It has been nearly 14 months since my brother-in-law, Omri Miran, was taken hostage by Hamas during the devastating attacks of Oct. 7, 2023. These have been months of anguish and uncertainty for my family and for the families of the 100 individuals still held captive after Hamas kidnapped 251 people from Israel to the Gaza Strip. We have advocated tirelessly with the Israeli government, the U.S. administration, and the international community, but our loved ones remain in captivity.

The recent U.S. elections, which delivered a Republican trifecta and Donald Trump’s return to the White House, have sparked intense debates about what this shift means for America and the world. While other issues are as important for us, the families of hostages, there is only one thing on our minds: How can this new political reality provide the best opportunity yet to break the deadlock and bring the hostages home?

The situation is complex, but at its heart, the release of the hostages hinges on one thing: leverage. For a deal to happen, Israel must feel secure enough to make compromises, Hamas and its backers must feel compelled to negotiate, and the United States must be the guarantor of a credible path forward. Republican-controlled executive and legislative branches may have the tools, relationships, and political capital to make this happen, and there are already signs of a (cautious) change emerging from the talks in Cairo between Egypt and Hamas.

For Israel, the issue of security guarantees is paramount. The Israeli government has consistently emphasized that any ceasefire or hostage release deal must be tied to a broader framework ensuring that Hamas will no longer control Gaza. A post-war Gaza without Hamas is a non-negotiable Israeli demand, yet it requires a robust international framework to ensure implementation. Trump, with his historically close relationship with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, has the credibility to push Israel toward the compromises necessary to secure the hostages’ release while reassuring its leadership that America will stand firm on ensuring Hamas’ disarmament and exclusion from Gaza’s future governance, and Israel’s right to re-engage if Hamas and their accomplices violate the ceasefire at any point. Such guarantees should not be limited to the next four years; they should be incorporated into a long-term defense agreement between the U.S. and Israel.

On the other side, Hamas operates under the patronage of powerful sponsors—namely Iran, Qatar, and Turkey. These countries provide Hamas with financial, logistical, and diplomatic support, thus holding considerable sway over its decisions. Under the Biden administration, these relationships were diplomatically acknowledged but never effectively leveraged. While the Biden team showed incredible empathy and determination in advocating for the hostages, internal divisions within the Democratic Party and the fact it had to manage such conflict during an election year undermined its ability to exert consistent and unified pressure on all the players involved.

… the Trump administration’s track record of a transactional approach to diplomacy, paired with a hardline stance on Iran and an unapologetic alliance with Israel, creates a different dynamic. 

In contrast, the Trump administration’s track record of a transactional approach to diplomacy, paired with a hardline stance on Iran and an unapologetic alliance with Israel, creates a different dynamic. Iran, Qatar, and Turkey would likely interpret Trump’s demands as less flexible and more consequential than Biden’s. These nations—especially Qatar, which has acted as a mediator—must be compelled to press Hamas into concessions. With Trump in office and a Republican Congress backing him, the U.S. can create a cohesive and credible threat that changes the calculus for Hamas and its sponsors.

Critics will argue that Trump’s return to power brings risks, including escalating regional tensions. However, in this case, Trump’s willingness to take bold, even controversial, actions could lead to a breakthrough. His administration’s Abraham Accords, which normalized relations between Israel and several Arab nations, showcased a capacity to upend long-standing diplomatic impasses through unconventional methods. That same approach could be applied here.

The Biden administration’s efforts should not be overlooked. President Biden personally supported the families of hostages, showing compassion and a deep understanding of our pain. His administration worked diligently, especially for the American hostages, and his leadership has left an indelible mark on the international response to the crisis. However, deep divisions within his party hamstrung his ability to pressure all sides effectively. Progressive voices critical of Israeli policy complicated U.S.-Israeli coordination, while a lack of unified strategy and urgency limited the administration’s engagement with Hamas’ backers.

Now, with Trump’s return, the game has changed. His alignment with Netanyahu and his hawkish stance on Iran makes it possible to align U.S. and Israeli priorities in a way that was more challenging under the previous administration. Moreover, a Republican Congress can provide the unified legislative support needed to back bold executive actions, from increased military aid for Israel to sanctions or diplomatic maneuvers targeting Hamas’ sponsors.

This is not to suggest that the path forward will be simple or painless. The scars left by October 7 will not heal quickly, and the humanitarian crisis in Gaza demands urgent attention. However, ending this cycle of violence requires a solution that addresses all sides’ core concerns. A ceasefire tied to the release of the hostages and a post-war reality in Gaza that excludes Hamas offers a framework that, while challenging, is achievable.

For families like mine, this is not a partisan issue. It is a matter of life and death. We need leadership that can break through the impasse and deliver results. If the Republican trifecta can provide Israel with the guarantees it needs and compel Hamas’ sponsors to act, then this moment must not be wasted.

Omri and 99 more hostages, at least half are believed to be alive by Israel’s intelligence community, are waiting. Their freedom depends on the courage and determination to seize this opportunity.

Rep. Brian Mast, R-Fla., excoriated Secretary of State Antony Blinken over the estimated ‘tens of billions’ of U.S. taxpayer dollars he says have been sent to the Taliban since U.S. troops withdrew from Afghanistan. 

Mast, who was selected a day earlier to become the new chair of the House Foreign Relations Committee next month, grilled Blinken over the Biden administration’s handling of the chaotic August 2021 withdrawal. 

The current committee chair, Rep. Michael McCaul, R-Texas, issued multiple subpoenas in September for Blinken to testify. Under threat of a contempt of Congress vote, he finally agreed. 

Mast asked the U.S.’ top diplomat if he had been in Afghanistan since the killing of 13 U.S. service members and roughly 170 Afghan civilians by a suicide bombing attack at Hamid Karzai International Airport’s Abbey Gate, and Blinken responded that he had not. Noting that the United States no longer has control of the U.S. embassy in Afghanistan, Mast said, ‘yet we are still giving the Taliban tens of billions of dollars.’ 

‘There’s an American citizen out there, literally woke up this morning losing 30% of their paycheck. And a good percentage of that is going to the Taliban or other programs abroad,’ Mast said. ‘And this is something that we all need to think about, and we will be thinking about deeply for the next two years. There’s a joke that’s made often out there about kids going to college to learn basket weaving, and what a joke that would be. But the United States right now is literally sending tens of millions of dollars to the Taliban. 14.9 million, to be exact, to teach Afghans how to do carpet weaving.’ 

‘We are giving $280 million to the United Nations to do cash transfers for food in Afghanistan,’ Mast continued. ‘Yet we’re not sending an ear of corn from Iowa, a sack of potatoes from Idaho, or a cucumber or an orange from Florida. And that discounts the fact that there’s no American tonnage going through our ports to send those things out of here, either. It’s just cash transfers.’ 

Citing reports by the Special Inspector General for Afghanistan Reconstruction (SIGAR), which tracks the status of U.S. funds appropriated for reconstruction efforts, Mast said another $75 million has been sent to teach women to become farmers. 

‘I don’t believe that we spend $30 million in the United States of America to teach women to be farmers,’ Mast said. 

Earlier, Rep. Joe Wilson, R-S.C., stressed how since Afghanistan fell to the Taliban ‘women have effectively been banished from public life, unable to speak in public or holding a job, including nursing.’ 

‘My colleague Mr. Wilson brought up that they can’t even dance in the streets or speak to one another or go to school. I’m not sure that we can trust that that $75 million is being used to teach them agriculture,’ Mast said. ‘And as you pointed out, we don’t have any diplomats on the ground to confirm the validity of these programs.’ 

Mast also asked Blinken to explain the $3.5 billion transferred to the Afghan fund ‘that is tended to protect the macro financial stability on behalf of the Afghan people.’ 

‘What the hell does that mean? Can you tell me? I don’t know, that’s a bunch of gibberish to me,’ Mast pressed. ‘Even worse, by the numbers, we spent $9 billion to resettle 90,000 roughly Afghan refugees here since the fall of Afghanistan. My simple Army math tells me that’s about $100,000 a person. That’s absurd. So my question for you. We do not even have an embassy in Afghanistan. We have no diplomats there. What are we doing giving them $1?’ 

Blinken’s response centered on how the money the United States and other countries provide is implemented through partners, such as United Nations agencies and NGOs. 

‘Yes, we could say that about all the State Department dollars, foreign NGOs, foreign countries, foreign companies, and in this case, foreign adversaries,’ Mast interjected. 

‘Mr. Secretary, you know for a fact that people literally, especially outside of this country, they directly lied to us,’ Mast said. ‘Your people had to come back and correct. Hey, it turns out we were, in fact, spending half a million dollars to expand atheism in Nepal. through the third party implementer of Humanist International. They were lying to us. They didn’t show us the exact slide show that they put together for half a million dollars. And all this, they lied to us. We have no eyes on the ground. And I would simply close with this. We again, we do not even have an embassy there. We have no business putting one dollar into that place.’ 

Mast was referencing how a two-year investigation by House Republicans forced the State Department to admit that a $500,000 grant intended to promote ‘humanism and secularism’ in Nepal may have been misused. 

In response, Blinken said he respectfully disagreed with Mast’s opposition to the Afghan funds, saying, ‘The work we have done through these partners, and many other countries have done, has saved many, many lives in an incredibly difficult situation.’ 

House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries, D-N.Y., pledged to try to find agreement with President-elect Trump when the Republican takes power next year.

‘Democrats have consistently made clear that we are ready, willing and able, to find bipartisan common ground with the incoming administration on any issue,’ Jeffries said during his weekly press conference on Wednesday.

One issue he held up in particular was finding bipartisan ways to tackle the cost of living crisis that’s putting a strain on millions of Americans.

He later reasserted that promise when asked by a reporter about how he anticipates navigating a relationship with Trump.

‘We are prepared to find common ground with the incoming administration on any issue, particularly as it relates to the most decisive ones to emerge from this election, which, in our view, is to deal with the high cost of living,’ Jeffries said.

‘The American people are correct that the deck has been stacked against everyday Americans for decades in ways that undermine the ability for far too many Americans to access the American Dream.’

The Democratic leader said he has not spoken with Trump yet since his election but anticipated a conversation ‘in the next few weeks.’

Jeffries will be among the figures to watch next year as lawmakers navigate another Trump-held Washington. 

He is the only one of the four congressional leaders next year to not have any kind of relationship with Trump. 

His predecessor, former Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., had a famously combative relationship with the president-elect.

But House Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., a close ally of Trump’s, will almost certainly need to have buy-in from Jeffries on critical legislation next year. 

With several Republicans expected to leave the House for Trump administration roles, the likely margin for at least the first few months in Congress will be 217-215 – meaning Republicans must vote in lock-step to pass any bills without Democratic support.

FBI Director Christopher Wray announced plans to step down from his post at the end of the Biden administration.

Fox News learned just moments before the announcement that Wray would make the announcement during an FBI town hall in Washington, D.C., during which thousands of FBI employees are expected to join virtually across the country.

‘After weeks of careful thought, I’ve decided the right thing for the bureau is for me to serve until the end of the current administration in January and then step down,’ Wray said during the town hall. ‘My goal is to keep the focus on our mission — the indispensable work you’re doing on behalf of the American people every day. In my view, this is the best way to avoid dragging the bureau deeper into the fray while reinforcing the values and principles that are so important to how we do our work.’

The FBI director said the decision was not easy for him, adding he loves the FBI, its mission and people.

Wray also said his focus is, and always has been, on the FBI doing what is right.

‘When you look at where the threats are headed, it’s clear that the importance of our work — keeping Americans safe and upholding the Constitution — will not change. And what absolutely cannot, must not change is our commitment to doing the right thing, the right way, every time,’ Wray said. 

‘Our adherence to our core values, our dedication to independence and objectivity and our defense of the rule of law — those fundamental aspects of who we are must never change. That’s the real strength of the FBI — the importance of our mission, the quality of our people and their dedication to service over self. 

‘It’s an unshakeable foundation that’s stood the test of time and cannot be easily moved. And it — you, the men and women of the FBI — are why the bureau will endure and remain successful long into the future.’ 

Wray is seven years into his 10-year term.

The Republican lawyer in D.C. was hired by President Trump in 2017 after Trump fired former Director James Comey.

Since being re-elected to a second term in the Oval Office, Trump has nominated Kash Patel to succeed Wray, giving the current director the option to leave on his own or be fired.

While Wray’s last day is still undecided, it is expected to be in January before Trump’s inauguration.

The moment Wray leaves, Deputy Director Paul Abbate will become acting director until a new director — Patel if confirmed — is in place. Abbate is a career official who is eligible to retire from the bureau soon. He planned months ago to retire in the new year. 

– More than 30 House Republicans who are military veterans are expressing their ‘strong support’ for Pete Hegseth, President-elect Trump’s nominee for Defense Secretary.

In a letter to Republican Sen. John Thune of South Dakota, the incoming Senate majority leader, and Democratic Sen. Chuck Schumer, the current majority leader, the House GOP lawmakers ‘call on the Senate to honor its constitutional duty of advice and consent by conducting a fair, thorough confirmation process.’

The letter, shared first with Fox News on Wednesday, was written by Rep. August Pfluger of Texas. He urges that senators evaluate Hegseth’s nomination ‘solely on its substantive merits— his distinguished military service, academic credentials, and a bold vision for revitalizing our national defense.’

Hegseth, an Army National Guard officer who deployed to the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq and who until last month was a longtime Fox News host, has been the focus of a slew of reports spotlighting a series of drinking and sexual misconduct allegations, as well as a report alleging he mismanaged a veterans nonprofit organization that he once led.

Trump’s defense secretary nominee has denied allegations that he mistreated women but did reach a financial settlement with an accuser from a 2017 incident to avoid a lawsuit. He has vowed that he won’t drink ‘a drop of alcohol’ if confirmed as defense secretary.

While Hegseth’s confirmation is still far from a sure bet, a very public pronouncement of support from Trump late last week, behind-the-scenes efforts by Vice President-elect Sen. JD Vance to persuade his GOP Senate colleagues to support the nominee, and Hegseth’s own determination, seem to have resuscitated a nomination that appeared to be teetering last week.

Pfluger, in the letter, emphasizes that Hegseth’s ‘ability to communicate across institutional landscapes—with military leadership, congressional representatives, and frontline troops—will set him apart. His media expertise and transparent communication style will be crucial in executing a clear vision that cuts through bureaucratic inertia.’

‘Mr. Hegseth represents the strategic reset our defense infrastructure requires: an unorthodox yet qualified leader who can streamline the defense bureaucracy, accelerate modernization, and ensure America remains the world’s most formidable military power,’ Pfluger argues.

Pfluger, an Air Force Academy graduate who served as a pilot on active duty for two decades and flew combat missions in Iraq and Syria. He later served on the National Security Council during Trump’s first term in office before winning election in 2020 to the House in Texas’ 11th Congressional District.

The letter is co-signed by Rep. Michael Waltz of Florida – Trump’s pick to serve as his national security adviser in his second administration. Waltz, a colonel in the National Guard, received four Bronze Stars while serving in the Special Forces during multiple combat tours in Afghanistan, the Middle East, and Africa. In 2018, he became the first ‘Green Beret’ elected to Congress.

The fellow veterans putting their signatures on the letter are – in alphabetical order – Republican Reps. Mike Bost of Illinois, Andrew Clyde of Georgia, Elijah Crane of Arizona, Jake Ellzey of Texas, Scott Fitzgerald of Wisconsin, Scott Franklin of Florida, Mark Green of Tennessee, Clay Higgins of Louisiana, Wesley Hunt of Texas, Ronny Jackson of Texas, Trent Kelly of Mississippi, Nick LaLota of New York, Barry Loudermilk of Georgia, Anna Paulina Luna of Florida, Morgan Luttrell of Texas, Brian Mast of Florida, Richard McCormick of Georgia, Max Miller of Ohio, Cory Mills of Florida, Barry Moore of Alabama, Troy Nehls of Texas, Zach Nunn of Iowa, Guy Reschenthaler of Pennsylvania, Keith Self of Texas, Greg Steube of Florida, William Timmons of South Carolina, Derrick Van Orden of Wisconsin, Brandon Williams of New York, Ryan Zinke of Montana, and Dan Crenshaw of Texas.

Outgoing Treasury Sec. Janet Yellen said that she’s ‘concerned about fiscal sustainability’ and thinks the deficit must be decreased.

She made the comments during the Wall Street Journal’s CEO Council Summit after Greg Ip, chief economic commentator for the outlet, noted that President Joe Biden and Yellen are leaving behind a big budget deficit. ‘Are you sorry you couldn’t make more progress on that?’ he asked. Ip also asked Yellen how much risk the issue presents to the economy.

‘Well I am concerned about fiscal sustainability. And I am sorry that we haven’t made more progress. I believe that the deficit needs to be brought down, especially now that we’re in an environment of higher interest rates,’ Yellen replied. 

Yellen helmed the Treasury Department during President Joe Biden’s White House tenure, but will soon step down as Biden’s term ends next month.

In that time, the already-massive national debt continued soaring to new heights, and has now surpassed $36 trillion.

‘Today, the U.S. economy is in strong shape, with a robust labor market and solid economic growth. Tune in as I join @Greg_Ip at the @WSJ CEO Council Summit to discuss the economic progress we have made under the leadership of @POTUS and @VP,’ Yellen declared in a post on X.

Trump decisively defeated Vice President Kamala Harris during the 2024 presidential contest, winning both the Electoral College and the popular vote.

The president-elect tapped Scott Bessent to serve as Treasury Department secretary in his upcoming administration.

‘Scott is widely respected as one of the World’s foremost International Investors and Geopolitical and Economic Strategists,’ Trump said in a statement last month.

Yellen previously served as chair of the Federal Reserve Board of governors from early February 2014 through early February 2018.

Republican tax hawks are worried that key Trump administration tax policies could expire at the end of 2025 if congressional leaders follow through on a plan to break up a massive conservative budget bill into two parts.

Reconciliation is a way to fast-track legislation on issues like taxes, the debt limit and federal spending by bypassing the Senate’s 60-vote threshold for passage, instead lowering it to a simple 51-vote majority.

It is a process normally used once per year, but incoming Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D., floated a plan earlier this month to split Republicans’ reconciliation priorities into two bills – one dealing with the border and defense and a second aimed at implementing President-elect Donald Trump’s tax policy. The plan was also backed by top Trump adviser Stephen Miller.

However, Republicans on the House Ways & Means Committee, including Chairman Jason Smith, R-Mo., are concerned it could put their goals – such as preserving Trump’s 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act – out of reach.

‘I think because we’ve already had some of the provisions expire or sunset, and the remainder of the legislation expires at the end of 2025, that waiting toward the second half of the year puts a lot of it at risk. And there’s no way we can allow these rates to expire,’ Rep. Nicole Malliotakis, R-N.Y., told Fox News Digital. ‘Americans across the board will see a tax increase, and it really jeopardizes our quest to bring manufacturing home.’

She pointed out that Republicans are set to have a razor-thin majority in the next Congress.

‘I do get nervous that, you know, one person can hold it up, or two people could hold it up, and I think it’s best to try to do it as early as possible,’ she said. ‘I think that’s a belief that’s shared by many of the members on Ways & Means.’

Smith pointed out to Fox Business’ ‘Mornings With Maria’ that Congress has not passed two reconciliation bills into law in one year since 1997.

‘I am saying we need a reconciliation bill that has border, energy, permitting and tax. You put all four of those things together, we can deliver on that,’ Smith said.

He told Fox News Digital on Tuesday, ‘My focus all along is to make sure that we are best positioned to deliver on President Trump’s tax proposals and policies.’

The debate is putting top Republicans who will be in charge of crafting fiscal policy next year at odds, while both argue they are fighting for Trump’s agenda.

Rep. Greg Murphy, R-N.C., said Smith was doing an ‘excellent job’ and echoed concerns about a slim margin.

‘I think it is a big challenge. We have a very slim majority, and there are at least, I believe, two people, if not three of the Republicans, who voted against it are still here,’ he said.

Thune and other Republicans who support the two-track plan argued that taxes are more complex of an issue and would take longer to hash out.

House Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., told ‘Special Report’ host Bret Baier on Tuesday night, ‘There probably will be at least two reconciliation packages. So, the determination right now is where does the tax piece fit and do we do that first out of the gates, or do you wait a couple of months to get all that done? Because it can be very complicated.’

House Freedom Caucus Chairman Andy Harris, R-Md., similarly argued, ‘I think we need to prove to the American people that we can actually defend our borders… The bottom line is I think they need to be on almost parallel tracks. But I do believe that taxes are much more complicated.’

However, a senior House GOP aide asked what was complex about extending tax provisions that were already put in place in 2017.

‘It’s confusing — given that extending the Trump tax cuts has been on the agenda for seven years and is a central campaign promise of [Trump’s], how can including them in a reconciliation bill require extra time and consideration by Senate Republicans, many of whom have already pledged their support?’ the aide posed.

The discussion is a preview of what Washington will look like next year when Republicans hold the White House and both congressional chambers.

If Republicans are unable to harness enough momentum to pass a tax bill next year, Americans across the country could see their taxes rise.

Ways & Means member Rep. Adrian Smith, R-Neb., said it ‘could be more difficult’ to pass a tax bill if it’s separated from the first reconciliation bill, but said he was ‘not at all concerned’ about Republicans coming to an agreement.

Another member of the committee, Rep. Ron Estes, R-Kan., agreed with the committee chair that one bill ‘would be a much better solution for us to work and get that process done.’

However, Rep. Drew Ferguson, R-Ga., also on the panel, did not give insight into his stance but said he was optimistic.

‘I think this reconciliation process will be very different than what we did back in 2017, because I think members are better prepared, committees are better prepared, and I think the president’s going to be much better prepared,’ he said. ‘So I wouldn’t get too worked up over a division of the plans right now.’