Vice President JD Vance, former Vice President Kamala Harris and former President Barack Obama were among the prominent political figures who issued statements following the death of Rev. Jesse Jackson Sr. The civil rights leader and two-time Democratic presidential primary candidate was 84.

Vance indicated that one of his family members voted for Jackson in the 1988 Democratic presidential primary and for Trump in the 2016 Republican presidential primary.

‘I have a close family member who voted in two presidential primaries in her entire life. Donald Trump in 2016 and Jesse Jackson in 1988,’ Vance wrote in a post on X. ‘RIP Jesse Jackson.’

Former Vice President Kamala Harris recalled getting positive reactions from others when she had a ‘Jesse Jackson for President’ bumper sticker on her car when she was a law student.

‘As a young law student, I would drive back and forth from Oakland, where I lived, to San Francisco, where I went to school. I had a bumper sticker in the back window of my car that read: ‘Jesse Jackson for President.’ As I would drive across the Bay Bridge, you would not believe how people from every walk of life would give me a thumbs up or honk of support. They were small interactions, but they exemplified Reverend Jackson’s life work — lifting up the dignity of working people, building community and coalitions, and strengthening our democracy and nation,’ she noted in a post on X.

‘I was proud to partner with and learn from him on this work throughout my career, and I am so grateful for the time we spent together this January. Reverend Jackson was a selfless leader, mentor, and friend to me and so many others,’ she wrote.

Former President Barack Obama noted in a statement that he and former first lady Michelle Obama ‘were deeply saddened to hear about the passing of a true giant, the Reverend Jesse Jackson.’

‘Michelle got her first glimpse of political organizing at the Jacksons’ kitchen table when she was a teenager. And in his two historic runs for president, he laid the foundation for my own campaign to the highest office of the land,’ Obama noted. ‘Michelle and I will always be grateful for Jesse’s lifetime of service, and the friendship our families share.’

Arguing that noncitizens could be on state voter rolls — something that is illegal under federal law — the Trump administration is escalating its campaign to obtain registration data ahead of the 2026 midterms, despite a string of federal court setbacks.

The strategy has unfolded on three fronts: cooperation from Republican-led states willing to share voter data, lawsuits against roughly two dozen blue and purple states that have refused, and a legislative push in Congress to tighten national voting requirements. Federal judges have so far rebuffed the administration’s legal demands, but the Justice Department is widening its campaign as Election Day draws near. 

Hans von Spakovsky, a senior legal fellow at the conservative group Advancing American Freedom, said voter rolls are a central focus ahead of the midterms because of the Trump administration’s concerns that noncitizens are on them and could end up voting. It is illegal for noncitizens to vote in federal elections.

‘The problem is, blue states, like Oregon, they have no interest in that kind of verification, so they’re not actually doing what they ought to be doing, which is running data-based comparisons with the [Department of Homeland Security],’ von Spakovsky told Fox News Digital.

The DOJ has made sweeping demands for not just publicly available voter roll data, but also sensitive information, such as voters’ partial Social Security numbers and dates of birth.

The latest state to successfully fight the DOJ’s request is Michigan, where Secretary of State Jocelyn Benson said the federal government was not entitled to its 7 million voters’ personal information beyond what was already available.

The DOJ cited three federal laws, the Civil Rights Act, the Help America Vote Act and the National Voter Registration Act, that it said gave the Trump administration the right to the confidential information. Judge Hala Jarbou disagreed.

‘The Court concludes that (1) HAVA does not require the disclosure of any records, (2) the NVRA does not require the disclosure of voter registration lists because they are not records concerning the implementation of list maintenance procedures, and (3) the CRA does not require the disclosure of voter registration lists because they are not documents that come into the possession of election officials,’ Jarbou, a Trump appointee wrote.

Federal judges in Oregon and California have also thrown out the DOJ’s lawsuits. The DOJ could appeal the decisions. A department spokesperson declined to comment for this story.

But the DOJ has seen cooperation from red states, such as Texas, Alabama and Mississippi, who were among several to reach a ‘Memorandum of Understanding’ that led the states to hand over the information the department wanted.

In another maneuver, Attorney General Pam Bondi pressured Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz, a Democrat, to provide the Midwest battleground’s voter rolls, saying in a warning letter that such action would help ease unrest in the state that stemmed from a federal immigration crackdown there. 

Democrats were enraged by the letter and have argued the Trump administration is infringing on states’ rights to conduct their own elections.

Sen. Chris Murphy, D-Ct., argued the letter was a ‘pretext for Trump to take over elections in swing states,’ while a state lawyer described the letter as a ‘ransom note.’ The DOJ, at the time, told Fox News Digital Democrats were ‘shamelessly lying’ about the letter’s purpose. Bondi said that handing over the voter rolls was among several ‘simple steps’ Minnesota could take to ‘bring back law and order.’ A lawsuit is still pending in Minnesota over the voter rolls.

In Congress, the Safeguard American Voter Eligibility Act would make it a national requirement that people registering to vote provide in-person proof of citizenship, such as birth certificates or passports. The legislation also includes a new national requirement for photo ID at the polls.

The bill has widespread Republican support. The House passed the SAVE Act last week, and even moderate Republican senators like Sen. Susan Collins, R-Me., have said they are on board with it. The bill is still stalled in the Senate, however, because it needs 60 votes to pass, meaning several Democrats would need to support it. Currently, none do. 

Von Spakovsky noted that the SAVE Act had a key provision that would allow private citizens to bring lawsuits over it.

‘There’s no question in my mind that if the Save Act gets passed, there are election officials in blue states that will be reluctant to or may refuse to enforce the proof of citizenship requirement,’ von Spakovsky said. ‘The Save Act provides a private right of action, so that means that citizens in Oregon could sue those election officials if they’re refusing to comply with the Save Act.’

He said the private right of action provision would also provide recourse for citizens if Democrats take over the DOJ in the next administration and refuse to enforce the SAVE Act.

Trump has repeatedly argued that noncitizen voting poses a threat to election integrity and has pressed Republican lawmakers to tighten federal requirements. Last week, he floated attempting to impose identification requirements through executive order if Congress does not act.

‘This is an issue that must be fought, and must be fought, NOW!’ Trump wrote on Truth Social. ‘If we can’t get it through Congress, there are Legal reasons why this SCAM is not permitted. I will be presenting them shortly, in the form of an Executive Order.’

A much broader bill called the Make Elections Great Again Act is still moving through the House and faces a steeper uphill climb to passage.

In addition to national documented proof of citizenship requirement, the MEGA Act would end universal mail voting, eliminate ranked-choice voting and ban ballots postmarked by Election Day from being accepted after that day, which would outlaw postmark rules in 14 states and Washington, D.C.

The House Oversight Committee is hearing from a billionaire on Wednesday who was named one of Jeffrey Epstein’s co-conspirators by a 2019 FBI document.

Les Wexner is the latest person to be deposed in the House’s investigation into the federal government’s handling of Epstein’s case. 

Unlike most previous depositions, however, committee staff and potentially some lawmakers are traveling to Ohio on Wednesday morning to depose Wexner in his home state.

A spokesperson for Wexner declined to comment on the deposition and on whether he would invoke his Fifth Amendment right to avoid answering questions.

But if he cooperates with the committee’s questioning, Wexner’s insight is likely to be key to unlocking information on just how Epstein obtained his vast wealth before dying by suicide in a Manhattan jail in 2019.

The 88-year-old businessman is the founder of L Brands, formerly called The Limited, through which he acquired well-known companies Victoria’s Secret, Bath & Body Works, Express, and Abercrombie & Fitch, among others.

He was also one of Epstein’s first major clients as a financial advisor, with Epstein being granted power of attorney over Wexner’s vast wealth.

Wexner also sold his Manhattan townhouse to Epstein, which was later discovered to be one of the locations where federal authorities accused Epstein of abusing young women and girls under 18.

But Wexner has never been criminally accused nor charged in relation to the late pedophile’s crimes.

A letter from Wexner to his Wexner Foundation charity dated Aug. 7, 2019, said he ended his relationship with Epstein sometime after the first federal investigation into his crimes emerged nearly 20 years ago.

Wexner also accused Epstein of misusing his vast wealth.

‘As the allegations against Mr. Epstein in Florida were emerging, he vehemently denied them. But by early fall 2007, it was agreed that he should step back from the management of our personal finances. In that process, we discovered that he had misappropriated vast sums of money from me and my family,’ read the letter, obtained by Fox News Digital on Tuesday.

‘This was, frankly, a tremendous shock, even though it clearly pales in comparison to the unthinkable allegations against him now. With his credibility and our trust in him destroyed, we immediately severed ties with him. We were able to recover some of the funds.’

Wexner is the fourth person appearing before the House Oversight Committee in its Epstein probe.

House Oversight Committee Chairman James Comer, R-Ky., previously oversaw the panel through the depositions of former Trump administration Attorney General Bill Barr, ex-Trump Labor Secretary Alex Acosta, who was the U.S. attorney in Florida who signed off on Epstein’s infamous 2008 non-prosecution agreement, and convicted Epstein accomplice Ghislaine Maxwell.

Maxwell’s deposition lasted less than an hour after she invoked the Fifth Amendment, refusing to answer questions unless she was granted clemency by President Donald Trump.

The U.S. is preparing to expand the deployment of advanced missile systems in the northern Philippines, placing additional long-range strike capability within range of key Chinese military assets and reinforcing Washington’s effort to counter Beijing’s growing assertiveness across the Indo-Pacific.

U.S. and Philippine officials announced plans to increase deployments of ‘cutting-edge missile and unmanned systems’ to the treaty ally, as both governments condemned what they described as China’s ‘illegal, coercive, aggressive and deceptive activities’ in the South China Sea.

The move comes as confrontations between Chinese and Philippine vessels have intensified in disputed waters and as Beijing continues to pressure Taiwan, raising the stakes across the region’s most sensitive flashpoints.

It builds on the deployment of the U.S. Army’s Typhon missile system in northern Luzon, Philippines, a ground-based launcher capable of firing Tomahawk cruise missiles that can travel more than 1,000 miles.

Tomahawks can travel more than 1,000 miles — a range that, from northern Luzon, Philippines, places portions of southern China and major People’s Liberation Army (PLA) facilities within reach. The positioning also allows the U.S. and Philippine militaries to cover large swaths of the South China Sea and key maritime corridors connecting it to the broader Pacific.

The U.S. first deployed the Typhon system to Luzon, Philippines, in April 2024. An anti-ship missile launcher known as the Navy Marine Expeditionary Ship Interdiction System was deployed in 2025 to Batan Island in the northernmost Philippine province of Batanes.

That island faces the Bashi Channel, a strategic waterway just south of Taiwan that serves as a critical transit route for commercial shipping and military vessels moving between the South China Sea and the Western Pacific. Control of that channel would be vital in any potential Taiwan contingency.

Beijing has urged Manila to withdraw the U.S. systems from its territory, but officials under President Ferdinand Marcos Jr. have rejected those demands.

‘China has consistently stated its firm opposition to the United States’ deployment of advanced weapons systems in the Philippines. The introduction of strategic and offensive weapons that heighten regional tensions, fuel geopolitical confrontation, and risk triggering an arms race is extremely dangerous. Such actions are irresponsible to the people of the Philippines, to Southeast Asian nations, and to regional security as a whole,’ Chinese embassy spokesperson Liu Pengyu told Fox News Digital.  ‘The United States is not a party to disputes in the South China Sea and has no standing to intervene in maritime issues between China and the Philippines.’

‘The Taiwan question lies at the very heart of China’s core interests. China’s determination to defend its national sovereignty, security, and territorial integrity is unwavering. Any provocation that crosses red lines on Taiwan will be met with resolute countermeasures, and any attempt to obstruct China’s reunification is doomed to fail,’ Liu continued. 

Neither side detailed how many additional systems would be sent or whether the deployments would be permanent, but Philippine Ambassador to Washington Jose Manuel Romualdez said U.S. and Filipino defense officials discussed deploying upgraded missile launchers that Manila may eventually seek to purchase.

‘It’s a kind of system that’s really very sophisticated and will be deployed here in the hope that, down the road, we will be able to get our own,’ Romualdez told The Associated Press.

Romualdez stressed that the deployments are intended as a deterrent.

‘It’s purely for deterrence,’ he said. ‘Every time the Chinese show any kind of aggression, it only strengthens our resolve to have these types.’

China repeatedly has objected to the missile deployments, warning they threaten regional stability and accusing Washington of trying to contain its rise.

In a joint statement following annual bilateral talks in Manila, the U.S. and the Philippines underscored their support for freedom of navigation and unimpeded commerce in the South China Sea — a vital global trade artery through which trillions of dollars in goods pass each year.

‘Both sides condemned China’s illegal, coercive, aggressive and deceptive activities in the South China Sea, recognizing their adverse effects on regional peace and stability and the economies of the Indo-Pacific and beyond,’ the statement said.

China claims virtually the entire South China Sea despite an international tribunal ruling in 2016 that invalidated many of its sweeping claims. In recent years, Chinese coast guard and maritime militia vessels have clashed repeatedly with Philippine ships near disputed shoals, including Second Thomas Shoal.

The expanded missile deployments also come as the Pentagon balances rising tensions in multiple theaters. In recent weeks, the USS Abraham Lincoln carrier strike group — which had been operating in the Indo-Pacific — was redirected toward the Middle East as the U.S. moved to bolster its posture amid escalating tensions with Iran. 

The deployments also reflect a broader U.S. effort to strengthen its military posture along the so-called ‘first island chain’ — a string of territories stretching from Japan through Taiwan and the Philippines that forms a natural barrier to Chinese naval expansion into the Pacific.

Washington has deepened defense cooperation with Manila under the Enhanced Defense Cooperation Agreement, expanding U.S. access to Philippine bases, including sites in northern Luzon close to Taiwan.

China in May released a national security white paper criticizing the deployment of an ‘intermediate-range missile system’ in the region — widely viewed as a reference to the U.S. Typhon launcher in the Philippines. The document accused unnamed countries of reviving a ‘Cold War mentality’ and forming military ‘small groups’ that aggravate regional tensions.

For U.S. planners, dispersing mobile, land-based missile systems across allied territory complicates Beijing’s military calculus. Instead of relying solely on ships and aircraft, the U.S. can field ground-based systems that are harder to track and capable of holding Chinese naval and air assets at risk.

For Beijing, however, such deployments reinforce its long-standing claim that the United States is encircling China militarily.

As tensions simmer in both the South China Sea and around Taiwan, the positioning of long-range U.S. missile systems on Philippine soil underscores how the strategic competition between Washington and Beijing is increasingly being defined by geography — and by which side can project credible deterrent power across it.

The Vatican will not join President Donald Trump’s newly formed Board of Peace, its top diplomatic official said Tuesday, signaling reluctance from the Holy See to take part in the post-war initiative.

Vatican Secretary of State Cardinal Pietro Parolin said the Holy See ‘will not participate in the Board of Peace because of its particular nature, which is evidently not that of other States,’ the Vatican’s official news outlet reported.

The Board of Peace, which was chartered in January and includes nearly 20 countries, is tasked with managing recovery efforts in the Gaza Strip after the Israel-Hamas war.

While responding to questions about Italy declining to join the board, Parolin said ‘there are points that leave us somewhat perplexed,’ adding that ‘there are some critical points that would need to find explanations.’

‘The important thing is that an attempt is being made to provide a response,’ he said. ‘However, for us there are certain critical issues that should be resolved.’

Parolin continued, ‘One concern is that, at the international level it should above all be the UN that manages these crisis situations. This is one of the points on which we have insisted.’

Pope Leo, the first U.S. pope, received an invitation to join the peace board in January.

Leaders from 17 countries participated in the initial charter signing ceremony in Davos, Switzerland, in late January, including presidents and other senior government officials from Latin America, Europe, the Middle East and Central and Southeast Asia.

Israel formally joined the board last week ahead of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s meeting with Trump at the White House.

Several other countries were also invited by the White House, including Russia, Belarus, France, Germany, Vietnam, Finland, Ukraine, Ireland, Greece and China.

Poland and Italy on Wednesday said they would not join.

Trump announced Sunday that board members have pledged more than $5 billion in aid for Gaza.

The president said the funding would be formally pledged during a meeting Wednesday in Washington, D.C.

Fox News Digital’s Anders Hagstrom contributed to this report.

Senate Democrats have panned the GOP’s push for voter ID legislation as akin to segregationist laws from the Deep South, but the architect of the bill in the Senate says their arguments are detached from reality.

‘It’s paranoid fantasy,’ Sen. Mike Lee, R-Utah, told Fox News Digital. ‘These are absurd arguments. They should be ashamed to make them.’

Lee was responding to comments from Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., who has doubled down on his claim that the Safeguarding American Voter Eligibility (SAVE) America Act is ‘Jim Crow 2.0.’

The bill, which passed the House last week and has been introduced and championed by Lee in the Senate, would require photo ID to vote in federal elections, proof of citizenship to register and would mandate that states keep voter rolls clear of ineligible voters.

Schumer and his caucus plan to block the bill, arguing that it is a tool of voter suppression that would disproportionately harm poorer Americans and minority groups.

But Lee argued that providing identification or proof of citizenship is routine in everyday life — whether undergoing a background check to buy a firearm or filling out tax forms when starting a new job.

‘By their logic, it’s Jim Crow to require somebody to establish citizenship before taking a job with a new employer, and that’s insane,’ Lee said.

‘And so then they argue here, well, voting is so fundamental, and we have constitutional protections protecting our right to vote,’ he continued. ‘Well, we’ve got constitutional protections protecting our right to bear arms, and yet that doesn’t cause us to dispense with proving who you are and your eligibility to buy a gun. This has just been insane.’

Without Democratic support, however, the pathway to sending the legislation to President Donald Trump’s desk is complicated.

Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D., has vowed to bring the SAVE America Act to the floor, and Republicans have the votes to move it through its first key procedural hurdle. From there, Democrats can block it with the 60-vote filibuster, which Lee often refers to as the ‘zombie’ filibuster.

Eliminating the filibuster is out of the question for several of Lee’s colleagues, but Republicans are warming to reinstating a talking, or standing, filibuster, which would require Senate Democrats to make their case against the bill on the floor over hours of debate.

Trump has already suggested he would issue an executive order if the legislation fails, which Lee declined to speculate on without first knowing what exactly would be done.

But he noted that it was all the more reason to pass the SAVE America Act, given the ever-swinging political pendulum in Washington, D.C.

‘It’s still really critically important that we pass this law, because let’s assume that he issued such an order, and that it does most or all of what we needed to do here, that gives us protection for the moment, to whatever degree he’s able to do that through an executive action,’ Lee said. ‘But we need something that can last longer than he’s in office.’

An 88-year-old billionaire businessman and former Victoria’s Secret chief is the latest person to fall within the House Oversight Committee’s investigative crosshairs.

The crimes of late billionaire sex trafficker Jeffrey Epstein are well-known, having gained new media attention in recent months after Congress forced the Department of Justice (DOJ) to disclose millions of pages of documents.

But less is known about the figures who operated within Epstein’s orbit and how they helped him get the vast international sphere of influence he enjoyed before finding himself in a Manhattan jail awaiting trial, where he killed himself in 2019.

Leslie ‘Les’ Wexner, founder of L Brands, the former chief of Victoria’s Secret, is one of those figures, having been named a co-conspirator of Epstein in a recently uncovered FBI document from 2019.

Wexner is the founder of L Brands, formerly known as The Limited, which included Victoria’s Secret, Bath & Body Works, and Pink. He also helped found Abercrombie & Fitch, a clothing brand that was once popular among teens in the U.S.

Wexner has never been charged with crimes related to the late financier, and a spokesperson for the mogul told Fox News Digital that the ‘Assistant U.S. Attorney told Mr. Wexner’s legal counsel in 2019 that Mr. Wexner was neither a co-conspirator nor target in any respect.’ 

But documents released by the DOJ allege that Wexner was one of the key players in how Epstein built his wealth and later ran his illicit empire.

One file from 2013 that appears to have been in the possession of the Southern District of New York (SDNY) titled ‘Jeffrey Epstein Source of Wealth,’ said Wexner ‘became a well-known client’ of Epstein’s financial management firm in 1987.

At the time, Wexner was identified as the founder and chairman of the Ohio-based women’s clothing brand The Limited.

‘Since all but one of his financial clients are anonymous, it has been speculated that much of Epstein’s lavish lifestyle was once financed by Wexner,’ reads the document, which appears to be an email. Wexner’s spokesperson declined to comment on the allegations.

That paper also noted that Wexner sold his massive Manhattan townhouse — reported to be the largest private residence in the New York City borough — to Epstein.

A 2019 FBI witness statement from a man who purported to be Wexner’s bodyguard from 1991 to 1992 said Wexner ‘sold his mansion in New York to Epstein for $20.’

The same witness statement alleged that ‘Epstein got all of his money from Wexner.’

A 1998 document obtained by Fox News Digital, however, shows Wexner sold his home to Epstein for a $20 million price tag. Half was paid via cashier’s check, while the other half was covered by a promissory note, the record shows.

Epstein’s Manhattan mansion was raided by the FBI in July 2019 as part of the federal sex trafficking investigation. There, law enforcement officials found vast troves of evidence, including photos of partially or fully nude women and girls, including ones who appeared to be minors.

The DOJ’s unsealed indictment against Epstein also said it was one of the places where he ‘enticed and recruited, and caused to be enticed and recruited, dozens of minor girls… to engage in sex acts with him, after which he would give the victims hundreds of dollars in cash.’

Wexner reportedly bought the mansion in 1989 for $13.2 million before selling it to a corporation partially controlled by Epstein for an ‘undisclosed amount,’ according to Business Insider. It was then reportedly transferred to a U.S. Virgin Islands-based company controlled by Epstein for $0 in 2011.

The home was reportedly valued at $77 million at the time of the raid, making it a massive portion of Epstein’s wealth.

A heavily redacted email chain from July 2025 that appears to show witness statement summaries, with the subject line, ‘RE: Epstein – Cellmate Interview,’ also said, ‘Steve Scully stated Wexner was #1 on Epstein’s speed dial.’

Steve Scully appears to be a reference to a former IT contractor who lived and worked on Epstein’s private island of Little St. James from 1999 through 2005. Wexner’s spokesperson declined to comment on Scully’s claim.

Wexner even signed a document in 1991 giving Epstein vast control over his finances via power of attorney, according to the New York Times. That document gave Epstein the power to sign checks, borrow money, and buy or sell real estate on Wexner’s behalf, the report said.

A letter Wexner wrote to his nonprofit, the Wexner Foundation, in August 2019 said that while he did give power of attorney to Epstein, their relationship ended soon after the 2007 federal investigation first began into the late financier in Florida.

‘[B]y early fall 2007, it was agreed that he should step back from the management of our personal finances. In that process, we discovered that he had misappropriated vast sums of money from me and my family. This was, frankly, a tremendous shock, even though it clearly pales in comparison to the unthinkable allegations against him now,’ the letter said.

‘With his credibility and our trust in him destroyed, we immediately severed ties with him. We were able to recover some of the funds. The widely reported payments Mr. Epstein made to the charitable fund represented a portion of the returned monies. All of that money — every dollar of it — was originally Wexner family money.’

But other documents released by the DOJ allege that Epstein and Wexner’s relationship went further than financial management.

An FBI witness statement by Robert Morosky, a former executive for Wexner’s fashion brand, said, ‘He had information regarding the use of ‘Limited’ brand aircraft used in the 1990s to transport young girls from Mexico to the U.S.’

‘Morosky did not wish to give any additional information at that time; however if someone would like to pursue this information he could be reached on his personal cellular phone,’’ the statement said.

It’s unclear if the lead was ever pursued, but a spokesperson for Wexner told Fox News Digital, ‘The allegation is false. Mr. Morosky was terminated from the company in 1987 and therefore in no position to know anything about the use of Limited planes in the 1990s.’

A witness statement from 2020, with the identity of the female witness redacted, said she claimed to have ‘often’ seen Epstein and Wexner together.

She ‘stated that often Wexner would have models who could not have been over 18 years old do private viewings for him and Epstein. She said the models would be wearing [swimsuits] and some were in lingerie,’ the document read.

Wexner’s spokesperson declined to comment on those claims and called her account of seeing the pair together ‘vague.’

The female witness said she ‘would help with getting people to work at parties at Wexner’s compound in catering and other positions,’ and that ‘anyone who went to work there had to have a full background check and there were certain areas of the house where they could not go without an approved escort.’

However, there was no indication of what years or period of time her claims are focused on.

A source with knowledge of company procedures argued the situation could not have happened, however. Model fittings always involved teams of 15 to 20 professionals and Epstein was never a part of that, the source maintained.

Wexner is scheduled to appear before the House Oversight Committee in Ohio on Wednesday morning.

Fox News Digital reached out to Wexner’s attorney for comment on the deposition and on the aforementioned claims.

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.