Former President Bill Clinton and former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton will be deposed by the House Oversight Committee in their hometown instead of in Washington, D.C. next week, Fox News Digital has learned.

The Clintons are testifying under oath for the committee’s probe into Jeffrey Epstein. Hillary Clinton’s deposition is scheduled for Feb. 26 while Bill Clinton will sit down with congressional staff and lawmakers on Feb. 27.

‘The Clintons’ depositions will be held in Chappaqua, New York on February 26 and 27 as an accommodation for their schedules. The depositions are in accordance with House and Committee rules,’ a spokeswoman for the House Oversight Committee told Fox News Digital.

The former first couple purchased their home in Chappaqua, just north of New York City, in 1999, and it has been their main residence since leaving the White House.

Their depositions will come after months of back-and-forth with committee Republicans about various terms for the closed-door meetings.

‘The Clintons’ testimony is critical to understanding Epstein and [Ghislaine Maxwell’s] sex trafficking network and the ways they sought to curry favor and influence to shield themselves from scrutiny,’ House Oversight Committee Chairman James Comer, R-Ky., told Fox News Digital on Thursday evening. ‘Their testimony may also inform how Congress can strengthen laws to better combat human trafficking. Our goal for this investigation is straightforward: we seek to deliver transparency and accountability for the American people and for survivors.’

House Republicans nearly moved forward with a vote on holding them both in contempt of Congress last month after the Clintons’ lawyers ripped Comer’s subpoenas as legally invalid and a breach of separation of powers.

While some Democrats agreed with the move, the majority of them accused Comer of persecuting the Clintons on political grounds.

If the votes were successful, they would both have been referred to the Department of Justice (DOJ) for prosecution. A guilty verdict for contempt of Congress carries up to one year in jail and a maximum fine of $100,000.

But days before the expected vote, the Clintons’ counsel told Comer they would agree to testify.

In the days since, however, both Clintons have waged a public pressure campaign demanding they get public hearings instead of a closed-door transcribed and taped interview. 

‘I have called for the full release of the Epstein files. I have provided a sworn statement of what I know. And just this week, I’ve agreed to appear in person before the committee. But it’s still not enough for Republicans on the House Oversight Committee,’ Bill Clinton posted on X this month.

‘Now, Chairman Comer says he wants cameras, but only behind closed doors. Who benefits from this arrangement? It’s not Epstein’s victims, who deserve justice. Not the public, who deserve the truth. It serves only partisan interests. This is not fact-finding, it’s pure politics.’

Comer has said that public hearings are not out of the question, but not before depositions behind closed doors.

Bill Clinton was known to be friendly with Epstein long before the federal case against him first emerged and has appeared in documents on the late pedophile released by the DOJ. But neither he nor Hillary Clinton are implicated in any wrongdoing.

The Clintons are two of over a dozen people and entities who have been subpoenaed for information in the committee’s bipartisan Epstein probe.

It’s not unprecedented for the committee to travel for depositions, either. Committee staff and some lawmakers were in Ohio on Wednesday to depose former Victoria’s Secret CEO Leslie Wexner, a former client of Epstein’s financial advisory firm who was named in documents released by the DOJ about the late pedophile thousands of times.

For weeks, the U.S. military has quietly amassed what President Donald Trump has described as an ‘armada’ in Iran’s backyard. Mapped out across the Persian Gulf and beyond, the deployment tells its own story — one of calculated pressure backed by credible capability.

The latest signal of escalation is the movement of the world’s largest aircraft carrier, the U.S. Navy’s USS Gerald R. Ford, and its strike group from the Caribbean toward the Middle East.

The buildup coincides with indirect negotiations between Washington and Tehran over Iran’s disputed nuclear program. Trump has warned that the regime must fully dismantle its nuclear infrastructure — or face consequences.

At the heart of America’s force projection is another carrier strike group: USS Abraham Lincoln — a mobile fortress at sea, guarded by destroyers and equipped to unleash precision strikes at a moment’s notice. On deck, F-35 fighters and F/A-18 attack aircraft sit within range of dozens of key Iranian military and nuclear targets.

Meanwhile, in the Eastern Mediterranean, destroyers USS Bulkeley and USS Roosevelt provide additional strike capability and missile defense coverage — and could potentially assist Israel in defending against any Iranian counterattack.

Farther south, in the Red Sea, USS Delbert B. Black adds another layer of firepower along one of the world’s most important shipping lanes. The Red Sea links the Mediterranean to the Indian Ocean through the Suez Canal, a corridor that carries a significant share of global trade and energy supplies. 

A U.S. destroyer there not only protects commercial traffic but also gives Washington the flexibility to respond quickly to threats moving between the Middle East and Europe.

Even closer to Iran’s coastline, in the Persian Gulf and the Strait of Hormuz, USS McFaul and USS Mitscher are operating in one of the most strategically sensitive waterways on the planet. Roughly a fifth of the world’s oil passes through the Strait of Hormuz each day. Their presence signals that the U.S. can both defend that vital choke point and, if necessary, strike Iranian targets from close range.

Beyond naval forces, U.S. air power is spread across multiple Middle Eastern bases, giving commanders the ability to strike, defend and sustain operations quickly.

Several types of combat aircraft are operating from regional bases, including F-15s, F-16s and the radar-evading F-35. The A-10 specializes in close-air support missions against armored threats.

Those fighters are backed by a network of support aircraft. KC-135 and KC-46 tankers refuel jets midair, allowing them to fly farther and stay aloft longer. EA-18G electronic warfare aircraft can jam enemy radar and communications. E-3 Sentry aircraft serve as airborne command centers, tracking threats across wide areas. P-8 Poseidon planes patrol and monitor maritime activity.

Additionally, heavy transports — including C-5 Galaxy and C-17 Globemaster aircraft — move troops and equipment, while MQ-9 Reaper drones provide surveillance and can carry precision weapons. The assets give U.S. commanders flexibility to operate across air, sea and land.

Taken together, the air and naval deployments create overlapping strike capability, missile defense coverage and control over major maritime routes. For Iran, it means U.S. forces are not concentrated in a single vulnerable location — they are distributed, layered and positioned to operate from multiple directions at once. 

President Donald Trump said Friday he is ‘considering’ a limited military strike on Iran to pressure its leaders into a deal over its nuclear program.

‘I guess I can say, I am considering that,’ Trump said at a breakfast with governors at the White House.

This is a developing story. Please check back for updates.
 

When President Donald Trump announced ‘TrumpRx’ in early February, a weight I’ve carried my entire adult life suddenly lifted from my shoulders. The website offers life-saving medications at much lower prices than normal, based on the president’s promise to give Americans the same prescription drug costs as patients in other developed countries. I can personally attest that such equal treatment — a policy known as ‘most favored nation’ pricing — is urgently needed for people who struggle with chronic disease.

I’ve had debilitating asthma since I was a child. I’ve been able to manage it thanks to a prescription drug which blocks lung inflammation and keeps my airways open. The few times I’ve gone off the medication, I’ve ended up in the emergency room, unable to breathe. That nearly happened four years ago in what I thought was the worst possible place — on the other side of the world, unable to contact my doctors or go to my pharmacy.

My family and I were in Italy, on a trip to honor my mother. She had recently been diagnosed with cancer and my brother and I scheduled the trip in between her chemo treatments, when she would be well enough to travel. She had always wanted to go there with us. But in our rush to get two families and three little kids packed, I accidentally grabbed a nearly empty inhaler.

I realized my mistake a few days into the trip, when I looked at the inhaler and saw that I only had two doses left. I wasn’t just worried about my health, though, of course, that was paramount. I worried how I’d afford the drug if I even found it in Italy.

I’ve organized my professional life around access to insurance that covers my medication, given its longstanding retail price $600 for a month’s supply. For 25 years, I’ve grappled with denied coverage letters, premium tier prescription charts and the constant worry that we would have to cut back on necessities to get my medication. At the time, in Italy, I was already paying a few hundred dollars a month for the drug — a lot, but a bargain compared to its normal price.

But I had no choice. I had to get my medication. After a few minutes of searching, I found an Italian pharmacy across town. I walked there immediately, trying to control my racing thoughts of what might happen. I knew that if I couldn’t get the drug, I couldn’t get safely back to the U.S.

Fifteen minutes later, in tears I walked out, drug in hand. It cost me only 30 euros or about $35.

At first, I was both relieved and grateful. But by the end of the day, I was scratching my head. Why was it $600 in the U.S. while Italians could get it for next to nothing? In the days that followed, I discovered that the answer is beyond complicated.

It’s affected by everything from a lack of price transparency to the meddling of middlemen who jack up costs. It’s also true that foreign countries have been negotiating the prices of prescription drugs for decades, forcing Americans to cover the enormous cost of pharmaceutical development while they pay far below market prices.

Whatever the reason, the system doesn’t work for Americans. Brand name prescription prices in the U.S. are more than four times higher than prices in other wealthy countries. As many as 18 million Americans have struggled to buy the prescriptions they need in recent years.

I’m now using a generic version of the drug that costs significantly less. But that doesn’t change the fact that I, like many other Americans with chronic disease, have paid through the nose for decades on end, only to find the medication I needed in Italy for what seemed like pennies.

I wasn’t just worried about my health, though, of course, that was paramount. I worried how I’d afford the drug if I even found it in Italy.

Trump is fighting to fix this broken system. Before launching TrumpRx, he reached 16 deals with pharmaceutical companies to charge most-favored-nation prices. As a lifelong conservative, I’m typically uncomfortable with this kind of government intervention in the market. But other countries have already intervened and people like me have paid the price.

If pharmaceutical companies need the extra money, they should take it up with other countries that negotiated them down first. Then they could recoup their costs on the backs of others, not simply by charging more in the U.S. Bottom line, there’s no good reason why 340 million Americans should pay so much more than hundreds of millions of people who live in Europe and Asia.

I will always be grateful that my medication was so affordable in Italy back in 2022. It may very well have saved my life. But I’m even more grateful that President Trump is finally lowering prices for every American here at home.

Ex-Victoria’s Secret mogul Les Wexner’s lawyer was caught on a hot mic jokingly threatening to ‘kill’ him if he continued giving long answers to questions during his deposition on Jeffrey Epstein by the House Oversight Committee.

The moment was caught after the committee released its full, nearly five-hour deposition of 88-year-old Wexner as part of its ongoing probe into Jeffrey Epstein’s network.

Several hours into the deposition, while Wexner was giving a particularly long-winded answer, Wexner’s attorney leaned over to him and whispered in his ear, ‘I’m going to f—ing kill you if you answer another question with more than five words, okay?’

Both Wexner and his attorney laughed after this statement, indicating Wexner understood it as a joke. The lawyer proceeded to instruct Wexner to ‘answer the question,’ laughing more.

Shortly before this exchange, the attorney had urged Wexner to ‘answer the question,’ saying, ‘I’m sure we all appreciate the stories, we’re just trying to answer questions that they actually want answered,’ referring to the House committee.

The Oversight Committee heard from Wexner, a billionaire fashion mogul best known for his work in revolutionizing the Victoria’s Secret store chain, about his involvement with Epstein, whom Wexner characterized as strictly a business associate rather than a close friend.

Despite being named a co-conspirator in a recently uncovered FBI document from 2019, Wexner said that he has never been directly contacted by either the FBI or the Department of Justice. He maintained his total innocence during the deposition, saying, ‘I was naïve, foolish, and gullible to put any trust in Jeffrey Epstein. He was a con man. And while I was conned, I have done nothing wrong and have nothing to hide. I completely and irrevocably cut ties with Epstein nearly twenty years ago when I learned that he was an abuser, a crook, and a liar.’

The committee stated it was releasing the full deposition with ‘no spin,’ saying, ‘The American people deserve to see the testimony for themselves—transparency matters.’

Wexner is the founder of L Brands, formerly called The Limited, through which he acquired well-known companies Victoria’s Secret, Bath & Body Works, Express, and Abercrombie & Fitch, among others. He is no longer associated with Victoria’s Secret. He was one of Epstein’s first major clients as a financial advisor, with Epstein being granted power of attorney over Wexner’s vast wealth. Wexner also sold his Manhattan townhouse to Epstein, which was later discovered to be one of the locations where federal authorities accused Epstein of abusing young women and girls under 18.

Despite this, Wexner stated that he always kept his relationship with Epstein as strictly professional, saying, ‘I don’t think I ever went to lunch, or dinner, a movie or had a cup of coffee with Jeffrey,’ adding, ‘My focus was on my business and on community.’

Wexner said he severed ties with Epstein in 2007 after learning of an investigation and discovering that Epstein had misappropriated funds from him and his family. He said a substantial amount of the money was returned. 

Wexner also testified that he was not aware of Epstein ever staying at a guesthouse on his New Albany, Ohio, estate, where Maria Farmer is said to have been abused by Epstein and associate Ghislaine Maxwell. He maintained that he only had knowledge of Epstein staying at a nearby neighbor’s residence. Pressed on whether he denies Farmer’s testimony that she was abused on his property, he stated, ‘I never met her, didn’t know she was here, didn’t know she was abused.’

He categorically denied any knowledge of either Epstein or Maxwell arranging women for prominent individuals. He also categorically denied ever having a sexual encounter with anyone introduced by Maxwell and Epstein or having any sexual relationship with Epstein himself.

He further denied any sexual contact or knowledge of another prominent Epstein victim, Virginia Giuffre.

Wexner was also asked about his knowledge of Epstein and President Donald Trump’s relationship. He said that he does not think they were friends, but said Epstein ‘held him out as a friend.’

Committee members also questioned Wexner on a note he wrote in a birthday book to Epstein in which he drew breasts with the caption, ‘Dear Jeffrey, I wanted to get you what you want, so here it is … Your friend, Leslie.’

Wexner confirmed that he wrote the note but dismissed it, saying, ‘He was a bachelor, so I drew a pair of boobs as kind of a joke, offhandedly, I would say.’

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

Fox News Digital’s Liz Elkind contributed to this report.

The Pentagon is deploying the USS Gerald R. Ford to the Middle East, creating a rare two-carrier presence in the region as tensions with Iran rise and questions swirl about possible U.S. military action.

The Ford will reinforce the USS Abraham Lincoln already operating in theater, significantly expanding American airpower at a moment of heightened regional uncertainty.

While officials have not announced imminent action, the dual-carrier presence increases the Pentagon’s flexibility — from deterrence patrols to sustained strike operations — should diplomacy falter.

The largest aircraft carrier in the world

The Gerald R. Ford is the largest and most advanced aircraft carrier ever built.

Commissioned in 2017, the nuclear-powered warship stretches more than 1,100 feet and displaces more than 100,000 tons of water. It serves as a floating air base that can operate in international waters without relying on host-nation approval — a key advantage in politically sensitive theaters.

Powered by two nuclear reactors, the ship has virtually unlimited range and endurance and is designed to serve for decades as the backbone of U.S. naval power projection.

How much airpower does it carry?

A typical air wing aboard the Ford includes roughly 75 aircraft, though the exact mix depends on mission requirements.

Those aircraft can include F/A-18 Super Hornets, stealth F-35C Joint Strike Fighters, EA-18G Growler electronic warfare jets, E-2D Hawkeye early warning aircraft and MH-60 helicopters.

In a potential conflict with Iran, several of those platforms would be central. 

The F-35C is designed to penetrate contested airspace and carry out precision strikes against heavily defended targets. The Growler specializes in jamming enemy radar and communications — a critical capability against Iran’s layered air defense systems. 

The E-2D extends surveillance hundreds of miles, helping coordinate air and missile defense.

Together, they give commanders options ranging from deterrence patrols to sustained strike operations.

Built for higher combat tempo

What separates the Ford from earlier carriers is its ability to generate more sorties over time.

Instead of traditional steam catapults, it uses an electromagnetic aircraft launch system, or EMALS, allowing aircraft to launch more smoothly and at a faster pace. The system is designed to reduce stress on jets and increase operational tempo.

The ship also features advanced arresting gear and a redesigned flight deck that allows more aircraft to be staged and cycled efficiently.

In a high-intensity scenario — particularly one involving missile launches or rapid escalation — the ability to launch and recover aircraft quickly can be decisive.

How it compares to the Lincoln

While both the Ford and the Abraham Lincoln are 100,000-ton, nuclear-powered supercarriers capable of carrying roughly 60 aircraft to 75 aircraft, they represent different generations of naval design.

The Lincoln is a Nimitz-class carrier commissioned in 1989 and part of a fleet that has supported decades of operations in the Middle East. The Ford is the Navy’s next-generation carrier and the lead ship of its class.

The key difference is efficiency and output. 

The Ford was built to generate a higher sustained sortie rate using its electromagnetic launch system, along with a redesigned flight deck and upgraded power systems. In practical terms, both ships bring substantial strike capability — but the Ford is designed to launch and recover aircraft faster over extended operations, giving commanders greater flexibility if tensions escalate.

How it defends itself

The Ford does not sail alone. It operates as the centerpiece of a carrier strike group that typically includes guided-missile destroyers, cruisers and attack submarines.

Those escort ships provide layered air and missile defense, anti-submarine protection and additional strike capability.

The carrier itself carries defensive systems including Evolved Sea Sparrow Missiles, Rolling Airframe Missiles and the Phalanx Close-In Weapon System — designed to intercept incoming threats at close range.

That defensive posture is especially relevant in the Middle East.

Iran has invested heavily in anti-ship ballistic missiles, cruise missiles, armed drones, naval mines and fast-attack craft operated by the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps. The Gulf region presents a dense and complex threat environment, even for advanced U.S. warships.

Why two carriers matter

With both the Ford and the Lincoln in theater, commanders gain more than just added firepower. Two carriers allow the U.S. to sustain a higher tempo of operations, distribute aircraft across multiple areas, or maintain continuous presence if one ship needs to reposition or resupply.

Dual-carrier deployments are relatively uncommon and typically coincide with periods of heightened regional tension.

The timing — as negotiations with Tehran continue — underscores the strategic message. Carriers are often deployed not only to fight wars, but to prevent them.

By positioning both ships in the region, Washington is signaling that if diplomacy falters, military options will already be in place.