One of the world’s largest and most influential scientific societies held its annual conference last weekend, which a Fox News Digital review found was littered with examples of progressive messaging, criticisms of the Trump administration, and ‘woke’ workshops.

Attendees who showed up at the American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS) event, held at the Phoenix Convention Center from Feb. 12-14, were immediately greeted at registration with identifier stickers that used gender pronouns such as ‘they/them,’ ‘xi/xer,’ ‘xe/xem,’ and other descriptors that critics have alleged have little to do with science and biology.

During the meeting’s opening night, shortly after a 10-minute hoop dance routine from traditional Native American dancers, AAAS CEO Dr. Sudip Parikh told the audience that it’s been a ‘hard’ and ‘tough year for science and scientists in this country.’

Parikh went on to blame DOGE for the ‘devastation’ of ‘some of our science agencies’ and the ‘president’s budget request’ that ‘cut science by half’ and, in his opinion, amounted to ‘forfeiting the future.’

‘What happened over the course of the last year is a rupture. We’re not going back, it’s not possible, too much damage has been done, too much has changed. There’s an entire generation of scientists that have a scar, a scar that is not going to go away,’ Parikh explained, adding that scars can ‘make us tougher’ and ‘become almost shields’ that ‘build resilience.’

Parikh told the crowd that he warned last year that Robert F. Kennedy Jr was the ‘wrong person’ for Health and Human Services secretary and said, ‘I still feel that way,’ which prompted laughter and applause from the crowd.

‘It’s going to take protests, it’s going to take politics, it’s going to take the ability to not speak gibberish, all of that has got to come together if we’re going to fight for the inheritance of the enlightenment to continue to make this world a better place,’ Parikh said.

Workshops at the event, which provided gender-neutral washrooms, included a session titled ‘Mao-Mei Liu: Nurturing Diversity in Science is Resistance,’ and another called ‘Investigating the Role of Race in Clinical Decision-Making.’

‘Who Gets to Belong? Disability, Power, and Participation in Higher Education,’ another workshop was called. 

Dr. Theresa A. Maldonado, a world-renowned expert in electrical engineering, delivered the president’s address at the conference and also lamented what a difficult year 2025 was for science and suggested climate change was responsible for the devastating southern California wildfires last year.

AAAS, the publisher of the highly respected Science magazine, posted several more videos over the course of the next few days, many including speakers who criticized the Trump administration and injected politics into discussions. 

‘Colonial Legacies, Climate Crises, and the Erosion of Mobility Choice’ was another workshop that scientists at the conference were offered and in an interview with ‘climate justice scholar’ Jola Ajibade, she explained how climate change has benefited a ‘few wealthy people’ while ‘low-income communities are displaced.’

‘At the center of my work is giving a voice but also bringing to the attention of everyone the impact of a slew of climate solutions, the impact of those solutions on low-income communities, on Black communities, on indigenous, on Latino communities as well,’ Ajibade explained, adding that she is focused on finding a ‘decolonial’ approach. 

Listed sponsors of the event included the Science Philanthropy Alliance, a group tied to the progressive consulting behemoth Arabella Advisors through the New Venture Fund, a nonprofit that pushes a variety of progressive causes. 

‘The whole thing that is sad for me is that when I attended these conferences in the first Trump administration there was plenty of liberal nonsense, but it still was a celebration of science and the achievements of the year, and you left excited,’ an event attendee told Fox News Digital.

‘This year felt like a funeral, with nothing but griping and moaning. Why would people want to keep coming back year after year with something like that? I suspect that is why their attendance greatly suffered this year compared to the pre-COVID years. Their constant pleas to keep politics out of science are completely undercut by their perpetual whining and endorsing utter craziness. They’re happy for science to be political, as long as it’s leftist.’

Additionally, as lawmakers in the United States continue to warn about the growing threat posed by China and what they believe is the CCP’s infiltration of top institutions in the United States — particularly in the medical and science fields — the AAAS conference opted to allow the Beijing-based research institute Chinese Academy of Sciences (CAS) to operate a booth at the event. 

The state-run Chinese academy, which has faced controversy over its ties to China’s government and military, has collaborated with a Chinese medical technology firm linked to a 2013 U.S. bribery case involving NIH-funded research. The company has also installed equipment in leading American research labs.

‘The AAAS says that their organization wants to ‘inspire’ future scientists and engineers, but session topics and material from their meeting actually discourage participants from relying on their effort and merit and turns the focus to race and ethnicity,’ Johnathan Butcher, acting director of the Center for Education Policy at the Heritage Foundation, told Fox News Digital. 

‘These are the very same kind of racist ideas inspired by DEI that have been prohibited in universities, state governments, and the federal government, because the ideas violate state and federal civil rights laws,’ Butcher added. ‘Policymakers should be aware of what this organization is doing and make sure the association is not promoting racial preferences in hiring, promotion or research awards in academia or anywhere else.’

In a statement to Fox News Digital, an AAAS spokesperson said, ‘A broad spectrum of the scientific enterprise attends the meeting. The topics covered were wide-ranging across scientific disciplines and are proposed by scientists. AAAS respects their First Amendment right to free speech.’

With less than nine months before a politically bruising battle in the November midterm elections, the realities of a one-seat majority are bearing down on the House GOP.

Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La. — and by extension, President Donald Trump — faced back-to-back losses on the House floor last week after a small group of GOP rebels joined Democrats in an effort to curb Trump’s unilateral tariff authority.

It’s part of a growing trend that comes with a razor-thin House majority, and moderates making a choice between appealing to their battleground district voters and following the president in a year when history dictates the opposing party will fare better in the coming elections.

‘Getting things done in Washington can be tough enough as it is,’ veteran GOP strategist Doug Heye told Fox News Digital. ‘Add to that a super slim majority and the shortened legislative calendar of an election year, and it’s tough to see much happening legislatively through the rest of the year.’

Last Tuesday, House GOP leaders tried to insert language into an unrelated procedural vote aimed at blocking Democrats from forcing consideration of a bill aimed at limiting Trump’s ability to levy tariffs on Canada without consent from Congress.

That failed, however, after three Republicans joined Democrats in sinking that procedural vote — Reps. Kevin Kiley, R-Calif., Don Bacon, R-Neb., and Thomas Massie, R-Ky.

‘I think it was not unexpected, and certainly we’ve got to find a new course to chart now,’ one House Republican granted anonymity to speak freely told Fox News Digital.

‘This is going to change the dynamics of the type of legislation we’re going to see, and the type of political posturing the Democrats are going to do the next nine months. So we’ve got to come up with a better strategy.’

But Republicans who spoke with Fox News Digital largely did not blame Johnson, arguing he was doing his best with the circumstances in front of him. Instead, much frustration was aimed at their fellow GOP lawmakers who dissented.

The move not only paved the way for a vote on Trump’s Canada tariffs, but opened the door to allowing Democrats to force a vote on tariffs targeting other countries as well.

‘A lot of people were disappointed with how that went, with the actors who voted no’ rather than House leadership, a second House Republican said.

They pointed out that the following day would bring a vote on Trump’s tariffs themselves — a politically tricky situation for people in vulnerable seats.

‘I get the overall idea about tariffs. That’s not the vehicle to vote no on and put a lot of our moderates in jeopardy, and that’s exactly what happened,’ the second GOP lawmaker said.

A third House Republican said there was ‘frustration that they aren’t playing team ball like they used to, and we need them to.’

But not everyone agreed. Rep. Eli Crane, R-Ariz., a member of the conservative House Freedom Caucus, told Fox News Digital, ‘I actually like when they put bills on the floor, even if they don’t have the votes…it gives the American people a chance to see where their representatives stand. And far too often, the calculus is, well, we’re not gonna put it on the floor if we don’t think it has the votes.’

‘A lot of the American people don’t even know where their reps stand, because this whole place is designed to shield members from taking votes,’ Crane said.

He added of Johnson’s leadership, ‘I think it’s one of the hardest jobs you can have. I’ve been critical of the speaker in the past, but what he’s working with, I think he’s doing a good job.’

Democrats did successfully force a vote on ending Trump’s emergency at the northern border the following day, which if passed in the Senate and signed into law would effectively roll back his Canada tariffs. 

Three more Republicans — Reps. Brian Fitzpatrick, R-Pa., Jeff Hurd, R-Colo., and Dan Newhouse, R-Wash. — joined the original trio in voting to pass the measure, even despite Trump vowing political ‘consequences’ for those who dissented.

It’s almost certain that Trump would veto the resolution if it gets to his desk, but it’s an example of a situation that is increasingly likely to happen as the midterms draw closer.

Bacon and Newhouse, for example, are not running for re-election. Fitzpatrick and Hurd are running in battleground districts where their independence from the party line could be critical to their survival — and Republicans’ overall chances of keeping the House.

Trump is already targeting Massie with a primary challenge, and Kiley has not yet said what his plans are for November after California Democrats badly disadvantaged him with a new congressional map.

‘I think you’re going to see some moderate Republicans try to distinguish themselves as being independent voters or independent thinkers … and this is a way to do it,’ John Feehery of EFB Advocacy, who served as press secretary to former Republican House Speaker Dennis J. Hastert, told Fox News Digital.

‘And the tariffs are not uniformly popular amongst the Republican conference. I mean, most Republicans would probably want to vote with those guys. But they don’t want to undermine the president as he’s negotiating.’

Republicans are currently dealing with a one-seat majority until mid-March, when a special election for the seat vacated by former Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene, R-Ga., is likely to get another GOP lawmaker into the House.

But the April race for a blue-leaning seat to replace New Jersey Gov. Mikie Sherill could bring the margin back down. Republicans would then not likely see relief until August, when a special election will be held to replace late Rep. Doug LaMalfa, R-Calif.

And Feehery said Democrats’ unwillingness to work with Trump will likely keep much of the president’s agenda from succeeding in Congress this year.

‘It doesn’t look to me like the Democrats have any interest in giving Trump any kind of legislative victory, so that makes it very difficult. I mean, [House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries, D-N.Y.], he doesn’t really want to work with Trump at all, and so it’s going to pretty much scale back the ability for Republicans to get much done for the rest of the year,’ he said.

‘And the other situation is that the Senate, they’re not going to get 60 votes for a lot of things, so it just makes the agenda itself pretty slim.’

Sen. Mark Kelly, D-Ariz., has confirmed he will ‘seriously consider’ a run for president in 2028, opening the door to a potential White House bid.

Kelly’s comments to the BBC Feb. 16 came as he remains locked in a legal and political battle with the Trump administration.

In an interview, the retired Navy captain and former astronaut made clear he has not yet decided whether to launch a campaign but confirmed the idea is under consideration.

‘I have people talk to me about it all the time, but we have an election in 2026 that I’m really worried about. We’ve got to get through that first. I will make a decision.’

Kelly emphasized that any choice would involve discussions with his wife, Gabrielle Giffords, their daughters and his identical twin brother, also a former astronaut.

‘You know, with my wife, Gabby, with my two daughters, and my brother, I have a twin brother who was also an astronaut. Think about for a second how this would affect him. We’re identical twins,’ he said.

‘So you know, I’ll seriously consider this, because we are in some seriously challenging times right now,’ Kelly added.

Kelly’s comments came within days of two major developments in his standoff with the administration.

As previously reported by Fox News Digital, a federal judge blocked the Pentagon from demoting him Feb. 12 over a controversial video about ‘illegal orders.’

A grand jury declined to indict him and five other Democratic lawmakers on seditious conspiracy charges.

The dispute is over a 90-second video Kelly recorded with fellow Democratic lawmakers reminding U.S. service members that they are not obligated to follow ‘illegal’ commands.

‘Our laws are clear,’ Kelly said in the clip. ‘You can refuse illegal orders.’

President Donald Trump had labeled the video ‘seditious behavior’ and suggested the lawmakers be arrested.

The Justice Department sought indictments, but a grand jury refused to bring charges.

War Secretary Pete Hegseth had also moved to initiate retirement-grade determination proceedings against Kelly, potentially reducing his rank as a retired Navy captain and cutting his retirement pay.

Kelly sued, arguing the action was unconstitutional retaliation for protected speech.

U.S. District Judge Richard Leon agreed to temporarily block the demotion, writing that the administration had likely violated Kelly’s First Amendment rights and warning against ‘shrinking the First Amendment liberties of retired service members.’ Hegseth has vowed to appeal.

‘This will be immediately appealed,’ Hesgeth wrote in the post. ‘Sedition is sedition, ‘Captain.’’

In the Feb. 17 interview with the BBC, Kelly also reflected on his career.

‘I don’t know if I would be the best person in this job. I am a lot different than most of these other 100 senators there are,’ he said.

‘I’m one of the very few engineers. I’m the only person with a graduate degree in engineering in the United States Senate. I’ve got combat experience that’s kind of rare,’ Kelly explained.

‘I spent 25 years in the military. I didn’t start out in some state legislature somewhere. I don’t think of myself as a politician. I’m a Navy pilot who was so fortunate and so lucky, in fact, that I had the opportunity to fly this incredible spaceship, you know, four times and back.’

Kelly also struck a note of humility about a possible White House run.

‘I never thought I’d find myself here. So I will obviously think about this. It’s a serious decision. I just haven’t made it yet, he added.

Fox News Digital has reached out to Kelly’s office for comment.

Senate Republicans say they’ve struggled to get out on the campaign trail ahead of the midterm elections — and Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D., argues Democrats are to blame.

‘Their whole goal, and everything is to, you know, force us to stay around, force us to try and get members to take hard votes and just to tie people down so that they can’t be back campaigning,’ Thune told Fox News Digital.

Thune had just left a local furniture store in Sioux Falls, S.D., where he touted the economic benefits of the bill, which largely extended Trump’s tax cuts from his original 2017 tax bill, along with making tweaks to the tax code that lawmakers believe would directly benefit small businesses.

There, he noted that the owners of Montgomery’s told him, ‘If people had discretionary income out here, they spend it.’

That was the crux of the colossal bill Republicans rammed through Congress last year. In effect, it was a direct response to the pocketbook issues that largely drove the 2024 election cycle and propelled the GOP to a trifecta of federal control in Washington, D.C.

But time and again, Schumer and his caucus made it difficult for the GOP to get that message out, let alone leave the Capitol, Thune contended. Each day counts during campaign season, and canceling a travel plan or nixing an event can add up for Republicans seeking to stay in power.

The latest example is the now-four-day partial government shutdown, where an end doesn’t seem to be in sight as Senate Democrats and the White House engage in ongoing negotiations to fund the Department of Homeland Security (DHS).

While this closure hasn’t affected lawmakers’ travel plans — Thune has reminded the Senate to be ready at a moment’s notice should a deal be reached — the previous 43-day shutdown blew up any plans for lawmakers to get out and communicate with voters.

Then there was a carte blanche blockade against Trump’s nominees last year, too, that saw Thune cancel a portion of August recess. That time, particularly ahead of a midterm election cycle, is used by lawmakers to gin up early support for their reelection campaigns.

‘Right now for [Democrats], it’s just all about — everything’s all about politics and making it, you know, really hard for our incumbents who are running for reelection,’ Thune said.

Republicans see their ability to sell the ‘big, beautiful bill’ as crucial to their election survival in November.

And once again, the cost of living and how the Trump administration has dealt with inflation will yet again be a prominent factor in the upcoming election, Thune said.

‘I think most voters are, you know, especially the voters that are going to decide probably who controls the House and Senate after November, are going to be kitchen table-type, pocketbook … the bread and butter issues,’ Thune said. ‘They’re economic voters, and so inflation is going to matter, and having more money in their pockets is going to matter.’

An American was sentenced Tuesday to four years in jail in Russia for allegedly trying to fly out of an airport in Moscow with the stocks of Kalashnikov assault rifles in his suitcase, a report said. 

The unnamed U.S. citizen, who collects Kalashnikov weapons, did not make a customs declaration after purchasing two stocks and checking a suitcase containing the items at Moscow’s Vnukovo airport, Reuters reported, citing the RIA Novosti state news agency. 

He later was found guilty under an article of Russian criminal code relating to the smuggling of weapons, it added. 

Fox News Digital has reached out to the State Department for comment.

Russian state media is also claiming the American partially admitted guilt, according to Reuters. 

The State Department warns Americans not to travel to Russia ‘for any reason due to terrorism, unrest, wrongful detention and other risks.’

‘The U.S. Embassy in Moscow has limited ability to assist in the case of a detention of a U.S. citizen. There is no guarantee that the Russian government will grant the U.S. Embassy consular access to detained U.S. citizens,’ the State Department said. ‘U.S. citizens may serve their entire prison sentence without release. The risk of wrongful detention of U.S. citizens remains high. Even if a case is determined wrongful, there is no guarantee of release.’  

‘Russian officials often question and threaten U.S. citizens without reason. Russian security services have arrested U.S. citizens on false charges,’ it added. They have denied them fair treatment and convicted them without credible evidence. Russian authorities have opened questionable investigations against U.S. citizens for their religious activities.’ 

Former Biden White House press secretary Jen Psaki raised alarm recently about an international ‘web’ surrounding Jeffrey Epstein’s sex-trafficking case, echoing remarks from many Democrats who have seized on the politically expedient topic in the wake of the Department of Justice releasing Epstein’s unclassified case files.

‘It is Trump, yes. … But it is the wealthy, the elites, and basically every faction of the world,’ Psaki, a political analyst for MS Now, said in a video clip. ‘It’s global leaders. It’s people in the business sector. It is people in Hollywood probably, who knows. It is a bunch of people who think that they can get away with anything.’

Democrats have since last year claimed that Epstein’s case has newfound salience because Trump, once among Epstein’s many wealthy friends before Epstein was accused of trafficking underage girls, was, in their view, suspiciously dismissive of the files when he took office.

Republicans have countered, however, that Democrats had full access to the documents for four years under the Biden administration — when Psaki served as the chief White House spokesperson — and neither released them nor uncovered information damaging to Trump. Fox News Digital reached out to Psaki for comment.

Rep. Jamie Raskin, D-Md., ranking member of the House Judiciary Committee, told Fox News Digital claims of Democratic inconsistency ‘are seriously detached from reality’ and pointed to his own investigations dating back to 2019 into former Trump Labor Secretary Alex Acosta’s handling of a 2008 plea deal with Epstein.

Raskin argued the Democratic Party has not shifted, but rather that the Trump administration has.

‘Trump abruptly killed the ongoing federal investigation into Epstein’s co-conspirators when he took office,’ Raskin said, alleging the administration undertook a ‘massive redaction project’ to hide evidence of Trump’s and others’ ties to Epstein.

The DOJ in January released more than three million pages of files but signaled that another three million were withheld because they contained victim information or were protected by various privileges.

‘Democrats have always fought to support an investigation of Epstein’s co-conspirators,’ Raskin said. ‘We have always been on the side of full transparency and justice for the victims.’

House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries, D-N.Y., has made similar remarks, saying, ‘All we want is full transparency, so that the American people can get the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.’

The heightened Democratic push for transparency comes after years during which the party showed more intermittent interest in Epstein’s case, which some Democrats have attributed to the sensitivity of seeking information while Epstein associate Ghislaine Maxwell’s sex trafficking case was pending and while some of Epstein’s victims were pursuing litigation.

But the Democrats’ new, unified fixation on Epstein has come as Republicans have struggled to manage the issue, which has caused intra-party fractures.

The files became a political thorn for the administration after Attorney General Pam Bondi’s chaotic rollout last year of already-public files by the DOJ, which enraged a faction of Trump’s base who had been expecting new information.

The DOJ said at the time that it would not disclose further files because of court orders and victim privacy and said the department found no information that would warrant bringing charges against anyone else. In a turnabout, however, Bondi ordered a review, at Trump’s direction, of Epstein’s alleged connections to Democrats, including former President Bill Clinton.

The president, who was closely associated with Epstein but was never accused of any crimes related to him, also relented to months-long pressure to sign a transparency bill last year that ordered the DOJ to release all of its Epstein-related records within 30 days. Among the most vocal supporters of the bill was former Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene, R-Ga., which resulted in her highly public falling out with the president, whom she once fervently supported.

The Epstein saga has also plagued the administration because some of Trump’s allies, now in top roles in the DOJ, once promoted the existence of incriminating, nonpublic Epstein files, including a supposed list of sexual predators who were his clients. FBI Director Kash Patel, for instance, said in 2023 the government was hiding ‘Epstein’s list’ of ‘pedophiles.’ But the DOJ leaders failed to deliver on those claims upon taking office.

House Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., meanwhile, faced accusations from Democrats that he kept the House in recess for about two months in the summer to avoid votes on Epstein transparency legislation. Johnson shot back that Democrats had, in his view, been lax on the Epstein case until Trump took office.

‘We’re not going to allow the Democrats to use this for political cover. They had four years,’ Johnson told reporters at the time. ‘Remember, the Biden administration held the Epstein files for four years and not a single one of these Democrats, or anyone in Congress, made any thought about that at all.’

The House Oversight Committee has also spurred infighting over how Epstein material has been handled, as it has been actively engaged in subpoenaing, reviewing, and releasing large batches of Epstein-related records from both the DOJ and Epstein’s estate.

Committee Republicans have said their Democratic counterparts ‘cherry-picked’ material to release, such as photos featuring Trump and Epstein, and that they ‘keep trying to create a fake hoax by being dishonest, deceptive, and shamelessly deranged.’

Negotiations between the United States and Iran advanced Tuesday toward what Tehran described as the beginning of a potential framework, but sharp public divisions between the two sides underscored how far apart they remain.

Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi said the two sides reached a ‘general agreement on a number of guiding principles’ and agreed to begin drafting text for a possible agreement, with plans to exchange drafts and schedule a third round of talks. 

‘Good progress was made compared to the previous meeting,’ he said, adding that while drafting would slow the process, ‘at least the path has started.’

Yet Washington publicly has insisted that any agreement must result in the dismantling of Iran’s nuclear program — including its enrichment capacity — along with limits on Tehran’s ballistic missile program and an end to its support for allied militant groups such as Hamas and Hezbollah. Those demands go well beyond temporary enrichment pauses or technical adjustments.

Iran Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei appeared to push back directly against that premise, signaling a firm ceiling on Iran’s concessions. 

‘The Americans say, ‘Let’s negotiate over your nuclear energy, and the result of the negotiation is supposed to be that you do not have this energy!’’ he wrote on social media as talks were underway. ‘If that’s the case, there is no room for negotiation.’

Khamenei’s remarks suggest that while Iranian negotiators may be discussing limits or interim measures, Iran is unlikely to accept an agreement that eliminates its nuclear program outright — setting up a direct collision with the Trump administration’s insistence on dismantlement.

‘Progress was made, but there are still a lot of details to discuss,’ according to a U.S. official. ‘The Iranians said they would come back in the next two weeks with detailed proposals to address some of the open gaps in our positions.’

President Donald Trump said Monday he would be watching the talks closely.

The mistrust runs deep. 

Iranian officials have pointed to U.S. military strikes on their nuclear facilities in June 2025 as part of the broader backdrop complicating diplomacy, arguing such actions demonstrate Washington’s willingness to use force even as negotiations unfold.

Behind the diplomatic push, the United States has significantly expanded its military footprint in the region. The USS Abraham Lincoln is operating in the Arabian Sea, and F-35 fighter jets from the carrier shot down an Iranian Shahed-139 drone recently after it approached the strike group — a move U.S. officials described as demonstrating low tolerance for provocations.

The USS Gerald R. Ford, the Navy’s newest aircraft carrier, is now transiting toward the Middle East. President Trump confirmed the deployment on Feb. 13, saying, ‘In case we don’t make a deal, we’ll need it.’ Reports indicate a third carrier, the USS George H.W. Bush, is being prepared for possible expedited deployment, which would create a rare three-carrier U.S. presence near Iranian waters.

The buildup extends beyond naval forces. A squadron of F-35A Lightning II aircraft landed at RAF Lakenheath in the United Kingdom earlier in February as a staging point for potential deployment to the Middle East, while satellite imagery shows additional U.S. aircraft — including F-15E Strike Eagles and A-10 Thunderbolts — positioned at Muwaffaq Salti Air Base in Jordan.

Logistics flights into the region have also surged. 

More than 100 C-17 cargo aircraft have arrived since late January, transporting advanced air defense systems, including Patriot and THAAD batteries, to bases in Qatar and Saudi Arabia, according to defense tracking data.

At the same time, Iran’s leadership has paired diplomatic engagement with forceful warnings. 

Khamenei said the United States could be ‘struck so hard that it cannot get up again,’ and a senior commander in Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps Navy declared the country is prepared to close the Strait of Hormuz if ordered — a move that could disrupt roughly one-fifth of global oil flows through the strategic waterway.

Despite the heightened rhetoric and military signaling, Iranian officials said talks would continue, framing the Geneva discussions as a step toward a possible agreement — even as the fundamental dispute over dismantlement versus preservation of Iran’s nuclear capabilities remains unresolved.

Fox News’ Nick Kalman contributed to this report. 

President Donald Trump said the way Rep. Alexandra Ocasio-Cortez answered questions at the Munich Security Conference ‘was not a good look for the United States.’ 

The Democrat lawmaker from New York and potential 2028 presidential candidate has been facing criticism for making foreign policy gaffes at the event. In one instance, Ocasio-Cortez appeared to stall for nearly 20 seconds when asked if the U.S. should send troops to defend Taiwan from a possible invasion by China, and in another, claimed Venezuela is below the equator. 

‘By the way, I watched AOC answering questions in Munich. This was not a good look for the United States. I watched Gavin Newscum answering questions in Munich, and this was a bad look for our country,’ Trump told reporters onboard Air Force One on Monday night. 

‘This was a bad – these two people are incompetent, and at least Hillary is competent. She’s just Trump deranged. She was so deranged and she is an angry woman. But I watched the other two speaking and answering basic questions. Look, Gavin has destroyed California, and AOC I never really got her, I never heard her speak very much and they started answering questions. She had no idea what was happening,’ Trump continued, referencing Newsom’s and Clinton’s attendance at the Munich Security Conference.

‘She had no idea how to answer, you know, very important questions concerning the world. But she can’t answer questions concerning New York City either, because New York City [has] got some problems,’ Trump also said about Ocasio-Cortez. 

Fox News Digital has reached out to Ocasio-Cortez’s and Newsom’s offices for reaction.

Ocasio-Cortez was asked on Friday, ‘Would and should the U.S. actually commit U.S. troops to defend Taiwan if China were to move?’ 

The four-term lawmaker appeared to stall for nearly 20 seconds before offering that the U.S. should try to avoid reaching a clash with China over Taiwan.

‘This is, of course, a, a very long-standing, policy of the United States, 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,’ Ocasio-Cortez said. 

Ocasio-Cortez also claimed that Venezuela was ‘below the equator’ while criticizing the Trump administration for arresting the nation’s dictator Nicolás Maduro. 

‘It is not a remark on who Maduro was as a leader. He canceled elections. He was an anti-democratic leader. That doesn’t mean that we can kidnap a head of state and engage in acts of war just because the nation is below the equator,’ Ocasio-Cortez said.

In a post on Truth Social Monday night, Trump said, ‘AOC and Newscum were an embarrassment to our Nation.’ 

Fox News Digital’s Paul Steinhauser, Lindsay Kornick and Peter Pinedo contributed to this report. 

The Senate inched closer to striking a compromise on a Homeland Security (DHS) funding deal as the partial government shutdown entered its fourth day Tuesday.

Whether Senate Democrats and the White House can reach a deal this week while lawmakers are out of town remains an open question.

Negotiations between the Trump administration and Senate Democrats were seemingly at an impasse through much of Monday after little activity over the weekend. The White House provided a counteroffer to Democrats’ list of demands midway through last week, which they summarily rejected and, in turn, blocked attempts to fund DHS.

But that changed when Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer’s, D-N.Y., office announced that Senate Democrats had sent their counterproposal to the White House late Monday night. 

Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D., was wary of whether Schumer and his caucus would actually put forth a response, but remained hopeful that negotiations would continue. 

‘We’ll see if they are at all serious about actually getting a solution to this, or whether they just want to play political games with these really important agencies,’ Thune told Fox News Digital. 

He also noted that lawmakers went through the same exercise last year when Senate Democrats slow-walked negotiations during the 43-day shutdown.  

‘It’s wrong, in my view, for Democrats to use these folks as collateral in yet another harmful government shutdown,’ Thune said.

The administration wants to keep the dialogue going, a White House official told Fox News Digital.

‘The Trump administration remains interested in having good-faith conversations with Democrats,’ the White House official said.

The official noted that Senate Democrats’ refusal to extend DHS funding is affecting several key functions under the agency’s umbrella, including the Transportation Security Administration (TSA), the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), the U.S. Coast Guard and the U.S. Secret Service.

‘President Trump has been clear — he wants the government open,’ the official said.

The partial government shutdown, which went into effect over the weekend, stems from Schumer and Senate Democrats’ demands for reforms to Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE).

ICE operations are unlikely to be significantly affected by the lapse in DHS funding, as legislation backed by President Donald Trump allocates billions of dollars to immigration enforcement.

Both sides remain at odds over how far those changes should go. Senate Republicans have signaled willingness to cede some ground but have drawn a red line on certain demands, such as requiring ICE agents to obtain judicial warrants or prohibiting them from wearing face coverings during enforcement actions.

Senate Democrats, however, describe their 10 demands as straightforward reforms designed to ensure federal immigration agents adhere to standards similar to those governing local and state police.

‘There’s not much we need to figure out,’ Sen. Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass., told Fox News Digital. ‘Either you think ICE agents are special, and they get to own our streets with no accountability, or that ICE agents should follow the same rules as everyone else — that’s all Democrats are asking for.’

The State Department’s allegation that China conducted a yield-producing nuclear test in 2020 is reigniting debate in Washington over whether the United States can continue its decades-long moratorium on nuclear weapons testing. 

U.S. officials warned that Beijing may be preparing tests in the ‘hundreds of tons’ range — a scale that underscores China’s accelerating nuclear modernization and complicates efforts to draw Beijing into arms control talks.

Under Secretary of State for Arms Control and International Security Thomas DiNanno said recently that the United States has evidence China conducted an explosive nuclear test at its Lop Nur site.

‘I can reveal that the U.S. government is aware that China has conducted nuclear explosive tests, including preparing for tests with designated yields in the hundreds of tons,’ DiNanno said during remarks at the United Nations Conference on Disarmament.

He added that ‘China conducted one such yield-producing nuclear test on June 22 of 2020.’

DiNanno also accused Beijing of using ‘decoupling’ — detonating devices in ways that dampen seismic signals — to ‘hide its activities from the world.’

China’s foreign ministry has denied the allegations, accusing Washington of politicizing nuclear issues and reiterating that Beijing maintains a voluntary moratorium on nuclear testing.

But the accusation has sharpened questions about verification, deterrence and whether the U.S. stockpile stewardship program — which relies on advanced simulations rather than live detonations — remains sufficient in an era of renewed great-power nuclear competition.

Why small nuclear tests are hard to detect

Detecting small underground nuclear tests has long been one of the thorniest problems in arms control.

Unlike the massive atmospheric detonations of the Cold War, modern nuclear tests are conducted deep underground. If a country uses so-called ‘decoupling’ techniques — detonating a device inside a large underground cavity to muffle the seismic shock — the resulting signal can be significantly reduced, making it harder to distinguish from natural seismic activity.

That vulnerability has been debated for decades in discussions over the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty, which China signed but never ratified. Even a relatively small underground detonation can provide valuable weapons data while remaining difficult to detect.

‘If you detonate a device inside a large underground cavity, you can significantly attenuate the seismic signature,’ said Chuck DeVore, chief national initiatives officer at the Texas Public Policy Foundation and a former Pentagon official. ‘That makes it much harder to detect with confidence.’

Are simulations enough?

China signed the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty in 1996 but has not ratified it, and the treaty has never entered into force. It has maintained a voluntary testing moratorium — a commitment that a yield-producing detonation would contradict.

As China expands its nuclear arsenal and major arms control frameworks falter, the Cold War principle of ‘trust but verify’ is under growing strain.

‘The arms control community should feel thoroughly discredited at this point,’ DeVore said, arguing that policymakers should not assume Western restraint will be reciprocated by Beijing.

For decades, the U.S. has relied on the Stockpile Stewardship Program — advanced computer modeling and simulations — to ensure its weapons remain reliable without explosive testing. DeVore warned that this approach may no longer be sufficient if competitors are conducting live detonations.

‘The question presupposes that we only live in a technical world,’ he told Fox News, arguing that relying solely on simulations while rivals ‘cheat at every treaty they’ve ever signed’ risks leaving the United States behind.

DeVore also pointed to what he described as a growing institutional challenge.

‘Virtually everyone who had direct experience with live testing is now retired,’ he said. ‘Rebuilding that expertise would take years.’

But not all nuclear experts agree that resuming testing is the answer.

Henry Sokolski, executive director of the Nonproliferation Policy Education Center, cautioned that a return to live detonations would be far more complex and costly than critics of the current system suggest.

‘Yield testing isn’t a magic switch,’ Sokolski said. ‘If you want meaningful reliability data, you don’t do one test — you do many.’

He noted that the United States conducted more than 1,000 nuclear tests during the Cold War, building a deep database that now underpins the program. Restarting that process, he argued, would likely require years of preparation and significant funding before yielding strategic benefits.

‘The debate isn’t pro-nuclear weapon versus anti-nuclear weapon,’ Sokolski said. ‘It’s about what’s technically necessary and what’s economical.’

A debate inside the weapons complex

Sokolski said the disagreement extends even within the U.S. nuclear weapons complex.

‘Certainly at one of our major labs that likes using calculations — that’s Livermore — they would say you’re home,’ he said, referring to confidence in advanced simulations and hydrodynamic modeling.

Others place greater weight on empirical validation and preserving the option of live testing.

The dispute, he said, is not ideological but technical — centered on confidence levels, cost and long-term strategic planning.

Allies and the credibility question

The implications extend beyond Washington and Beijing. 

Sokolski warned that the credibility of ‘extended deterrence’ — the U.S. commitment to defend allies under its nuclear umbrella — could come under strain if doubts grow about American resolve or capability.

‘Do they think you’re going to come to their defense?’ Sokolski said. ‘If they don’t, it doesn’t matter how reliable your weapons are, extended deterrence isn’t going to work very well.’

Allies such as Japan and South Korea long have relied on U.S. nuclear guarantees rather than pursuing independent arsenals. Any perception that the balance is shifting could complicate regional stability and long-standing nonproliferation efforts.

The policy crossroads

For now, U.S. lab directors continue to certify that the American arsenal remains safe, secure and reliable without explosive testing. But Heather Williams, director of the Project on Nuclear Issues at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, said sustained testing by competitors — particularly absent transparency — could alter that calculus.

‘If Russia and China continue their nuclear testing activities without providing some sort of transparency, then the technical community might make a different assessment,’ she said.

The debate confronting U.S. policymakers is not simply whether to test, but under what conditions testing would meaningfully strengthen deterrence rather than accelerate competition.

Trump previously has suggested the U.S. should ensure testing ‘on an equal basis’ with competitors, though his administration has not formally announced a policy shift.

Trump in October 2025 suggested the U.S. should consider resuming nuclear weapons testing ‘on an equal basis’ with other powers, and at one point said that if others were testing, ‘I guess we have to test.’ 

The president did not clarify whether he meant full nuclear explosive detonations, which the U.S. has not conducted since 1992,  or other forms of testing such as delivery system evaluations that do not involve nuclear explosions. Any return to explosive testing would represent a significant shift in U.S. policy.

The White House did not immediately return a request for comment.