Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., accused President Donald Trump of working to push the U.S. and the rest of the globe in the direction of ‘authoritarianism.’

‘Trump’s hostility toward Europe has little to do with his absurd and irrational arguments over Greenland. It has everything to do with his efforts to undermine democracy and move this country and the world toward authoritarianism. Trump does not like free elections, a free media or the right of people to dissent,’ Sanders claimed in a statement posted on X.

‘That is why he hates Europe, with its strong democratic governance, social safety net, and commitment to peacefully resolving disputes. That is why he is sending ICE to invade American cities,’ the left-wing lawmaker continued.

Sanders claimed the president would prefer a world controlled by wealthy ‘oligarchs.’

‘Let’s be clear. Trump would prefer the world to be ruled by his fellow multi-billionaire oligarchs, like his good friends in Saudi Arabia and Russia. These dictators crush political dissent, jail their opponents, and engage in massive kleptocracy,’ he asserted.

‘As patriotic Americans who believe in our Constitution and the rule of law, we will stand with those heroes and heroines who gave their lives to defend our freedoms. Now, in this dangerous moment in American history, it is imperative that all of us, regardless of our political views, come together to confront the grave threat of authoritarianism,’ he declared.

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

A rare filing from economic heavyweights could shape how Supreme Court justices view the limits of presidential control over the Federal Reserve and U.S. monetary policy.

On Wednesday, the nation’s highest court heard oral arguments for two hours on whether President Donald Trump has the authority to remove Lisa Cook from the Federal Reserve’s Board of Governors. 

That debate has drawn an extraordinary amicus brief from some of the most influential figures in U.S. economic policy. An amicus brief is a submission from a group not directly involved in a suit that offers information, expertise or arguments to help a court decide the matter.

It was signed by every living former chair of the Federal Reserve, Alan Greenspan, Ben Bernanke and Janet Yellen, as well as six former Treasury secretaries who served presidents of both parties.

The group, which also includes seven former White House economic advisers, spans roughly five decades of U.S. economic policymaking.

Such intervention is almost unheard of, as former Fed chairs and Treasury secretaries typically steer clear of public legal battles.

In the 32-page amicus brief, the group argues that allowing the Trump administration to remove a sitting Fed board member would ‘erode public confidence in the Fed’s independence and threaten the long-term stability of the economy.’

Expanding the president’s power over Fed board membership is ‘neither necessary nor appropriate’ and would be counterproductive, the group writes, because it would weaken the central bank’s independence and lead to higher inflation and economic instability.

That concern, the group argues, is already playing out in real time. 

‘Sectors that pay close attention to the Federal Reserve — including the financial markets, the public, employers and lenders — are watching the current dispute over the President’s removal of Governor Cook to judge how credible the Fed will be going forward.’

John Sauer, the solicitor general, said Cook’s amici filing did not address the ‘legal issues at the heart of this case.’

‘Most of Cook’s amici emphasize policy arguments, touting the perceived benefits of the Federal Reserve Board’s independence in setting monetary policy,’ Sauer wrote, adding that ‘policy preferences are not the law, and these particular preferences lack any logical limit.’

In deciding Cook’s case, the justices could also shape Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell’s future at the Fed.

In a notable departure from his typically measured and low-profile approach, Powell attended the oral arguments at the Supreme Court. His appearance comes amid a criminal investigation by the U.S. Attorney’s Office in Washington, D.C., related to his congressional testimony on a multibillion-dollar renovation of the Fed’s headquarters. 

Powell described the investigation as ‘unprecedented,’ calling it another instance of the Trump administration using legal threats to pressure the central bank on policy decisions.

Cook’s ascent to the Federal Reserve was historic from the start. 

Now, she stands at the center of an even more consequential moment, as President Donald Trump moves to fire her — a step that would be unprecedented in the Fed’s 112-year history.

The court is expected to issue a ruling on Cook’s case by the summer.

Former Chicago Mayor Rahm Emanuel, a potential White House hopeful for 2028, said on Wednesday that he wants a mandatory retirement age of 75 for the president and people holding office in other branches of government.

‘You’re 75 years old: done,’ Emanuel, a Democrat, said at a Center for American Progress event. ‘And that would be in the legislative branch, it’d be in the executive branch — including the Cabinet — and it’d also be in the Supreme Court, and all the federal courts.’

Emanuel, 66, acknowledged that he would be affected by this proposal if he happens to be elected president in 2028 and seeks re-election, as he would be 73 at the start of a potential second term.

‘I know where I am in my age. Of course it would apply to me,’ Emanuel told Politico. ‘You can’t say ‘here’s what I want to do to change Washington, one of the things I want to do’ — but I get an exemption because I bought it beforehand.’

The proposal would make President Donald Trump, 79, ineligible to continue serving and would have prevented former President Joe Biden, now 83, from serving his term in the White House.

In Congress, 17 senators and 45 House members are currently 75 or older and would be impacted by the standard.

Supreme Court Justices Clarence Thomas, 77, and Samuel Alito, 75, would also be barred from continuing to serve on the bench, while Justices Sonia Sotomayor, 71, and John Roberts, 70, are nearing Emanuel’s mandatory retirement age.

‘You can’t serve in the armed forces, you can’t serve in private sector jobs,’ Emanuel told reporters on Wednesday. ‘Go work on your golf swing, it’s not that good to begin with.’

Emanuel, who served as ambassador to Japan under Biden and chief of staff under former President Barack Obama, is reigniting a topic that was hot during the last presidential election.

Biden, then 81, and Trump, then 78, were both campaigning for a second term ahead of the 2024 election while facing questions surrounding repeated gaffes. Biden ultimately dropped out of the race amid pressure to end his campaign over his mental and physical fitness.

Former U.S. Ambassador to the U.N. Nikki Haley, who ran in the GOP primary in the last presidential election, proposed mandatory mental competency tests for politicians over the age of 75 during her campaign.

Emanuel, also a former House member, said he would push for legislation to set the limit instead of attempting a constitutional amendment. It is unclear whether that proposed legislation would be constitutional, and could be difficult to receive support in a Congress where the median age for senators is 64.

He said the age limit would be part of a broader demand for ‘comprehensive ethics, lobbying [and] anti-corruption reform’ across the federal government that he said would include a crackdown on lawmakers and judges accepting and stock trading. He wants the Democratic Party to push that proposal as part of a midterms message that also includes raising the minimum wage.

‘You have a president of the United States, in my view, that has expanded, deepened the swamp. Our job is to drain the swamp as Democrats,’ Emanuel said. ‘There’s not a day that goes by that you don’t read a story about either his family, [Commerce Secretary Howard] Lutnick’s family or [Special Envoy Steve] Witkoff’s family making money.’

After President Donald Trump announced a new Greenland ‘framework’ had been agreed upon with North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) Secretary General Mark Rhutte, the NATO chief told Fox News’ ‘Special Report with Bret Baier’ that U.S. forcibly taking control of Greenland, away from Denmark, was not discussed during meetings between him and President Donald Trump in Switzerland during the World Economic Forum.

‘That issue did not come up anymore in my conversations with Mr. President. He’s very much focused on what we need to do to make sure that that huge Arctic region, where change is taking place at the moment, where the Chinese and Russians are more and more active, how we can protect that’ Rhutte said when pressed on the details of the reported ‘framework’ that has been agreed upon, and that Trump said has resulted in his decision not to impose certain tariffs scheduled to go into effect Feb. 1. 

‘That was really the focus of our discussions,’ Rhutte insisted.

Trump announced the new ‘framework’ pertaining to Greenland in a post on his social media site Truth Social Wednesday afternoon while at the World Economic Forum this week. 

‘Based upon a very productive meeting that I have had with the Secretary General of NATO, Mark Rutte, we have formed the framework of a future deal with respect to Greenland and, in fact, the entire Arctic Region,’ the president wrote. ‘Based upon this understanding, I will not be imposing the Tariffs that were scheduled to go into effect on February 1st. Additional discussions are being held concerning The Golden Dome as it pertains to Greenland. Further information will be made available as discussions progress.’

Trump noted that Vice President JD Vance, Secretary of State Marco Rubio and Special Envoy Steve Witkoff will lead ‘the negotiations’ and report directly back to him.

‘We probably won’t get anything unless I decide to use excessive strength and force where we would be, frankly, unstoppable. But I won’t do that,’ Trump said earlier in the morning at the World Economic Forum. ‘Now everyone’s saying, ‘Oh, good.’ That’s probably the biggest statement I made, because people thought I would use force. I don’t have to use force. I don’t want to use force. I won’t use force.’

During the exclusive interview with Fox News, Rhutte called Trump ‘totally right’ about needing to shore up security in the Arctic region, noting that the chance of Russia or China becoming a threat in that region is increasing every day. The NATO Secretary General also praised Trump’s leadership in getting other NATO countries to pay more money to the alliance’s defenses.

‘I would argue tonight with you on this program, he was the one who brought a whole of Europe and Canada up to this famous 5%,’ Rhutte insisted. ‘Which is crucial for us to equalize our spending, but also protect ourselves. And this is the framework which you see in his post that we will work on.’

Rhutte also noted that increased volatility between NATO-aligned countries, Russia and China underscored the need to shore up security in the Arctic region, during his interview with Fox News Wednesday evening.

Meanwhile, the NATO chief was asked whether he thought other countries were dealing with the Russians and the Chinese differently than they have in the past.

‘It’s not up to me to comment on what individual allies are doing in terms of their relationship with China,’ Rhutte responded. ‘I think collectively, as NATO, we have a position. The position is that we should not be naive. I can tell you’ll regret these huge investments the Chinese are making in the military. They are not there to organize parades in Beijing, and the military in Russia are not there to organize parades in Moscow. They are there to be used.’

President Donald Trump dramatically reversed course Tuesday on a U.K. plan to transfer sovereignty of the Chagos Islands to Mauritius while warning it could jeopardize U.S. access to the Diego Garcia military base.

Trump’s reversal highlights what a defense expert called a ‘new Trump Doctrine’ before linking the president’s opposition to the Chagos deal with his Greenland push and citing fears Mauritius could later back out.

Writing on his Truth Social platform Tuesday, Trump called the U.K.’s Chagos decision ‘an act of great stupidity.’

‘Shockingly, our ‘brilliant’ NATO Ally, the United Kingdom, is currently planning to give away the Island of Diego Garcia, the site of a vital U.S. Military Base, to Mauritius, and to do so FOR NO REASON WHATSOEVER,’ Trump wrote. ‘There is no doubt that China and Russia have noticed this act of total weakness.’

‘Trump has done a 180, partly because of the U.K.’s support for Denmark’s sovereign claims over Greenland and partly because of a new strategy outlined by the White House,’ John Hemmings, director of the National Security Center at the Henry Jackson Society, told Fox News Digital.

‘These moves are linked and part of a ‘new Trump Doctrine’’ outlined in November’s National Security Strategy,’ he explained.

‘Diego Garcia is a potential threat to Beijing’s strategy to control vital shipping lanes between the oil-rich Middle East and China’s industrial heartland,’ he added, describing how ‘nearly 23.7 million barrels of oil transit the Indian Ocean every day, with the base being vital in any U.S.-China conflict over Taiwan.’

In a separate post, Trump explicitly linked the Chagos dispute to his Greenland push.

‘The U.K. giving away extremely important land is an act of GREAT STUPIDITY, and is another in a very long line of national security reasons why Greenland has to be acquired,’ Trump wrote.

The Chagos Islands were separated from Mauritius during Britain’s decolonization process, a move the International Court of Justice ruled unlawful in 2019. 

The U.K. later agreed to transfer sovereignty while leasing Diego Garcia back for at least 99 years at a cost of at least $160 million annually.

Diego Garcia is a hub for long-range bombers, logistics and power projection across the Middle East, the Indo-Pacific and Africa. Around 2,500 personnel, mostly American, are stationed there.

‘If Mauritius were to offer the islands to China after taking de jure control, it would put immense pressure on the U.S. in the eyes of international public opinion,’ Hemmings explained.

‘After all, once Mauritius has de jure sovereignty, it can renegotiate the lease terms or even renege on the treaty at any time it wants.

‘It might also provide access to the exclusive economic zone, with all of its rich fishing grounds, to Chinese fishing fleets, adding another layer of risk to U.S. Air Force operations around the island,’ Hemmings said.

‘At this moment, the U.S. base at Diego Garcia is thought to be secure, with Mauritius promising the U.K. (and by proxy, the U.S.) a 99-year lease, which will not, it is supposed, interfere with the operations of the air base at all. But the devil is in the details.’

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

President Donald Trump said Wednesday he will not impose tariffs that were set to take effect Feb. 1, citing a ‘framework of a future deal’ with NATO involving Greenland and the Arctic region.

‘Based upon a very productive meeting that I have had with the Secretary General of NATO, Mark Rutte, we have formed the framework of a future deal with respect to Greenland and, in fact, the entire Arctic Region,’ Trump wrote on Truth Social.

Trump said the deal, if finalized, ‘will be a great one for the United States of America, and all NATO Nations,’ adding that the agreement led him to halt the planned tariffs.

Trump added that talks are continuing, saying, ‘Additional discussions are being held concerning The Golden Dome as it pertains to Greenland,’ and said Vice President JD Vance, Secretary of State Marco Rubio and special envoy Steve Witkoff will lead negotiations and ‘report directly to me.’

‘As President Trump said, the details of the framework will continue to be unveiled as discussions continue,’ White House Spokeswoman Anna Kelly said to Fox News Digital. ‘The White House has nothing more to add at this time.’

This is a developing story, check back later for updates.

Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky., said a personal experience with Big Tech has led him to change his thinking, and he now believes companies should be liable for the content posted on their platforms.

Paul asserted that YouTube and its parent Google had refused to remove a video that falsely claimed that he had taken money from Venezuela’s Nicolás Maduro.

‘I’ve formally notified Google that this video is unsupported by facts, defames me, harasses me and now endangers my life. Google responded that they don’t investigate the truth of accusations… and refused to take down the video,’ the senator asserted in the opinion piece published by the New York Post on Monday.

Paul also noted that the person who posted the offending video removed it ‘under threat of legal penalty.’

‘My default position as a libertarian/conservative has been to defend the internet liability protections known in law as Section 230 of the Communications Act. The courts have largely ruled that Section 230 shields social-media companies from being sued for content created by third parties,’ he wrote. ‘Until now, I had not sufficiently considered the effects of internet providers hosting content accusing people of committing crimes.’

The experience was a turning point in his thinking.

‘The arrogance of Google to continue hosting this defamatory video and the resultant threats on my life have caused me to rethink Congress’ blind allegiance to liability shields,’ he asserted.

Paul accused the company of being inconsistent.

‘So Google does not have a blanket policy of refraining to evaluate truth. Google chooses to evaluate what it believes to be true when it is convenient and consistent with its own particular biases,’ he wrote.

‘This complete lack of decency, this inconsistent moderation of truthfulness, this conscious refusal to remove illegal and defamatory content has led me to conclude that the internet exemption from liability, a governmentally granted privilege and a special exemption from our common law traditions, should not be encouraged by liability shields and I will pursue legislation toward that goal,’ the senator explained.

‘I think Google is, or should be, liable for hosting this defamatory video that accuses me of treason, at least from the point in time when Google was made aware of the defamation and danger,’ he asserted.

Fox News Digital reached out to Google for comment on Wednesday — YouTube noted that the video had been pulled down by the user and is no longer on the platform. YouTube added that it relies on its openly available community guidelines to decide what material it will yank, and only takes down material ‘that poses a serious risk of egregious harm such as terrorist content.’ 

The video platform also claimed that it has always advocated for anyone to be able to share their view, asserting that it does not check the accuracy of individual videos ‘and the vast majority of content stays up.’

A ‘limited number’ of U.S. personnel are operating in Caracas as Washington looks to resume diplomatic relations with Venezuela after the historic capture of Nicolás Maduro, Fox News has learned.

A senior State Department official told Fox News that the Trump administration plan to resume official diplomacy with Venezuela is under way. This is the first time a State Department official has commented on reporting about the diplomatic team on the ground.

‘A limited number of U.S. diplomatic and technical personnel are in Caracas conducting initial assessments for a potential phased resumption of operations,’ the official said.

The official did not specify exactly what ‘a limited number’ meant, and it is not immediately clear exactly how many people are on the ground. The phased resumption of operations would include the re-opening of the U.S. Embassy and consulate offices in Venezuela.

Since Maduro was captured, the Trump administration has been cautious in its approach to Venezuela. President Donald Trump initially said that the U.S. would ‘run’ the country for an undetermined period of time. 

Since then, Trump has met with Venezuelan opposition leader María Corina Machado, who he said he doubts has the support necessary to take over the country.

After her meeting with Trump, Machado spoke at a news conference hosted by the conservative think tank, the Heritage Foundation, in Washington, D.C. She said that Venezuela would hold ‘free and fair’ elections ‘eventually.’ However, she did not offer a timeline for how long the current interim government would be allowed to rule, only that elections would happen ‘as soon as possible.’

Machado also attempted to downplay the appearance of competition between herself and Maduro’s successor, interim Venezuelan President Delcy Rodriguez, for Trump’s support.

‘This has nothing to do with a tension or decision between Delcy Rodríguez and myself,’ Machado said when asked about Trump’s openness to working with the interim government. ‘This is about a criminal structure that is a regime and the mandate of the Venezuelan people.’

On Jan. 15, Rodriguez, who was sworn-in as Venezuela’s interim president following the capture of Maduro, met with CIA Director John Ratcliffe. A U.S. official told CBS News that the purpose of the meeting was to ‘deliver the message that the United States looks forward to an improved working relationship.’

Rodriguez’s meeting with Ratcliffe took place one day after she had a phone call with Trump, who said the conversation was ‘very good.’

‘We are making tremendous progress, as we help Venezuela stabilize and recover. Many topics were discussed, including oil, minerals, trade and, of course, national security,’ Trump wrote on Truth Social. ‘This partnership between the United States of America and Venezuela will be a spectacular one FOR ALL. Venezuela will soon be great and prosperous again, perhaps more so than ever before!’

Fox News Digital’s Morgan Phillips contributed to this report.

President Donald Trump took a shot at Somalia and claimed that the investigations Minnesota faces alleged fraud schemes is a reminder that the West cannot allow mass migration from ‘failed’ societies. 

Minnesota has encountered heightened scrutiny in recent months as the state faces investigations into multiple alleged fraud schemes plaguing the state’s social services system. 

The majority of those charged are part of Minnesota’s Somali population, and Trump unveiled plans in November 2025 to end the temporary protected status for Somali migrants in Minnesota that offers protections against deportation.

‘The situation in Minnesota reminds us that the West cannot mass import foreign cultures, which have failed to ever build a successful society of their own,’ Trump said Wednesday at the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland. ‘I mean, we’re taking people from Somalia, and Somalia is a failed — it’s not a nation — got no government, got no police … got no nothing.’

Secretary of the Treasury Scott Bessent announced in December 2025 that his agency was launching an investigation evaluating whether Minnesota’s funds were potentially diverted to al-Shabab, a terrorist organization based in Somalia. 

Lawmakers also initiated probes into Minnesota’s alleged ‘Feeding Our Future’ $250 million fraud scheme that allegedly targeted a children’s nutrition program the Department of Agriculture funded and that Minnesota oversaw during the COVID-19 pandemic.

At least 77 people have been charged in that scheme, which took advantage of the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s decision to waive certain Federal Child Nutrition Program requirements.

Likewise, another alleged fraud scheme in the state stems from the Housing Stability Services Program, which allegedly offered Medicaid coverage for housing stabilization services in an attempt to help those with disabilities, mental illnesses and substance-use disorders receive housing.

The Justice Department so far has charged less than a dozen people for allegedly defrauding the program that runs through Minnesota’s Medicaid service, but more charges are expected.

Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz, a Democrat, has claimed that he believes that reports indicating the fraud could total over $9 billion are exaggerated and ‘sensationalized,’ but he’s also promised to address the issue. 

‘I am accountable for this, and more importantly, I am the one that will fix it,’ Walz told reporters in December 2025.

Justice Brett Kavanaugh voiced concern during oral arguments on Wednesday that a Supreme Court case involving Federal Reserve Governor Lisa Cook could erode the central bank’s independence if the justices were to side with President Donald Trump in it.

Kavanaugh asked Solicitor General John Sauer, who argued on behalf of the administration, about his position that Trump alone can decide what ’cause’ means when firing a Federal Reserve governor.

‘That’s your position, no judicial review, no process required, no remedy available,’ Kavanaugh said, describing it as a ‘very low bar for cause that the president alone determines.’

Kavanaugh, a Trump appointee, added that that would ‘weaken, if not shatter, the independence of the Federal Reserve.’

Sauer said he disagreed and that the law requiring a Federal Reserve governor to be fired for cause was, in fact, a ‘high bar.’

‘It’s our very strong protection because it does protect them from the one thing that Congress was apparently most worried about, which is a removal for policy disagreement,’ Sauer said. 

The high-stakes case stems from Cook, who was represented during oral arguments by renowned conservative attorney Paul Clement, suing over Trump removing her from the Federal Reserve’s powerful seven-member board of governors.

Cook was appointed by former President Joe Biden. Board members serve 14-year terms, and no president has ever fired a single one.

The justices are weighing whether to keep in place a lower court injunction that has allowed Cook to remain in her post while her lawsuit proceeds.

Trump has argued he has broad authority to fire Cook, alleging she committed private mortgage fraud. Cook has denied those claims and said she has received no due process. She has not been charged with any crime.

While the conservative justices appeared largely sympathetic during a separate case examining Trump’s stance that he could fire members of independent agencies, such as the Federal Trade Commission, the justices appeared to view the Federal Reserve as more insulated during Wednesday’s arguments.

The Federal Reserve, created in 1913, moderates interest rates and, unlike other independent agencies, it is not funded by Congress and its policy decisions do not need presidential or legislative approval.

Trump has repeatedly blasted Chairman Jerome Powell and the Federal Reserve for lowering benchmark interest rates at a slower pace than the president wants. The president’s feud with the Federal Reserve recently expanded after Powell revealed that the Department of Justice was investigating him over an allegation he lied to Congress, which Powell denies.

Kavanaugh also raised a bigger picture question, asking Sauer what the implications of deciding in favor of Trump would mean for future administrations.

‘Let’s talk about the real-world, downstream effects of this, because if this were set as a precedent, it seems to me, just thinking big picture, what goes around, comes around,’ Kavanaugh said. ‘All the current president’s appointees would likely be removed for cause on Jan. 20, 2029, if there’s a Democratic president or Jan. 20, 2033. And then, we’re really at at-will removal.’

Justices across the ideological spectrum voiced skepticism about Trump’s ability to fire Cook. Justice Sonia Sotomayor, an Obama appointee, said she found the whole case unusual, noting that Trump first raised Cook’s termination through social media.

‘This whole case is irregular, starting with a Truth Social notice, or thinking of it as notice at all, certainly didn’t invite an opportunity to be heard. But that’s where we are,’ Sotomayor said.

Fox News’ Bill Mears contributed to this report.