U.S. policy is often reported through announcements, personalities, and regulatory skirmishes. Far less attention is paid to the economic mechanisms that actually move structures and determine outcomes.

To understand how the White House is organizing a multi-pronged strategy for AI adoption and export, and how its pieces are meant to work together in practice, I had an exclusive sit down with Michael Kratsios, assistant to the president and director of the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy.

The fundamental issue you speak about at the summit is the widening AI adoption gap between the developed and developing world. What makes that a concern for the White House right now?

The divergence in AI adoption between developed and developing countries is growing every day. We see the world in two broad categories, and different tools are needed for each.

Developing countries are at risk of falling behind at a fundamental inflection point. That is why we urge them to prioritize AI adoption in sectors that deliver concrete benefits: healthcare, education, energy infrastructure, agriculture, and citizen-facing government services.

For too long, countries seeking development support faced a false choice. We believe the American AI Exports Program offers a different path: trusted best-in-class technology, financing to overcome adoption barriers, and deployment support so governments can learn how and where to use these tools.

America remains the undisputed leader in AI, from GPUs to data centers to frontier models and applications. That leadership brings with it a responsibility to share the foundations of a new era of innovation. We stand ready to work with partners around the world so creativity, freedom, and prosperity shape today’s technological revolution.

A lot of governments say they want AI leadership. Your delegation came in talking about real AI sovereignty, rejecting global governance, and launching an export program with multiple prongs. What is fundamentally different about this approach, and how should countries understand the system you’re building?

The hope of the United States is that the pursuit of real AI sovereignty, the adoption and deployment of sovereign infrastructure, sovereign data, sovereign models, and sovereign policies within national borders and under national control, will become an occasion for bilateral diplomacy, international development, and global economic dynamism. The American AI Exports Program exists to make that happen.

Real AI sovereignty means owning and using best-in-class technology for the benefit of your people, and charting your national destiny in the midst of global transformations. We urge nations to focus on strategic autonomy alongside rapid AI adoption rather than aiming for full self-sufficiency. AI adoption cannot lead to a brighter future if it is subject to bureaucracies and centralized control.

We deeply believe that the best pathway for the developing world to fully realize the untold benefits of AI is through the adoption of the American AI stack. The American AI stack has the best chips, the best models, and the best applications in the world, and that is what countries ultimately need to deploy AI effectively.

When you say the American AI stack, are you talking about selling products, or shaping the foundation on which countries build while keeping sensitive data under national control?

Working with the American AI stack allows nations to build on the best technologies in the world while keeping sensitive data within their borders. Independent partners are critical to unlocking the prosperity AI adoption can deliver. That is why the President launched the American AI Exports Program.

American companies can build large, independent AI infrastructure with secure and robust supply chains that minimize backdoor risk. They build it, and it belongs to the country deploying it.

If this is an adoption strategy, then cost and complexity become the bottlenecks. Your public remarks emphasize financing and deployment sophistication as the two biggest hurdles for developing countries. How are you actually removing those barriers?

Developing countries face two major obstacles to AI adoption. One is financing. The AI stack is expensive. Through the energy and material demands of its infrastructure, it brings the digital transformation of our world back into physical reality. Data centers, semiconductors, power production all require real labor and real resources.

The second barrier is a deficit in the technical sophistication needed to deploy AI tools effectively. To address this, we announced a U.S. government-wide suite of support initiatives to facilitate global adoption of trusted AI systems, create a competitive and interoperable AI ecosystem, and advance the American AI Exports Program in both developed and developing partner nations.

Spell out that suite. What are the prongs, capital, integration, standards, execution, and which agencies are being activated?

We unveiled a new set of initiatives across the federal government supporting the American AI Exports Program, which was launched by executive order last July.

The first new initiative within it is the National Champions Initiative. It is designed to include the leading technology companies of partner countries directly into the American AI stack. We want the best technologies from all our partners and allies to be part of that ecosystem wherever the American AI stack goes.

The second is a full suite of financing and funding opportunities. We are mobilizing support through the U.S. International Development Finance Corporation, the Export Import Bank, the Millennium Challenge Corporation, the U.S. Trade and Development Agency, and a new World Bank fund, with additional programs launched by Treasury and other parts of the U.S. government. The message is simple: this is serious. Every possible financing avenue is being brought to bear.

The third is the creation of the U.S. Tech Corps. It is a reimagining of how the Peace Corps can make an impact in the modern era. We are seeking Americans with technical backgrounds who can help deploy American technology abroad, because there is no better tool to drive economic development, health improvements, and quality of life gains than AI.

And finally, we believe one of the fastest ways to drive global adoption is through standards, particularly as the next wave of innovation centers on AI agents. How those agents communicate and coordinate their actions will benefit from unified standards, which is why NIST has launched a dedicated initiative.

The National Champions Initiative is easy to misunderstand. Critics hear American stack and assume dependency. Your framing suggests the opposite, integrating partner champions so countries do not have to choose between importing the stack and building domestic capability. Is that the point?

Exactly. To integrate partner nation companies with the American AI stack and ensure that no country has to choose between completing the stack and developing domestic AI, we established the National Champions Initiative. Partners need the opportunity to build native technology industries, and facilitating that is a core part of the exports program.

You have also criticized previous U.S. approaches to AI diffusion for restricting partners. What did that get wrong strategically?

The previous approach treated partners as second-tier actors with significant restrictions on access to advanced technology. That was a lose-lose AI diplomacy strategy. It cut off partners from the best technology and limited American companies from competing globally.

Under President Trump, the United States is rethinking how it advances international development and how technology can deliver lasting impact. We believe both developed and developing countries can build sovereign AI capability if given the chance.

Let’s talk about the Tech Corps, because it would be easy to dsmiss it as a feel-good addition. In your model, it sounds like an execution layer. What would these teams actually do on the ground?

These will be like Peace Corps volunteers, except the focus is on technology. We are looking for people with technical backgrounds who want to help implement AI solutions.

If a country wants to improve agriculture through precision farming, apply AI to healthcare systems to improve hospital efficiency, or modernize digital public services, American technologists through the Tech Corps and the Peace Corps will be able to support those efforts.

A lot of young people today care deeply about real-world impact. What is special about this moment is that the United States has incredible technology, the best chips, models, and applications, and we are being more deliberate about sharing it.

You put unusual emphasis on AI agents and interoperability. Why does the White House see standards as a strategic lever now?

The next wave of AI innovation over the next year or two will center on agents. How those agents communicate and orchestrate their actions would benefit greatly from unified standards. NIST has launched an initiative to develop standards for agents so these systems can interoperate securely and effectively.

You also linked this export architecture to supply chains, from chips to data centers to power and minerals. Where does Pax Silica fit? Is it the hard backbone complement to the adoption layer?

Pax Silica is a broader alliance focused on supply chain challenges that the United States and many partner nations have faced. It is a small, select group of countries working together to alleviate these challenges. India is a tremendous addition.

AI adoption depends on secure physical inputs. The AI stack is tangible: data centers, semiconductors, power generation. Pax Silica helps address those vulnerabilities while the exports program accelerates adoption. They are complementary.

Since India hosted the summit and joined Pax Silica, what role do you see for India within this strategy?

India is a technology powerhouse. It graduates an incredible number of engineers, has deep domestic talent, and is building strong products and applications. We look forward to working with them.

India has long been a strong partner in how the United States shares technology abroad. Our major hyperscalers have data centers and research operations here and employ large numbers of Indian engineers. We believe many Indian companies can ultimately become part of the American AI stack.

When critics frame this as being about China, you resist that characterization. How does the administration view competition?

We do not see this as being about any one competitor. This is about the fact that the United States has the best AI technology in the world, and many countries want it in their ecosystems. We are excited to share it and build mutually beneficial partnerships globally.

Anti-government protests are resurging across Iran, with videos showing students chanting slogans against the regime as nuclear negotiations with the United States are set to resume on Thursday.

A video translated by Reuters showed demonstrators shouting ‘We’ll fight, we’ll die, we’ll reclaim Iran,’ reflecting growing anger towards the country’s leadership.

The renewed unrest follows months of frustration over economic hardship, repression and previous crackdowns, placing additional domestic pressure on the regime as talks unfold. Analysts say the convergence of protests at home, military pressure abroad and a stalled diplomatic track has hardened rhetoric on both sides rather than pushing them toward compromise.

The Iranian regime, meanwhile, is striking a defiant tone. President Masoud Pezeshkian said Tehran would ‘not bow down’ to pressure tied to nuclear negotiations, warning that external coercion would not change Iran’s stance, according to Al Jazeera.

His remarks come ahead of a new round of U.S.–Iran talks set for Thursday in Geneva, confirmed by Oman, which is mediating the discussions. The negotiations aim to address Tehran’s nuclear program amid rising regional tensions, though major disputes remain over enrichment limits, sanctions relief and the scope of any deal.

In a February speech analyzed by the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei ruled out abandoning uranium enrichment and rejected U.S. demands to include Iran’s ballistic missile program and regional proxy activity in negotiations. 

The analysis, authored by FDD research analyst Janatan Sayeh and Iran Program Senior Director Behnam Ben Taleblu, noted that Khamenei has escalated attacks on Washington’s leadership, calling President Donald Trump a ‘criminal’ for backing Iranian protests and circulating rhetoric likening him to a tyrant.

Meanwhile, the United States has expanded its military presence in the Middle East while signaling force remains an option. The deployments have shaped both the tone and urgency of the negotiations, reinforcing that diplomacy is unfolding under the shadow of potential escalation.

Special envoy Steve Witkoff warned Saturday that Iran could be ‘a week away’ from having ‘industrial-grade bomb-making material,’ citing enrichment levels he said are approaching weapons capability.

‘It’s up to 60%,’ Witkoff said. ‘They’re probably a week away from having industrial-grade bomb-making material.’ He made the remarks on ‘My View with Lara Trump,’ describing the situation as dangerous and accusing Iran of violating President Trump’s ‘zero enrichment’ red line.

U.S. officials have warned that failure to reach an agreement could trigger serious consequences, while Tehran has signaled readiness to retaliate if attacked, reinforcing the sense that negotiations are taking place under intense pressure.

Reuters contributed to this report.

For two of Washington’s most diametrically opposed political figures, there is a newfound common ground: whether the truth is out there.

President Donald Trump and Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., have butted heads since the former came to Washington, D.C. But now both want to expose whether there is life beyond the stars.

Their newfound unity on the subject conjoins a passion of Schumer’s and a moment of expedience for Trump.

Trump, spurred by former President Barack Obama saying on a podcast that there was alien life — then walking it back shortly after — ordered Secretary of War Pete Hegseth late Thursday night to dump the government’s files on extraterrestrials.

‘Based on the tremendous interest shown, I will be directing the Secretary of War and other relevant Departments and Agencies to begin the process of identifying and releasing Government files related to alien and extraterrestrial life, unidentified aerial phenomena (UAP), and unidentified flying objects (UFOs), and any and all other information connected to these highly complex, but extremely interesting and important, matters,’ Trump said on Truth Social.

The timeline for release of the documents and the breadth and scope of materials that could become public were unclear, but chief Pentagon spokesman Sean Parnell told Fox News Digital in a statement, ‘The Department looks forward to working with the interagency to fulfill the President’s directive.’

For Schumer, it’s a passion project years in the making.

Seeking more transparency on UFOs and UAPs is a torch Schumer picked up from the late former Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., a friend and mentor of the current top Senate Democrat. It’s also an issue he has prodded Trump to take up since last year.

‘Now do UFOs,’ Schumer said in response to Trump ordering files related to the assassinations of former President John F. Kennedy, Robert F. Kennedy and Martin Luther King Jr. to be declassified.

Reid gave the quest to unveil secrets surrounding UFOs and UAPs legitimacy in the late 2000s when he played a key role in funding the Pentagon’s Advanced Aerospace Threat Identification Program. That public program received millions to investigate unexplained phenomena.

Several years later, Schumer picked up where his predecessor left off. His most recent push came in 2023, when he served as Senate majority leader under former President Joe Biden.

He and Sen. Mike Rounds, R-S.D., introduced legislation modeled after the President John F. Kennedy Assassination Records Collection Act of 1992.

That bill, meant to be an amendment to the annual National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA), would have created a review board at the National Archives and Records Administration to collect the government’s trove of documents on UFOs and UAPs and established a presumption of disclosure for the records, requiring the government to provide a compelling reason why they shouldn’t be released to the public.

Ultimately, their original version did not pass muster, and a more watered-down iteration of the bill became law — an outcome Schumer blasted as an ‘outrage’ at the time.

‘It means that declassification of UAP records will be largely up to the same entities that have blocked and obfuscated their disclosure for decades,’ Schumer said.

A federal judge on Monday agreed to permanently block the release of volume two of former special counsel Jack Smith’s report — centered on President Donald Trump’s handling of classified materials after his first term in office — in a significant victory for the president and his co-defendants.

U.S. District Judge Aileen Cannon, a Trump appointee, granted the president’s request to permanently block the release of the second volume of the report, ruling that its publication would represent a ‘manifest injustice’ both to Trump and the co-defendants in the classified documents case.

‘Special Counsel Smith, acting without lawful authority, obtained an indictment in this action and initiated proceedings that resulted in a final order of dismissal of all charges,’ Cannon said Monday. 

The ruling blocks the Justice Department from ‘releasing, distributing, conveying, or sharing with anyone outside the Department of Justice any information or conclusions in Volume II or in drafts thereof.’ 

Cannon previously ruled that Smith was unconstitutionally appointed as special counsel, though the matter was ultimately dismissed following Trump’s re-election in 2024.

Smith was tapped by former Attorney General Merrick Garland in 2022 to investigate the alleged effort by Trump and his allies to overturn the results of the 2020 election, as well as Trump’s retention of allegedly classified documents at his Mar-a-Lago residence in Palm Beach after leaving office in 2021.

Smith had brought charges against Trump in both cases.

The charges were dropped after Trump’s election, in keeping with a long-standing Justice Department policy that discourages prosecuting sitting presidents on federal criminal charges. Smith resigned from his role shortly afterward.

This is a breaking news story. Check back for updates.

The U.S. State Department ordered non-emergency personnel to evacuate the U.S. Embassy in Beirut, Lebanon, on Monday.

The department did not offer any details for the reason behind the evacuation. The move comes as President Donald Trump has ordered a large buildup of forces in the Middle East and made threats against the Iranian regime.

‘The Department of State has ordered the departure of non-emergency U.S. government personnel and eligible family members from U.S. Embassy Beirut,’ the State Department said.

‘We continuously assess the security environment, and based on our latest review, we determined it prudent to reduce our footprint to essential personnel. The Embassy remains operational with core staff in place. This is a temporary measure intended to ensure the safety of our personnel while maintaining our ability to operate and assist U.S. citizens,’ the statement continued.

Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) has tightened control over Hezbollah in Lebanon amid looming prospects of potential U.S. strikes, according to reports.

According to the Jerusalem Post, the tactical shift comes as Hezbollah and Iran prepare for military confrontation in the region, with analysts warning that if Washington specifically strikes the regime, Hezbollah is ready to be ‘activated.’

‘If the regime in Tehran feels threatened, the likelihood of unleashing Hezbollah against Israel and U.S. regional assets increases substantially,’ Ross Harrison, a senior fellow at the Middle East Institute, told Fox News Digital.

‘Hezbollah would not be activated right away, unless the attack immediately targets the leadership of the Islamic Republic. But as part of a graduated response, Hezbollah will likely be seen as an asset,’ he said.

‘If it faces an existential risk, then Iran may throw caution to the wind and try to deploy Hezbollah to the maximum,’ Harrison, author of ‘Decoding Iran’s Foreign Policy’ explained.

Trump previously gave Iran a deadline of 10 to 15 days to respond to a deal, raising questions about what steps Washington could take if Tehran fails to comply.

A new round of talks is now scheduled for Thursday in Geneva and expected to focus on Iran’s nuclear program, including uranium enrichment levels and sanctions relief.

‘The decision-making circle in the White House is very small regarding Iran, with the president keeping a close hand on it all,’ Harrison explained.

He added that any decision to directly target the Iranian regime would likely rest within Trump’s inner circle of advisers.

This is a developing story. Check back soon for updates.

Greenland’s rejection of President Donald Trump sending a U.S. military hospital ship has touched off a private-public healthcare debate amid ongoing diplomatic talks about Arctic security.

Greenland’s Prime Minister Jens-Frederik Nielsen on Sunday turned down Trump’s offer, and now Trump’s special envoy to Greenland, Louisiana Gov. Jeff Landry, has weighed in.

‘Shame on Prime Minister Jens-Frederik Nielsen!’ Landry wrote in response to a Fox News report on Nielsen’s objection. ‘President Donald J. Trump and America care. After speaking to many Greenlanders about the day to day problems they face, one issue stood out — healthcare.’

Greenland has sought more self-governance from Denmark under the Self Government Act in 2009 to take more local authority under home rule, but Danish officials’ instant rejection of Trump’s offer is aligned with Greenland’s own rejection that came later Sunday.

‘President Trump’s idea of ​​sending an American hospital ship here to Greenland has been noted,’ Nielsen wrote in a translated Facebook post. ‘But we have a public healthcare system where treatment is free for citizens.

‘It is a deliberate choice.’

Greenland remains open to dialogue and cooperation with the U.S., with a caveat, according to Nielsen.

‘But talk to us instead of just making more or less random outbursts on social media,’ Nielsen said in his own public Facebook protestation.

Greenland’s ‘free for citizens’ care is not sufficient, Landry argued in his Facebook response posted to his campaign’s page.

‘Many villages and small towns lack basic services that Americans often take for granted,’ Landry’s post continued. ‘Small settlements are without permanent doctors, diagnostic tools, or specialist care – forcing residents to travel great distances for vital treatments that should be available at home.’

The healthcare issue underlies the overreaching Trump hopes to annex Greenland to secure the strategic Arctic region from Russian and Chinese designs, calling it a vital issue for ‘national security’ for both the U.S. and the NATO alliance.

‘A healthy Greenland is vital for America’s national security,’ Landry’s post concluded. ‘America is committed to defending Greenland, and that begins by ensuring its people are defended against basic illnesses and ailments. 

‘These missions matter because health is inseparable from security. America’s commitment to defending Greenland must begin with ensuring its people are healthy.’

The recent dust-up came after Denmark’s Joint Arctic Command evacuated a crew member who required urgent medical treatment from a U.S. submarine in Greenlandic waters, seven nautical miles outside of Greenland’s capital of Nuuk.

‘Working with the fantastic Governor of Louisiana, Jeff Landry, we are going to send a great hospital boat to Greenland to take care of the many people who are sick, and not being taken care of there,’ Trump wrote Saturday night on Truth Social. ‘It’s on the way!!!’

That post sparked objections from both Danish Defense Minister Troels Lund Poulsen and Danish Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen on Sunday.

‘The Greenlandic population receives the healthcare it needs,’ Poulsen told Danish broadcaster DR, according to Reuters. ‘They receive it either in Greenland, or, if they require specialized treatment, they receive it in Denmark.

‘So it’s not as if there’s a need for a special healthcare initiative in Greenland.’

Frederiksen spun the Trump offer into a political debate on public healthcare.

‘Am happy to live in a country where there is free and equal access to health for all,’ Frederiksen wrote in a translated post, sharing a Democrat attack point on Trump’s Republican Party’s struggles to reform what Trump has rebuked as a ‘failure’ of Obamacare. ‘Where it’s not insurances and wealth that determine whether you get proper treatment. You have the same approach in Greenland.’

The U.S. Navy has two hospital ships, the Mercy and the Comfort. Both were last docked in Alabama for repairs, according to Reuters.

The race to the moon is on — again. But the strategic competition playing out today is much bigger than our race with the Soviet Union in 1969. If China reaches the moon ahead of the United States and establishes a permanent, manned presence — it will not treat the lunar surface as a peaceful scientific outpost, but as an extension of its campaign to surpass America, intimidate our allies and compromise our systems that keep the American homeland secure. This is no longer something of science fiction.

President Donald Trump understands this threat, signing the Executive Order on Ensuring American Space Superiority, which made it abundantly clear that he wants the United States to lead this new space race — returning Americans back to the moon by 2028 and building a permanent manned presence on the lunar surface.

Let me be clear, the fear that China could somehow ‘claim’ the moon by arriving first misunderstands both geography and international reality. Two of the main locations for settlement are the Shackleton Crater, which stretches about the distance from Washington, D.C., to Baltimore, Maryland, and the South Pole–Aitken Basin, which is roughly the distance from Washington, D.C., to Denver, Colo. The moon is vast.

The strategic concern and question for Congress is not who arrives ‘next,’ but who establishes a durable, scalable and defensible presence on the lunar surface. China understands this question and is well on their way to develop a reusable launch system to control this terrain and its abundant critical resources within a decade. The U.S. needs to recognize this threat and address it with the urgency it demands.

The Obama-Biden administration’s Space Launch System (SLS), which is currently being used for the Artemis missions, utilizes 1980s architecture developed from the shuttle missions and has been highly criticized by NASA’s former inspector general during the Biden administration who calculated the cost of a single SLS launch was $4.2 billion, with nearly $64 billion already spent despite only one operational flight since 2022. This is an enormous price tag with limited payload capacity and a launch cadence measured in years rather than months.

Seeing NASA’s struggles with the SLS, Chinese state-backed firms are now mimicking architectures that support fully reusable, self-landing heavy-lift rockets modeled on SpaceX’s Starship. As seen on Feb. 11, China’s Long March 10 booster (developed in just eight years) successfully guided itself to a powered, vertical ocean splashdown. This is an unmistakable signal that China is quickly catching up to us and recognizes that a nation that can launch more often and move more mass will dominate.

The critical national security question is this: What happens if the U.S. does not pivot quickly toward prioritizing cost, capacity and cadence, after Artemis III?

First, we will likely see the formation of a permanent Chinese, manned presence expanding Beijing’s intelligence collection and space awareness across the Earth–moon system helping China monitor U.S. and allied activity. Beijing has invested in capabilities designed to ‘degrade, damage, or destroy’ U.S. satellites — the backbone of American command-and-control and targeting. This has direct homeland security implications.

Trump is right to push a layered, space-enabled missile defense, known as the ‘Golden Dome,’ but if the Chinese control the ultimate high ground, it can build a moon-based counter-command designed to blind, spoof, disrupt or hold at risk the space layer that makes that shield possible. Put simply: you cannot defend the homeland from above if Beijing can contest the space above you. The United States should establish that capability first — call it the ‘Donald J. Trump Moon Base’ and lock in the operational advantage ahead of the Chinese.

Second, if China is left untouched on the lunar surface, it would surely increase the risk of espionage, sabotage and gray-zone interference against our own forthcoming lunar infrastructure.

Seeing NASA’s struggles with the SLS, Chinese state-backed firms are now mimicking architectures that support fully reusable, self-landing heavy-lift rockets modeled on SpaceX’s Starship.

Finally, Beijing will seek to turn its presence into control over resources on the lunar surface. It is critical for us to get ahead of the Chinese on the extraction of these critical minerals, which China already has a stronghold of on Earth. We need these critical minerals for national defense, economic prosperity, and, frankly, our sovereignty.

The moon is the ultimate high ground; we cannot afford to be first on Earth but second in space. If China gets to the moon, fine, but if it frequently returns, they will turn their presence into control — over the ‘Golden Dome,’ over our critical infrastructure on Earth and in low Earth orbit, and over the resources the moon provides — America will be permanently exposed to its greatest adversary.

To beat China, Congress should demand accountability for delays and cost overruns, stop blindly giving subsidies to outdated systems, and pivot to reusability. Our continued homeland security depends on it. Let’s put America first and prioritize cost, capacity and cadence.

A government shutdown, big or small, is usually a front-and-center issue for lawmakers — but the most recent partial closure could be put on the back burner as Congress returns to several issues in Washington.

Senate Democrats and the White House are still at odds over funding the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), as the shutdown dragged into its 10th day. Neither side is budging, with the most recent concrete action coming early last week.

Trump, who proved pivotal in striking a funding truce with Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., in January, was not directly involved in recent negotiations. 

Trump has not had any ‘direct conversations or correspondence’ with congressional Democrats recently, White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt said, noting that the White House and its representatives have been handling the dialogue.

‘But, of course, Democrats are the reason that the Department of Homeland Security is currently shut down,’ she said. ‘They have chosen to act against the American people for political reasons.’ 

Senate Democrats offered a counter to the White House’s own counterproposal, which quickly was rejected as ‘unserious’ by Leavitt. It’s a peculiar instance, given that this is the third shutdown during Trump’s second term, and neither side appears to be in a particular rush to end it.

Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D., told Fox News Digital that there’s ‘some room for give and take’ in the negotiations, but remained firm in the GOP’s positioning against requiring Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents from getting judicial warrants, unmasking or other reforms sought by Democrats that could increase risks for agents in the field.  

‘I felt like, you know, the last offer the White House put out there was a really — it was a good faith one, and it was clear to me that they’re attempting, in every way, to try and land this thing so we can get DHS funded,’ Thune said. 

Funding the agency will be a top priority for the upper chamber, but they’ll be delayed because of winter storms descending on the East Coast. The weather has caused the Senate to delay a vote on the original DHS spending bill until Tuesday night, ahead of Trump’s State of the Union address.

There are other issues that could get in the way of hashing out a deal, including a possible conflict with Iran and Trump’s desire to move ahead with tariffs without congressional approval.

Trump told reporters Friday that he was ‘considering’ a limited military strike against Iran, which already has riled up some in Congress, who are demanding that lawmakers get a say on whether the U.S. strikes.

Sen. Tim Kaine, D-Va., said in a statement that he has a war powers resolution to block an attack on Iran filed and ready, and challenged his colleagues to vote against it.

‘If some of my colleagues support war, then they should have the guts to vote for the war and to be held accountable by their constituents, rather than hiding under their desks,’ Kaine said.

On the heels of the Supreme Court’s ruling to torpedo his sweeping duties, Trump is considering bypassing Congress to move ahead with another set of global 10% tariffs.

That comes as some Republicans are quietly celebrating the end of the duties, and others are open to working with the administration on a path forward for trade policy.

On tariffs, a Republican aide told Fox News that the GOP was ‘waiting to see what POTUS does next.’

‘The State of the Union should be interesting,’ they said.

Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) has tightened control over Hezbollah in the Middle East amid looming prospects of potential U.S. strikes, according to reports.

According to the Jerusalem Post, the tactical shift comes as Hezbollah and Iran prepare for military confrontation in the region, with analysts warning that if Washington specifically strikes the regime, Hezbollah is ready to be ‘activated.’

‘If the regime in Tehran feels threatened, the likelihood of unleashing Hezbollah against Israel and U.S. regional assets increases substantially,’ Ross Harrison, a senior fellow at the Middle East Institute, told Fox News Digital.

‘Hezbollah would not be activated right away, unless the attack immediately targets the leadership of the Islamic Republic. But as part of a graduated response, Hezbollah will likely be seen as an asset,’ he said.

‘If it faces an existential risk, then Iran may throw caution to the wind and try to deploy Hezbollah to the maximum,’ Harrison explained.

President Donald Trump previously gave Iran a deadline of 10 to 15 days to respond to a deal, raising questions about what steps Washington could take if Tehran fails to comply.

A new round of talks is now scheduled for Thursday in Geneva and expected to focus on Iran’s nuclear program, including uranium enrichment levels and sanctions relief.

‘The decision-making circle in the White House is very small regarding Iran, with the president keeping a close hand on it all,’ Harrison explained.

He added that any decision to directly target the Iranian regime would likely rest within Trump’s inner circle of advisers.

‘Normally there is input from the National Security Council and the wider intelligence community,’ Harrison said. ‘Since the decision-making process in the White House is opaque, it is hard to know how much of this is getting through.’

‘If the U.S. is engaging with the Saudis and Emiratis, they are getting warnings about the possibility of this war spreading to the broader region, which would be deleterious to the U.S. and its allies,’ he added.

Harrirson also warned that there was ‘potential for attacks to spread across the region, to Israel through direct Iranian ballistic attacks and via Hezbollah, and to the Gulf Arab states through Iran directly and possibly via the Houthis from Yemen.’

Regional media reports also suggest Iran’s ties with Hezbollah are strengthening. Sources told Al Arabiya and Al Hadath that IRGC officers have been rebuilding Hezbollah’s military infrastructure and managing strategic war plans.

The coordination follows changes within Hezbollah’s leadership, Harrison explained.

‘Since the killing by Israel of Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah last year, ties and operational coordination have to some degree been reestablished,’ he said.

‘The IRGC has supported Hezbollah in Lebanon for decades,’ he said, adding that efforts to reestablish ties appear to be occurring ‘particularly in light of the destruction of Iran’s nuclear sites last June.’

‘Iran is trying to resurrect lost assets, such as its missile program and its connections to Hezbollah,’ Harrison said.

‘Hezbollah has been seen for decades by Iran as a deterrence asset against an Israeli or American attack. Since Hezbollah has its own interests, connected to but separate from Iran, whether its leadership will go all the way for Tehran is unknown,’ he concluded.

The developments surrounding Hezbollah and the IRGC came as Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei has appointed close ally Ali Larijani as the country’s de facto leader, according to reports.

Fox News Digital has reached out to the White House for comment.

An emotional Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, D-N.Y., attempted to blame critics – and even President Donald Trump’s own off-the-cuff agility – for the backlash she received for her response to a question at the recent Munich Security Conference on American defense of Taiwan in the event of a Chinese invasion.

‘If you think I don’t understand foreign policy, because of out of hours of discourse about international affairs, I pause to think about one of the most sensitive geopolitical issues that currently exist on earth, I’m afraid the issue is not my understanding, but perhaps the problem is you’ve gotten adjusted to a president that never thinks before he speaks,’ a raspy-voiced Ocasio-Cortez said on a late-night Instagram Live video circulating on social media.

The leftist congresswoman’s Munich stumbling on Friday, Feb. 13, started the critical firestorm and has conservatives questioning her fitness for a potential 2028 Democrat presidential primary campaign.

‘Um, you know, I think that this is such a, you know, I think that this is a um — this is, of course, a, um, very long-standing, um, policy of the United States,’ she said with pause when asked about America defending Taiwan in the event of a Chinese invasion to enforce its One China Policy over the island-nation.

‘And I think what we are hoping for is that we want to make sure that we never get to that point, and we want to make sure that we are moving in all of our economic, research and our global positions to avoid any such confrontation and for that question to even arise.’

Vice President JD Vance, a potential 2028 presidential campaign opponent in a prospective general election matchup, weighed in multiple times this week to Ocasio-Cortez’s remarks.

‘I think it’s a person who doesn’t know what she actually thinks, and I’ve seen this way too much in Washington with politicians: Where they’re given lines and, when you ask them to go outside the lines they were given, they completely fall apart,’ Vance told Fox News’ ‘The Story With Martha MacCallum’ in an in-studio interview earlier this week.

‘That was embarrassing,’ he continued. ‘If I had given that answer I would say, ‘You know what? Maybe you ought to go read a book about China and Taiwan before I go out on the world stage again.’ I hope that Congresswoman Cortez has the same humility. I’m skeptical.’