In a political environment where little is agreed upon, there stands one exception: China. That country is cited by nearly every national security expert as the No. 1 geopolitical threat to the U.S. The question is how to coexist without being codependent, how to compete without conflict, and how to protect American producers and consumers while China plays by its arbitrary rules.

No sooner had a meeting between President Donald Trump and Chinese President Xi Jinping been announced before China threatened U.S. access to rare earth minerals. The U.S. countered by threatening an additional 100% tariff on Chinese imports.

Most Americans could not conjure why China would make such a provocative move after both presidents agreed to meet. Surely, the Chinese government must know Trump would react. Xi has been the leader of China for well over a decade with no sign of relenting.

Conversely, Trump is nearly a year into his final term in office. China has always played the long game, assuming Americans lack the will to wait out a prolonged contest. China thinks patience will win — that Americans can’t sustain pressure. It may wind up being surprised that patience is an overrated virtue and how quickly this administration can act.

The Trump administration has already resolved conflicts around the globe, as evidenced by its history-defying peace agreement in the Middle East. The administration has used tariffs and the threat thereof to increase revenue for the U.S., balance the trade playing field and reposition the U.S. for increased domestic manufacturing.

It has been clear about the threats posed by Venezuela, repositioned our relationship with Colombia, opened dialogue between Israel and moderate Arab states, bombed Iranian nuclear ambitions and closed a porous border. All of that in less than a year.

The conflict left to be resolved is in Eastern Europe, and the ‘white whale’ among outstanding trade agreements is China. The two are interconnected. While the U.S. was trying to isolate Russia for its aggression against Ukraine, China was providing both military and economic assistance to Russia.

Next on the administration’s agenda is ending the Russian invasion of Ukraine and negotiating a trade agreement with China that can withstand the reality that the problematic forces within today’s Chinese Communist Party aren’t going anywhere.

Even if Xi steps down or his power wanes, there is no Chinese equivalent to America’s 22nd Amendment — no constitutional limit to the number of terms or years a leader can serve. That means Beijing’s leadership can remain in power indefinitely, which is a central pillar of the Communist Party’s strategy. The United States must live with that reality and yet negotiate from a position of strength to achieve our interests.

While recent reports suggest Xi’s grip may be weakening amid internal purges and speculation about dissent within the Chinese Communist Party, history teaches such reports are often exaggerated. And even if Xi were to fall, his successor would continue the long-term authoritarian policies that define modern China.

China perceives time and our democratic system as allies in its strategy. The key is to make Beijing recognize Trump’s impatience with that country’s malingering and duplicity is not a weakness but rather a threat to their own interests.

The administration’s China pressure strategy isn’t confined to tariffs. It extends to the technological front, where the next great battles for global power will be fought.

The Trump administration has already resolved conflicts around the globe, as evidenced by its history-defying peace agreement in the Middle East. 

Recognizing that China’s dominance in communications and artificial intelligence poses an existential threat to U.S. security, the Trump administration has moved to aggressively end Beijing’s control of critical infrastructure.

For example, the Department of Justice has taken decisive steps to counter the dominance of Huawei, a company controlled by the Chinese Communist Party, over global telecommunications. Huawei still controls the global telecom market (and, by extension, the AI and 5G future) and has repeatedly been found by the Department of Defense and our security agencies to include backdoors and security vulnerabilities.

To level this playing field, the Trump administration — working together with U.S. intelligence officials — approved the HPE-Juniper merger, giving America a credible competitor and a real chance to out-innovate China while securing critical communications infrastructure.

There were opponents to this merger — both the usual suspects and a few new ones. Democrat attorneys general, led by Colorado Attorney General Phil Weiser — are crying foul but doing so without access to any of the information necessary to make an informed decision. Too often, visceral disdain for the president has supplanted a reasoned consideration of national security realities.

When the president perceived national security threats in the computer chip realm, he took the unprecedented step of teaming with Intel. Unconventional? Yes. But these are not traditional times, and the next conflicts will not be waged in conventional terms.

While progress has been made both practically and in principle with China, more remains to be done, which is why the president and his economic, trade and national security teams are willing to meet with China. Next may come tightening export controls on other sensitive technologies and strengthening military partnerships in the Indo-Pacific to deter Chinese ambitions.

Beijing has watched Trump re-invigorate NATO, end several wars, impose tariffs and meet intended pain with imposed pain. Beijing has seen patience when warranted, power when called for, and an overarching preference for peace.

While recent reports suggest Xi’s grip may be weakening amid internal purges and speculation about dissent within the Chinese Communist Party, history teaches such reports are often exaggerated. 

Do not mistake diplomacy for weakness or discussion for a lack of resolve. Trump can make peace, level the playing field, stop intellectual property theft, punish currency manipulation and allow for healthy, fair competition, even among perceived opponents.

The fact that someone seeks peace does not mean he isn’t preparing for a world without it. China would be wise to know that while democracy limits a person’s time in office, it does nothing to deter the speed with which actions can be taken to preserve that democracy.

Argentine President Javier Milei secured a decisive victory Sunday in midterm elections, expanding his control of Congress and giving his government fresh momentum to push forward with deep spending cuts and sweeping free-market reforms.

The result gives Milei’s libertarian movement a boost and marks another sharp turn for one of Latin America’s largest and most volatile economies.

Milei’s party, La Libertad Avanza, won about 41.5% of the vote in Buenos Aires province, a historic upset in a region long dominated by the Peronist opposition. The rival coalition took 40.8%, according to figures cited by Reuters and The Associated Press.

Nationwide, La Libertad Avanza increased its seats in the lower house from 37 to 64, positioning Milei to more easily defend his vetoes and executive decrees that have defined his economic agenda.

‘The result is better than even the most optimistic Milei supporters were hoping for,’ Marcelo Garcia, Americas director at the risk-analysis firm Horizon Engage, said in comments reported by Reuters. ‘With this result, Milei will be able to easily defend his decrees and vetoes in Congress.’

Political consultant Gustavo Cordoba told Reuters the outcome reflected a cautious optimism among voters who appear willing to give Milei’s economic policies more time.

‘Many people were willing to give the government another chance,’ Cordoba said. ‘The triumph is unobjectionable, unquestionable.’

Reuters reported that inflation has fallen from 12.8% before Milei’s inauguration to 2.1% last month. His government has also posted a fiscal surplus and pushed through broad deregulation measures — a dramatic reversal after years of economic turbulence.

According to The Associated Press, the U.S. government under President Donald Trump offered Argentina a $40 billion aid package, including a $20 billion currency swap and a proposed $20 billion debt-investment facility, after tying future U.S. support to Milei’s performance in the midterms.

Investors reacted positively to the results. Reuters reported that Argentine bonds and stocks are expected to rally as Milei’s stronger hand in Congress gives him the political capital to accelerate his reforms

Milei called the election ‘a turning point for Argentina,’ according to AFP via the Times of Israel.

History is being rewritten on the White House grounds, where a new formal ballroom is rising in place of the East Wing. The project has become a political lightning rod, as images of its construction reignite debate over President Donald Trump’s imprint on the nation’s most iconic address.

While the White House has hosted countless ceremonial events, it has never had a dedicated ballroom. The new structure will fill that void, replacing the historic East Wing with a space designed instead to host large-scale gatherings.

The ballroom is estimated to cost $250 million and will be financed jointly by Trump and private donors.

While the White House has pledged to release details on the individuals and corporations funding the ballroom’s construction, a comprehensive breakdown of contributions has not yet been made public.

During a July 31 briefing, White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt detailed the administration’s plans to construct a 90,000-square-foot ballroom on the White House grounds.

Leavitt said the new ballroom will accommodate approximately 650 seated guests and will stay true to the classical design of the White House.

‘The White House is currently unable to host major functions honoring world leaders in other countries without having to install a large and unsightly tent approximately 100 yards away from the main building’s entrance,’ Leavitt said on July 31.

She added that the new ballroom will be ‘a much-needed and exquisite addition.’

Rep. Eric Swalwell, D-Calif., said the next Democratic presidential nominee must vow to demolish President Donald Trump‘s White House ballroom, proposing the pledge a litmus test for the party’s 2028 contenders.

‘Don’t even think of seeking the Democratic nomination for president unless you pledge to take a wrecking ball to the Trump Ballroom on DAY ONE,’ Swalwell wrote on X on Saturday.

Swalwell’s office did not immediately respond to Fox News Digital for additional comment.

For the first time in its history, the White House will have a formal ballroom, a new addition built where the East Wing once stood, a project that has become a political flashpoint as photos of the demolition fuel debate over President Trump’s mark on the historic residence.

On July 31, White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt announced the planned construction of a 90,000-square-foot ballroom. The sprawling ballroom will accommodate approximately 650 seated guests and will stay true to the classical design of the White House.

‘The White House is currently unable to host major functions honoring world leaders in other countries without having to install a large and unsightly tent approximately 100 yards away from the main building’s entrance,’ Leavitt said, adding the new ballroom will be ‘a much-needed and exquisite addition.’

Construction on the White House grounds, which began earlier this month, is estimated to cost $250 million and will be financed by Trump and private donors.

The ballroom isn’t the only update. 

Trump has introduced gold accents in the Oval Office and Cabinet Room, a new monument dubbed the ‘Arc de Trump,’ the ‘walk of fame’ with portraits of former presidents, including a photo of the autopen representing former President Joe Biden’s time in office, added stone pavers to the Rose Garden lawn and installed two 88-foot flagpoles.

There appears to be no end in sight to the current government shutdown, with Democrats and Republicans still far from striking a federal spending deal nearly a month into fiscal year (FY) 2026.

Hundreds of thousands of federal workers have been furloughed and thousands have been laid off. Certain federal services have also paused due to lack of funding.

It is not the first time such a standoff has paused all or some government operations. Below is a list of the top five longest government shutdowns in U.S. history, and how they were resolved.

December 2018–January 2019: 35 Days

The longest government shutdown in history happened during the first Trump administration and lasted five weeks.

Funding for President Donald Trump’s border wall was at the heart of that dispute. Trump had refused to sign a federal spending deal that did not include money for the project, and a standalone bill with $5.7 billion was blocked by a Senate Democrat-led filibuster.

Trump eventually backed a short-term federal funding measure to reopen the government on Jan. 25, 2019, and a few weeks later, Congress approved $1.375 billion for 55 miles of border fencing between the U.S. and Mexico.

It was a partial shutdown, meaning lawmakers managed to strike a deal on five of 12 appropriations bills before their clock ran out.

Oct. 1, 2025–current: 26 Days and Counting

The current government shutdown is now the second-longest in history, and the longest-ever full shutdown.

That means Congress was unable to strike a federal funding deal on any appropriations bills before the end of FY 2025 on Sept. 30.

Republicans, who control the House and Senate, had offered a seven-week extension of FY 2025 spending levels to give lawmakers more time to hash out next fiscal year’s numbers. 

It passed the House on Sept. 19, with support from one Democrat, but has stalled in the Senate 12 separate times.

Democrats are demanding that any federal funding plan also include an extension of COVID-19 pandemic-era enhanced Obamacare subsidies, which are set to expire at the end of this year without congressional action.

As of the most recent tally, at least five more Senate Democrats are needed to overcome a filibuster and pass the measure in the Senate.

Republican leaders have shown no signs of giving in, however, accusing Democrats of trying to jam an unrelated issue into the yearly funding process.

December 1995–January 1996: 21 Days

The second of two government shutdowns under former President Bill Clinton lasted three weeks, breaking a record at the time for the longest shutdown in U.S. history.

Republicans had taken control of both the House and Senate in the 1994 midterm elections, leading Clinton on a collision course with then-House Speaker Newt Gingrich, R-Ga.

Gingrich pursued significant cuts to the federal budget after being emboldened by the 1994 red wave in the House following his ‘Contract with America.’

Clinton, who also pushed for a balanced budget, disagreed with the spending cuts sought by Republicans in Congress.

That was also a partial shutdown, with the departments of energy, defense and agriculture among those funded before the impasse began.

Republicans moved to end that shutdown amid mounting negative public polling for the GOP, NPR reported.

Sept. 30, 1978–Oct. 18, 1978: 18 Days

The longest shutdown of former President Jimmy Carter’s four-year term in the White House lasted 18 days, at a time when Democrats controlled all levers of power in Washington.

Carter had vetoed Congress’ bills on defense spending and public works that he thought wasted federal dollars, according to the Washington Post. That included funding for a nuclear-powered aircraft carrier that Carter opposed.

There was also a dispute over abortion in the funding bill for the now-defunct Department of Health, Education, and Welfare.

Congress wound up stripping the funding that Carter opposed from the defense and public works bills, while a compromise was reached on the latter issue.

Oct. 1, 2013–Oct. 17, 2013: 16 Days

Much like the current standoff, the 2013 government shutdown also centered on Obamacare — also known as the Affordable Care Act (ACA).

It is the second-longest full shutdown in history behind today’s. At the time, Republicans controlled the House while Democrats held the Senate.

The GOP had insisted on spending bills that rolled back significant portions of Obamacare, then only about three years old.

Senate Democrats rejected such measures passed by the Republican-controlled House, however.

Congress eventually agreed to a short-term spending patch to end the shutdown, and Republicans relented on pushing funding bills with Obamacare cuts.

President Donald Trump danced alongside Malaysian performers as he was greeted on the first leg of his Asia tour.

The White House dubbed his moves, ‘TRUMP DANCE MALAYSIA VERSION’ on social media. The performance was part of a greeting for Trump laid out by Malaysian Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim.

The five-day trip will see Trump meet with newly-elected Japanese Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi in Tokyo as well as Chinese President Xi Jinping in South Korea.

Trump also oversaw the signing of a peace agreement between Cambodia and Thailand on Sunday.

The president watched as Cambodian Prime Minister Hun Manet and Thai Prime Minister Anutin Charnvirakul signed the expanded ceasefire at the annual summit of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations.

The agreement requires Thailand to release 18 Cambodian soldiers held prisoner and for both countries to begin removing heavy weapons from the border.

‘We did something that a lot of people said couldn’t be done,’ Trump said. 

Cambodia’s prime minister called it a ‘historic day,’ and the Thai prime minister said the agreement establishes ‘the building blocks for a lasting peace.’

Ibrahim praised the agreement between Thailand and Cambodia, saying during opening remarks at the summit that ‘it reminds us that reconciliation is not concession, but an act of courage.’

After the expanded ceasefire agreement was signed, Trump reached separate economic deals with Cambodia and Thailand.

Trump also signed agreements with Malaysia involving trade and critical minerals. The U.S. has been working to expand its supply chains to reduce reliance on China, as Beijing has limited exports of key components in technology manufacturing.

Fox News’ Landon Mion and The Associated Press contributed to this report.

– Progressive stars Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, D-N.Y., and Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., are teaming up with New York City mayoral candidate Zohran Mamdani Sunday night for a ‘New York is not for sale’ rally at Forest Hills Stadium in Queens, New York City.

The high-profile campaign event comes nearly one week before Election Day, as New Yorkers head to the polls for the first weekend of early voting, closing out a contentious mayoral battle where Mamdani’s unanticipated success has landed him on the national stage.

‘Zohran Mamdani is modeling a different kind of politics,’ Sanders, the former Democratic presidential candidate and longtime progressive leader, said in a statement ahead of the rally. 

The trio of self-identified Democratic socialists have invigorated the Democratic Party’s progressive base at a time when Democrats are still grappling with devastating losses in 2024 amid growing discontent with President Donald Trump’s sweeping, second-term agenda.

When Sanders and Ocasio-Cortez teamed up for the ‘Fighting Oligarchy’ tour earlier this year, they sparked sizable buzz, firing up thousands of Democrats at rallies across the United States who had been left without a clear party leader.

‘As mayor, he will not run a top-down, billionaire-funded, consultant-driven administration. Instead, Zohran will be a champion for the working people of New York,’ Sanders said.

Both Sanders and Ocasio-Cortez have campaigned alongside Mamdani in his bid to lead the nation’s most populous city. 

On Friday night, Sanders appeared for a virtual ‘Get Out the Vote’ event with Mamdani. Last month, Sanders and Mamdani teamed up for a ‘Fighting Oligarchy’ town hall in Brooklyn. 

Ahead of the Brooklyn town hall event, the two progressive leaders marched alongside union members in Manhattan’s Labor Day parade. That afternoon, Mamdani posed for a photo with Sanders and Ocasio-Cortez in Astoria, Queens, amassing millions of views.

Sanders, a two-time Democratic presidential nominee runner-up, was an early endorser of Mamdani’s primary campaign, along with Ocasio-Cortez. Their endorsements helped Mamdani consolidate progressive support in the 11-candidate field during the final weeks of the primary race.

Mamdani’s primary upset triggered a political earthquake as the democratic socialist handily defeated former Gov. Andrew Cuomo, who was widely expected to secure the Democratic nomination.

Mamdani’s cross-endorsement with fellow progressive New York City Comptroller Brad Lander cleared the path for Mamdani to consolidate support against Cuomo through ranked-choice voting. 

Cuomo has since launched an independent campaign, teeing up a competitive and contentious general election battle. 

Since Mamdani secured the Democratic nomination, Trump has labeled him a ‘100% Communist Lunatic,’ and ‘my little communist,’ ushering Mamdani onto the national political stage. Mamdani has rejected the moniker, maintaining that he identifies as a democratic socialist, like Sanders and Ocasio-Cortez. 

As Trump began criticizing Mamdani, New York Democrats chose to withhold their endorsements of the socialist candidate, who has made a slew of ambitious campaign promises, like fast and free buses, city-run grocery stores and free childcare, all of which he plans to pay for by raising taxes on corporations and the top 1% of New Yorkers. 

After months of withholding their endorsements, Gov. Kathy Hochul finally endorsed Mamdani last month and House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries finally affirmed his support in a statement Friday. Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer has still yet to endorse. 

Pressure had been mounting since Mamdani won the Democratic primary in June for Mayor Eric Adams, who was also running as an independent, or Cuomo to drop out of the race to consolidate support against Mamdani. Adams dropped out of the race and endorsed Cuomo on Thursday. 

That pressure reached a boiling point last week as billionaires, including Red Apple Media CEO John Catsimatidis and hedge fund CEO Bill Ackman, called on Republican nominee Curtis Sliwa to drop out of the race in order to clear a pathway to victory for Cuomo.

The latest Fox News survey, conducted Oct. 10-14, ahead of the first general election debate last week, revealed that Mamdani has a substantial lead in the race. According to the poll, Mamdani has a 21-point lead among New York City registered voters with 49% of voters backing Mamdani, while 28% go for Cuomo and 13% favor Sliwa.

Mamdani also rose above the 50% threshold among likely voters, garnering 52% support, while Cuomo picked up 28%, and Sliwa received just 14%.

For decades, the United States has fought the war on drugs as if it were exclusively a law enforcement issue. It never was. It has always had national security implications. 

After years of inaction, drugs now kill more Americans each year than every modern war combined. Fentanyl alone claimed more than 100,000 lives in 2021, a number that continues to rise despite billions spent on interdiction, prevention and policing. That is not a criminal nuisance. That is a sustained mass-casualty event inside the homeland.

President Donald Trump’s new approach finally treats the crisis for what it is. By designating major drug cartels as foreign terrorist organizations and authorizing the use of military force against them, his administration has drawn a clear line between criminality and warfare. 

The cartels are not ordinary traffickers. They are transnational powers that control territory, wield military-grade arsenals and use terror as a tool of governance. In Trump’s words, they are ‘the ISIS of the Western Hemisphere.’

The numbers already justify the policy. In the first weeks of operations, the new Homeland Security Task Force has arrested more than 3,200 gang and cartel members, seized 91 tons of narcotics and captured over 1,000 illegal weapons. Those seizures represent tens of thousands of American lives saved. Every boat stopped and every shipment intercepted means fewer overdose deaths, fewer funerals, and fewer communities shattered by addiction and violence.

For too long, Washington treated the cartels as criminals who could be prosecuted rather than enemies who had to be defeated. That approach failed. The cartels wage war on America for profit. They assassinate, extort and kidnap while basking in riches captured through intimidation and terror.  They destabilize our neighbors and corrupt governments from Mexico to Venezuela. If America had the right to strike al Qaeda and ISIS abroad for killing Americans, it has an equal right to strike the cartels that kill Americans at home. 

The legal foundation is clear. In February 2025, the State Department designated Tren de Aragua, Sinaloa, Jalisco Nueva Generación, MS-13 and others as Foreign Terrorist Organizations. A presidential determination in September formally declared that the United States is in a non-international armed conflict with these groups. 

No court has challenged the policy because it aligns with both domestic and international law. When foreign networks deliberately kill American citizens, the president has not only the authority but the obligation to act.

The ethical case is equally strong. The Just War tradition requires a just cause, competent authority, proportionality and last resort. Every criterion has been met. The cause could not be more just when drug overdoses in the United States claimed more than 100,000 lives for a third consecutive year by 2023. 

Years of law enforcement, education campaigns and international coordination have not slowed the killing. When nonviolent means have failed, the duty of a government is to protect its citizens by every lawful means available.

Each go-fast boat in the Caribbean and each semi-submersible in the Pacific carries more than cocaine or methamphetamine. It carries a body count of Americans. These are not fishing vessels. They are militarized smuggling platforms crewed by combatants in a foreign network that profits from death. To treat them as anything less is to deny reality. The era of denial is over.

Critics argue that military strikes risk escalation. The cartels crossed this line long ago when they began murdering, intimidating and corrupting their way into power. These transnational criminal enterprises now operate as shadow governments. To continue treating them as mere criminal syndicates would be absurd.  In truth, it would be to accept defeat. 

Trump’s use of force is not about vengeance. It is about national defense. The Department of War, the CIA, the intelligence community, the DEA, FBI and Coast Guard are now unified in a single mission to dismantle the cartels’ capacity to kill Americans. 

Every strike on a drug boat denies the enemy profit and saves lives. As Secretary Pete Hegseth said, each destroyed vessel represents roughly 25,000 Americans who will not die from the poison it carried.

The cartels’ economic reach rivals that of small nations, generating hundreds of billions annually. They corrupt officials, weaponize migration and flood American streets with narcotics. This is not commerce. It is organized war for profit.

A government that fails to confront such an enemy is unworthy of the people it serves. Trump’s use of military force against the cartels is justified both legally and morally. It is long overdue. The United States has every right to defend its borders, its citizens and its sovereignty against a foreign network that profits from American death.

For decades, America fought this war with hesitation and half-measures. Now it is being fought with purpose. This is not a new war. It is the same one that has been killing Americans for generations. The difference is that, at last, America is fighting to win.

U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio on Saturday said that the U.S., Israel and other mediators of the Gaza peace deal had shared intelligence to avoid a possible attack last weekend and would do so going forward. 

‘We put out a message through State Department, sent it to our mediators as well, about an impending attack, and it didn’t happen,’ he told reporters while flying from Israel to Qatar. ‘So that’s the goal here, is ultimately to identify a threat before it happens.’

This comes a week after the State Department said it had ‘credible reports’ that Hamas was planning an attack on Palestinian civilians in violation of the agreement.

Rubio said Saturday the U.S. has talked with countries like Qatar, Egypt and Turkey who are interested in contributing to an international stabilization force in the region. He added that Indonesia and Azerbaijan are also interested.

But, he said, ‘Many of the countries who want to be a part of it can’t do it without’ a United Nations resolution supporting the force.

Rubio also met with President Donald Trump in Qatar ahead of the president’s Asian tour.

Vice President JD Vance was also in Israel earlier this week along with special envoy Steve Witkoff and Trump adviser and son-in-law Jared Kushner in an attempt to solidify the ceasefire deal, which took effect earlier this month.

Next week, Rubio said the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Gen. Dan Caine, is expected to travel to Israel as well.

Trump thanked Qatar for their part in helping secure the peace deal while meeting with Qatar’s Emir Sheikh Tamim bin Hamad al-Thanimet and Qatar Prime Minister and Foreign Minister Sheikh Mohammed bin Abdulrahman bin Jassim Al Thani.

‘This should be an enduring peace,’ Trump told reporters of the deal.

His visit to Qatar was part of a refueling stop before heading on to Asia.

The Associated Press and Reuters contributed to this report. 

The anonymous donor who gave $130 million to the Pentagon to pay troops during the government shutdown has been identified as Timothy Mellon, a reclusive billionaire and a major financial backer of President Donald Trump, according to a report.

Trump announced the donation on Thursday, but declined to reveal the donor’s identity, only describing him as a ‘patriot’ and a friend. The president again refused to name the person on Friday while talking to reporters aboard Air Force One shortly after departing Washington for Asia, calling the donor ‘a great American citizen’ and a ‘substantial man.’

‘He doesn’t want publicity,’ Trump said on Friday. ‘He prefer that his name not be mentioned, which is pretty unusual in the world I come from, and in the world of politics, you want your name mentioned.’

But the two people familiar with the matter told The New York Times that the man is Mellon, a wealthy banking heir and railroad magnate.

It remains unclear how long the donation will cover the troops’ salaries. The Trump administration’s 2025 budget asked for about $600 billion in total military compensation, according to the Congressional Budget Office.

The $130 million donation would equal about $100 a service member, according to The New York Times.

Mellon, a grandson of former Treasury Secretary Andrew W. Mellon, is a backer of Trump who gave tens of millions of dollars to groups supporting the president’s 2024 campaign. Last year, he gave $50 million to a super PAC supporting Trump, making it one of the largest single contributions ever disclosed, the newspaper noted.

The billionaire was not a prominent Republican donor until Trump was first elected but has given hundreds of millions of dollars in recent years into supporting the president and the GOP.

He is also a significant supporter of Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr., who also ran for president in 2024, first as a Democrat and later as an independent before dropping out to endorse Trump. Mellon donated millions to Kennedy’s presidential campaign and has also given money to the secretary’s anti-vaccine nonprofit, Children’s Health Defense, according to The New York Times.

Despite his political contributions, Mellon has sought to keep a low profile.

In an autobiography published in 2015, Mellon described himself as a former liberal who moved from Connecticut to Wyoming for lower taxes and fewer people.

The Pentagon said it accepted the donation under the ‘general gift acceptance authority.’

‘The donation was made on the condition that it be used to offset the cost of service members’ salaries and benefits,’ Pentagon spokesman Sean Parnell said in a statement to The New York Times.

But the donation may be a potential violation of the Antideficiency Act, which prohibits federal agencies from spending money in excess of congressional appropriations or from accepting voluntary services.