Fox News RSS Feed

This is an excerpt from Shyam Sankar and Madeline Hart’s forthcoming book Mobilize: How the Reboot the American Industrial Base and Stop World War III. Mobilize is available to order now.

Everything about how Marine Colonel Drew Cukor ran Project Maven, the Department of Defense’s upstart AI initiative, put a target on his back. He infuriated the acquisition community, which is a powerful enemy in the Pentagon. Ultimately, the firestorm of criticism triggered a series of unfounded but unrelenting IG reports that would harry Cukor until his retirement. Some of the details that follow may seem obscure, but they’re essential to understanding the bureaucratic inertia and pettiness that hold our military back.

When Cukor launched Maven in 2017, the government still bought software like it bought hardware. This posed a problem. The phases of a hardware program are research, development, test, and evaluation (RDT&E), followed by production and sustainment. Costs are very high initially, and then they decline. The Department of Defense treated software the same way. It paid a lot up front for a systems integrator to build software, then it paid very little when the software went into production for patches and minor security upgrades. Software was treated as a static, finished product once it entered production.

Here’s the problem: software (at least, good software) is not static. It’s constantly improving, yet the cost is relatively flat across stages of development, which is why you pay a recurring subscription for commercial software instead of a large, upfront fee. This insight is the basis of the software-as-a-service model, and it enables constant improvement of the product. Development, testing, and production of software happen simultaneously, all the time. Understanding this, Cukor made the heretical argument to Congress that Maven should be procured as a continuously evolving capability, with a similar cost over its lifetime. Cukor procured software using Broad Agency Announcements (BAAs), a flexible contracting vehicle that categorized software as RDT&E. Although this categorization wasn’t perfect, the BAA allowed the program costs to reflect how software was developed and deployed and allowed Cukor to make frequent changes to the product while it was in production.

AMERICA MUST POWER AI WITH SPEED AND DISCIPLINE — OR CHINA WILL DOMINATE

Cukor would soon run into other problems with categorizing software as RDT&E. The department’s general posture is that if the US government is paying for R&D, it should own the intellectual property (IP) that results from that work. The problem is that despite the categorization of the contract vehicle as R&D, Maven wasn’t paying for commercial companies to perform R&D. When Palantir or Microsoft or Amazon showed up on day one of their work with Maven, they showed up with products that had decades and billions of dollars already invested. The R&D was already done. Yes, that product would get fine-tuned during the program and the companies would learn from the government’s mission and data, but fundamentally, the government was paying for software, not R&D. To Cukor, the government’s obsession with owning IP was an "overstated matter" more likely to harm the companies, and therefore national security, in the long term. As Cukor correctly notes, "If you [the company] can’t monetize this after working with us, then what’s the use of doing this? Why would you hand over your IP ever?"

To be clear, the companies did not own the government’s data and were not free to, say, sell a terrorist-targeting algorithm to China. International Traffic in Arms Regulations (ITAR) were in place, and the government’s interests were protected. But a company that built a deep learning algorithm maintained the IP to its proprietary model weights. For Palantir, this meant that we retained the IP to our core platform while giving the government rights to Maven-specific logic configured on top of it.

Safe to say, Cukor’s approach was correct. Almost a decade later, Maven remains the best example of a robust ecosystem of leading commercial technology companies working with the government. Unfortunately, Cukor’s view on IP remains in the minority. It was heretical then, and it’s heretical now. For this heresy, Cukor was cast by his enemies as acting against the interests of the government. "I was considered to be just a horrific human being.… There’s a whole class of people in the government that will go to their grave hating me because I would not compromise on this topic: platform IP belongs to the vendor, configurations on top are the customer’s."

What happened next is almost hard to believe, if you know little about how the government operates: Cukor was punished for being too effective at his job. He was very good at rapidly getting money for Project Maven because he knew how acquisition worked and because his program was delivering. What’s more, he viewed acquisition as a form of "maneuver warfare" and never underestimated its importance as a source of continuous, rapid change to solve the most difficult problems.

MADURO RAID QUESTIONS TRIGGER PENTAGON REVIEW OF TOP AI FIRM AS POTENTIAL ‘SUPPLY CHAIN RISK’

In the Pentagon, the easiest way to attack someone is to accuse him of stealing money and issuing contracts illegally. For almost the entirety of Cukor’s time running Maven, a vicious stream of anonymous complaints were filed against Cukor. Some of these complaints were fueled by personal vendettas. It was a clear abuse of the process, but each allegation was treated with the utmost seriousness. Cukor was forced to face off against his mostly faceless opponents with little more than a heavily dog-eared copy of the Federal Acquisitions Regulation (FAR), the bible for procurement law and regulations. It had a permanent spot on his desk. 

One day, the under secretary—Cukor’s boss—received an anonymous, five-page letter with a litany of terrible accusations against Cukor: he was corrupt, with bags of government money in his house that he used to buy expensive cars. He was wining and dining people to get contracts to move faster. His use of BAAs was illegal. He was setting himself up for a plush job after Project Maven. He had created a command environment that did not respect rank. (To this charge, Cukor pleads guilty: "I had some very strong captains that would happily tell off a colonel or general if they were wrong. We had a climate of moving fast and getting things done.") Worst of all, the letter alleged, Cukor was illegally harboring a family of foreigners in his basement. This last, fantastic allegation came about because Cukor sponsored the (very legal) immigration of exceptional foreign mathematicians.

Cukor explains why he was a target: "You just have to understand this: when one group of people in the Pentagon get ahead of everybody else, the natural reaction is to kill that thing and get everyone back in line. That’s the Pentagon." One is reminded of the Soviet Union, where the central government suppressed exceptional individuals who threatened the state’s uniformity and control. Everyone was doing exceptional work, which meant no one was.

Cukor told his boss the allegations were patently false and demanded the identity of his accuser. But his boss insisted on a full investigation. An Army officer was hired to investigate Cukor. This was a bad omen. The Marines and the Army have a long-standing rivalry that became even more acrimonious when the Army advocated abolishing the Marine Corps during the reorganization debates in and immediately after World War II. Harry Truman, partial to the Army, famously said that the Marines "have a propaganda machine almost the equal of Stalin’s."

The Army officer published his investigation, but the best he could find, in his opinion, was that Cukor had not properly enforced rank, thereby creating a command climate that the Army officer said was anti-military. There were no allegations of criminal conduct. What he "found," essentially, was that Cukor let his captains loose and didn’t enforce niceties—hardly fireable offenses. And what about the crazy allegations of money laundering and human smuggling? The Army officer didn’t have the skills to look into these matters, so he recommended that the Naval Criminal Investigative Service (NCIS) do it instead.

At this point, Cukor’s ordeal turned from tragedy to farce. When an NCIS investigator showed up at Cukor’s 1,400-square-foot home in Northern Viriginia, where he lived with his wife and four kids, there were no bundles of cash, fancy cars, or illegal immigrants in sight (although there were a few modest vehicles, all with more than 100,000 miles). The investigator left in disbelief. How had Cukor managed to support all these people on a government salary in such a small house?

PENTAGON’S AI BATTLE WILL HELP DECIDE WHO CONTROLS OUR MOST POWERFUL MILITARY TECH

That the NCIS found no incriminating evidence further enraged the establishment. Their options dwindling, they seized on a final chance to attack: Cukor’s retirement. After thirty years of exceptional service, Cukor had announced his intention to exit. Because of the baseless allegations, he knew there was no path for advancement. But instead of letting Cukor retire in peace, his critics went for his rank, threatening to demote him to lieutenant colonel!

At this point, any confusion on your part is excusable. Shouldn’t the Marine Corps be fighting for the person responsible for bringing AI to the Department of Defense? One of its own? Cukor finds the suggestion quaint. No, "the institution is always more important than the individual. We all know this; we sign up knowing this." And Cukor was now associated, however baselessly, with money laundering, luxury cars, and undermining national security. He underwent two years of soul-crushing IG investigations that never really ended.

Cukor’s critics eventually gave up their campaign to take his rank, but he still suffered one final indignity on his way out the door. The last conversation that Cukor had before exiting the Pentagon was with the IG, who made clear that while Cukor was walking free today, the investigations would stay open for years. They could come after him at any point during that window.

STEVE FORBES: THE AI COLD WAR HAS BEGUN AND AMERICA CANNOT AFFORD TO LOSE

In 2022, after Cukor had retired, the Office of Inspector General finally published an unclassified but redacted version of its findings, "Evaluation of Contract Monitoring and Management for Project Maven." The sanitized report contains no findings of fraud or impropriety. The primary conclusion is that Project Maven was indeed run "in accordance with FAR, DFARS [Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement], Defense Grant and Regulatory System, and contract requirements." The worst the IG could find is that the "AWCFT did not document its approach to monitoring by formalizing the reporting metrics, processes, and procedures for monitoring and managing Project Maven contracts." Cukor disputes even this one minor, critical finding. If you bother to read deeper in the report, it supports Cukor’s claim, too. Maven "actively monitored contract deliverables using AWCFT-developed reporting, metrics, processes, and procedures to meet Project Maven objectives," and it scheduled "frequent and transparent programmatic reviews." The IG admitted that monitoring and management techniques for AI and machine learning "are not captured in current procedures and best practices that are used by the DoD acquisitions community." If only the IG applied such scrutiny and thoroughness to outcomes, rather than process. We should all be a little more concerned with whether a program actually works and a little less concerned with whether bureaucrats are checking the right boxes along the way.

The IG did, begrudgingly and in its own way, admit that Project Maven worked. It explained that documentation was needed, or else "future DoD acquisitions related to this complex, rapidly-moving technology may not benefit from the AWCFT’s monitoring and management lessons learned." In other words, the IG criticized Maven for making it harder for other programs to learn from its example! The IG doesn’t write reports like this. It’s the equivalent of going before the Spanish Inquisition and coming away with a gold star for good behavior. 

By the time the report was published, Cukor had already been driven out of the military. He’d had several chances for promotion, but because of the litany of accusations against him he couldn’t even be on the list of potential candidates. By the time his name was cleared, it was too late. What type of people do get promoted? Per Cukor:

Those that ascend are a rare breed: they’ve figured out how to survive in an environment where people can log any complaint against them and start investigations that jam up everything. This often results in a risk-averse senior leadership who avoid controversy at all costs. And the IG process is an unfortunate reality that favors the status quo and instills institutional complacency.

By contrast, Cukor had relentlessly pushed a contrarian AI agenda. People didn’t like it when a colonel ran through their organization at breakneck speed, delivering new technology via real-word experimentation, unorthodox contract terms, and vendors far outside the Beltway.

As Cukor recounts this vendetta, he does so without bitterness. There’s passion in his voice, but no anger. There’s no victim mentality. It’s actually kind of weird. Most people would, understandably, be bitter. Cukor attributes his equanimity to his Marine stoicism. He knows what’s right and what’s wrong. "There are many of us like that in the military. That’s why you have people who literally jump on hand grenades. They’ll do anything because it’s what’s right." What’s more, the bad actions of others were often a source of motivation. This is the reason he was able to continuously deliver Maven even while these investigations were ongoing. After the fact, people on Maven were shocked to learn he’d been under investigation for more than two years, because it hadn’t altered his focus or output one bit. One engineer said that Cukor so effectively shielded the team from the politics that he had a nickname for him: the "iron dome of Pentagon bullshit."

CLICK HERE FOR MORE FOX NEWS OPINION

Project Maven was the culmination of Cukor’s military career. Fighting for better intel methods and technology, fighting for Legacy to get police intelligence on the insurgencies in Iraq and Afghanistan, fighting against non-performant programs such as DCGS—all of these experiences trained him to bring a revolutionary AI effort to the military when the cards were stacked against him.

Significantly, Cukor was in his seat for five years—long enough for it to count. Too many talented officers are rotated in and out of their positions every two years. How many potential Mavens has the military lost due to constantly rotating personnel policy? Cukor is also a prime example of why you can’t separate the role of creating requirements from the role of delivering capabilities: designer and builder must work together. Much like Rickover built and then operated nuclear submarines, Cukor created the specifications for the AI solutions he wanted to exist, coordinated them, and then built them.

Cukor insists that while he and his team accomplished something exceptional with Maven, it need not be the exception. There are many others like him out there, just waiting for a chance and a climate that doesn’t presume they’re guilty until proven innocent. In many ways, Cukor views himself as a typical Marine: he came from a humble background, imbibed the service’s values, and put his training to good use.

Perhaps most important, Cukor is living, breathing proof that herculean effort and selfless service are still possible in government—even in as flawed and sclerotic an institution as the Pentagon. We think of titans like Rickover as existing solely in a bygone and inaccessible age. Cukor shows that isn’t true, either. Cukor had a book about the Yazidis, a basement office, and a righteous fire burning within him. That was enough for him to revolutionize the Pentagon and the way we fight wars forever.

Madeline Hart is a Defense Lead at Palantir Technologies, where she works on next-generation defense and space products. She started Palantir’s First Breakfast publication.

from Latest & Breaking News on Fox News https://ift.tt/6cQjWR9
via IFTTT

Fox News RSS Feed

Democratic leaders say they don’t oppose voter ID laws, but they blocked a bill to impose a nationwide requirement Thursday.

Sen. Jon Husted, R-Ohio, attempted to pass a standalone voter ID bill through unanimous consent Thursday night, but Sen. Jeff Merkley, D-Ore., blocked the measure on the Senate floor. 

"I’ve heard my Democratic colleagues say that they don’t oppose photo ID laws," Husted said during a floor debate. "I heard Senator Schumer say, ‘Our objection as Democrats is not to photo ID. I heard Senator Fetterman say he supports a photo ID law."

"If I could quote him, ‘If the GOP wants real reform over a show vote, put out a clean standalone bill and I’m in aye," Husted continued, referring to a social media post Fetterman released Tuesday. "Well, that’s what I’m doing tonight."

THUNE ACCUSES CRITICS OF 'CREATING FALSE EXPECTATIONS' AMID BACKLASH OVER STALLED SAVE AMERICA ACT

The measure would have enacted a nationwide voter ID requirement, though 36 states already have similar rules on the books. The Ohio Republican said citizens could use a state-issued driver’s license, a U.S. passport or valid military or tribal ID to meet the requirement.

Husted, who is running for a full six-year term in November, slammed Democrats’ opposition to the voter ID measure in a brief interview with Fox News Digital on Friday.

"So apparently they would like people to believe that they’re for photo ID, but when it comes down to it, they didn’t appear to be," the Ohio Republican said.

Husted’s voter ID gambit came as the Senate is currently in the midst of a multi-day floor fight over the SAVE America Act, a Trump-backed elections bill aimed at preventing noncitizens from voting.

The marathon debate schedule is a move by Republicans to pin blame on Schumer and Democrats for blocking the bill. 

But it’s not the same floor takeover, called a talking filibuster, that President Donald Trump, a cohort of conservatives in the Senate GOP and a fervent right-wing social media campaign have pressed for the conference to pursue.

That’s because not enough Senate Republicans supported the move, which would require a near-unified front to successfully execute. And without Democratic support, the bill is doomed to fail at the end of the floor fight.

REPORTER'S NOTEBOOK: TRUMP'S SAVE ACT ULTIMATUM RUNS INTO SENATE REALITY

A Fox News poll released in September 2025 found that 84% of registered voters said photo ID should be required to prove citizenship before voting.

Still, Democrats could move to filibuster a standalone voter ID bill if Republicans were to hold an up-or-down vote on the measure over the coming days.

Sen. John Fetterman, D-Pa., who notably opposes the SAVE America Act over provisions that would restrict mail-in ballots, has called on the Senate to pass a standalone voter ID bill. 

"Stop turning this into a Christmas list and attacking vote-by-mail," Fetterman wrote Tuesday. "If GOP wants real reform over a show vote––put out a clean, standalone bill and I’m AYE."

One of the core components of the SAVE America Act is providing proof of citizenship to register to vote, something Democrats have pushed back against more fiercely than the voter ID provision.

Sen. Mike Lee, R-Utah, who is leading the SAVE America Act in the Senate, questioned why Democrats would say they want one without the other. 

"I’d love to hear their reasoning, why they would support voter ID but not proof of citizenship," Lee told Fox News Digital.

from Latest & Breaking News on Fox News https://ift.tt/4af5q6G
via IFTTT

Fox News RSS Feed

A criminal case tied to the 2020 Austin, Texas, George Floyd riots is erupting into a broader controversy, with prominent law enforcement groups calling for the Soros-backed district attorney to resign over accusations of misconduct, political coordination, and withholding key evidence.

Attorneys for Austin Police Department officer Chance Bretches filed a motion in Travis County district court to dismiss the case against him, alleging prosecutors in DA Jose Garza’s office violated the officer’s constitutional rights and compromised the integrity of the case by not disclosing alleged behind-the-scenes communications with Austin officials about potentially holding the city or police leadership criminally responsible for harming injured protesters. 

Bretches is facing charges of aggravated assault by a public servant after being deployed as part of a crowd-control response during the 2020 riot, where officers worked to disperse demonstrators and restore order in downtown Austin. His attorneys argue he relied on department-issued "less-lethal" beanbag rounds that were later called into question, contending the equipment itself was defective and contributed to the injuries at issue.

The alleged "secret meetings" with Austin officials about the city being responsible for the defective beanbag rounds that caused more harm than they were designed for, Bretches’s attorney says, were something the prosecution was "required to give us" because it showed the belief and possibility the city had "criminal culpability" in the case.

TRAVIS COUNTY DA FACES RENEWED ‘SOFT ON CRIME’ CRITICISM AFTER CAREER CRIMINAL CHARGED WITH MURDER

The motion bases its claim of "secret meetings" on two sworn declarations: one from a former Austin city manager, who says he personally met multiple times with Garza and prosecutors in 2023 to discuss potential charges against the city, and another from a former city council member, who says she was aware of internal communications indicating the DA’s office was considering such charge.

"Prosecutors can hold meetings with anybody, there’s nothing illegal about that," Bretches’ attorney Doug O’Connell told Fox News Digital. "The problem in this case is the district attorney felt he had enough evidence to indict the city as a corporate entity, which would make the city an alternative suspect or an unindicted co-defendant."

O’Connell argues that Garza triggered disclosure obligations under Brady v. Maryland, which requires prosecutors to turn over potentially exculpatory evidence to the defense.

"If you follow that logic, then the basis of his indictment of the city, which never materialized, is, in fact, Brady," O’Connell said. "Even if he thought he had enough evidence and later determined he didn’t, it’s still Brady. It’s a violation of the Michael Morton Act, a violation of the court’s order, and the defendant’s constitutional rights."

SOROS-BACKED 'ANTI-POLICE' DA SPARKS OUTRAGE AFTER SHOWING UP TO FALLEN OFFICER FUNERAL: 'SLAP IN THE FACE'

The Michael Morton Act, a Texas law enacted after a wrongful conviction case, requires prosecutors to turn over most evidence in their possession to the defense, including information that could be favorable to the accused.

O’Connell says that the law mandates that "exculpatory mitigating evidence" must be given to the defense.

"It's clear they didn't turn over the evidence of why they felt they could indict the city and the city was legitimately scared about this enough that the city went out and hired their own criminal defense attorney," O’Connell said. "So one of two things is true, either he had the evidence and he didn't produce it to us, or he didn’t have any basis to indict the city, and he was just threatening them, and that would be official oppression anyway."

Two of the most recognized police organizations in the area, Combined Law Enforcement Associations of Texas (CLEAT) and the Austin Police Retired Officers Association (APROA), reacted to the motion by calling on Garza, who has long been accused of harboring animosity toward police, to resign from his role as the county’s top prosecutor.

"It's kind of the final straw, everything that's been going on with the continuing political prosecutions of Austin police officers who are out simply doing their job and doing the job the way that we're trained to do their job," Farris told Fox News Digital about the APROA’s official letter calling for Garza to step down, the first time they have done so despite intense criticism of Garza over the years.

Garza has faced public blowback from his critics for years over his treatment of police officers and from families of crime victims who have spoken out against what they view as a lack of willingness to put criminal offenders behind bars. 

"His focus has been on the cops and now we're finding out that he did some shady stuff and it's time for him to go," Farris said.

After winning an election following a campaign, backed by liberal megadonor George Soros, that pledged to prosecute police officers, Garza indicted over 20 police officers, including Bretches, for their role in quelling the Black Lives Matter riot. Garza has attempted to prosecute multiple other officers on deadly force-related charges with only one successful conviction that was later overturned. 

"There can be no worse violation of the oath taken by a District Attorney than to intentionally deny a defendant a fair trial," Robert Leonard, CLEAT executive director, said about the motion. "It is a direct violation of their Constitutional rights."

Additionally, O’Connell filed a motion requesting a court of inquiry calling on a district judge to investigate if Garza committed a crime through his actions.

O’Connell described the move as utilizing an "obscure provision in the Texas Code of Criminal Procedure that allows a district court judge to hold a hearing to determine if the law has been violated."

"In this case, it would be a hearing to determine if the elected DA and top lieutenants committed an offense of official oppression and tampering with evidence by not producing the mitigating or exculpatory evidence in this case."

While some in local media have cast doubt on the likelihood of the motion being successful, O’Connell says he is optimistic that he will be granted a hearing on his motion, possibly on a previously scheduled court date on April 7. 

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

"We are not going to litigate this case in the press," Garza’s office said in a statement this week to local media vowing to carry on with their case. 

"We remain ready to try this case and expect to start the trial in June as previously agreed with the defense. Justice delayed is justice denied, and four years is too long to wait. It is time for the community to weigh in on whether they believe that the defendant's actions violated the law."

from Latest & Breaking News on Fox News https://ift.tt/jaO5Bh6
via IFTTT

Fox News RSS Feed

As a partial government shutdown blows past the one-month mark, Democrats are demanding lawmakers shrink the size of the Department of Homeland Security’s (DHS) funding lapse — while leaving out the agency at the heart of Trump’s immigration crackdown.

Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), in their view, can stay shut down.

"We already said we'd open everything in the department except ICE, so the answer is yes," Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse, D-R.I., said when asked about partial funding for DHS.

"Republicans won't agree because they're trying to hold the security of the country hostage."

SCHUMER, DEMS AGAIN BLOCK DHS FUNDING, FORCE STATE OF THE UNION SHOWDOWN

His position was echoed by Rep. Ro Khanna, D-Calif.

"We need to fund every aspect of it other than ICE. We're going to fight on the ICE funding. I mean, they already have $75 billion," Khanna said, noting that ICE itself already received funding through Donald Trump’s Big Beautiful Bill.

In light of those appropriations, Republicans believe Democrats have assumed an unsustainable position as they continue to shoot down efforts to fund DHS in its entirety.

"They’re not interested in reopening, right? Their whole thing is: ‘Okay, we're doing a shutdown to go out there and affect ICE and Border Patrol.’ But ICE and border patrol are the ones that are not even affected by this shutdown. They're funded by the One Big, Beautiful Bill that passed previously," Rep. Brian Mast, R-Fla., said.

"How long do I foresee Democrats lying to their base? Forever," Mast added.

Calls to implement the partial funding stance have grown louder since the shutdown first began.

KRISTI NOEM'S FIRING FAILS TO SWAY DEMOCRATS AS DHS SHUTDOWN DRAGS ON

Funding for DHS originally lapsed on Feb. 14 when Democrats refused to advance spending legislation for DHS that didn’t also include a set of demands to reform ICE. Among other changes, Democrats have conditioned their support on a ban on masks for ICE agents, stiffer warrant requirements for apprehending suspects in public and a ban on roaming patrols.

Republicans have rebuffed the demands, arguing they would handcuff President Donald Trump's immigration enforcement goals.

Republicans need at least seven Democrats to reach the 60-vote threshold to break a filibuster in the Senate, where they hold just 53 seats.

The standoff has overlapped with a series of domestic attacks, raising alarm among Republicans that DHS’ closure may be reducing the country’s preparedness to counter similar threats.

A vehicle-ramming at a synagogue in Michigan, a university shooting in Virginia, the detonation attempts in New York and another shooting in Texas have left members like Seth Magaziner, D-R.I., joining calls to pass non-ICE DHS funding.

'YOU CAN CRY ABOUT IT': TEMPERS FLARE IN SENATE AS DHS SHUTDOWN DEBATE ERUPTS, STALEMATE DIGS DEEPER

"If it takes more time to negotiate those changes to ICE, then the right thing to do is to fund the rest of DHS, TSA, Coast Guard, FEMA, counterterrorism, all of that, while we continue to negotiate over ICE," Magaziner said.

Sen. Richard Blumenthal, D-Conn., said he has also joined that position.

"Ready, willing, and eager to approve funding for TSA, for FEMA, and for the Coast Guard through the separate bill that we've offered and Republicans have rejected. There's an easy solution here," Blumenthal said.

from Latest & Breaking News on Fox News https://ift.tt/OfJN6VL
via IFTTT

Fox News RSS Feed

EXCLUSIVE — As he praises President Donald Trump for "taking the fight directly" to Iran, former Vice President Mike also argues that the attacks show that the president isn't listening to the isolationist wing of the Republican Party.

"It's one of the things I give President Trump great credit for," Pence said this week in an exclusive interview with Fox News Digital.

Pence's comments come nearly three weeks into the military strikes against Iran, as some loud voices in the MAGA and America First orbits have pilloried the president over the attacks.

ONLY ON FOX: PENCE URGES SENATE TO ‘RESTORE PUBLIC CONFIDENCE’ BY PASSING NATIONAL VOTER ID BILL

The former vice president, who has long been a proponent of strong American deterrence around the world, highlighted that "around this administration, and to some extent in this administration, there have been some increasingly loud voices calling for America to pull back from our role as leader of the free world. Isolationist voices have taken hold in some quarters of the Republican Party."

"But fortunately, President Trump turned a deaf ear to those voices last year when he struck Iran, and this year, when he launched Operation Epic Fury," Pence emphasized. "I think it's greatly to his credit."

Pence argued that it's "reflective of where the overwhelming majority of Republicans are. Republicans understand that America is the arsenal of democracy, that we're the leader of the free world, that we have obligations to lead."

And pointing to his former boss during Trump's first administration, Pence said, "I've told people many times, I'm proud of President Trump for making the decision to launch operation Epic Fury. But I'm not surprised, because the President I serve with is no isolationist."

The military attacks by the U.S. and Israel have resulted in the death of Iran's Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, and other top officials, and the decimation of the country's military.

HEAD HERE FOR FOX NEWS LIVE UPDATES ON THE ATTACKS ON IRAN

But Iran has retaliated with attacks against Israel and many of its other neighbors in the volatile Middle East.

Iran has also targeted energy facilities with missile and drone attacks in a number of Persian Gulf nations. It has also made the Strait of Hormuz nearly impassable to commercial shipping, bringing to a halt roughly 20% of the world's oil supply, which has sent fuel prices skyrocketing in the U.S. and across the globe.

But Pence emphasized that he "couldn't be more proud of President Donald Trump for making the decision to send our troops directly against an enemy that has literally claimed thousands of American lives, including nearly 1,000 service members."

The former vice president said Trump has "unleashed the armed forces of the United States to take the fight directly to the source of global terrorism. And I think at the end of the day, the American people understand that this is a fight that we have to win, and it's going to be important that we finish the threat that Iran has posed to the American people, to our cherished ally, Israel, to nations across the region and across the West, once and for all."

And Pence said that if he were advising Trump, he would urge the president "to finish the threat that the mullahs and Tehran have posed to the people of this country once and for all."

from Latest & Breaking News on Fox News https://ift.tt/g0Kzdv5
via IFTTT

Fox News RSS Feed

It was the morning after a day when the American military campaign against Iran had not gone particularly well.

President Donald Trump rebuked our Israeli allies for bombing a major Iranian gas field. "NO MORE ATTACKS WILL BE MADE BY ISRAEL," he posted, even as U.S. and Israeli sources disputed Trump’s insistence that he had not approved the attack in advance.

Mideast oil shipments remained paralyzed as such U.S. allies as Britain and France refused Trump’s appeal to neutralize Iran’s blockade of the Strait of Hormuz, saying they didn’t want a military escalation.

As oil prices soared, with the country producing virtually no new jobs over the previous six months, the Federal Reserve chairman said the economic outlook was "uncertain." 

WHY TRUMP IS DENOUNCING THE MEDIA’S IRAN WAR COVERAGE AS TOO NEGATIVE – BOOSTED BY RHETORICAL FCC BACKING

That was the backdrop when War Secretary Pete Hegseth began an early-morning news conference yesterday by slamming…the media.

"A dishonest and anti-Trump press will stop at nothing, we know at this point, to downplay progress, amplify every cost and call into question every step. Sadly, TDS is in their DNA. They want President Trump to fail." He was referring to Trump Derangement Syndrome.

Yet if you magically wiped out all the coverage of these latest events, they would be no less true, rocking the world economy and puncturing the financial markets.

PENTAGON TARGETS IRAN-LINKED MILITIAS IN IRAQ AS HEGSETH VOWS 'WE WILL FINISH THIS' FOR FALLEN US TROOPS

It was a jarring note, as if the lack of upbeat headlines was at the root of the problem.

This is a familiar theme of Hegseth’s, who has said media organizations are turning such developments as the deaths of American service members into front-page news to make Trump look bad. 

The former "Fox & Friends Weekend" co-host sprayed other targets, including "ungrateful allies" in Europe, and Joe Biden, George W. Bush and Barack Obama.

Now let’s assume, for the sake of argument, that the Pentagon chief has a point. 

The coverage of this president, especially in the second term, has been overwhelmingly negative, whether justified or not, and that could certainly seep into the reporting and analysis on Iran.

But on what planet would journalists want America to lose the war against the world’s leading terror state, which is responsible for the deaths of so many thousands of innocent civilians?

In fact, even those in the media who question the president’s decision to attack Iran right now – with no clear-cut evidence that the religious dictators are on the verge of developing nuclear weapons – say the U.S. is easily winning the war.

The world’s most powerful military has decimated Iran’s defenses, no question about it. Tehran’s ability to use drones to strike back (with Russian help) against Americans in the surrounding Arab countries is relatively feeble, but still capable of inflicting death and damage.

And right now, Iran has succeeded in choking off oil traffic in the strait. All this is news, no matter how it’s reported.

TRUMP QUIPS ABOUT PEARL HARBOR WHEN ASKED IF JAPAN GIVEN ADVANCED NOTICE ON IRAN ATTACKS: 'WANTED SURPRISE'

Barbara Starr, the former CNN Pentagon correspondent, said this about Hegseth on my "Media Buzzmeter" podcast:

"I think he would much rather have 100 percent news coverage that is glowing of President Trump’s policies and efforts in this war. He doesn’t want any criticism… The job of the news media in wartime is to cover all the news. And I don’t think there’s really anything more important than the troops, which he claims is number one on his list, and their welfare and their safety."

The most significant comment by Hegseth, who confirmed a request to boost the defense budget by $200 billion, was that there would be "no nation-building quagmire" in Iran, "no democracy-building exercise." That may turn out to be true, but it underscores the long shadow cast by the Bush administration’s invasion of Iraq, in which a supposed cakewalk wound up costing more than 4,000 American lives.

In appealing to the "patriotic" press yesterday to "thank" Trump for attacking Iran, Hegseth was of course broadcasting to the boss. Online, the president has accused "Highly Unpatriotic ‘News’ Organizations of pushing "LIES" about the war, and said some should be "brought up on Charges for TREASON."

But yesterday Trump soberly described the situation in Iran while taking questions during a meeting with Japan’s prime minister, making no reference at all to the media’s reporting.

SUBSCRIBE TO HOWIE'S MEDIA BUZZMETER PODCAST, A RIFF ON THE DAY'S HOTTEST STORIES

He called the military attacks an "excursion," acknowledging the huge spike in oil prices by saying: "I thought it would be worse – much worse, actually." The president said things are "ahead of schedule… It’s not bad and it’s going to be over with pretty soon."

If that’s the case, no amount of negative coverage will change the public perception. In the meantime, though, journalists need to keep asking probing questions about this war and take the heat from the Trump team and its allies.

from Latest & Breaking News on Fox News https://ift.tt/LdTVAtC
via IFTTT

Fox News RSS Feed

Former FBI Director James Comey has been called many things by critics and fans alike. However, it appears that his stab at being a pop singer did not pan out. Comey recently raised eyebrows with an account of his singing Beyoncé's "Sandcastles" to FBI officials in a classified briefing … only to be met by a stony silence.

It appears that some of his agents may have viewed the occasion as grounds for intervention rather than for rendition. In fairness to the agents, they were likely unaware of Comey’s use of beaches to uncover hidden intelligence and messages.

Comey has periodically popped up in the press with bizarre or self-edifying posts. However, this one left many scratching their heads. Yet, it was vintage Comey, including a surprising admission about his handling of classified information.

Comey recalled the moment from a classified FBI briefing when he realized that a secret program being discussed was named after a favorite song. He wrote:

JAMES COMEY ADMITS TO SINGING BEYONCÉ SONG DURING SENSITIVE FBI BRIEFING

"One morning, I was sitting at the head of a big table in a crowded room to get briefed on a particular piece of work. The briefer started by saying, the operation was codenamed ‘Sandcastles.’ Now, this was 2016, and you may know that Beyoncé’s album ‘Lemonade’ had come out with a track called ‘Sandcastles.’ So, I said, ‘Oh, like the Beyoncé song.’ Blank stares all around the FBI conference room. So, I did the natural thing. I think I sang, ‘We rebuild sand castles that washed away.’ Nope, nothing — dead silence. ‘Never mind,’ I said, "‘continue.’ Only when I got home and told my family the story did I get the reaction I was looking for. When I write, I listen to classical or jazz because, in ways I can’t explain, the music unlocks something. It frees me."

It also apparently freed Comey from security protocols. His charming story included the fact that, disappointed by his audience at the FBI, he decided to repeat it to his family. In doing so, he may have revealed the code name of a classified FBI program to uncleared individuals in an unsecured location. This is no indication from Comey whether the code name was considered sensitive information by the FBI before his encore performance.

The Justice Department has fought in court to withhold code names as sensitive national security matters, including during Comey’s tenure as director.

FORMER TRUMP LAWYER HALLIGAN DEFENDS US PROSECUTOR STATUS IN WAKE OF COMEY, JAMES DISMISSALS

For example, in N.Y. Times v. DOJ, 2023, it was uncontested that the FBI could withhold code names because "specific code names that [the] FBI used for certain FBI programs’ and that disclosure of these things ‘would risk circumvention of the law by revealing FBI processes and potential issues related to relationships with foreign countries."

This is not the first time Comey has raised concerns of his violation of FBI protocols and procedures regarding classified material. The Justice Department inspector general issued a scathing account of how, after being fired by President Donald Trump, Comey improperly removed FBI files and then arranged for the information to be leaked to the media to undermine Trump.

The media immediately came to his defense despite his having led investigations into leakers in the past. On CNN and MSNBC, legal experts dismissed the arguments that this was improper or FBI material.

The memos clearly reveal that Comey was likely aware they contained possible classified information. Comey wrote in a Jan. 7, 2017, memo that "I am  not sure of the proper classification, so I have chosen secret." The four memos, including two given to his friend to leak to the media, were later found to be classified.

CLICK HERE FOR MORE FOX NEWS OPINION

What was notable about the leaks was Comey’s obsession with his own public persona. He took FBI material to bolster his image with the media. He later published "A Higher Loyalty: Truth, Lies, and Leadership," which portrayed him in heroic terms without addressing allegations that he was a leaker. During his term as director, the Justice Department investigated and prosecuted FBI personnel for leaks. The "higher loyalty" shown by Comey often seemed to be his blind loyalty to his own image.  

Comey has previously recounted his obsession with Taylor Swift as well as Beyoncé, but insists that "I can’t explain, the music unlocks something. It frees me."

Given his history of leaks and other violations, it may be time to try a new musical genre. It appears that pop is a bit too liberating for James Comey.

In the meantime, Comey may be misinterpreting tears of joy rather than regret when he made it to the line from "Sandcastles": "I made you cry when I walked away."

CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM JONATHAN TURLEY

from Latest & Breaking News on Fox News https://ift.tt/hGvXR4O
via IFTTT