Australia’s ambassador to the U.S. who criticized President Donald Trump is leaving his post early. The announcement comes just a few weeks after the U.S. president made a cutting remark about the diplomat.

‘It is with deep appreciation for his tireless contribution to our national interests over the last three years in Washington that we today announce the Hon Dr. Kevin Rudd AC will conclude his posting as Australia’s Ambassador to the United States at the end of March 2026,’ a joint statement issued by Australian Prime Minister Anthony Albanese MP and Australian Minister of Foreign Affairs Penny Wong read.

In their statement, Albanese and Wong seemed to defend the work that the Hon. Dr. Kevin Rudd AC had done in his position. In what could be seen as a swipe at the Trump administration, the two said that Rudd ‘delivered concrete outcomes for Australia – during both Democrat and Republican Administrations – in collaboration with our closest ally and principal strategic partner.’ 

They also highlighted his knowledge of U.S.-China relations, which is particularly relevant as he takes the helm of the Asia Society, a nonprofit headquartered in New York, which aims to foster relationships between the U.S. and Asia.

Rudd, who previously served as Australia’s prime minister, thanked Albanese and Wong for their ‘kind remarks’ ahead of his departure and gave some insight into his new role.

‘I will be remaining in America working between New York and Washington on the future of U.S.-China relations, which I have always believed to be the core question for the future stability of our region and the world,’ Rudd wrote in an X post from his unofficial account.

On his official X account, Rudd said that ‘It has been an honor to serve as Australia’s Ambassador to the United States over the last three years. I thank the Prime Minister and the Foreign Minister for their kind remarks today.’

Rudd is no stranger to Asia Society, as he served as the organization’s president and CEO 2021-2023. He was also the inaugural President of the Asia Society Policy Institute (ASPI) for nearly 10 years, holding the position from 2015 until 2023. Now, he is set to serve as the president and CEO of the organization and will hold a leading role in the ASPI’s Center for China Analysis, which he established in 2022, according to Asia Society.

In October, when Albanese visited the U.S., Trump was asked about Rudd’s remarks, with one reporter wondering if the comments were the reason why the meeting in Washington was so late in the year. Trump said that he did not know what the ambassador had said before asking Albanese if Rudd was still working for him. In response, Albanese pointed at Rudd who seemed to stumble as he tried to explain the remarks he made, first clarifying that he said them before he took the position as ambassador to the U.S. However, Trump quickly cut him off, saying, ‘I don’t like you either. I don’t and I probably never will.’

Rudd made headlines in November 2024 when he deleted a series of tweets that were critical of Trump after the U.S. president won his second term. Rudd had described Trump in a 2020 post as ‘the most destructive president in history,’ according to reporting from NDTV. Rudd made the comments while serving as the chair of the ASPI. Rudd’s office said that the posts were deleted to prevent others from taking them as remarks made in his capacity as ambassador

‘This has been done to eliminate the possibility of such comments being misconstrued as reflecting his positions as ambassador and, by extension, the views of the Australian Government. Ambassador Rudd looks forward to working with President Trump and his team to continue strengthening the US-Australia alliance,’ a statement from Rudd’s office that was shared with Fox News Digital in November 2024 read.

It is not immediately clear whether these past remarks played a role in Rudd’s departure. However, a Trump administration official told Fox News Digital that Rudd ‘worked well with President Trump and the administration.’ The official added that ‘We wish him well.’

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

As Iran weakens, a power vacuum is emerging across the Middle East — and Saudi Arabia is moving to fill it by recalibrating relations with former rivals, hedging global partnerships and asserting a more independent foreign policy, according to several experts.

Javed Ali, former senior official at the National Security Council and professor at the University of Michigan, told Fox News Digital that ‘Since Iran’s 1979 revolution, both Saudi Arabia and Iran have vied for influence across the broader Muslim world. Mohammed bin Salman’s consolidation of power in the kingdom has also introduced a markedly different vision from that of his predecessors.’

Riyadh’s recent moves, from Yemen to Turkey, are fueling debate over whether Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman’s expanding regional role still aligns with U.S. interests. As part of that recalibration, Bloomberg reported on Jan. 9 that Turkey is seeking entry into the Saudi–Pakistan mutual defense pact signed four months earlier, according to people familiar with the talks.

Michael Rubin, a senior fellow at the American Enterprise Institute, said Saudi Arabia’s current trajectory must be viewed through years of accumulated frustration with U.S. policy.

‘To be fair to MBS, previous U.S. administrations did not uphold their end of the bargain either,’ Rubin told Fox News Digital, pointing to repeated Houthi attacks on Saudi territory. ‘The Houthis launched hundreds of drones and rockets that the Obama administration ignored.’

Rubin said tensions deepened as Mohammed bin Salman pursued reforms long urged by U.S. policymakers, only to face sharp criticism from Washington. He cited the Biden administration’s decision to remove the Houthis’ terror designation.

‘By no objective measure should Secretary of State Antony Blinken have removed the terror designation from the Houthis,’ Rubin said, calling the move ‘pure spite directed at MBS and Donald Trump.’

Rubin said that decision marked a turning point. ‘MBS calculated that if the United States did not have his back, he would need to embrace a Plan B,’ he said, describing outreach to Russia and China as tactical signaling rather than ideological realignment.

Saudi geopolitical researcher Salman Al-Ansari rejects claims that Riyadh is drifting ideologically or embracing Islamist movements, framing Saudi policy as interest-driven.

‘Saudi Arabia does not base its foreign policy on ideological alignment, but on pragmatic considerations aimed at stability and development,’ Al-Ansari told Fox News Digital. He said outreach to Turkey reflects an effort to de-escalate rivalries. ‘The rapprochement with Turkey reflects this diplomatic approach, which seeks to transform the Middle East from a region of chronic conflict into one of greater stability.’

Al-Ansari said the shift has already delivered results. ‘This shift has given Riyadh increased flexibility in engaging regional powers, a change Ankara quickly recognized and that has translated into expanding economic cooperation.’

He rejected claims of alignment with the Muslim Brotherhood. ‘Saudi Arabia designated the group as a terrorist organization in 2014, and this position remains unchanged,’ he said.

Those competing interpretations of Saudi intent are now colliding most visibly in Yemen where the Saudi-Emirati alliance originally formed to counter Iran’s Houthi proxy. While both entered the war to roll back Iranian influence, their strategies diverged. Riyadh backs a unified Yemeni state under the internationally recognized government, arguing fragmentation strengthens Iran. The UAE has supported southern separatists, including the Southern Transitional Council, prioritizing control over ports and security corridors.

In the last few days, Saudi and Yemeni government forces have largely recaptured southern and eastern Yemen from the UAE-backed Southern Transitional Council (STC), and the STC’s leader reportedly fled to the UAE amid the group’s reported dissolution, highlighting a sharp rift involving Emirati support for separatists

Rubin called Yemen the clearest warning sign. ‘This is best seen in Yemen, where he has been supporting the Muslim Brotherhood faction militarily and attacking the more secular Southern Forces in a way that only empowers al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula and the Houthis,’ he said.

Al-Ansari countered that ‘differences with the UAE stem from its backing of separatist armed actors in Yemen, which complicates the political process, fragments the anti-Houthi front, and ultimately benefits the Iranian-backed Houthi militia.’

Rubin warned of long-term consequences. ‘By ‘blowback’ I mean the same Islamists MBS cultivates today will end up targeting Saudi Arabia in the future,’ he said.

With Iran weakened and regional power shifting, Washington now faces a central question: whether Saudi Arabia’s expanding role will reinforce U.S.-backed stability, or redefine the balance of power in ways that test the limits of the long-standing partnership.

As protests spread across Iran and the government responds with lethal force, amid increasing reports claiming thousands have been killed, a growing question is being debated by analysts and Iranians alike: Is the Islamic Republic facing its most serious threat since the 1979 revolution, or does it still retain enough coercive power to survive?

For Mehdi Ghadimi, an Iranian journalist who spent decades protesting the regime before being forced to leave the country, this moment feels fundamentally different from anything that came before.

‘From 1999, when I was about fifteen, until 2024, when I was forced to leave Iran, I took part in every street protest against the Islamic Republic,’ Ghadimi told Fox News Digital. ‘For roughly half of those years, I supported the reformist movement. But after 2010, we became certain that the Islamic Republic is not reformable, that changing its factions is a fiction.’

According to Ghadimi, that realization gradually spread across Iranian society, culminating in what he describes as a decisive shift in the current unrest.

‘For the first time in the 47 years of struggle by the Iranian people against the Islamic Republic, the idea of returning to the period before January 1979 became the sole demand and the central point of unity among the people,’ he said. ‘As a result, we witnessed the most widespread presence of people from all cities and villages of Iran in the streets, on a scale unprecedented in any previous protests.’

Ghadimi claimed the chants on the streets reflected that shift. Instead of demanding economic relief or changes to dress codes, protesters openly called for the fall of the Islamic Republic and the return of the Pahlavi dynasty.

‘At that point, it no longer seemed that we were merely protesting,’ he said. ‘We were, in fact, carrying out a revolution.’

Still, Ghadimi was clear about what he believes is preventing the regime’s collapse.

‘The answer is very clear,’ he said. ‘The government sets no limit for itself when it comes to killing its own people.’

He added that Tehran appears reassured by the lack of consequences for its actions. ‘It has also been reassured by the behavior of other countries that if it manages to survive, it will not be punished for these blatant crimes against humanity,’ he said. ‘The doors of diplomacy will always remain open to them, even if their hands are stained with blood.’

Ghadimi described how the regime cut off internet access to disrupt coordination between protesters and opposition leadership abroad. He said that once connectivity was severed, the reach of video messages from the exiled Prince Reza Pahlavi dropped dramatically.

While Iranian voices describe a revolutionary moment, security and policy experts caution that structural realities still favor the regime.

Javed Ali, an associate professor at the Gerald R. Ford School of Public Policy, said the Islamic Republic is facing far more serious threats to its grip on power than in years past, driven by a convergence of military, regional, economic and diplomatic pressures.

‘The IRGC is in a much weaker position following the 12-day war with Israel last summer,’ Ali said, citing ‘leadership removals, ballistic missile and drone capabilities that were used or damaged, and an air and radar defense network that has been significantly degraded.’

Ali said Iran’s regional deterrence has also eroded sharply. ‘The so-called Axis of Resistance has been significantly weakened across the region,’ he said, pointing to setbacks suffered by Hamas, Hezbollah, the Houthis and Shiite militias allied with Tehran.

Internally, Ali said demographic pressure is intensifying the challenge. ‘Iran’s younger population is even more frustrated than before with deteriorating economic conditions, ongoing social and cultural restrictions and repeated violent crackdowns on dissent,’ he said.

Ali also pointed to shifting external dynamics that are limiting Tehran’s room to maneuver, including what he described as a stronger U.S.-Israel relationship tied to the Netanyahu-Trump alliance. He added that there are ‘possible joint operations already underway to support the protest movement inside Iran.’

Israeli security sources, speaking on background, said Israel has no such interest in intervening in a way that would allow Tehran to redirect domestic unrest outward.

‘Everyone understands it is better to sit and wait quietly and not attract the fire toward Israel,’ one source said. ‘The regime would like to make this about Israel and the Zionist enemy and start another war to repress internal protests.’

‘It is not Israel against Iran,’ the source added. ‘We recognize that the regime has an interest in provoking us, and we do not want to contribute to that.’

The source said a collapse of the Islamic Republic would have far-reaching consequences. ‘If the regime falls, it will affect the entire Middle East,’ the official said. ‘It could open a new era.’

Ali said Iran is increasingly isolated diplomatically. ‘There is growing isolation from Gulf monarchies, the fall of Assad in Syria and only muted support from China and Russia,’ he said.

Despite those pressures, Ali cautioned that Iran’s coercive institutions remain loyal.

‘I think the IRGC, including Basiji paramilitary elements, along with the Ministry of Intelligence, are still loyal to the regime out of a mix of ideology, religion, and self-interest,’ he said, citing ‘power, money and influence.’

Whether fear of collapse could drive insiders to defect remains unclear. ‘Whether there are insiders willing to flip because of a sense of imminent collapse of the clerical structure is hard to know,’ Ali said.

He placed the probability of an internal regime collapse at ‘25% or less,’ calling it ‘possible, but far less probable.’

For now, Iran appears caught between two realities: a population increasingly unified around the rejection of the Islamic Republic, and a security apparatus still willing to use overwhelming force to preserve it.

As Ali noted, pressure alone does not bring regimes down. The decisive moment comes only when those ordered to enforce repression decide it is no longer in their interest to do so.

Despite the scale of unrest, Ghadimi cautioned that the outcome remains uncertain.

‘After these four hellish days, without even knowing the fate of our friends and loved ones who went into the streets, or whether they were alive or not, it is truly difficult for me to give you a clear assessment and say whether our revolution is now moving toward victory or not,’ he said.

He recalled a message he heard repeatedly before leaving Iran, across cities and social classes.

‘The only thing I consistently heard was this: ‘We have nothing left to lose, and even at the cost of our lives, we will not retreat one step from our demand for the fall of the Islamic Republic,’’ Ghadimi said. ‘They asked me to promise that now that I am outside Iran, I would be their voice.’

‘That spirit is what still gives my heart hope for victory,’ he added. ‘But my mind tells me that when mass killing carries no punishment, and when the government possesses enough bullets, guns and determination to suppress it, even if it means killing millions, then victory would require a miracle.’

Former President Bill Clinton has been summoned to appear on Capitol Hill Tuesday morning, as Republicans threaten a possible criminal referral if the ex-commander-in-chief skips out.

He and former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton have both been subpoenaed to appear before the House Oversight Committee for separate closed-door depositions for the panel’s investigation into Jeffrey Epstein.

Clinton was scheduled to appear Tuesday morning at 10 a.m., but it’s not clear whether he will do so. The deposition is expected to move forward regardless.

A spokeswoman for the committee told Fox News Digital on Friday that neither had confirmed their scheduled dates at that point.

‘The Clintons have not confirmed their appearances for their subpoenaed depositions. They are obligated under the law to appear, and we expect them to do so. If the Clintons do not appear at their depositions, the House Oversight Committee will initiate contempt of Congress proceedings,’ the spokeswoman said.

Both Clintons were originally scheduled to appear before the committee in October, but their deposition dates were postponed while the panel was in talks with their attorneys.

Their deposition dates were delayed again when House Oversight Committee Chairman James Comer, R-Ky., was informed the former first couple would be attending a funeral.

‘They’re saying now that he’s going to a funeral on that day, so we’ve been going back and forth with the lawyer,’ Comer told Fox News Digital in December. ‘We’re going to hold him in contempt if he doesn’t show up for his deposition.’

The House Oversight Committee would need to advance a contempt resolution before it’s considered by the entire chamber. If a simple majority votes to hold someone in contempt of Congress, a criminal referral is then traditionally made to the Department of Justice.

A criminal contempt of Congress charge is a misdemeanor that carries a punishment of up to one year in jail and a maximum $100,000 fine if convicted.

In the absence of mutually agreed-upon new dates, new subpoenas were issued for Bill and Hillary Clinton to appear on Jan. 13 and Jan. 14, respectively.

They were two of 10 people who Comer initially subpoenaed in the House’s Epstein investigation after a unanimous bipartisan vote directed him to do so last year.

Clinton was known to be friendly with the late pedophile before his federal charges but was never implicated in any wrongdoing related to him.

Fox News Digital reached out to the Clintons’ lawyer and Bill Clinton’s spokesperson to ask whether he would appear Tuesday, but did not receive a response.

A bipartisan group of lawmakers is introducing a bill aimed at restricting any unauthorized military action by President Donald Trump, amid growing debate over his comments about acquiring Greenland ‘one way or the other.’

Rep. Bill Keating, D-Mass., is leading the legislation along with Reps. Steny Hoyer, D-Md., Brendan Boyle, D-Pa., and Don Bacon, R-Neb., according to POLITICO.

‘This is about our fundamental shared goals and our fundamental security, not just in Europe, but in the United States itself,’ Keating said in a statement to the outlet.

The group involved in the effort is soliciting broader support for the legislation and say they hope additional Republicans will back the effort to restrict funding for any unauthorized military action against U.S. allies.

In a letter to colleagues, Keating said ‘this legislation takes a clear stand against such action and further supports NATO allies and partners,’ according to POLITICO.

While the measure does not specifically name any specific countries, it is clearly in response to Trump’s repeated threats against Greenland.

Keating said the decision to omit Greenland’s name was meant to broaden the legislation’s focus. He said he met with the Danish Ambassador and the head of Greenland representation.

‘This isn’t just about Greenland. This is about our security,’ Keating said.

Keating also said he believes slashing funding is the most impactful way to disincentivize Trump administration officials from taking action.

‘War powers are important, but we’ve seen with Democratic and Republican presidents that that’s not as effective,’ he said. ‘It’s hard to get around having no funds or not allowing personnel to do it.’

This comes after the Senate advanced a bipartisan resolution last week that would limit Trump’s ability to conduct further attacks against Venezuela after the U.S. military’s recent move to strike the country and capture its president, Nicolás Maduro. The Upper Chamber could pass the measure later this week, although its future in the House remains uncertain despite some support from Republicans.

On Greenland, administration officials are openly weighing options such as military force to take the Danish territory, a move that would violate NATO’s Article V, which states that an attack on one member is an attack on all of them and could end the alliance of more than 75 years.

‘We are going to do something on Greenland, whether they like it or not,’ Trump said on Friday. ‘Because if we don’t do it, Russia or China will take over Greenland, and we’re not going to have Russia or China as a neighbor.’

Greenland Prime Minister Jens-Frederik Nielsen and four party leaders reaffirmed last week that the self-governing island has no interest in becoming part of the U.S.

‘We don’t want to be Americans, we don’t want to be Danes, we want to be Greenlanders,’ the leaders said, adding that Greenland’s ‘future must be decided by the Greenlandic people.’

Danish Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen, French President Emmanuel Macron, German Chancellor Friedrich Merz, British Prime Minister Keir Starmer, as well as the leaders of Italy, Spain and Poland, also signed a letter stating: ‘Greenland belongs to its people. It is for Denmark and Greenland, and them only, to decide on matters concerning Denmark and Greenland.’

The chance of expanding U.S. control over Greenland has drawn mixed reactions from Congress. While most Democrats have opposed the idea, some Republicans have voiced support for pursuing closer ties with the territory.

Rep. Randy Fine, R-Fla., who introduced legislation to make it the 51st U.S. state, although he said the best way to acquire Greenland is voluntarily.

‘I think it is in the world’s interest for the United States to exert sovereignty over Greenland,’ Fine told Fox News Digital.

Former special counsel Jack Smith will testify in a hearing before the House Judiciary Committee next week, giving Republican and Democratic lawmakers on the panel a chance to grill him in a public setting on his prosecutions of President Donald Trump.

Smith will appear before the committee on Jan. 22, one month after he sat for a closed-door deposition with the committee and testified for eight hours about his special counsel work, a source familiar told Fox News Digital.

Smith had long said he wanted to speak to the committee publicly, and although Chairman Jim Jordan, R-Ohio, first demanded the deposition, the chairman also said an open hearing was on the table.

Smith investigated Trump and brought two indictments against him over the 2020 election and alleged retention of classified documents. Trump pleaded not guilty and aggressively fought the charges, and Smith dropped both cases when Trump won the 2024 election, citing a Department of Justice policy that discourages prosecuting sitting presidents.

In a public hearing, House lawmakers will be able to question Smith in five-minute increments, whereas in the deposition, each party questioned Smith in one-hour sessions. Politico first reported that Smith would appear for a hearing sometime this month.

Smith gave little new information during his initial meeting with the committee and defended his work.

‘I made my decisions in the investigation without regard to President Trump’s political association, activities, beliefs, or candidacy in the 2024 presidential election,’ Smith said, according to a transcript of the deposition. ‘We took actions based on what the facts, and the law required, the very lesson I learned early in my career as a prosecutor.’

Smith said he followed DOJ policy when his team made the controversial decision to subpoena numerous Republican senators’ and House members’ phone records as part of his 2020 election probe. Smith noted the subpoenas sought a narrow set of data.

‘If Donald Trump had chosen to call a number of Democratic senators [to delay the election certification proceedings], we would have gotten toll records for Democratic senators. So responsibility for why these records, why we collected them, that’s — that lies with Donald Trump,’ Smith said.

The Republicans have said the subpoenas were unconstitutional violations of the speech or debate clause, and they have broadly said the Biden DOJ abused its authority by bringing, in their view, politicized criminal charges against a former president and presidential candidate.

Trump, who has long decried Smith as a ‘thug’ and said he belongs in jail, has said he welcomes Smith at a public hearing.

Asked about Smith’s appearance next week, a representative for Smith provided a statement from one of his lawyers, Lanny Breuer.

‘Jack has been clear for months he is ready and willing to answer questions in a public hearing about his investigations into President Trump’s alleged unlawful efforts to overturn the 2020 election and his mishandling of classified documents,’ Breuer said.

House Democratic Leader Hakeem Jeffries, D-N.Y., directed some heated remarks at a Trump administration Cabinet official whose department has been dominating headlines in recent weeks.

‘What is clear is that Kristi Noem is completely and totally unqualified. She should have never been confirmed by Senate Republicans,’ Jeffries said of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) secretary during a Monday press conference. ‘It’s disgraceful that she’s there. She should be run out of town as soon as possible.’

Criticism against Noem, DHS, and Immigrations and Customs Enforcement (ICE) has intensified on the left in the wake of a deadly ICE-involved shooting in Minneapolis last week.

An ICE agent shot and killed a U.S. citizen, 37-year-old Renee Nicole Good, who allegedly presented a threat to ICE agents as they attempted to conduct enforcement operations. Partisan fissures have since erupted over which side was acting improperly when the deadly incident occurred.

‘Kristi Noem, the Department of Homeland Security and ICE, they’re totally out of control. And the American people want these extremists to be reined in,’ Jeffries said on Monday.

He said Good ‘should be alive today’ and accused both Noem and the ICE agent who shot Good of a ‘depraved indifference toward human life.’

Video of last week’s incident appears to show Good’s car making contact with the ICE agent who shot her before he opened fire. Arguments have since raged over whether she was deliberately getting in the way or even weaponizing her car, or whether she was trying to drive away.

Federal officials like Noem have defended the agent as acting in self-defense while accusing Good of trying to actively impede ICE activity in the Democrat-controlled city.

Democrats, including Minneapolis Mayor Jacob Frey and Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz, have accused ICE and Republican officials of stoking fear and tension in the city while demanding the federal government cease current operations there immediately.

Now Democrats in Congress have been threatening to withhold support from funding DHS unless significant reforms are made — a threat Jeffries alluded to during his press conference.

‘What’s in front of us right now is a spending bill that will go either one of two ways. Either Republicans will continue their my-way-or-the-highway approach as it relates to the Homeland Security bill — and if that happens, then it’s going to be on them to figure out a path forward,’ Jeffries began.

‘Alternatively, particularly in the face of the tragedy…there’s some commonsense measures that need to be put in place so that ICE can conduct itself in a manner that is at least consistent with every other law enforcement agency in the United States of America, at the state, local and federal level.’

The deadline to finish federal funding and avert a partial government shutdown is at the end of day on Jan. 30.

Fox News Digital reached out to DHS for a response.

Tech billionaire Elon Musk is increasingly drifting back into President Donald Trump’s MAGA orbit after their public blowup in June 2025 led to months of icy distance between the pair.

That thaw surfaced publicly again over the weekend. Trump mentioned Musk by name Sunday when asked by the media whether he would lean on Starlink, Musk’s satellite internet constellation, to help deliver internet access to Iran as citizens take to the streets in mass protests against Ayatollah Ali Khamenei’s regime.

‘We may get the internet going if that’s possible,’ Trump told the media Sunday while aboard Air Force One. ‘We may speak to Elon. Because, as you know, he’s very good at that kind of thing. He’s got a very good company. So we may speak to Elon Musk.’ 

The president added, ‘I’m gonna call him as soon as I’m finished with you.’ 

SpaceX did not immediately respond to Fox Digital’s request for comment on the president’s remarks. 

Trump’s comment is the latest signal that the Trump–Musk friendship is warming after months of the pair spatting or having cordial interactions — a stark contrast to their cozy relationship while on the 2024 campaign trail and the early days of the administration. 

When asked Monday for updates on the president’s friendship with Musk, and if Trump’s comments were more reflective of the urgency in Iran, the White House directed Fox Digital to Trump praising Musk Jan. 4. 

‘Elon’s great. I say about Elon, he’s 80% super genius, and 20% he makes mistakes. But he’s a good guy. He’s a well-meaning person,’ Trump said of Musk while aboard Air Force One Jan 4. 

Trump’s comments follow the pair sharing a ‘lovely dinner’ together at Mar-a-Lago in Florida, Musk reported on X at the time. 

Just roughly a year ago, Musk was described as Trump’s ‘first buddy,’ as the media took note of the pair’s close working relationship, which included Musk serving as a special employee of the federal government as Trump unleashed the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE). Special government employees are commonly experts that the federal government hires on a temporary basis for no more than 130 days a year. 

Musk would sleep at the White House on late work nights, attend Cabinet meetings and become a common face on the White House campus when he served as the public leader of DOGE — the government office Trump established in January 2025 to seek out and end potential fraud, waste and mismanagement within the federal government. 

‘He’s one of the greatest business leaders and innovators the world has ever produced,’ Trump said in May, when Musk’s tenure as a special government employee ran dry of its 130 days. ‘He stepped forward to put his very great talents into the service of our nation, and we appreciate it.’

Days later, Musk began publicly criticizing the ‘big, beautiful bill’ — a massive tax and spending package that advanced Trump’s agenda on taxes, immigration, energy, defense and the national debt — as a ‘disgusting abomination.’ 

Musk warned on X it would be the ‘BIGGEST DEBT ceiling increase in HISTORY’ — then escalated the spat with a personal jab that ‘@RealDonaldTrump is in the Epstein files.’

Trump told the media that he was disappointed in Musk’s comments, while the tech billionaire reeled in some of his commentary, remarking he sometimes ‘went too far.’ The president said in 2025 that his relationship with Musk changed when he began discussing plans to eliminate the electric vehicle mandate, which would affect Musk’s signature electric company, Tesla.

The pair abruptly parted ways in June. Musk has sporadically signaled support for the Trump administration, including just weeks later in July when he praised Trump’s actions in Israel to end the war with Gaza. 

Trump signed the ‘big, beautiful bill’ into law on the Fourth of July. 

Their relationship has been on an apparent mend since at least September 2025, when the pair was seen sitting next to each other and chatting during Turning Point USA founder Charlie Kirk’s memorial service in Arizona following his shocking assassination.

Musk attended a White House dinner for Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman of Saudi Arabia on Nov. 18, 2025, and Trump told the media in December 2025, ‘I like Elon a lot,’ but said he was unsure if the tech leader was back in his friend circle following the June fallout. 

The next global energy war won’t just be fought over oil and gas – it will be decided by who can power artificial intelligence first, and the U.S. must win that race, the head of the nation’s largest oil and gas trade group told Fox News Digital.

American Petroleum Institute President Mike Sommers said surging AI-driven electricity demand has made energy infrastructure the decisive front in the next phase of U.S. economic and national security competition, as the Trump administration and Republicans in Congress moved aggressively in 2025 to deliver landmark domestic energy production wins.

Sommers, who will headline the 2026 State of American Energy forum at Washington’s wharf on Tuesday, told Fox News Digital that of the goals set out in API’s two-year plan, ‘we got 90% of it done in 2025,’ – while permitting reform remains unresolved and AI is both a growing energy demand and a tool the industry plans to deploy.

‘The [June 2024 plan] was all about how to reduce inflation and ensure that we have energy security here in the United States. And the Trump administration, along with their allies in Congress, allowed us to get historic victories in 2025.’

‘The Trump administration has done everything they can to get permitting done at the federal level, but there’s only so much they can do without congressional action. So our focus going into 2026 is how do we finally unlock permitting form that both Republicans and Democrats can get behind.’

That remaining frontier, Sommers said, is AI. Sommers said that not only must the U.S. win the battle to power AI the fastest and most efficient but also harness its power in a novel way to in turn increase the effectiveness of energy development itself.

‘We expect that energy demand is going to go up by 50% just in the next 15 years. What that means is, is that we’re really going need every energy source going forward. But primarily what that means is that, we’re going need a lot more natural gas,’ he said, calling it the ‘backbone’ of contemporary electricity and the power grid in the U.S.

The AI race is intertwined with a newly bipartisan push for permitting reform – slashing the red tape preventing major projects from getting off the ground.

Republicans and some top Democrats are onboard, and Sommers said all sides likely understand what’s at stake. At the 2025 meeting of the National Governor’s Association, both Republicans, like Oklahoma’s Kevin Stitt and Democrats, like Pennsylvania’s Josh Shapiro, spoke about the importance of reforming the permitting process to unleash their states’ energy potential.

‘It’s time for both sides to put their swords down and work together because we know that we’re going to need a lot more energy going into the future. And the only way that we are going to be able to get it built in this country is to get a comprehensive permanent bill through Congress that is durable and can survive the pendulum swings of American politics.’

On the AI front, Sommers said a lot of infrastructure must be developed to power the U.S. into the AI age.

‘We have to win the war for AI. But if we don’t win the War for Energy, we’re never going to even be able to get to the war for AI,’ he said.

‘So that’s just on what has to happen for artificial intelligence. There’s another side of this, which is how our industry is going to use AI into the future: What I’m optimistic about is that we’re going to be able to use AI in a way that allows us to find more resources than we can even find today.’

He added that the AI frontier can be the next fracking revolution in the U.S. – as fracking allowed energy companies to capture resources they never thought they could reach.

‘AI has that exact same potential. And I think 10 years from now, we’ll be talking about the incredible impact that AI has had on our ability to find more oil and more natural gas in the United States.’

Sommers said that even with the heightened technology in the energy exploration sector today, up to 80% of oil and gas resources get left underground.

Energy companies are developing ways to harness AI to better explore the subsurface of the Earth – helping them draw out more proverbial bang for their buck on what lies beneath.

‘So there’s kind of a two-pronged message here: One, we have to have permanent reform so that we can build out the infrastructure that’s going to power AI.’

‘And two, AI is really the path of future energy security for the United States,’ Sommers said.

President Donald Trump branded himself as the ‘president’ of Venezuela in a social media post Sunday night, after signaling that the U.S. would oversee Caracas, Venezuela, for years. 

Trump shared a doctored image that looked like a Wikipedia page that identified him as ‘Acting President of Venezuela’ since January 2026, after the U.S. conducted strikes in Venezuela and seized its dictator, Nicolás Maduro. 

Trump said Jan. 3 that the U.S. would run Venezuela until a safe transition could occur, and he told The New York Times in an interview published Wednesday that he anticipated that the U.S. would oversee Venezuela ‘much longer’ than six months or a year. Even so, he did not share a more detailed estimated timeline. 

The social media post also comes as the Trump administration has sought to reassert U.S. dominance in the Western Hemisphere, and has claimed it’s revived the Monroe Doctrine, rebranded as the ‘Don-roe Doctrine,’ which originally sought to limit European influence in Latin America and to protect U.S. influence in the region.

The Monroe Doctrine, first introduced in 1823 by President James Monroe, eventually was used to justify U.S. actions in the region as an ‘international police power’ under former President Theodore Roosevelt, according to the National Archives.

In response to questions from Fox News Digital regarding whether the post was shared jokingly, and what it suggests about how long the U.S. will be involved in running Venezuela, White House spokeswoman Anna Kelly told Fox News Digital: ‘President Trump will be the greatest President for the American and Venezuelan people in history. Congratulations, world!’

Trump announced Jan. 3 that U.S. special forces conducted a ‘large-scale strike’ against Caracas, Venezuela, and seized Maduro and his wife, Cilia Flores. Both were taken to New York and appeared in a Manhattan federal court Jan. 5 on drug charges, where they each pleaded not guilty.

The raid came after months of pressure on Venezuela and more than two dozen strikes in Latin American waters against alleged drug traffickers as part of Trump’s effort to crack down on the influx of drugs into the U.S.

The Trump administration routinely stated that it did not recognize Maduro as a legitimate head of state and said he was the leader of a drug cartel. Likewise, Trump said in December 2025 he believed it would be ‘smart’ for Maduro to step down. 

The Trump administration has justified seizing Maduro as a ‘law enforcement’ operation, and Secretary of State Marco Rubio said congressional approval wasn’t necessary since the operation didn’t amount to an ‘invasion.’

However, lawmakers primarily on the left have questioned the legality of the operation in Venezuela, which was conducted without Congress’ approval.

‘This has been a profound constitutional failure,’ the top Democrat on the Senate Armed Services Committee, Sen. Jack Reed, D-R.I., said in a statement Jan. 3. ‘Congress — not the President — has the sole power to authorize war. Pursuing regime change without the consent of the American people is a reckless overreach and an abuse of power.’