Fox News RSS Feed

On September 11, 2001, while thousands of people were trying to get away from the danger in lower Manhattan, my brother Stephen was heading straight toward it. His shift as a New York City firefighter was over and he was supposed to meet his brothers for a round of golf, but the moment he heard that a plane had hit the World Trade Center, he turned his truck around. For Stephen, there was never really a choice—people needed help, and he was going to help them.

My brother Stephen barely had time to think when news of a plane hitting the World Trade Center’s North Tower came across the scanner inside his black 1990 GMC Sierra 1500 pickup truck just after 8:46 a.m. on September 11, 2001.

Perhaps that was fitting. In the few seconds that Stephen had to consider whether to keep driving from Brooklyn’s Park Slope neighborhood—where his shift at FDNY Squad 1 had ended just sixteen minutes prior—toward Staten Island, where he was supposed to meet up with the rest of us Siller brothers and head down to central New Jersey and play golf, there was no decision to make. A major accident or attack had just occurred—and countless innocent people needed help. The only direction for Stephen to drive was not away from the fire, but straight toward it.

As golf balls rattled and his clubs whipped to the other side of the truck, Stephen quickly turned around on the Brooklyn-Queens Expressway, put his foot on the gas, and began racing in the direction of the Brooklyn-Battery Tunnel, where he could drive under the river to lower Manhattan. He could see the thick smoke emanating from lower Manhattan as he tore down the BQE, wondering exactly what had happened and how fast he could get there. Having known Stephen his entire life, I am certain that one question dominated his mind in those frantic yet simultaneously measured few minutes: How many lives can I help save?

FRANK SILLER: 'I LOVE YOU, BROTHER': THE 9/11 LOSS THAT INSPIRED A MISSION OF SERVICE

At some point while driving as fast as he safely could on the BQE, Stephen called his wife, Sally. He told her that some sort of aircraft had hit the World Trade Center and that even though he’d already finished his overnight shift at the elite Squad 1 in Brooklyn, he was now driving toward lower Manhattan instead of home. Right after he said "I love you" and started getting ready to put down his Nextel phone, Stephen also asked Sally to please let his brothers know that he wouldn’t be able to play golf that day.

Other than saving lives and the well-being of his wife and kids, I believe that there was an additional prominent thought going through Stephen’s mind as he got closer to the tunnel. This is no accident. This is a terrorist attack.

9/11 HERO’S MEMORY PRESERVED THROUGH MASSIVE EFFORT TO ‘DO GOOD’ FOR VETS, FIRST RESPONDERS: ‘HIS LEGACY’

For years, Stephen had told myself and others that it was only a matter of time before New York—and specifically the World Trade Center—would be targeted a second time by international terrorists. He also believed that it was going to be a lot worse than the 1993 bombing, which happened the year before Stephen became a firefighter. While my brother deserves credit for his foresight, his prediction was hardly unique within FDNY ranks, as many senior department leaders (like my friend Sal Cassano) all the way down the totem pole to firefighters like Stephen believed that another attack was imminent. Tragically, they were right.

Stephen’s golf equipment kept bouncing around as he maneuvered among cars like he would ordinarily do while driving his beloved red Chevy. Many of these vehicles had stopped right in the middle of the BQE to watch the terrifying events that were unfolding in the lower Manhattan sky. Stephen, who was urgently trying to reach the mouth of the Brooklyn-Battery Tunnel, undoubtedly knew that anything could happen in the next few moments. Yet as Sally could hear in his voice, Stephen was undeterred. Nothing short of an ensuing nuclear missile attack could stop my brother from getting through that tunnel and reaching the Twin Towers.

WHERE TUNNEL TO TOWERS' STEEL ACROSS AMERICA TOUR WILL STOP AHEAD OF 9/11

Robin and Joe Raiso were sitting at that very spot at the mouth of the tunnel after witnessing the surreal sight of the first plane—American Airlines Flight 11—hitting the North Tower. Their car, which had almost made it inside the Brooklyn-Battery Tunnel before the NYPD quickly shut it down, was now covered in soot. Even on the Brooklyn side, debris was raining down from a previously bright September sky that was suddenly clouded by smoke and fire.

Naturally, Robin and Joe were both baffled and scared by what they were seeing. They became even more frightened when they heard the screeching sound of a black pickup truck screeching to a stop beside them, on a median. If what was unfolding in the sky above them was some kind of terrorist attack, could the man getting out of his truck be a part of it? Was the tunnel about to be bombed or subjected to another kind of mass casualty incident? A million thoughts raced through Robin’s and Joe’s worried minds.

NYPD CHIEF: 9/11 HEROES’ LEGACY LIVES ON IN EVERY GENERATION OF OFFICERS

That was when they saw my brother. As calmly as possible in the middle of what he correctly assumed was a terrorist attack with sirens blaring, thick black smoke filling the air, and debris falling around him, Stephen got out of his truck, went around back, and started rummaging through the bay of his pickup. After maybe a minute or so, Stephen returned to the front side wearing sixty pounds of firefighter’s gear. Then, without hesitation, my brother started running toward the mouth of the tunnel.

A few moments later, Robin and Joe saw a few NYPD officers stop Stephen in his tracks at the tunnel entrance, which was completely blocked by police barricades. It didn’t take them long to realize that Stephen was indeed an FDNY firefighter, so they nodded, patted Stephen on the back, and let him through.

9/11 MUSEUM UNVEILS EXHIBITION FOR GENERATION TOO YOUNG TO REMEMBER THE ATTACKS: 'CALLED EVERYBODY TO LEAD'

"We were shocked and amazed. Everyone was trying to run out," Joe would later say. "He was running in." The last time Robin and Joe saw Stephen was when he ran full speed into the uncertain darkness of the Brooklyn-Battery Tunnel. Above him was fire, dust, smoke. In front of my brother was a 1.7-mile path through North America’s longest continuous underwater vehicular tunnel toward the only thing in the world that mattered to him in that moment: the victims of what would soon become known as 9/11. With each step forward, even with that heavy gear on his shoulders and chest, Stephen was closer to helping the helpless.

9/11 DEATH TOLL KEEPS GROWING DECADES LATER AS TOXIC EXPOSURE HAUNTS SURVIVORS

It is difficult, if not impossible, to determine precisely what happened next. Because of Robin and Joe’s eyewitness account, I believe it is most likely that while Stephen was running through the Brooklyn-Battery Tunnel, the unthinkable—at least for most New Yorkers and Americans who weren’t part of the FDNY, NYPD, or intelligence services—happened in front of millions of eyeballs watching from the ground and on television screens across America. At 9:03 a.m., a second hijacked plane—United Airlines Flight 175—hit the South Tower.

CLICK HERE FOR MORE FOX NEWS OPINION

If Stephen was indeed inside the tunnel when the world as we all knew it changed forever, I can only imagine the tunnel shaking and the deafening sounds that Stephen must have heard. That terrible experience probably made him run even faster—not because he was afraid, but because he knew from the sounds of new explosions that thousands more innocent people were almost certainly in grave danger.

What I cannot imagine is what Stephen saw when he first reached the other side. We know that there was no light at the end of the tunnel—lower Manhattan was covered in darkness and filled with the sounds and smells of fire, smoke, and death.

For Stephen Siller, however, I do believe that he managed to find some light in that darkness. Even amid the chaos, I think my brother knew that his life’s defining moment had arrived.  Going backward was not an option—Stephen’s only direction was forward, toward the innocent people he wanted so desperately to help save.

Stephen’s final run through the Brooklyn-Battery Tunnel has come to represent everything he stood for: courage, sacrifice, and putting others before himself. In his honor, our family started the Tunnel to Towers Foundation to carry that spirit forward and support America’s heroes and their families. To learn more about Stephen’s legacy and our mission, visit T2T.org.

Excerpted from "LET US DO GOOD: My Brother Stephen, 9/11, and the Mission to Honor America’s Heroes" by Frank Siller. Copyright 2026 by Frank Siller. Published with permission from Broadside Books and HarperCollins Publishers.

CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM FRANK SILLER

from Latest & Breaking News on Fox News https://ift.tt/fbC6tW7
via IFTTT

Fox News RSS Feed

The Trump administration designated an Ecuadorian gang as a "foreign terrorist organization" on Wednesday, extending its list of designated foreign terrorist groups in Latin America and the Caribbean to 21.

The State Department designated Los Tiguerones as a Foreign Terrorist Organization and a Specially Designated Global Terrorist.

According to the department, Los Tiguerones is an Ecuador-based gang linked to narcotrafficking and other illicit activity, along with several attacks targeting civilians, law enforcement officers and journalists, including the live takeover of an Ecuadorian TV station in 2024.

"The Trump administration will continue to use all available tools to protect our nation by keeping illicit drugs off our streets and disrupting the revenue streams funding violent narcoterrorists," Secretary of State Marco Rubio said in a statement.

US FORCES SINK NARCO-REFUELING STATION LINKED TO ECUADORIAN CARTEL IN PACIFIC: SOUTHCOM

"Today’s action taken by the State Department further demonstrates that the Trump administration continues to deliver on its promises to the American people to dismantle cartels and narcoterrorist networks in our region, ensuring the safety of the American people," he added.

The announcement came during Rubio's diplomatic tour to South America, where he made stops in Colombia, Ecuador and Peru to address U.S. efforts to combat drug trafficking in Latin America.

The label was previously reserved for terrorist groups such as ISIS and al-Qaida that use violence for political ambitions and not for financially motivated crime organizations like the ones in Latin America and the Caribbean that have recently been added to the list.

But the administration wants to increase pressure on the crime rings and anyone believed to be assisting them.

The government began using the strategy in February 2025, and it served as a pretext for the U.S. capture of then-Venezuelan leader Nicolás Maduro earlier this year, as well as dozens of deadly attacks on boats allegedly involved in narcotics trafficking.

The strategy also prompted Latin American countries, including Guatemala and Argentina, to take similar action against certain groups and led Ecuador to launch joint operations on its own soil.

Rubio said terrorist designations "expose and isolate entities and individuals, denying them access to the U.S. financial system and the resources they need to carry out attacks." He also said designations can assist law enforcement actions of other U.S. agencies and governments.

RUBIO DESIGNATES AFGHANISTAN AS 'STATE SPONSOR OF WRONGFUL DETENTION': 'DESPICABLE TACTICS'

Mexico has the most groups of any country on the U.S. list for designated foreign terrorist organizations with eight. The Mexican government is under intense pressure from the U.S. to prevent President Donald Trump from taking unilateral action against cartels in Mexico.

Trump’s approach has also featured contradictions, as he pardoned former Honduran President Juan Orlando Hernández, who was sentenced to 45 years in prison for drug trafficking and accused during his trial of protecting the Sinaloa Cartel. Hernández has since returned to his country.

The Associated Press contributed to this report.

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

Fox News RSS Feed

In 1863, as the Civil War raged and its result was not yet certain, Congress for the first time raised the number of justices on the Supreme Court to 10. The Tenth Circuit Act was approved on March 3, 1863. This was done in large part to allow Abraham Lincoln to nominate a strong Unionist justice to the Court, Stephen J. Field, on March 6, 1863. Field was confirmed on March 10, after Congress created a new Supreme Court seat.

Three years later, after the Union’s triumph in the war, the assassination of President Abraham Lincoln and the beginning of a long, drawn-out era of Reconstruction, Congress passed a bill on July 23, 1866, that reduced the number of justices to seven through attrition and barred the filling of vacancies until that number was reached. This was done to prevent President Andrew Johnson from making any nominations to fill Supreme Court vacancies.

Just prior to this statute’s passage, Congress had passed the Fourteenth Amendment on June 13, 1866, and formally transmitted it to the states for ratification on June 16, 1866. Ratification was not certain, nor was the defeat of Johnson in 1868. While the proposed Fourteenth Amendment was silent on the number of justices on the Supreme Court, the amendment explicitly guaranteed the citizens of the United States the right to "due process of law," along with unenumerated privileges or immunities and the equal protection of the laws. The language of the amendment’s first section concludes: "No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws."

REPUBLICANS FAIL TO EASE ONE OF TRUMP'S GREATEST FEARS AS SUPREME COURT MEASURE COLLAPSES

The original Constitution had been silent as to the number of justices on the Supreme Court, but from 1866 to 1869, a combination of three statutes and one amendment put a constitutional imprimatur on the number of nine. The Fourteenth Amendment was ratified on July 9, 1868, by the necessary number of states, and Secretary of State William Seward formally proclaimed the Fourteenth Amendment as part of the Constitution on July 28, 1868.

On March 2, 1867, while the new amendment was pending ratification or rejection, Congress passed a Reconstruction Act that obliged any state in the defeated Confederacy to ratify the Fourteenth Amendment before that state’s representatives could be admitted to Congress.

Less than a year after ratification and certification of the Fourteenth Amendment, Congress completed the work of the Reconstruction Era with regard to the Supreme Court with the passage of the Judiciary Act of 1869.

That act first passed in March 1869, but outgoing President Johnson pocket-vetoed the bill. Congress promptly passed it again, and the new President, Ulysses S. Grant, promptly signed it. That law completed the work of the Fourteenth Amendment and fixed the Supreme Court at nine members, where it has remained for 157 years.

There is an excellent argument that this sequence of events over three post-war years—a proposed amendment passing Congress, then a statute tying the hands of Johnson, then a statute requiring ratification as a precondition of admission to the Union, followed by ratification of the amendment and then the final statute on the makeup of the Supreme Court—embedded the number of nine justices implicitly in the notion of the "due process" of law language of the Fourteenth Amendment, and that this reading was confirmed by the rapid move to make that number nine explicit after ratification of the Fourteenth Amendment.

Certainly, the refusal of overwhelming Democratic majorities in Congress in 1937 and 1938 to endorse President Franklin Roosevelt’s attempt to "pack the Court" fortifies the view that the Supreme Court’s number of nine justices is very much part of the "due process" of law in the United States and cannot be changed from nine except by a constitutional amendment.

DEMOCRATIC SENATOR CLAIMS GOP 'STOLE' TWO SCOTUS SEATS IN 2016, 2020, CALLS FOR EXPANSION

Last week, the House GOP majority put forward a constitutional amendment (H.J. Res. 8) to explicitly fix the Supreme Court at nine members. The proposal failed to reach the required two-thirds majority in a 212–206 vote. House Republicans voted overwhelmingly in favor, while Democrats voted 1–205 against it, with Rep. Don Davis, D-N.C., as the lone Democrat supporting the measure. Independent Rep. Kevin Kiley, who caucuses with Republicans, voted against it, while 15 members did not vote.

Democrats fear they cannot win and hold the presidency long enough to allow for the nomination and confirmation of enough new justices for the gradual evolution of American constitutional law to reflect their distinctly minority views on what the Constitution requires on a score of issues.

Achieving a significant course change in American constitutional law requires enormous patience and wisdom over the decades it takes to see vacancies arise and new justices confirmed. "Originalists"—known in a previous era as "strict constructionists" and more commonly as "old-fashioned judges"—were shocked by the 1973 radical decision in Roe v. Wade, to cite just one example, but they were obliged to wait nearly a half-century until the Dobbs decision in 2022 to see the disfiguring jurisprudence hatched by Roe repudiated.

The terrible decision in the 1978 case Regents of the University of California v. Bakke launched affirmative action in admissions at colleges and universities, an unconstitutional experiment that did not meet its long-overdue demise until the 2023 decisions in Students for Fair Admissions, Inc. v. President & Fellows of Harvard College and Students for Fair Admissions, Inc. v. University of North Carolina.

When the Court heads down the wrong path, it can take decades to course-correct back to the Constitution’s design.

And the waiting can be extremely frustrating.

KAMALA HARRIS BACKS MAJOR CHANGES TO THE SUPREME COURT, ELECTORAL COLLEGE AHEAD OF POSSIBLE 2028 CAMPAIGN

After President Reagan and President George H.W. Bush made a combined three appointments to the Court, originalists expected the repudiation of Roe in 1992 in the case of Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pennsylvania v. Casey, but the three Supreme Triumvirs of the time—Justices Anthony Kennedy, Sandra Day O’Connor and David Souter—conjured up a replacement theory, gutted Roe and replaced it with a wholly new and novel theory of abortion "rights" without explicitly overturning Roe. Three more decades of bad law followed until Dobbs returned the regulation of abortion to the states, where it has been the subject of ongoing debate, legislation and referenda. Abortion remains widely available in the United States today, though not everywhere or on demand in most states. That’s federalism at work, and it does indeed work.

Those who longed for a return of the Court to its pre-Roe humility concerning its own role on every controversial issue did not, however, think of "packing the Court" as a means to their ends, as that is a step that is not just too radical and unthinkable—it is also unconstitutional.

This past "summer of the DSA" and the rise of far-left Twitch streamer Hasan Piker have communicated to even long-serving Democratic members of the House of Representatives that its activist base is gripped by a fever of anti-American rage unseen in that party since secession gripped the Democrats in December 1860. Like the pro-slavery Democrats of antebellum America, the Democrats of today would rather wreck the Constitution than abide by it.

The proposal to change all the laws of the United States by suddenly injecting hard-left judicial "philosophy" into a supermajority of new justices to the left of Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson ought to scare every American who believes in the rule of law. Every established precedent in every area of law would be out the door if that change ever occurs. Eight individuals—five new radical justices plus Justices Brown Jackson, Sonia Sotomayor and Kagan—would effectively and immediately rule the United States. The left’s longed-for "revolution" would arrive.

Suddenly. Irreversibly. And that is what the DSA left and the Democratic Party it has cowed demands.

CLICK HERE FOR MORE FOX NEWS OPINION

A statute approving the expansion of the Court is unconstitutional. It violates the guarantee of due process of law in the Fourteenth Amendment, substituting in its place an endless roller coaster of judicial revolution and counter-revolution via an accordion Supreme Court that just expands and never contracts. There is no end in sight on this road to the radicals’ ruin of the rule of law.

The House GOP would perhaps have been better served by forcing a vote on the constitutionality of such a statute. Over the past weekend, the Manhattan Institute's James Piereson took to the Wall Street Journal to argue in an op-ed that "there are good reasons to think such a law would be unconstitutional, in that it would undermine the separation of powers and the independence of the judiciary."

Piereson is right that the "history of court expansion in the 19th century provides no support for the Democrats’ plan, nor does the language of the founders in their commentary on the Constitution or FDR’s ill-fated experiment with court packing." He could have gone further, and others will, to explain how the "due process" guaranteed every American by the Fourteenth Amendment is incompatible with expansion of the Court beyond nine, as provided for in the post-14th Amendment Judiciary Act of 1869.

Democrats cannot use transient majorities and rule changes in the Senate to gain the authority to undo the Constitution remade anew in 1868. Americans love their country and their freedoms. They do not want the radical makeover proposed by the DSA and now acquiesced in by the 2026 Democrats. 

Republicans put the issue front and center last week. It should remain there throughout the fall and all of the 2028 campaign. The DSA Democrats "hate" the Constitution. The GOP is right to defend it.

CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM HUGH HEWITT

Hugh Hewitt is a Fox News contributor and host of "The Hugh Hewitt Show" heard weekday afternoons from 3 PM to 6 PM ET on the Salem Radio Network, and simulcast on Salem News Channel. Hugh drives Americans home on the East Coast and to lunch on the West Coast on over 400 affiliates nationwide, and on all the streaming platforms where SNC can be seen. He is a frequent guest on the Fox News Channel’s news roundtable, hosted by Bret Baier weekdays at 6pm ET. A son of Ohio and a graduate of Harvard College and the University of Michigan Law School, Hewitt has been a Professor of Law at Chapman University’s Fowler School of Law since 1996 where he teaches Constitutional Law. Hewitt launched his eponymous radio show from Los Angeles in 1990. Hewitt has frequently appeared on every major national news television network, hosted television shows for PBS and MSNBC, written for every major American paper, has authored a dozen books and moderated a score of Republican candidate debates, most recently the November 2023 Republican presidential debate in Miami and four Republican presidential debates in the 2015-16 cycle. Hewitt focuses his radio show and his column on the Constitution, national security, American politics and the Cleveland Browns and Guardians. Hewitt has interviewed tens of thousands of guests from Democrats Hillary Clinton and John Kerry to Republican Presidents George W. Bush and Donald Trump over his 40 years in broadcasting. This column previews the lead story that will drive his radio/ TV show today.

from Latest & Breaking News on Fox News https://ift.tt/3jzRM5o
via IFTTT

Fox News RSS Feed

The United States Coast Guard (USCG) on Tuesday said only one boater, a 15-year-old, was rescued alive after three individuals went missing earlier this week.

Rescue personnel found the teenager "clinging to the capsized vessel" Monday off the coast of Alaska. Officials said crews found him in the midst of a medical emergency.

The "survivor was rescued from the overturned skiff experiencing symptoms of hypothermia," officials said.

TWO DEAD, INCLUDING INFANT, AFTER BOAT CAPSIZES IN NEW YORK HARBOR; 12 RESCUED

The two other mariners were found dead after the 18-foot fishing vessel they were aboard overturned about 4 miles east of St. Lawrence Island, according to authorities.

The Coast Guard said crews initiated a search mission early Monday after Alaska State Troopers notified the Coast Guard of an overdue boat Sunday evening. The vessel was expected to return Sunday at 3 a.m.

Officials said crews were unable to launch a rescue mission until Monday morning due to weather and poor visibility.

US COAST GUARD SAVES 8, INCLUDING INFANT AND CHILD, AFTER VESSEL CAPSIZES OFF FORT MYERS BEACH

After launching an aircrew, personnel spotted the survivor and deployed a raft with survival equipment.

Officials said a good Samaritan vessel also stepped in, rescuing the 15-year-old survivor and recovering the bodies of the two deceased mariners from the water.

The two mariners and the teen survivor were then brought to Nome, Alaska, officials said.

from Latest & Breaking News on Fox News https://ift.tt/ZNzi1tE
via IFTTT

Fox News RSS Feed

Democratic Gov. Dan McKee of Rhode Island is fighting for his political life in the smallest U.S. state's primary elections on Wednesday as he faces potential downfall stemming from the nearly three-year partial closure of a crucial bridge.

McKee first assumed office in March 2021 when then-Gov. Gina Raimondo stepped down to become U.S. commerce secretary he was then elected four years ago for a full term. Now, McKee is trying to avoid becoming the nation's first elected governor in a dozen years to lose renomination.

The governor is facing off in a primary rematch with Helena Buonanno Foulkes, a former longtime executive with CVS, which is based in Rhode Island.

THESE 12 MIDTERM RACES WILL DECIDE WHICH PARTY CONTROLS THE SENATE

McKee narrowly edged Foulkes, who is the niece of former Democratic Sen. Chris Dodd of neighboring Connecticut, in a multi-candidate field in the 2022 Democratic primary before winning the general election in the solidly blue state.

As he fights for renomination, the governor has been outspent by a nearly two-to-one margin by Foulkes, according to Rhode Island campaign finance records.

Also working against McKee is his handling of the reconstruction of the Washington Bridge, which was shut in December 2023 after officials spotted critical structural flaws.

The bridge connects Providence to East Providence and before its westbound span was shut, it carried roughly 100,000 vehicles per day. Westbound and eastbound traffic share the reconfigured eastbound span with reduced lanes.

State officials originally estimated the bridge would reopen this year, but the completion date was later pushed back to November 2028.

The bridge has become a top issue in the gubernatorial primary, with McKee and Foulkes battling over the bidding process for reconstruction and the pace of rebuilding.

While pushing back on criticism over his handling of the bridge, McKee has slammed Foulkes as an out-of-touch corporate executive trying to buy herself an election win.

DEMOCRACY ’26: STAY UP TO DATE WITH THE FOX NEWS ELECTION HUB

But also working against the governor in an anti-incumbent year are the high electricity rates Rhode Islanders pay and the state's severe shortage of affordable housing.

The winner of the Democratic primary will be considered the clear favorite in the general election against either Aaron Guckian, a state trade association executive and the 2022 GOP lieutenant governor nominee, or former actress and first-time candidate Elaine Pelino, who are vying for the Republican nomination. The state GOP has endorsed Guckian.

In the race for the Senate, Democratic Sen. Jack Reed, who has served for three decades, faces two longshot challengers in their party's primary.

SIGN UP TO GET THE POLITICS NEWSLETTER

Raymond McKay, a former president of the Rhode Island Republican Assembly and a former leading state GOP official, is the presumptive Republican Senate nominee.

Democratic Rep. Gabe Amo faces no opposition for renomination in the state's 1st Congressional District, while entrepreneur Kellie Keenan is the presumptive GOP nominee.

Democratic Rep. Seth Magaziner is the presumptive nominee in Rhode Island's 2nd Congressional District.

Businessman Victory Mellor and physician Stephen Skoly are facing off in the Republican primary.

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

Fox News RSS Feed

As we approach the 25th anniversary of 9/11, there are many in our country who want us to pretend that the greatest attack on the United States since Pearl Harbor never happened. They want us to look away from the Muslim terrorists who flew planes into the World Trade Center and the Pentagon, and who drove another plane full of innocents to their deaths in a grassy Pennsylvania field. They want us to forget that on that day in 2001, Americans came under attack for reasons that few understood, from a far-away people who loathe our culture, our freedoms and our country.

When Rep. Ilhan Omar, D-Minn., dismissively says, "Some people did something," she is trying to erase the truth. She wants us to forget who it was who purposefully killed 2,977 people who were going about their daily lives, unaware of the Saudi jihadis who schemed and plotted for years to cause as much death and suffering as possible to our great nation.

Sorry, Ilhan — I remember.

AMERICA’S HEARTLAND COMES FACE-TO-FACE WITH 9/11 HISTORY AS 25TH ANNIVERSARY NEARS

I remember my young daughters calling home terrified that the planes had hit their father's office, which was across the street from the Twin Towers. I remember my husband's colleagues witnessing the panicked souls jumping to their deaths from the towers, and the rain of ashes that blanketed the entire downtown area. He was in midtown at the time of the attack, but his co-workers were not so lucky, navigating the pitch-dark stairwells of the neighboring building and wading through the debris-darkened chaos. Some walked miles to our uptown apartment, stranded by the closure of the city's bridges and tunnels; they arrived frightened and exhausted, covered head to toe in ashes.

Life stood still, as New Yorkers watched on television the frantic recovery efforts at Ground Zero. The city's ambulance drivers gathered to help the injured, but most returned home empty-handed; there were few survivors. We watched the heroic efforts of firefighters and police officers who raced into the falling buildings as others tried to get out; most were trapped and died there.

FRANK SILLER: 'I LOVE YOU, BROTHER' -- THE 9/11 LOSS THAT INSPIRED A MISSION OF SERVICE

I recall the horror of the buildings collapsing, knowing what it meant for those left inside. In the days that followed, I remember calling friends and slowly piecing together who we had lost, and who had survived. Everyone knew someone who perished — a husband, a son, a friend. Lives were forever changed, darkened by hateful strangers.

People forget that in the days after 9/11, other attacks were expected. The enormity of the coordinated strikes suggested a military-type offensive. Everyone stayed home, avoiding Grand Central Terminal and other possible targets, not knowing whether it was safe to venture out. No major events took place in Manhattan for weeks; the city went dark except for the fires that smoldered for months where the Twin Towers once stood.

I LOST MY WIFE ON 9/11. PLEASE LET THIS 25TH ANNIVERSARY BELONG TO THE FAMILIES

Several weeks later, the New York Philharmonic performed the Brahms Requiem before a crowd that included Mayor Rudy Giuliani, New York Gov. George Pataki and other officials. My husband and I attended that concert, nervous — as was everyone — that so many luminaries gathering in one place might attract the next assault. It was the first time we had walked through body scanners, the first time our bags were searched. Life in America had forever changed, thanks to Muslim extremists who threatened our way of life.

That night, the audience stood and sang our national anthem; the orchestra played under an historic 48-star American flag that had been used in Carnegie Hall concerts during World War II. At the conclusion, as requested, there was no applause. Everyone filed out in silence, many in tears.

NEW 9/11 MUSEUM EXHIBIT AIMS TO CONNECT YOUNGER AMERICANS TO THE ATTACKS THROUGH POWERFUL ARTIFACTS

So yes, Ilhan — I remember. I remember Americans learning the significance of the date 9/11, which some said commemorated a battle in 1683, in which the king of Poland waged war against the Ottoman Empire's advance into Europe. Muslim jihadis, including mastermind Usama bin Laden, reportedly viewed this as a seminal event in the long conflict between Islam and the West. Most Americans had little idea that such a conflict existed.

Today, 25 years later, leftist educators are erasing this history, encouraging those who blame America for the horrifying mass murder. At least 40 states require public schools to address the 9/11 terror attacks, but the "provisions vary widely in scope, specificity and framing," the Associated Press reports. According to one survey of Middle East professors, the majority of college students have no idea why nearly 3,000 Americans died on that day.

TEXAS EDUCATION BOARD APPROVES CONTROVERSIAL CURRICULUM CHANGES TYING 'RADICAL ISLAM' TO 9/11 ATTACKS

A curriculum from the University of Pennsylvania Graduate School of Education, which has been picked up by several Democratic-run states, includes this: "On the 11th of September, 2001, 19 hijackers flew two airplanes into the Twin Towers of the World Trade Center in New York, one airplane into the Pentagon in Virginia and a fourth into a field in Pennsylvania. A total of 2,996 people were killed, including the hijackers." The lesson further says, "The U.S. accused Saudi national Osama bin Laden…of being the mastermind behind the attacks." No mention of bin Laden's confessions, or his well-documented jihad against the U.S. Not a word about who those 19 hijackers were.

ANTISEMITIC VIOLENCE REACHES DEADLIEST LEVEL SINCE 1994, NEW GLOBAL REPORT FINDS

Instead of teaching about Muslim terrorists, radical Israel-hating teachers in the U.S. focus on Islamophobia, a bigotry barely witnessed but much touted on the left. So far this year in New York, there have been 27 hate crimes against Muslims, about 6 percent of the total, compared to 229, or 54%, targeting Jews. Islamophobia is not the problem.

CLICK HERE FOR MORE FOX NEWS OPINION

Why the concerted effort to bury the truth about 9/11? Muslim Democrats, like Abdul El-Sayed, who is running for the Senate in Michigan, or New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani, want to distance themselves from the horrific murder of nearly 3,000 Americans, but it is not their religion that earns them opprobrium; it is their contempt for the United States and hatred toward our ally Israel.

Americans must not tolerate this rewriting of recent history. We must also not tolerate antisemitism. Those who say Israel is our enemy should answer this: When was the last time Jewish terrorists attacked Americans?

Twenty-five years later, we still mourn the friends we lost, the brave first responders who made the ultimate sacrifice, and thousands of others who died at Ground Zero. Not speaking out about what really happened on 9/11 and who was responsible is to dishonor those tragic souls. 

That is unacceptable.

CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM LIZ PEEK

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

Fox News RSS Feed

A federal appeals court on Tuesday upheld an injunction blocking the Internal Revenue Service from sharing personal information such as the addresses of taxpayers with immigration authorities, ruling the Trump administration's policy was unlawful.

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit found that the IRS unlawfully disclosed taxpayer information in response to Immigration and Customs Enforcement's request for the last known addresses of 1.28 million suspected illegal migrants. The court said the IRS failed to ensure that ICE's requests met the "stringent conditions" required under a federal tax-confidentiality law adopted in the aftermath of the Watergate scandal, which generally bars the IRS from sharing tax-return information with other federal agencies.

Last year, the IRS shared roughly 47,000 taxpayer addresses with ICE under a policy that aims to assist President Donald Trump's mass deportation agenda. The IRS had adopted a policy that allowed ICE to collect taxpayer information, sparking lawsuits over allegations that the practice was unlawful.

A lower-court judge sided with the plaintiffs and blocked the policy, although by that time the IRS had already shared 47,289 taxpayer records with ICE.

IRS ERRONEOUSLY SHARED CONFIDENTIAL IMMIGRANT TAXPAYER DATA WITH DHS: COURT FILING

The administration appealed, arguing the ruling hindered federal law enforcement.

"But that's a gripe with Congress, not the court," U.S. Circuit Judge Cornelia Pillard said in the appeals court's ruling on Tuesday.

Pillard said the IRS procedures violated federal law in several ways, including "most egregiously" by not requiring ICE to provide an actual taxpayer address, as the law requires.

"The IRS failed to require ICE to provide a 'specific reason' why the requested return information 'is or may be relevant to [a qualifying] proceeding or investigation,' as the statute demands," Pillard wrote.

"It entirely fails to ensure that ICE lists a federal employee, let alone one ‘personally and directly engaged’ in a qualifying investigation of a particular taxpayer," Pillard continued. "That failure has serious consequences. When ICE requested information on 1.28 million taxpayers in the summer of 2025, ICE identified the same person as the point of contact for every single request."

The practice "automates the review of millions of records without any individual review or any other means of ensuring compliance with the legal prerequisites to releasing each individual taxpayer's information," the judge added.

The three-judge panel also ruled that information sharing would violate privacy laws.

NEW MAINE LAW LIMITS POLICE COOPERATION WITH FEDERAL IMMIGRATION OFFICIALS

"The Data-Exchange Procedure reduces noncitizens’ privacy rights in their tax returns. By providing a distinct, automated pathway for ICE to request noncitizens’ information, the Data-Exchange Procedure deprives noncitizens of the protections that section 6103 guarantees to all taxpayers," the court found.

A spokesperson for the Department of Homeland Security said in a statement to Reuters that it disagrees with the ruling and "will continue using every lawful tool available to locate and remove illegal aliens with final orders of removal."

Reuters contributed to this report.

from Latest & Breaking News on Fox News https://ift.tt/QgLs467
via IFTTT