House Speaker Mike Johnson told reporters he was ‘surprised’ by Elon Musk’s criticism of the ‘big, beautiful bill’ after the two of them discussed the legislation. 

While the speaker expressed confidence in the bill, he acknowledged that it took Congress ‘decades’ to reach a point where the national debt has crept past $36.2 trillion and that it would take more than one bill to fix the situation.

‘The Trump administration needs four years to do all this reform, not two years. The Biden administration, Biden-Harris, made such a disaster of every metric of public policy, it’s going to take us more than one bill to fix it all,’ Johnson said.

The Republican House leader said he and Musk, whom he considers a ‘friend,’ had a ‘great conversation’ about the ‘big, beautiful bill’ Monday. The tech billionaire apparently joked that the bill could not be ‘big and beautiful,’ to which Johnson replied, ‘Oh, yes it can, my friend. It’s very beautiful.’

‘Elon and I left on a great note. We were texting one another — you know, happy texts,’ Johnson told reporters. The speaker added he was surprised when Musk came out against the bill the next day. 

‘I think he’s flat wrong,’ Johnson said. ‘I think he’s way off on this, and I’ve told him as much.’

Johnson also praised the ‘obviously brilliant’ tech billionaire for his work with the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) to cut government waste.

Despite seemingly ending his tenure with the Trump White House on good terms last week, Musk came out swinging against the ‘big, beautiful bill,’ calling it a ‘disgusting abomination.’ 

‘This massive, outrageous, pork-filled Congressional spending bill is a disgusting abomination. Shame on those who voted for it: you know you did wrong. You know it,’ Musk tweeted.

Musk also retweeted multiple pleas from Sen. Mike Lee, R-Utah, for the Senate to improve the bill and avoid saddling Americans with more government spending. 

On Wednesday, during a weekly press briefing, House Republican leadership advocated for the ‘big, beautiful bill,’ saying it was necessary for funding the Trump administration’s crackdown on illegal immigration. Multiple leaders, including Johnson and House Majority Leader Rep. Steve Scalise, R-La., cited the antisemitic attack in Colorado allegedly carried out by an illegal immigrant as an example why the bill’s funding is needed.

‘We need to go find the other Solimans and get them out of America,’ Johnson said in reference to suspected Boulder, Colorado, attacker Mohamed Soliman, the Egyptian national accused of throwing Molotov cocktails at a group of people calling for the release of hostages being held in Gaza. 

Now that the bill has passed the House, it’s up to Senate Republicans to meet President Donald Trump’s July 4 deadline.

House Oversight Committee Chairman James Comer, R-Ky., is widening his investigation into the alleged ‘cover-up’ of former President Joe Biden’s mental decline by seeking interviews with five more former White House aides.

Comer sent letters to five more top former Biden staffers, putting his total outreach in the investigation to 10 people so far.

The latest round of letters are being sent to former White House Chief of Staff Ron Klain, former senior communications advisor Anita Dunn, former top advisors Michael Donilon and Steve Ricchetti, and former Deputy Chief of Staff for Policy Bruce Reed.

‘The Committee on Oversight and Government Reform is investigating the role of former senior White House officials in possibly usurping authority from former President Joe Biden and the ramifications of a White House staff intent on hiding his rapidly worsening mental and physical faculties,’ Comer wrote to the five former aides.

‘The Committee has been investigating this issue for nearly a year. The Committee seeks to understand who made key decisions and exercised the powers of the executive branch during the previous administration, possibly without former President Biden’s consent. The Committee requests your testimony to evaluate your eye-witness account of former President Biden’s decline.’

Each letter also detailed specific reasons the committee is seeking to speak to each person.

‘You served as Chief of Staff for former President Biden. Before departing the White House in 2023, you had been by former President Biden’s side ‘for more than three decades.’ You returned to the former president’s side in 2024 to aid his campaign and prepare him for the June 27, 2024, debate with President Donald Trump,’ the letter to Klain read, citing a recent Politico article.

‘According to an interview, you cut short the debate prep ‘due to the president’s fatigue and lack of familiarity with the subject matter’ and said that the former president ‘didn’t really understand what his argument was on inflation.’ The scope of your responsibilities—both official and otherwise—and personal interactions within the Oval Office cannot go without investigation.’

To Dunn, Comer wrote, ‘Former President Biden confided in you extensively over the past decade. The Committee seeks to understand your observations of former President Biden’s mental acuity and health as one of his closest advisors.

‘If White House staff carried out a strategy lasting months or even years to hide the chief executive’s condition—or to perform his duties—Congress may need to consider a legislative response,’ the letter said.

Comer has asked each of the five aides to appear for closed-door transcribed interviews. 

He told Fox News Digital on Tuesday that it was a more effective investigation tactic than a public hearing that could easily devolve into an unproductive spectacle.

‘You’ve got one hour, you’re not interrupted, you don’t have to go five minutes back and forth,’ Comer said. ‘So to extract information, we’re going to go with the interviews.’

Comer previously reached out to former Biden doctor Kevin O’Connor and former White House aides Annie Tomasini, Anthony Bernal, Ashley Williams and Neera Tanden to appear. 

The committee said it expects the witnesses to voluntarily comply with the investigation and will release transcribed interview dates later this week. Comer has not ruled out the threat of subpoenas, however, if talks go awry.

A federal judge on Tuesday dismissed a lawsuit from the Democratic National Committee (DNC) claiming President Donald Trump’s executive orders had threatened the independence of the Federal Election Committee (FEC), a significant – albeit rare – court victory for the president.

In his ruling, U.S. District Judge Amir Ali, a Biden appointee, said the DNC failed to demonstrate ‘concrete and imminent injury’ – or the burden needed to justify their request for a preliminary injunction. He said that the concerns raised by the party about the FEC’s independence as a result of Trump’s executive order were far too speculative to satisfy the court’s higher bar for emergency relief. 

At issue in the case was the executive order Trump signed on Feb. 18, titled, ‘Ensuring Accountability for All Agencies.’ 

Democrats filed the lawsuit just 10 days after the order was signed, arguing that the order threatened to encroach on the independence of the FEC and risked subjecting it to the whims of the executive branch.

The lawsuit focused largely on the claim that the FEC is an independent regulatory agency and argued that the credibility of the entire regulatory enterprise would be ‘fatally undermined if the party controlling the White House can unilaterally structure campaign rules and adjudicate disputes to disadvantage its electoral competitors.’

Notably, Ali said Tuesday that he had not found any evidence to date that the White House or the Trump administration had taken steps to change or undermine how the FEC interprets federal election law, or target its independent role.

The ‘possibility that the president and attorney general would take the extraordinary step of issuing a directive to the FEC or its Commissioners purporting to bind their interpretation of FECA is not sufficiently concrete and imminent to create Article III injury,’ Ali said Tuesday.

Should that change, however, Ali said the DNC was welcome to submit an amended filing to the court to reconsider the case.

‘This Court’s doors are open to the parties if changed circumstances show concrete action or impact on the FEC’s or its Commissioners’ independence,’ Ali said.

Iranian Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei on Wednesday came out swinging at the U.S.’ most recent proposal, which apparently included a call for zero uranium enrichment, to which the Iranian leader said was ‘100 %’ against Tehran’s interests.

The issue of whether the U.S. would push a complete ban on uranium enrichment – a process that is needed to produce nuclear energy as well a warhead – came into question this week after reporting suggested a U.S. proposal submitted to Iran through Omani mediators on Saturday allowed for ‘low levels’ of enrichment.

President Donald Trump appeared to refute this in a social media post this week, and on Wednesday, Khamanei, who did not comment directly on the specifics of the proposal, said that ‘In the current nuclear talks that are being mediated by Oman, the U.S.’s proposal is 100% against the spirit of ‘We can’.’ 

‘What the U.S. is demanding is that you should have no nuclear industry at all and be dependent on them,’ he added. 

Included in the proposal was apparently a call for a regional coalition for enrichment that could provide Iran with the uranium it needs for civilian projects, like energy. 

Iranian authorities said this week that this idea was not a new concept, and while Tehran is not opposed to being part of such a coalition, it would not serve as an adequate substitute even though Iran relies on nuclear energy for less than 1% of its energy consumption. 

Khamanei did not say that Iran was unwilling to continue negotiating with the U.S., though Tehran has repeatedly insisted that a zero-enrichment policy is a non-starter. 

‘A nuclear industry without enrichment capabilities is useless, because we would then be dependent on others to obtain fuel for our power plants,’ he said.

The Iranian leader said on Wednesday that Iran’s nuclear development has become a source of national pride and claimed, ‘The number of countries in the world that have achieved a complete nuclear fuel cycle is perhaps fewer than the number of fingers on a person’s two hands. 

‘We’re capable of producing nuclear fuel starting from the mine and all the way to the power plant,’ he added. 

Iran has also repeatedly claimed it does not intend to develop a nuclear weapon, though its near-weapons-grade enrichment levels and missile program have suggested otherwise and prompted immense concern among international security officials, including the U.N.’s nuclear watchdog, the International Atomic Energy Agency.

Khamanei’s comments regarding Iran’s possession of a nuclear weapon were among the most fervent he has issued and again called into question Tehran’s claims that it is not looking to make itself the 10th nuclear nation. 

‘You Americans possess atomic bombs and have the massive destruction of the world at your disposal,’ he said in a series of posts on X. ‘What business is it of yours whether the Iranian nation should or shouldn’t have uranium enrichment or whether it should or shouldn’t have a nuclear industry?

‘Why are you interfering and trying to say whether Iran should have uranium enrichment or not? That’s none of your business,’ Khamanei said. 

Rep. Thomas Massie, R-Ky., said Elon Musk should fund primary challenges against almost every Republican who voted for President Donald Trump’s ‘big, beautiful bill’ last week.

‘I don’t primary my colleagues, but I feel pretty good about him doing it,’ Massie told Fox News Digital on Wednesday.

‘There’s a few others that should be spared,’ when asked to clarify if he meant all 215 House Republicans who supported the legislation. ‘But people want term limits, right? Elon can bring term limits.’

Musk came out against the massive Trump agenda bill that House Republicans passed last week.

‘I’m sorry, but I just can’t stand it anymore. This massive, outrageous, pork-filled congressional spending bill is a disgusting abomination. Shame on those who voted for it: you know you did wrong. You know it,’ Musk first posted.

It was followed by several posts on the national debt, and one that read, ‘In November next year, we fire all politicians who betrayed the American people.’

Massie said on Wednesday, ‘I just think he made one mistake when misstatement – he said take them out in November. I would take them out in primaries if I were Elon Musk.’

Both House Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., and the White House have closed ranks around the legislation.

Johnson issued a rare forceful response to Musk from the podium of his weekly press conference on Wednesday, calling the billionaire ‘flat wrong.’

‘Elon and I left on a great note. We were texting one another, you know, happy texts, you know, Monday and then, and then yesterday, you know, 24 hours later, he does a 180, and he comes out and opposed the bill,’ Johnson told reporters.

‘And it surprised me, frankly. And, I don’t take it personal…I think he’s way off on this, and I’ve told him as much, and, I’ve said it publicly and privately.’

The massive budget reconciliation bill is aimed at advancing Trump’s priorities on taxes, immigration, energy, defense and the debt limit. 

The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office projected it would add $2.4 trillion to the federal deficit over 10 years, but House GOP leaders have dismissed that modeling as inaccurate representations of economic growth.

Massie was one of three House Republicans to vote against the bill. Rep. Warren Davidson, R-Ohio, also voted ‘no,’ while House Freedom Caucus Chairman Andy Harris, R-Md., voted ‘present.’

Massie is also no stranger to clashing with both Trump and Johnson. He has faced primary threats from the former and led an unsuccessful bid to remove the latter from House leadership.

Massie has been consistent, however, in his opposition to legislation that would have any chance of adding to the federal debt – now currently nearly $37 trillion.

Republican supporters of the bill, however, have contended that it is the best possible vehicle to radically reform government programs plagued with waste, fraud and abuse, and restore much-needed funding to the border, while extending Trump’s 2017 tax cuts.

However, the legislation is now in the Senate, where Republicans have already signaled they would want to see changes to the final bill.

Fox News Digital reached out to the National Republican Congressional Committee for comment on Massie’s remarks.

Another member of Sen. John Fetterman’s staff is reportedly leaving his office, and the maverick lawmaker doesn’t want to talk about it.

Fetterman’s office has been plagued by a string of departures since he came to Washington in 2023, and his alleged erratic behavior, concerns over his health and decision to skip certain votes have led to a wave of scrutiny in recent weeks.

And now, Fetterman, D-Pa., is set to lose another top staffer. Axios first reported that Krysta Sinclair Juris, who has been the lawmaker’s chief of staff since April 2024, is set to leave his office. Fox News Digital reached out to Juris and Fetterman’s office for comment.

When pressed about the situation in his office, Fetterman didn’t want to talk about it.

‘Well, have you, have you spoken to the significant number of my colleagues that have much higher staff turnover?’ Fetterman asked Fox News Digital.

He doubled down when asked again if Axios’ reporting was accurate.

‘I think you should talk to my colleagues that have much higher turnover,’ he said after ducking into an elevator.

Politico later reported that Cabelle St. John would take over the chief of staff position.

The latest departure is not the first instance where staffers have left this year. Two aides left last month after a bombshell report from New York Magazine detailed rising concerns among his staff about his health.

And in February, his deputy chief of staff and communications director hit the exits, too.

Fetterman has been no stranger to controversy since winning his seat two years ago and has made a name for himself by often bucking his party’s marching orders and siding with Senate Republicans on thorny policy issues.

For example, Fetterman has often broken with Democrats on Israel and immigration, saying his party has lost the argument on both issues.

The lawmaker acknowledged his unique brand of bipartisanship during a forum alongside fellow Pennsylvania Sen. David McCormick, a Republican, moderated by Fox News’ Shannon Bream on Monday.  

‘That’s part of the bipartisanship where, you know, it’s getting more and more kind of, punitive to just agree with some of these things in the middle of the party right now,’ he said.

Israeli officials are speaking out against a draft resolution that is set to go before the U.N. Security Council on Wednesday. The resolution, which has the support of Algeria, Denmark, Greece, Guyana, Pakistan, Panama, the Republic of Korea, Sierra Leone, Slovenia and Somalia, calls for a renewed ceasefire between Israel and Hamas, the return of the hostages and the lifting of restrictions on humanitarian aid.

The United Nations has issued a litany of criticisms of Israel’s handling of the war as Palestinians in Gaza struggled under the blockade that was reinstated after the ceasefire collapsed in March. Israel lifted restrictions on humanitarian aid in May.

Israeli officials warn that the drafr resolution ‘undermines’ humanitarian aid efforts while leaving Hamas in power. 

‘This resolution doesn’t advance humanitarian relief. It undermines it. It ignores a working system in favor of political agendas. It ignores the one party still endangering civilians in Gaza: Hamas. The group that hijacks trucks and stockpiles the aid to their benefit,’ Israeli U.N. Ambassador Danny Danon said ahead of the vote.

Israeli Foreign Ministry Spokesperson Oren Marmorstein told Fox News Digital that the resolution does not do enough to link the release of hostages to the establishment of a ceasefire. The Israeli official also said the resolution would allow Hamas to stay in power.

‘So basically, what this proposal is favoring or offering to do is to enable Hamas to come up with another October 7th massacre,’ Marmorstein told Fox News Digital. He added that Hamas said it would carry out another violent attack like the one on Oct. 7, 2023.

The Gaza Humanitarian Foundation (GHF), a U.S. and Israel-backed aid organization, paused its aid distribution operations on Wednesday following days of deadly incidents near its sites. 

‘GHF is actively engaged in discussions with the IDF to enhance its security measures beyond the immediate perimeter of GHF sites,’ a GHF spokesperson told Fox News Digital. ‘We have asked the IDF to: introduce measures that guide foot traffic in a way that minimizes confusion or escalation risks near IDF military perimeters; develop clearer IDF-issued guidance to help the population transit safely; enhance IDF force training and refine internal IDF procedures to support safety.’

If passed, the draft resolution would be legally binding—unlike those that come out of the U.N. General Assembly. It is unclear, however, what impact it would have on Israel’s current operations or policy.

The U.S. Mission to the U.N. did not respond to a Fox News Digital request for comment.

The Department of Justice (DOJ) sent an unprecedented letter to a Brazilian Supreme Court justice in May, admonishing the judge for ordering American-based video platform Rumble to restrict the free speech of a user on U.S. soil, describing the orders as international overreach that lack enforceability. 

Rumble, a popular U.S.-based video-sharing platform that bucks censorship efforts frequently found on other video and social media platforms, is at the center of an international battle to protect free speech that has been ongoing for months.

Brazilian Supreme Court Justice Alexandre de Moraes ordered the suspension of Rumble in the South American country back in February over claims the U.S. company did not comply with court orders, including removing the accounts of a Brazilian man living in the U.S. and seeking political asylum.

‘If you look at what’s happening around the world, it’s clear we’re living through a perilous moment for anyone who believes in freedom of expression — a fundamental human right enshrined in the U.S. Constitution and recognized globally, even by the United Nations,’ Rumble CEO Chris Pavlovski exclusively told Fox News Digital Tuesday following the DOJ’s May letter. 

‘The fact that Rumble has become a central player in this global fight for free speech is a powerful validation of our mission. We’re proud to stand at the front lines of this effort and grateful that President Trump and his administration have made this battle a foreign policy priority.’ 

Moraes is now in the U.S. government’s crosshairs after the DOJ sent a letter to him in May outlining his reported international overreach into U.S. law affecting the First Amendment, as well as Secretary of State Marco Rubio revealing in a congressional hearing that the Brazilian judge could face U.S. sanctions. 

Moraes had ordered Rumble to remove a user from its platform as he stands accused of spreading false information online and is considered a fugitive in Brazil. Rumble refused and was threatened with financial penalties for the lack of cooperation. 

The DOJ letter, dated May 7 and made public Thursday, argued that Moraes’ orders are not enforceable in the U.S. 

‘These purported directives to Rumble are made under threat of monetary and other penalties,’ the letter, signed by DOJ official Ada E. Bosque, reads. ‘We take no position on the enforceability of the various orders and other judicial documents directing Rumble to act within the territory of Brazil, which is a matter of Brazilian law. However, to the extent that these documents direct Rumble to undertake specific actions in the United States, we respectfully advise that such directives are not enforceable judicial orders in the United States.’ 

The DOJ did not have additional comment to provide when approached about the letter Tuesday. 

Pavlovski described to Fox Digital that the letter is ‘unprecedented’ and draws a clear line to foreign nations that they cannot attempt to thwart U.S. laws and the First Amendment. 

‘The letter from the U.S. Department of Justice to a foreign judge over censorship orders is unprecedented,’ Pavlovski said. ‘It draws a bright red line: foreign officials cannot issue censorship orders that violate the First Amendment or bypass U.S. law. That kind of extraterritorial overreach is incompatible with American sovereignty. And that’s good news, not just for Americans, but for free societies everywhere.’ 

The letter continued that there are established channels for international legal proceedings, which the DOJ said the judge bypassed, and directed the Brazilian judge to various proper procedures he could take regarding the court orders. 

Rumble facing restrictions in foreign nations is hardly new, with the platform currently disabled in China, Russia and France, as well as Brazil. It has also previously received censorship demands in nations such as the U.K., Australia and New Zealand, but has maintained its free speech objective. 

The DOJ’s letter comes as Rubio revealed in a House Committee on Foreign Affairs hearing in May that the State Department is considering sanctions against Moraes under the Magnitsky Act. The Global Magnitsky Human Rights Accountability Act authorizes the U.S. government to sanction individuals overseas if determined responsible for human rights abuses or corruption.

‘We’ve seen pervasive censorship, political persecution targeting the entire opposition, including journalists and ordinary citizens,’ Republican Florida Rep. Cory Mills asked Rubio at the hearing in May. ‘What they’re now doing is imminent, politically motivated imprisonment of former President Bolsonaro. This crackdown has extended beyond Brazil’s borders, impacting individuals on U.S. soil., the 2023 Financial Times article actually talked about this. What do you intend to do? And would you be looking at Supreme Court justice sanctioning of Alexandre de Moraes under the Global Magnitsky Act?’

Rubio responded, ‘That’s under review right now, and it’s a great, great possibility that will happen.’

Days later, Rubio posted to X that the State Department will roll out visa restrictions on foreigners found ‘complicit’ in censoring Americans. 

‘For too long, Americans have been fined, harassed, and even charged by foreign authorities for exercising their free speech rights,’ Rubio wrote on X. ‘Today, I am announcing a new visa restriction policy that will apply to foreign officials and persons who are complicit in censoring Americans. Free speech is essential to the American way of life — a birthright over which foreign governments have no authority.’ 

‘Foreigners who work to undermine the rights of Americans should not enjoy the privilege of traveling to our country,’ Rubio added, not naming specific individuals responsible for such actions. ‘Whether in Latin America, Europe, or elsewhere, the days of passive treatment for those who work to undermine the rights of Americans are over.’

Moraes is also overseeing the upcoming trial of former Brazilian President Jair Bolsonaro, who is accused of allegedly attempting to overturn his 2022 election results. 

Brazil President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva slammed the U.S. for threatening sanctions against Moraes in comment this week. 

‘It is unacceptable for the president of any country in the world to comment on the decision of the Supreme Court of another country,’ da Silva said Tuesday, according to Reuters. 

The Brazilian president added that the U.S. should understand the importance of ‘respecting the integrity of institutions in other countries.’

Fox News Digital reached out to Moraes’ office Tuesday but did not immediately receive a reply.