First lady Melania Trump is giving Fox News an exclusive first look at her upcoming film, ‘MELANIA,’ set to hit theaters worldwide next month.

The 104-minute film is set to hit theaters globally on Jan. 30, 2026, appearing in theaters across North America, South America, Asia, Europe, Israel, the United Arab Emirates and more. Amazon will also launch a documentary series in the coming months. 

‘History is set in motion during the 20 days of my life prior to the U.S. Presidential Inauguration,’ the first lady told Fox News. ‘For the first time, global audiences are invited into theaters to witness this pivotal chapter unfold—a private, unfiltered look as I navigate family, business, and philanthropy on my remarkable journey to becoming First Lady of the United States of America.’

Fox News exclusively obtained the trailer, which opens with the first lady walking into the U.S. Capitol rotunda ahead of her husband’s second inauguration. She looks to the camera in her now-iconic inauguration outfit, and says: ‘Here we go again.’

The trailer jumps from the first lady and president at the inauguration; to standing together outside of Mar-a-Lago; behind-the-scenes of the inauguration showing Baron Trump and Mrs. Trump’s father; to a series of images of the first lady; Air Force One; the presidential seal and more.

The infamous Metro Goldwyn Mayer (MGM) lion roars and takes over the screen. 

The trailer then shows Mrs. Trump entering a room where President Trump stands at a podium during a meeting and is rehearsing a speech.

‘My proudest legacy will be that of peacemaker,’ Trump said. 

The first lady breaks in and says: ‘Peacemaker and unifier.’ 

The trailer shows the first lady getting out of a vehicle, sporting a pair of black stiletto boots, and jumping to the East Wing residence, where she stands in her stunning white and black inaugural ball gown, and smiles at the camera. 

The trailer invites the audience to ‘witness history in the making.’ 

The trailer also shows the first lady reviewing materials with staff and more. 

It cuts to a scene of Mrs. Trump asking a security detail ‘is it safe?’ and the agent confirming ‘it is safe,’ before the film cuts to sirens and the motorcade driving through a city. 

’20 days to become first lady of the United States,’ the trailer says. 

‘Everyone wants to know,’ Melania Trump says. ‘So here it is.’ 

The trailer ends with Mrs. Trump calling ‘Mr. President’ to say ‘congratulations.’ 

‘Did you watch it?’ President Trump says through the phone. 

‘I did not.  Yeah, I will see it on the news,’ Mrs. Trump says. 

The film is set to hit theaters around the globe on January 30. 

The first lady said that the story ‘has never been told, and because the subject matter is historically consequential, it was imperative for me to produce a film of the highest cinematic standard, suitable exclusively in theaters worldwide.’

‘The 20 days of my life, preceding the U.S. Presidential inauguration, constitutes a rare and defining moment—one that warrants meticulous care, integrity, and uncompromising craftsmanship,’ she said. ‘I am proud to share this very specific moment of my life—20 days of intense transition and planning—with moviegoers and fans across the globe.’

Fox News Digital has learned that the first lady was involved ‘in every aspect’ of the film — from her ‘creative vision,’ to working as a producer on the film and to ensuring the post-production marketing is executed properly. Fox News Digital has learned that the first lady has been very ‘hands on’ from start to finish. 

‘She is giving the audience unprecedented access to her life — and to any first lady’s life — during this 20-day period,’ a source familiar with the planning of the film told Fox News Digital. 

The film takes the audience through the first lady’s life leading up to the inauguration — from her home in Trump Tower in New York City, to Mar-a-Lago in Palm Beach, and behind-the-scenes access in Washington D.C. 

Mrs. Trump first had the idea for the film in November 2024, after President Trump won the election. 

Marc Beckman, Mrs. Trump’s agent and exclusive senior advisor, led negotiations on her behalf with Amazon, specifically with Amazon CEO Andy Jassy, beginning on Nov. 18, 2024. 

Fox News Digital has learned that Disney sought to obtain the exclusive rights to the film, as well as Netflix and Paramount. Amazon and MGM had the highest bid, purchasing the license for the film for $40 million — the largest documentary deal in history.

‘I’m honored to be working with Amazon — they’ve been great partners from the minute we started to negotiate the deal, through production and now as we gear up for the film’s release,’ Beckman told Fox News Digital.

‘Speaking of the deal, there has been so much speculation in the press on the bidding and how we ended up with Amazon, that we’re at a point where it’s worth clarifying a few things,’ Beckman said.

First, Beckman told Fox News Digital that some bidders were ‘interested only in a film, and others only in a series.’

‘Amazon ended up bidding on both, and checked all the boxes we were looking for, as they could also deliver a theatrical film release,’ Beckman explained.

Beckman stressed that he negotiated the deal on behalf of the first lady while dealing with ‘all the studios directly.’

‘I’ve seen reporting that Amazon paid nearly three times the nearest other bid, and that’s just false,’ Beckman said. ‘It was an incredibly competitive bidding process with multiple rounds of bids.’

Beckman added: ‘Yes, Amazon had the highest bid, but they also bid on the most product — series and film.’

Filming began in December 2024. The film is executive produced by Trump and Fernando Sulichin of New Element Media, with Brett Ratner of RatPac Entertainment serving as director. 

The film itself is produced in a ‘highly cinematic’ way. Sources familiar with the production told Fox News Digital that the first lady did not want the film to look like a documentary, but rather an ‘elevated film.’ 

The launch of the film comes a year after the release of her first-ever book, ‘Melania.’ The memoir presents an intimate portrait of Melania Trump and includes personal stories and family photos she had not previously shared with the public. 

‘Melania’ has been at the top of the New York Times’ best-selling list since its release to the public. 

Upon the release of the memoir last year, the first lady told Fox News Digital that writing her story was ‘an amazing journey filled with emotional highs and lows.’

‘Each story shaped me into who I am today,’ she said. ‘Although daunting at times, the process has been incredibly rewarding, reminding me of my strength, and the beauty of sharing my truth.’ 

‘Melania’ is the first lady’s first book. She released the original book along with a special collector’s edition that includes photos hand-selected by the first lady, many of which she photographed herself of her home and of various trips she has taken around the world. 

A new report released Wednesday from Polaris National Security details what the group says are 100 foreign policy achievements from President Donald Trump’s second term. The document is organized chronologically, starting with his return to office in January and tracking each major foreign policy move through the present day.

The report, titled ‘100 Trump Foreign Policy Wins From 2025 the Media Wants You to Miss,’ is an advocacy and policy analysis document that reflects the authors’ evaluation of U.S. foreign policy developments over the past year. 

‘Since January, the Trump administration has moved with historic pace to restore America’s strength and security,’ the report states, arguing that the administration has emphasized deterrence, alliance burden-sharing and direct engagement with adversaries.

Venezuela and Western Hemisphere strategy

The report groups several Venezuela-related actions into what it describes as a broader U.S. policy shift in the Western Hemisphere. It highlights expanded counter-narcotics operations off Venezuela’s coast, including airstrikes on maritime vessels linked to organizations such as Tren de Aragua and the National Liberation Army. The campaign, called Operation Southern Spear, is described as underscoring a commitment to ‘defending the homeland from the influx of fentanyl and other illicit drugs ravaging American communities.’

The administration also raised the U.S. reward for information leading to the arrest of Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro to $50 million, citing a public announcement from Attorney General Pam Bondi accusing Maduro of central involvement in narcotics trafficking. Venezuela has rejected the allegations. Polaris links these actions to the 2025 National Security Strategy, calling it ‘the most significant hemispheric reorientation of U.S. foreign policy in decades.’ 

Cale Brown, chair of Polaris National Security and former State Department principal deputy spokesperson, said the administration’s posture marks a reset on the global stage. ‘President Trump has taken the world stage by storm, reasserting American strength after four years of weakness,’ he said.

Gaza ceasefire and hostage releases

A substantial section of the Polaris report focuses on the October Gaza ceasefire, which it calls a central diplomatic breakthrough involving the United States, Israel and Hamas. According to the document, the agreement ‘secured an immediate ceasefire and the return of all surviving hostages,’ including Americans, with one hostage still unaccounted for. It also outlines plans for prisoner exchanges, Gaza’s demilitarization, an international stabilization force, transitional governance and large-scale reconstruction.

The report also highlights a November U.N. Security Council vote in which a U.S.-led Gaza resolution passed 13–0, with Russia and China abstaining. The resolution is described as providing ‘an international legal framework for the next phase of the Israel-Hamas ceasefire.’

Additionally, the administration’s prohibition on U.S. taxpayer funding for UNRWA is noted, citing U.S. concerns over alleged ties between some personnel and Hamas. UNRWA denies institutional involvement in terrorism, while U.S. officials say the move was based on national security considerations.

Iran nuclear strikes 

The report cites U.S. military strikes carried out in June against Iranian nuclear facilities using B-2 bombers and bunker-buster munitions, framing the mission as proof that the United States ‘will not tolerate a nuclear-armed Iran.’ Iran denies pursuing a military nuclear program.

Nathan Sales, a distinguished fellow at the Atlantic Council and former State Department counterterrorism coordinator, said the administration views regional diplomacy primarily through the lens of countering Tehran. ‘The Trump administration gets that the Iranian regime is the fundamental source of violence and instability across the Middle East,’ Sales said.

However, some analysts say the administration’s record presents sharp contrasts. Foreign policy analyst and editor-in-chief of the Foreign Desk Lisa Daftari said that while Trump has delivered on several strategic priorities — including strong support for Israel, terrorist redesignations, aggressive action against drug cartels and renewed momentum behind the Abraham Accords — other moves warrant closer scrutiny.

‘This record is tempered by concerning diplomatic overtures that urge caution. The characterization of Syria’s president as ‘young, attractive tough guy’ appears premature given unverified claims about severing ties with terrorist organizations—particularly troubling in light of recent attacks on U.S. servicemen. Similarly, the administration’s approach to Turkey and Saudi Arabia suggests a willingness to extend trust and strategic concessions that may exceed what these relationships warrant, potentially squandering leverage on critical issues like the Abraham Accords. Whether these calculated diplomatic gambles yield strategic gains or prove costly remains an open question. The true measure of this foreign policy doctrine will ultimately depend on how these relationships and decisions unfold in 2026.’

NATO defense spending commitments

The report also points to commitments made at the NATO summit in The Hague, where alliance members pledged to raise defense spending to 5% of GDP by 2035, far above the longstanding 2% benchmark. The document says the pledge followed sustained U.S. pressure for ‘fairer burden-sharing among allied nations.’

Armenia–Azerbaijan peace pledge

The report highlights an August agreement signed at the White House by the leaders of Armenia and Azerbaijan aimed at ending the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict. The declaration includes commitments on border security, regional transit routes and economic cooperation involving the United States.

Gutting the filibuster was once a taboo notion among Senate Republicans, but the idea is gaining traction thanks to President Donald Trump’s repeated calls to throw out the longstanding procedure.

The Senate filibuster is the 60-vote threshold that applies to most bills in the upper chamber, and given the nature of the thin majorities that either party has commanded in recent years, that means legislation typically has to be bipartisan to advance.

It proved a key barrier to reopening the government and advancing several other Republican priorities in recent weeks, like the GOP’s Obamacare fix that was torpedoed by Senate Democrats.

For years, it’s been viewed as a tool of the minority party in the Senate meant to prevent majorities from ramming through partisan legislation that both Republicans and Democrats have taken advantage of.

But near-monthly prodding from Trump and recent frustration with the 43-day government shutdown has some Republicans rethinking their position on the filibuster.

‘It’s something I’m giving serious consideration to now,’ Sen. Roger Marshall, R-Kan., told Fox News Digital.

Marshall previously told Fox News Digital, ‘Never, never, ever, never, none,’ when asked if he would consider changing the rules after Trump called on Republicans to nuke the filibuster in October.

Just a few months later, Marshall is reconsidering his position.

‘I think between the last government shutdown and the threat of this one, it makes me pause,’ he said. ‘It seems like the appropriations process is being slowed down. It feels like, with healthcare, that the Democrats, really the Democratic Party, doesn’t want to get anything done. So eliminating the filibuster ends all that.’

He echoed Trump, who on Monday told reporters that he wanted Senate Republicans to ‘knock out’ the filibuster.

‘You wouldn’t have January 30th looming, because you have the 30th of January looming, you know that, right? And if we knocked out the filibuster it would be just a simple approval,’ he said. ‘But you have some Republicans — they’re unable to explain why, you know if you ask them why they’re unable to explain, they cannot win the debate, but they should knock out the filibuster.’

The likelihood that such a change crosses the floor in the Senate is low, given that Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D., has routinely remained rooted in his position that the filibuster shouldn’t be touched.

Still, Sen. Markwayne Mullin, R-Okla., a member of Thune’s leadership team, said that his position had also changed on the filibuster.

Mullin told Fox News’ Will Cain that during a recent meeting with Senate GOP leadership, he asked the room if they truly believed that Senate Democrats wouldn’t try to get rid of the procedural safeguard when they regained a majority again.

‘If we believe that they’re going to do it, then why don’t we just go ahead and get it done,’ he said.

Other Republicans are more skeptical about the odds of the filibuster getting axed. Some, like Mullin, think it could be narrowly tailored to only apply to spending bills, while others see the move as fantasy. 

‘That’s not gonna happen,’ Sen. Bernie Moreno, R-Ohio, told Fox News Digital.

And Sen. John Kennedy, R-La., said that lawmakers weren’t even ‘using the tools we have right now’ to pass Republicans’ agenda.

Kennedy has pushed for another round of budget reconciliation, given that Republicans have two more attempts at the grueling process, to tackle the growing affordability issues in the country.

He argued that’s how Republicans passed Trump’s signature legislation, the ‘one, big beautiful bill,’ earlier this year.

‘Yes, you can’t do everything, but you can do a lot, and that’s what I would be concentrating my energies on,’ Kennedy said. ‘And I’ve said respectfully to the president that I don’t think the United States Senate is going to give up the filibuster or the blue slip. He obviously disagrees, and I respect that reasonable people disagree sometimes, but I’m a pragmatist. I deal with the world as it is, not as I want it to be.’

President Donald Trump on Tuesday ordered a total blockade of oil tankers entering or leaving Venezuela, declaring the Nicolás Maduro regime a foreign terrorist organization and accusing it of using stolen U.S. assets to finance terrorism, trafficking and other criminal activity.

‘Venezuela is completely surrounded by the largest Armada ever assembled in the History of South America,’ Trump said on Truth Social. ‘It will only get bigger, and the shock to them will be like nothing they have ever seen before – Until such time as they return to the United States of America all of the Oil, Land, and other Assets that they previously stole from us.

‘The illegitimate Maduro Regime is using Oil from these stolen Oil Fields to finance themselves, Drug Terrorism, Human Trafficking, Murder, and Kidnapping,’ he continued. ‘For the theft of our Assets, and many other reasons, including Terrorism, Drug Smuggling, and Human Trafficking, the Venezuelan Regime has been designated a FOREIGN TERRORIST ORGANIZATION.

‘Therefore, today, I am ordering A TOTAL AND COMPLETE BLOCKADE OF ALL SANCTIONED OIL TANKERS going into, and out of, Venezuela,’ Trump added. ‘The Illegal Aliens and Criminals that the Maduro Regime has sent into the United States during the weak and inept Biden Administration, are being returned to Venezuela at a rapid pace. America will not allow Criminals, Terrorists, or other Countries, to rob, threaten, or harm our Nation and, likewise, will not allow a Hostile Regime to take our Oil, Land, or any other Assets, all of which must be returned to the United States, IMMEDIATELY.’

Trump announced Wednesday that the U.S. had seized an oil tanker called the ‘Skipper’ off the coast of Venezuela, sharply escalating U.S. tensions with the nation. The tanker was seized for allegedly being used to transport sanctioned oil from Venezuela and Iran, according to Attorney General Pam Bondi.

The ‘Skipper’ is a vessel that secretly ferries oil in defiance of sanctions, while also being part of an armada of roughly 1,000 tankers that quietly navigate global sea routes to move oil from sanctioned countries like Russia, Iran and Venezuela, according to the administration.

The so-called ‘ghost ships’ sail under foreign flags to obscure their origins, repeatedly change names, shift ownership through shell companies, disable transponders to evade tracking and conduct mid-sea transfers to mask their cargo.

The ‘Skipper’ was loaded with an estimated 1.8 million barrels of oil earlier in December before transferring an estimated 200,000 barrels just before its seizure, Reuters reported.

The oil on the tanker is likely worth $60 million to more than $100 million, based on current average oil prices. Fox News Digital reached out to the White House for any additional comment on the estimated price tag of the oil but did not immediately receive a reply. 

The U.S. military has carried out strikes on suspected drug trafficking boats near Venezuela since September as part of Trump’s mission to end the flow of drugs into the nation.

There have been at least 22 strikes on suspected narcotraffickers near Venezuela, killing 87, since September.

The boat strikes are viewed as part of a U.S. pressure campaign on Venezuela likely aimed to not only curb the flow of drugs, but also to oust Maduro as leader of the oil-rich nation. 

Fox News Digital’s Amanda Macias contributed to this report.

A federal judge on Tuesday said he was ‘inclined to deny’ a bid to force the Trump administration to halt construction of the White House ballroom but warned officials not to undertake any irreversible work before a January hearing that could still stop the project.

U.S. District Judge Richard Leon said he will hold another hearing during the second week in January and hinted he may still order a pause.

‘Any below ground construction’ in the coming weeks that dictates above-ground work should be avoided, Leon said, adding, ‘be prepared to take that down.’

Lawyers for the National Trust for Historic Preservation in the U.S. argued the case is not about the need for a ballroom but about the need to follow the law.

They said any construction on federal land requires congressional approval.

Lawyers representing the National Park Service countered that President Trump has authority to direct construction at the White House, saying ‘work must continue for national security issues.’

‘See you in January,’ Leon said as he warned the government not to pursue anything irreversible.

Attorney General Pam Bondi weighed in Tuesday evening.

‘Today @TheJusticeDept attorneys defeated an attempt to stop President Trump’s totally lawful East Wing Modernization and State Ballroom Project,’ she wrote on X. ‘President Trump has faced countless bad-faith left-wing legal attacks – this was no different. We will continue defending the President’s project in court in the coming weeks.’

On Monday, the Trump administration argued in a court filing that pausing construction would undermine national security, citing a Secret Service declaration warning that halting work would leave the site unable to meet ‘safety and security requirements’ necessary to protect President Donald Trump.

The declaration said the East Wing, demolished in October and now undergoing below-grade work, could not be left unfinished without compromising essential security measures.

The National Trust for Historic Preservation sued last week to stop the project, arguing the government had to follow federal review procedures before any irreversible work began.

The group said the proposed 90,000-square-foot addition, now estimated at more than $300 million, would overwhelm the Executive Residence and permanently alter the White House’s historic design.

The administration countered that the lawsuit was premature, noting regulatory reviews were still coming and above-grade construction was not scheduled to begin until April 2026.

The National Trust said early intervention was necessary, citing warnings from architectural historians who said the ballroom would mark the most significant exterior change to the White House in more than 80 years.

Fox News Digital’s Ashley Carnahan contributed to this report.

Sen. Eric Schmitt, R-Mo., is being sued by the People’s Republic of China (PRC) for tens of billions of dollars in damages for a lawsuit he filed against the country during his time as Missouri’s attorney general.

Schmitt is being sued by the People’s Government of Wuhan Municipality, the Chinese Academy of Sciences and the Wuhan Institute of Virology of the Chinese Academy of Sciences for roughly $50 billion, several years after the lawmaker sued the country during the COVID-19 pandemic.

The lawsuit, first obtained by Fox News Digital, accused Schmitt, FBI co-deputy director Andrew Bailey, and the state of Missouri of damaging the reputations of China, Wuhan and the associated research facilities through ‘malicious vexatious litigation, fabricating enormous disinformation, and spreading stigmatizing and discriminating slanders.’

Schmitt said in a statement to Fox News Digital that he’d been ‘banned from Communist China, and now I am being sued and targeted by Communist China in a $50 billion lawfare campaign, and I’ll wear it like a badge of honor.’ 

‘China’s sinister malfeasance during the COVID-19 pandemic led to over a million Americans losing their lives, economic turmoil that rocked our country for years, and an enormous amount of human suffering, and as Missouri Attorney General I filed suit to hold them accountable,’ Schmitt said. ‘Instead of trying to defend its indefensible behavior, Communist China responded with frivolous lawfare, attempting to absolve themselves of all wrongdoing in the early days of the pandemic.’ 

‘This novel lawsuit is factually baseless, legally meritless, and any fake judgment a Chinese court issues in this lawsuit we will easily beat back and keep from being enforced against the people of Missouri or me,’ he continued. ‘This is their way of distracting from what the world already knows, China has blood on its hands.’

Schmitt, who served as attorney general for the Show-Me state from 2019 to 2023, sued the PRC, several Chinese government ministries, the Communist Party of China, the Wuhan Institute of Virology and the Chinese Academy of Sciences in early 2020, shortly after the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic.

At the time, Schmitt accused the Chinese government of withholding information on the COVID-19 virus, failing to contain the outbreak of the virus, and actively hoarding high-quality personal protective equipment (PPE) while producing and selling lower-quality PPE for the rest of the world.

That case resulted in an eventual $24 billion judgment earlier this year.

The lawsuit against Schmitt, Bailey, who resigned as Missouri’s attorney general after he was tapped by President Donald Trump to serve as co-deputy FBI director in September, and Missouri contended that the preceding lawsuit, and statements published across a variety of media outlets, led to severe reputational and economic harm.

They’re demanding that apologies be published in several outlets, including The New York Times, CNN, Wall Street Journal, Washington Post and Chinese media outlets. The apologies come with a price tag, too.

Wuhan and the Chinese government demanded compensation of over 356 billion Chinese Yuan, which converts to just over $50 billion dollars.

There’s a year-end rush in all aspects of life.

Businesses try to run up profits in December. Supervisors want to finish employee reviews. Professors must grade exams.

Congress is no different.

There’s always a race to the finish line in December on Capitol Hill. 

This year’s adventure is health care. But it’s a practical impossibility that Congress can actually make law on health care before the calendar flips. Premium spikes for 24 million Americans loom on January 1st. Congress tried — kinda — to address this problem. But not really.

So, if you’re that professor handing out the grades at the end of the semester, prepare to flunk some pupils, if not the entire Congressional student body.

Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D., hermetically sealed any possibility of addressing health care in 2025 on Tuesday afternoon.

‘We’re not going to pass anything by the end of this week. But I do think there is a potential pathway in January if Democrats are willing to come to the table,’ said Thune.

House Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., rapidly assembled a bill to allow groups of people – like a bunch of small businesses or a coalition of carpenters – to purchase what they call ‘association’ health plans. In other words, this alliance of people would suddenly have ‘buying power’ if they operate as a team. So if they purchase a set of plans as an ‘association,’ that would defray the cost.

‘This is going to be a great piece of legislation that everybody will unite around,’ said Johnson.

But many Republicans groused privately that it’s one thing to do ‘a health care bill.’ It’s another thing to actually short-circuit the astronomical leap in premiums which hit on January 1.

Rep. Don Bacon, R-Neb., spoke frankly about simply re-upping the existing subsidies.

‘We need to do deeper fixes. This is throwing good money after bad. There is some truth to that. But we have constituents. They’re going to have their premiums go up. That doesn’t help them. That’s why I think we need a temporary extension,’ said Bacon.

Many conservatives adamantly oppose continuing the subsidies. Even if that would help their constituents.

But Bacon addresses the realpolitik of the moment. 

‘It’s not our fault that these things are skyrocketing. But we are in charge. When you’re in charge, you’ve got to deal with it,’ said Bacon. ‘They’re going to have to find some compromise.’

A Christmas Congressional crunch often compels lawmakers to solve big legislative headaches before the holidays.

‘What intensifies the pressure is January 1st is coming,’ said Rep. Adam Smith, D-Wash. ‘It’s having a huge impact on people. I think that is definitely a forcing mechanism.’

The push from Democrats — and some vulnerable Republicans — was to renew the subsidies.

‘I don’t understand why we can’t just do a clean extension of what we just had in place earlier this year,’ said Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, D-N.Y. ‘I think that is the easiest and most accessible, no nonsense thing for us to do. Especially as the year is coming to an end.’

But that wouldn’t fly with conservative Republicans.

‘I pity the Republican that has to explain why they would propagate or perpetuate a fraud-ridden subsidy from the COVID-era to prop up a failed health care program,’ said House Budget Committee Chairman Jodey Arrington, R-Texas. 

Rep. Eric Burlison, R-Mo., also opposes extending Obamacare help. But he worries what voters will think of Republicans if the party doesn’t address health care costs. 

‘I think that we fail the American people. We fail our base. We fail the Republican Party. Before I got up here, I was frustrated the Republicans didn’t repeal Obamacare,’ said Burlison. 

‘Repealing Obamacare’ probably won’t happen. That’s because the GOP has tried to unwind the measure since Democrats passed the first versions of it in late 2009. That’s why even through everyone was talking about health care on Capitol Hill, most were skeptical that lawmakers could solve this in a matter of days.

Despite possible Christmas magic.

And even as Thune punted health care into 2026, the House still nibbled around the edges. Critics argued this was only so House Republicans could inoculate themselves from denunciations that they did nothing on health care.

On Tuesday morning, Johnson nixed an idea from GOP moderates for a temporary extension of expiring Obamacare subsidies because it didn’t comply with Congressional budgetary rules.

But by afternoon, Johnson reversed himself to entertain another plan backed by Rep. Nick LaLota, R-N.Y. 

Rather than simply extending federal Obamacare subsidies on an interim basis — which means that insurance companies receive the money — LaLota’s idea provides a two-year tax deduction for those who previously received the Obamacare aid.

President Trump said he would not sign a bill which continued to send money to the insurance companies. So the revamped approach cuts out insurance companies from the equation and policyholders score the tax relief.

‘There’s a real possibility they’ll get a vote on it,’ said Johnson. ‘I’ve tried everything I can to get them that vote on the floor.’

But a roll call vote is a far cry from an actual fix. And it’s uncertain that the House would adopt any amendment and copy it onto the underlying GOP health care bill.

However, a vote on the amendment could give Republicans from swing districts a fig leaf to say they tried to defuse the health care premium crisis. And it’s still unclear if voters might blame Republicans for not addressing health care — now that Democrats copied that issue onto the fall government funding fight.

Health care will be a major issue in the 2026 midterms.

Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y. appeared skeptical that Congress could address the skyrocketing premiums in the near year.

‘You can’t do it after January 1st,’ said Schumer. ‘It’s expired already. It’s not the same as it was before. Once it expires, the toothpaste is out of the tube. 

Schumer also refused to commit to deploying the same maneuver about health care as the next government funding deadline approaches on January 30.

In short, Congress isn’t going to solve health care by Christmas.

But perhaps by Groundhog Day?

If that’s the case, any discussion about health care tied to Groundhog Day, probably resembles, well, Groundhog Day.

President Donald Trump isn’t offended by White House chief of staff Susie Wiles’ comments in Vanity Fair describing him as someone with ‘an alcoholic’s personality.’

On Tuesday, Vanity Fair published the first part of a two-part story about Wiles and the second Trump administration — which White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt claimed featured comments that were ‘wildly’ taken out of context. 

In response, Trump and his allies have come to dish out praise for Wiles, following the publication of a story where Wiles issued some unsavory remarks about Trump and others in his orbit. Hours after the Vanity Fair story was published, Trump told the New York Post that he wasn’t insulted by Wiles’ description of his personality. 

‘No, she meant that I’m — you see, I don’t drink alcohol. So everybody knows that — but I’ve often said that if I did, I’d have a very good chance of being an alcoholic. I have said that many times about myself, I do. It’s a very possessive personality,’ Trump told the Post. 

‘I’ve said that many times about myself. I’m fortunate I’m not a drinker. If I did, I could very well, because I’ve said that — what’s the word? Not possessive — possessive and addictive type personality,’ Trump said. ‘Oh, I’ve said it many times, many times before.’

The White House referred Fox News Digital to the Post’s reporting when asked for comment. 

Included in the Vanity Fair story were several quotes from Wiles describing others within Trump’s orbit in an unflattering manner. In addition to the remarks about Trump, Wiles was quoted claiming that Vice President JD Vance has been a ‘conspiracy theorist for a decade,’ and that Attorney General Pam Bondi ‘completely whiffed’ how she handled the release of documents pertaining to the late financier and convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein. 

Likewise, she described the Office of Management and Budget Director Russell Vought as ‘a right-wing absolute zealot,’ and claimed that SpaceX and Tesla CEO Elon Musk, who headed up the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), was an ‘odd duck’ and an ‘avowed ketamine (user).’ 

Even so, Wiles was also quoted praising Trump’s Cabinet, claiming that they are ‘a world-class Cabinet, better than anything I could have conceived of.’

In response to the story, Wiles claimed that the story was a ‘disingenuously framed hit piece on me and the finest President, White House staff, and Cabinet in history.’

‘Significant context was disregarded and much of what I, and others, said about the team and the President was left out of the story,’ Wiles said in a post on X Tuesday. ‘I assume, after reading it, that this was done to paint an overwhelmingly chaotic and negative narrative about the President and our team.’ 

Meanwhile, other members of the Trump administration also swiftly came to Wiles’ defense — including some of those who were mentioned in an unfavorable way. 

Vance dismissed Wiles’ comments during an event in Allentown, Pennsylvania, where he claimed that he and Wiles have privately joked that the vice president is a conspiracy theorist. 

‘Sometimes I am a conspiracy theorist, but I only believe in the conspiracy theories that are true,’ Vance said. 

Bondi also issued some praise for Wiles, and asserted that ‘any attempt to divide this administration will fail.’

‘Any attempt to undermine and downplay President Trump’s monumental achievements will fail,’ Bondi said in a post on X Tuesday. ‘We are family. We are united.’ 

Vought, who also served as director of the Office of Management and Budget during Trump’s first term, said that Wiles is an ‘exceptional’ chief of staff and that this is the most seamless era he’s experienced in his two terms working for Trump. 

‘In my portfolio, she is always an ally in helping me deliver for the president,’ Vought said about Wiles. ‘And this hit piece will not slow us down.’

Meanwhile, Secretary of War Pete Hegseth claimed the piece was a playbook from the left to ‘trash & smear our best & most effective people.’ 

‘They do it to President Trump daily — and now to Chief Susie Wiles. Susie is the most TRUSTED, most PROFESSIONAL & most EFFECTIVE Chief of Staff of my lifetime,’ Hegseth said in a post on X Tuesday. ‘Absolutely nobody better!’ 

United Nations Ambassador Mike Waltz, who previously served as the national security advisor at the White House, said he’d known Wiles for over a decade and that she ‘exemplifies integrity & dedication to our incredible President and country.’

‘The Queen of Florida politics – the architect of multiple successful governor’s and Presidential campaigns – she’s calm under fire, forthright, & results focused. Period,’ Waltz said in a post on X on Tuesday.

Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent also weighed in, describing Wiles as ‘the single most effective operator whom I have ever met.’ 

‘Susie is an exceptional Chief of Staff, and her tireless dedication, loyalty, and commitment to the President are beyond reproach,’ Bessent said in a post on X on Tuesday. ‘Powerful leadership often works quietly – never seeking credit and always relentlessly driving results. Our Chief exemplifies that.’

‘No one is more insightful, effective, and loyal,’ Bessent said. ‘She never loses sight of the big picture while managing the daily agenda.’ 

Bessent also challenged Vanity Fair’s portrayal of the Trump administration in the piece, claiming that the faulty characterization is ‘precisely why the insular chattering classes in America lose their minds as we notch victory after victory for the American people.’

Musk did not immediately respond to a request for comment from Fox News Digital. 

Conde Nast, which owns Vanity Fair, did not immediately respond to a request for comment from Fox News Digital. 

Sen. Lindsey Graham warned that the U.S. mission in Venezuela must end with Nicolás Maduro removed from power, arguing that leaving the embattled leader in place after a major U.S. show of force would be a ‘fatal mistake to our standing in the world.’

‘If after all this, we still leave this guy in power… that’s the worst possible signal you can send to Russia, China, Iran,’ Graham, R-S.C., told reporters after a classified all-senator briefing with War Secretary Pete Hegseth and Secretary of State Marco Rubio.

Trump administration officials did not say whether a series of narco-strikes in the Caribbean could escalate into direct strikes against Venezuelan territory or a broader campaign to oust Maduro. Sen. Richard Blumenthal, D-Conn., told Fox News Digital the briefing was ‘absent of specificity and detail’ and left ‘more questions than answers.’

‘I want to reassert, again, you cannot allow this man to be standing after this display of force, and I did not get a very good answer as to what happens,’ Graham said. ‘What I want is some clarity going forward. Is that in fact the goal?… If it’s not the goal, it is a huge mistake.’

Rep. Don Bacon, R-Neb., said he heard from briefers that there is a ‘very good process of determining if something’s a target or not’ before striking narco-trafficking boats, but the administration did not clarify its broader strategy toward the Maduro regime. 

‘Right now the focus has been on the boats,’ Bacon said. ‘I don’t know what we’re doing yet with Venezuela writ large.’

Rep. Gregory Meeks, D-N.Y., said the classified session also failed to address core questions. 

‘I actually think that was, for me, more of an exercise in futility. I really have no answers. Really didn’t gain anything more than what the public already has gotten,’ he said. He added that there was ‘really no conversation about why… we got 15,000 troops there,’ arguing the deployment ‘doesn’t seem to be just about narcotics trafficking.’ 

Meeks said briefers provided ‘no real rational decision or real answers’ about whether the U.S. is preparing for ‘a war in Venezuela,’ raising what he described as a pressing war powers issue. He said he plans to bring forward legislation this week addressing the recent strikes ‘in the Pacific, in the Caribbean’ as well as any potential move by Trump ‘to go into Venezuela.’

Rubio told reporters the mission is ‘focused on dismantling the infrastructure of these terrorist organizations that are operating in our hemisphere, undermining the security of Americans, killing Americans, poisoning Americans.’

Hegseth told reporters the War Department would not release video footage of the Sept. 2 narco-strikes — in which Adm. Frank Bradley ordered a ‘double tap’ strike to kill survivors — to the public. The video will instead be shown to the House and Senate Armed Services Committees.

Graham dismissed the footage as ‘the least of my concerns’ but said he urged Hegseth to release it so Americans could ‘make your own decisions.’

Hegseth and Rubio’s briefing came as the U.S. undertakes its largest military buildup in the region in decades: 15% of all naval assets are now positioned in the Southern Command theater. Graham cited the deployment as evidence that anything short of Maduro’s removal would undermine U.S. credibility. 

‘It got, yeah, 15% of the Navy pointed to this guy,’ he said.

Graham also pointed to historical precedent, arguing the U.S. has acted similarly when confronting hostile or destabilizing regimes. 

‘We have legal authority, in my view, to do in Venezuela what we did regarding Panama and Haiti,’ he said, recalling that in 1989 the U.S. ‘literally invaded Panama… took the president in power and put him in jail.’

He said he believes Trump intends a comparable outcome. 

‘Every indication by President Trump is that the purpose of this operation is to shut down the (Maduro) regime and replace it with something less threatening to the United States,’ Graham said.

Pressed on whether he meant regime change or lethal force, Graham replied: ‘I don’t care as long as he leaves.’

The public is now waiting to see whether the Trump administration will turn to direct strikes on Venezuelan territory as a means of pressuring Maduro to leave power — a step Graham argued is necessary for the operation to succeed.

Lawyers for the Trump administration and a historic preservation group are slated to appear in court Tuesday afternoon in a bid to halt — at least temporarily — President Donald Trump’s plan to continue building out a $300 million White House ballroom on the site of the now-demolished East Wing. 

‘No president is legally allowed to tear down portions of the White House without any review whatsoever — not President Trump, not President Biden, and not anyone else,’ the National Trust said in its lawsuit, filed late last week with U.S. District Judge Richard Leon.

The group argued that Trump’s project has already caused ‘irreversible damage’ to the White House, and asked Leon to grant both a temporary restraining order and preliminary injunction to block the Trump administration from commencing or continuing further work on the ballroom project until the necessary federal commissions have reviewed and approved the plans.

The suit alleges violations of multiple statutes, including the Administrative Procedure Act and the National Environmental Policy Act, and says the ballroom cannot move forward without authorization from Congress, the National Capital Planning Commission and the Commission of Fine Arts. Trump fired all six members of the CFA in October; the panel remains vacant.

Meanwhile, lawyers for the Justice Department argued in a separate filing on Monday that Trump does have the statutory authority to modify the structure as president.

‘The President possesses statutory authority to modify the structure of his residence, and that authority is supported by background principles of Executive power,’ the Justice Department told the court on Monday in a separate filing. 

They cited Trump’s personal involvement in the project, and noted that he has regularly taken part in meetings and discussions ‘regarding design and footprint and personally selecting the architect for the project,’ among other things. 

Lawyers for the Trump administration also argued that abruptly halting construction on the project would create ‘security concerns’ at the White House, an argument it is expected to seize on further during Tuesday afternoon’s hearing. 

They also included a declaration from Secret Service deputy director Matthew Quinn that said improvements to the site ‘are still needed before the Secret Service’s safety and security requirements can be met.’

‘Any pause in construction, even temporarily, would leave the contractor’s obligation unfulfilled in this regard and consequently hamper the Secret Service’s ability to meet its statutory obligations and protective mission.’

Trump in July first announced his plans to proceed with constructing the sprawling, 90,000-square-foot ballroom, which he estimated at the time would cost around $200 million. Trump has insisted it will be funded ‘100% by me and some friends of mine.’