‘of course supported bringing in the new president and delegitimizing the Maduro government,’ and ‘You always leave things on the table,’ when asked about U.S. intervention.

‘Democrats like Klobuchar and Schumer spent years demanding the removal of dictator Nicolás Maduro. Now that President Trump has actually done it, they suddenly oppose the outcome. The Democratic Party has entered the terminal phase of Trump Derangement Syndrome,’ said Rep. Andy Ogles, R-Tenn. 

‘Washington politics at its worst, says one thing to her pals in the media but turns her back on our brave military after they put their lives on the line,’ added ‘Ruthless’ podcast host John Ashbrook. 

‘It’s sad but not surprising that a committed ideologue like Amy Klobuchar is unable to give credit where credit is due for President Trump’s removal of Nicolás Maduro. The socialist regime of Venezuela drove one of the most energy-rich countries in the world into ruin, his citizens into poverty and served as a Western Hemisphere stalking horse for China, Iran, Russia and others who wish us harm,’ said longtime Republican strategist Colin Reed. ‘Not only do Venezuelans have a renewed sense of hope, but America is stronger on the world stage. Global politics used to stop at the water’s edge, but for Amy Klobuchar, partisan politics is priority one.’

The White House has called out a lengthy list of other high-profile Senate Democrats besides Klobuchar for allegedly once demanding Maduro’s capture but now ‘mourn[ing] his capture.’

Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer was among those slammed by the White House for going from blasting Trump for failing to dislodge a ‘more powerful’ and ‘more entrenched’ Maduro to calling Trump’s Maduro arrest ‘reckless’ and stoking fear about consequences. 

Sen. Dick Durbin, D-Ill., according to Trump, went from pledging sustained support to help Venezuelans rebuild what has been lost under Maduro, to criticizing Trump’s unilateral use of military force and warning about intervention. 

Chris Van Hollen is described by the White House as moving from urging the U.S. to ‘ratchet up the pressure’ for a negotiated transition to labeling any move to replace Maduro an ‘illegal act of war.’

Fox News Digital reached out to Klobuchar for comment but did not receive a response in time for publication. 

Claims that a mysterious ‘sonic weapon’ was used in Venezuela have fueled speculation about exotic U.S. military technology and its potential effects on the human body.

One eyewitness account from a Venezuelan guard, shared on social media by White Hosue press secretary Karoline Leavitt, claimed the weapon brought Venezuelan and Cuban security forces to their knees, ‘bleeding through their nose’ and vomiting blood. 

While the Trump administration has not confirmed what weapon, if any, may have been used, defense experts point to a well-known acoustic device that has been in use for years. 

Known as a long-range acoustic device, it’s been described as the ‘voice of God,’ according to Mark Cancian, a retired Marine lieutenant colonel and senior adviser for the Center for Strategic and International Studies.

The device deploys a directed, short-range ‘cone of sound.’ 

‘It’s not like a microphone, you know, where everybody’s neighborhood, it’s only within this cone,’ said Cancian. 

U.S. operators may have deployed it as they were landing on the ground in Caracas, Venezuela, as a way to disorient security forces and warn them to drop their weapons.  

LRADs can project spoken commands at intense volumes or emit a loud, piercing tone designed to get attention and deter movement. At close range, the sound can be painful and disorienting, and in extreme cases can damage hearing or rupture eardrums, but the devices are not designed to cause lasting physical harm.

It can cause pain and temporary disorientation, and can cause ruptured eardrums, but is not designed to inflict long-term damage. 

U.S. forces used them for crowd control in Iraq when Iraqis got too close to U.S. military installments, according to Cancian. 

The devices can reach up to 140 decibels of sound. The intensity drops quickly with distance and angle. This is why operators can stand nearby but outside the beam.

Other defense analysts say the account raises questions that go beyond conventional acoustic devices.

For decades, the Pentagon’s Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency, or DARPA, has studied nonlethal technologies intended to temporarily incapacitate adversaries without causing permanent injury. Publicly available research has explored acoustic and electromagnetic effects designed to overwhelm the senses, disrupt balance or motor control, and render targets briefly unable to fight or maneuver.

Can Kasapoglu, a defense analyst at the Hudson Institute, said such research has fueled speculation about more advanced incapacitation systems, but stressed there is no public evidence any experimental DARPA technology was used in Venezuela. 

‘There are some non-lethal technologies that DARPA has been working on, including acoustic weapon systems, sound waves, and also some neurological weapon systems that do not kill, but cause an unbearable sensation that you feel that you simply become inoperable in the battlefield,’ he said. 

While the symptoms described in the post shared by Leavitt are unverified, ‘they align closely with examples of DARPA research.’

The White House and Pentagon did not respond to a request for comment.

In addition to the reported sound offense, the U.S. launched a cyberattack that knocked out communications systems as operators were landing in Caracas, Venezuela. 

‘It was dark, the lights of Caracas were largely turned off due to a certain expertise that we have, it was dark, and it was deadly,’ Trump previously said. 

‘We were on guard, but suddenly all our radar systems shut down without any explanation,’ the local guard said in the account shared by Leavitt. ‘The next thing we saw were drones, a lot of drones, flying over our positions. We didn’t know how to react.’

Once operators were on the ground, ‘At one point, they launched something; I don’t know how to describe it,’ he said. ‘It was like a very intense sound wave. Suddenly I felt like my head was exploding from the inside.’

The effects were extreme, according to the guard. 

‘We all started bleeding from the nose,’ he said. ‘Some were vomiting blood. We fell to the ground, unable to move. We couldn’t even stand up after that sonic weapon — or whatever it was.’

The physical effects described by the guard go well beyond what experts say LRADs are known to cause. 

Vomiting blood, in particular, is not a typical reaction to acoustic exposure, raising questions about whether the account exaggerates the effects, misattributes their cause, or reflects a different factor entirely.

Experts caution that while directional acoustic devices are real and widely used, there is no publicly known ‘sonic weapon’ capable of producing the extreme injuries described — and no official confirmation that any such system was used in Venezuela.

Venezuela’s interior minister Diosdado Cabello said 100 people were killed in the Maduro operation. Cuba has said 32 members of its security forces, which were guarding Maduro, were killed in the operation. 

Seven U.S. service members were injured in the operation but none were killed.