Hunter Biden was furious with former President Barack Obama for leading then-President Joe Biden offstage with a guiding hand at a June 2024 fundraiser, according to a new book from ABC News’ Jonathan Karl.

An excerpt from the book, obtained by Axios, details how the younger Biden believed Obama had disrespected and embarrassed the president.

‘I almost jumped up on the stage and said, ‘Don’t ever f–king do that to the president of the United States again — ever,” Hunter told Karl in an interview.

‘The younger Biden insisted his dad was simply taking some time to acknowledge the crowd. ‘I knew that that was going to be a meme,’ Hunter recalled. ‘That really, really, really, really pissed me off,” the book reads.

The incident was one of many that contributed to criticism that Biden was too old to hold office, an opinion held by the vast majority of voters, according to polls from the time.

The clip was just one of many in the latter months of Biden’s presidency that showed an ally, aide or family member stepping in to seemingly direct or guide Biden off a stage or during an event.

The Obama incident came just days after Biden had to be redirected by another world leader during a G7 event in Italy. The former president was arrayed with other world leaders as he appeared to wander a few steps away from the group.

Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni then walked over to the president, touched his right arm and redirected him back to the group of world leaders.

The White House at the time dismissed the clip for having an ‘artificially narrow frame’ that only made it seem as though Biden was walking away from the crowd.

Fox News’ Emma Colton contributed to this report.

For nearly a decade, conservatives have argued President Donald Trump and his allies have been targeted by federal law enforcement agencies. The media and so-called intel experts tried to convince us that Hunter Biden’s laptop was fake news and the Steele Dossier was God’s honest truth. Why? Because of deep political bias against Trump. Rather than sweep these injustices under the rug, I want to set the record straight.  

In September, former FBI Director James Comey, known for misusing his power against the president, was indicted for lying to Congress. I’ve been arguing for five years that Comey’s actions should be examined carefully, including the possibility of criminal misconduct. 

In analyzing the prosecution of Comey, it’s important to review the facts that led to this moment. In July 2016, Comey’s FBI opened Crossfire Hurricane, a counterintelligence operation centered around whether Trump was colluding with Russia during his campaign. The genesis for this theory largely stemmed from the Steele Dossier prepared by Christopher Steele, who we now know was hired on behalf of the Clinton campaign.  

Within a month of opening Crossfire Hurricane, Comey attended a meeting at the White House where then-CIA Director John Brennan briefed then-President Barack Obama, then-Vice President Joe Biden and other high-ranking officials on credible intelligence suggesting then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s campaign may have been behind the narrative that Trump was colluding with the Russians. A few weeks later, Comey also received a memo from the intelligence community supporting the idea that the Clinton campaign signed off on an effort to link Trump to Russia. 

Fast-forward to January 2017, the Russian subsource who provided the information for the Steele Dossier told the FBI that the information in the dossier was unreliable and nothing but hearsay. Despite this interview, Comey and others continued to apply for warrants against Carter Page, an official adviser to the Trump campaign. 

One would think that alarm bells would go off in the FBI when the man primarily responsible for creating the document used to get a warrant in the FISA court had recanted the authenticity of the document. Apparently, this bombshell revelation in the bureau’s most high-profile investigation sat in the bowels of the FBI and never made it to Comey. I find that hard to believe. 

At that time, the FBI clearly possessed exculpatory information exonerating Trump. Despite the fact that the DOJ and FBI have a duty to share exculpatory information and evidence that might undercut the reliability of a warrant application with the FISA court, they never did. 

In 2020, Comey testified during a hearing I called as chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee that he was never informed of the dossier’s lack of credibility and that the intelligence reports indicating the Clinton campaign was behind the Russia narrative did not ‘ring any bells.’ I had a hard time then — as I do now — believing that the former FBI director was telling the truth. 

The other matter to consider is the Biden Justice Department’s persecution of Trump. Three days after he announced he would seek the White House in 2024, the Biden DOJ appointed Jack Smith as special counsel.  

Within nine months of launching his campaign, Trump was indicted on 91 criminal counts across four separate jurisdictions — two of which were started by Smith. It is my firm belief that if Trump had decided not to seek the presidency in 2024, none of this would have happened. Many Americans agree with me that these indictments were politically motivated and that Smith was not a fair arbiter of the law.  

It has been the DOJ’s long-standing policy to not charge political candidates before Election Day to avoid the appearance of impropriety. However, Smith obliterated this policy. Within a month before the 2024 election, Smith was allowed to publicly release a brief containing his own version of the evidence against Trump, and he was even allowed to release an unredacted version two weeks before the election.  

Smith not only went after Trump but also his allies in Congress. During their investigation, agents working for Smith obtained records from the phone calls I — as well as eight of my colleagues — made between Jan. 4-7, 2021. At that time, I was the chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee. These actions are an egregious violation of the Constitution’s separation of powers and should concern every American, regardless of their politics.  

 I’ve been arguing for five years that Comey’s actions should be examined carefully, including the possibility of criminal misconduct. 

The common theme between Comey and Smith is that they cut corners and ignored procedures in their pursuit of Trump. Comey disregarded evidence exonerating Trump during Crossfire Hurricane, and Smith released damaging information about him just weeks before the 2024 election. These misguided investigations resulted in numerous indictments, flooded the media with negative stories about Trump and wasted millions of taxpayer dollars.  

Fortunately, the American people saw through these examples of weaponization by the DOJ and FBI, but Comey, Smith and others still inflicted great damage on our country. Their misconduct eroded trust in our institutions and threatened the Constitution’s fundamental principle of equal justice under law. 

These abuses by Comey and Smith come along with numerous other examples of Democratic administrations targeting conservatives, including the RNC, parents attending school board meetings, Americans going to church, the America First Policy Institute, among others. When you hear Republicans say the law has been weaponized against President Trump and his supporters, at least have some understanding of why we feel that way. To suggest otherwise defies reality and common sense. 

I will join my Republican colleagues and fellow Americans in refusing to be intimidated. We will keep pushing to hold accountable those who were responsible for outrageous abuses of power in an effort to destroy all things Trump. 

Colombia’s former defense minister Juan Carlos Pinzón warned that the once-close U.S.–Colombia alliance has ‘collapsed’ under President Gustavo Petro, accusing the leftist leader of aligning with Venezuela’s Nicolás Maduro and turning Colombia into a ‘narco-state.’

Pinzón, who is weighing a presidential run, told Fox News Digital he could ‘repair U.S.-Colombian relations in a week’ and urged international oversight of Colombia’s May elections amid what he called growing cartel influence and political corruption.

‘Petro has made himself an ally to [Venezuelan dictator Nicolás] Maduro’s regime, a narco-state, and a regime that is held mainly by the Cartel de los Soles,’ Pinzón said. ‘He has justified the existence of drug trafficking in Colombia … he has aligned himself with the idea of something that he calls ‘Total Peace,’ which implies that he’s providing benefits to drug traffickers and terrorist organizations and in general terms to organized crime.’

Relations between Washington and Bogotá — historically one of the closest U.S. security partnerships in Latin America — have deteriorated sharply under Petro, who has sought warmer ties with Caracas while distancing Colombia from the U.S. and Western allies.

During his tenure as defense minister from 2011 to 2015 under President Juan Manuel Santos, Pinzón oversaw some of Colombia’s most aggressive operations against the FARC and other armed groups, helping drive coca production and kidnappings to historic lows. As ambassador to Washington from 2015 to 2017, he helped secure Colombia’s designation as a major non-NATO ally, expanding intelligence sharing and military training programs with the U.S. — partnerships he now says have been ‘dismantled’ under Petro.

Under Petro’s ‘Total Peace’ policy, the Colombian government negotiates directly with armed criminal groups in an effort to end decades of internal conflict and integrate fighters into civilian life. Critics, including Pinzón, say the initiative has legitimized cartels and weakened the country’s security forces.

‘Homicide has gone up, terrorist actions have gone up, kidnappings have gone up, and the killing of police officers and military is increasing,’ he said. ‘All this is very bad for my country. And this is why I’m so committed to fight this, to confront this.’

Pinzón, who previously served as both defense minister and ambassador to Washington, is positioning himself as a pro-U.S. alternative ahead of Colombia’s 2026 presidential race. ‘I might announce a decision in the coming weeks,’ he said. ‘That’s something that I’m really considering.’

He also called for international election monitoring, warning that criminal networks could interfere in the vote. ‘If I were to ask something to the world today and to the international community — to the U.S., to the European Union, and even to countries in Asia — it’s that they make sure Colombian elections are not tainted by drug trafficking, illegal mining or terrorist hands,’ Pinzón said.

After a recent spat where Petro accused the U.S. of killing a Colombian fisherman in one of its seven Caribbean strikes targeting drug traffickers, Trump announced he would cut off all counter-narcotics aid to Colombia and hike tariffs on the nation. 

Pinzón urged Washington not to punish ordinary Colombians for Petro’s policies.

‘It’s not regular Colombians who are doing this,’ he said. ‘Most of us completely disagree with what is going on under Petro. We don’t want to see tariffs that can affect jobs and businesses in Colombia.’

While he praised Trump’s stance against narco-trafficking and corruption, Pinzón said he hopes the U.S. will avoid cutting counternarcotics aid, which he described as vital to Colombia’s military and police forces on the front lines of the drug war. ‘Our military and police are the real fighters against drugs,’ he said. ‘They continue to sacrifice, they continue to confront terrorism and drug trafficking. If that support disappears, it’s the criminals who are going to benefit.’

Instead, Pinzón said Washington should focus on targeted financial sanctions—such as those imposed by the Treasury Department’s Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC)—to hit specific traffickers, corrupt officials and their enablers rather than imposing measures that ‘hurt regular Colombians.’ ‘We would prefer OFAC-style sanctions on the people committing crimes,’ he said, ‘not policies that punish those who oppose Petro’s agenda.’

Looking ahead to potential ties with Washington, Pinzón said he could quickly rebuild the partnership through renewed security and intelligence cooperation, technology exchange, and educational programs.

‘I will just come to the U.S., speak openly and clearly with President Trump and the U.S. leadership, and speak on the need of creating a security agreement again on intelligence, on air mobility, on technology, on combating drug trade, but also on critical minerals and education,’ he said. ‘We want more Colombians to come to U.S. schools and enhance their capabilities and come back to Colombia to create knowledge, wealth and prosperity. We’re going to be again the closest ally of the United States strategically in the region.’

If Colombia continues on its current course, Pinzón warned, it could destabilize the entire hemisphere. ‘Colombia is a stabilizer at the end,’ he said. ‘If Colombia fails, the whole region will fail.’

Asked if he would seek U.S. backing, Pinzón said he values bipartisan support. ‘Everybody knows that I will have a very good relationship with the United States, certainly with the current administration, with President Trump,’ he said.

Pinzón also accused Petro of ‘abandoning’ Colombian citizens during a diplomatic spat with Washington after refusing deportation flights from the U.S. because the migrants were shackled. He said he would cooperate on deportations and be open to broader agreements if asked.

‘When Afghanistan fell, we offered the U.S. even to take care of some of the Afghanis if necessary,’ Pinzón said. ‘When you have a strong relationship as the one we used to have between Colombia and the U.S., and we will have if I can get to the presidency, what we’re going to see is a lot of good coordination and a lot of good things for both the people of Colombia and the people of the United States.’

Fox News Digital reached out to the Colombian Embassy for comment but did not receive a response before publication.

A group of House Republicans is raising concerns about the potential effects of the U.S. importing Argentinian beef after President Donald Trump floated the idea earlier this week.

Rep. Julie Fedorchak, R-N.D., is leading seven other House GOP lawmakers in a letter to the president on Tuesday evening, warning the potential plan has rattled the multibillion-dollar American ranching industry.

‘America’s cattle producers are among the most resilient and hardworking in the nation,’ the Republicans wrote. ‘Collectively, the cattle industry supports thousands of jobs across our districts and contributes $112 billion to rural economies nationwide.’

‘In recent days, we have heard strong concerns from producers regarding reports that the U.S. may import beef from Argentina.’

The House Republicans acknowledged the ‘importance of strong trade relationships and diverse markets’ but added that beef producers in their districts ‘are seeking clarity on how this decision will be made, what safety and inspection standards will apply, and how this policy aligns with your administration’s commitment to strengthening American agriculture.’

Trump suggested Sunday that buying beef from Argentina could help lower prices for Americans at home, amid a wider promise to lower costs for U.S. citizens.

‘One of the things we’re thinking about doing is beef from Argentina,’ Trump told reporters aboard Air Force One.

He later elaborated in his conversation with reporters, ‘We would buy some beef from Argentina. If we do that, that will bring our beef prices down.’

‘Our groceries are down, our energy prices are down. I think we’re going to have $2 gasoline pretty soon. We’re getting close and everything’s down. The one thing that’s kept up is beef,’ Trump said.

He added that it would not be ‘that much’ but argued it would help Argentina, a U.S. ally, as well.

But the House Republicans questioned whether imported beef would be held to the same food safety and animal health requirements as that of the U.S., which they called ‘the gold standard.’

‘Any import policy must hold foreign suppliers to those same rigorous standards. Introducing beef from countries with inconsistent safety or inspection records could undermine the confidence that U.S. ranchers have worked decades to earn,’ the lawmakers warned.

‘We respectfully request additional information on this matter and urge your administration to ensure that any future decisions are made with full transparency, sound science, and a firm commitment to the U.S. cattle industry. America’s producers can compete with anyone in the world. If given an opportunity, they will continue to respond quickly to the market demand for more quality American beef in our grocery stores.’

In addition to Fedorchak, the letter is also signed by Reps. Michelle Fischbach, R-Minn., Troy Downing, R-Mont., Gabe Evans, R-Colo., Dusty Johnson, R-S.D., Derek Schmidt, R-Kan., Jeff Hurd, R-Colo., and Republican Study Committee Chair August Pfluger, R-Texas.

White House spokesman Kush Desai told Fox News Digital in response, ‘The Trump administration remains committed to addressing the needs and concerns of American cattle producers and safeguarding their interests at home and abroad. That’s why the administration has secured billions in new export opportunities for American agricultural products in our historic trade deals with the UK, Japan, the EU, and others.’

‘It’s also why the administration is focused on reversing a prolonged decrease in the supply of live cattle by growing American cattle herds with robust action to deliver disaster relief to cattle country, support new ranchers, and reduce risk for cattle producers,’ Desai said.

Trump’s proposal has stirred some anxiety among some Republicans whose constituencies depend on cattle ranching.

Sen. Deb Fischer, R-Neb., posted on X Tuesday, ‘If the goal is addressing beef prices at the grocery store, this isn’t the way.’

‘The U.S. has safe, reliable beef, and it is the one bright spot in our struggling ag economy. Nebraska’s ranchers cannot afford to have the rug pulled out from under them when they’re just getting ahead or simply breaking even,’ Fischer wrote.

Meanwhile, Fox News Digital was told that Rep. Harriet Hageman, R-Wyo., also raised significant concerns about what importing beef from Argentina could do to the U.S. cattle ranching industry during a call with fellow House Republicans on Tuesday.

But some Republican responses were more muted. Sen. Markwayne Mullin, R-Okla., told reporters that Trump ‘definitely identified a problem’ regarding a shortage of cattle in the U.S. He added, ‘I understand what he’s trying to get done. I think there’s more ways to implement it.’

Fedorchak herself told Fox News Digital, ‘We’ve all received a number of questions and calls from our constituents over the last few days, so we are asking for clarity on the administration’s long-term plans. Our farmers and ranchers stand ready to deliver on the president’s America-First agenda. North Dakotans take great pride in producing the safest, highest-quality beef in the world — and we should be building on that success.’

Former first son Hunter Biden is claiming that his father only pardoned him because Donald Trump reclaimed the presidency in November 2024 — and ‘would not have’ done so under ‘normal circumstances’ while the appeals process played out.

‘Donald Trump went and changed everything,’ Hunter said in an interview released Monday on journalist Tommy Christopher’s Substack platform.

‘And I don’t think that I need to make much of an argument about why it changed everything.’

The 55-year-old — who pleaded guilty last year to evading $1.4 million in back taxes to the IRS and was convicted on felony gun charges — declined to mention that he had apparently been present for discussions on pardons during Joe Biden’s final months in the White House.

‘I’ve said this before,’ Hunter went on.

‘My dad would not have pardoned me if President Trump had not won, and the reason that he would not have pardoned me is because I was certain that in a normal circumstance of the appeals [I would have won].’

The Biden scion added that Trump was planning a ‘revenge tour’ against his father, which would have made himself the ‘easiest target to just to intimidate and to not just impact me, but impact my entire family into, into silence in a way that at least he is not — it’s not as easy for him to do [with] me being pardoned.’

‘I realize how privileged I am,’ Hunter went on.

‘I realize how lucky I am; I realize that I got something that almost no one would have gotten.

‘But I’m incredibly grateful for it and I have to say that I don’t think that it requires me to make much of a detailed argument for why it was the right thing to do, at least from my dad, from his perspective.’

Ex-White House chief of staff Jeff Zients spilled last month that Hunter ‘was involved’ in clemency talks and even ‘attended a few meetings,’ a source with knowledge of the Biden official’s testimony to the House Oversight Committee told The Post.

In a letter to Attorney General Pam Bondi Tuesday, House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jim Jordan, R-Ohio, referred former CIA Director John Brennan to the Justice Department for allegedly making false statements to Congress.

Jordan accused Brennan of lying in his 2023 Judiciary Committee testimony by denying that the CIA used the Steele dossier in prepping the 2017 Intelligence Community Assessment (ICA) on Russian election interference, and falsely claiming the CIA opposed including the dossier.

The Steele dossier was a series of reports detailing President Donald Trump’s alleged ties to Russia. It was compiled and delivered to the FBI in 2016 by former British intelligence agent Christopher Steele.

In Jordan’s letter, he alleged subsequent investigations ‘confirmed that the Clinton campaign and the DNC paid Steele via the law firm Perkins Coie and opposition research firm Fusion GPS to provide derogatory information about Trump’s purported ties to Russia, which resulted in the discredited dossier.’

In July 2025, the Trump administration declassified documents which appear to show Brennan approved the decision to include the dossier, despite objections from senior CIA officials.

During a transcribed interview on May 11, 2023, Brennan stated that ‘the CIA was not involved at all with the [Steele] dossier.’

Yet, according to the declassified documents, the decision to incorporate information from the dossier in the ICA ‘was jointly made by the Directors of CIA and FBI.’

‘Brennan’s assertion that the CIA was not ‘involved at all’ with the Steele dossier cannot be reconciled with the facts,’ Jordan wrote in the letter. ‘As the newly declassified documents show, a CIA officer drafted the annex containing a summary of the dossier; Brennan made the ultimate decision, along with then-FBI Director James Comey, to include information from the dossier in the ICA; and, as discussed further below, Brennan overruled senior CIA officers who objected to the inclusion of the dossier material.’

While past the five-year statute of limitations on criminal prosecution, Jordan also accused Brennan of providing false testimony during a House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence (HPSCI) hearing in 2017 — a move Jordan said ‘indicates a pattern of Brennan’s willingness to lie to Congress about the Steele dossier.’

‘The HPSCI report and the CIA memorandum confirm not only that the Steele dossier was used as a basis for the ICA, but that Brennan insisted on its inclusion,’ Jordan wrote. ‘This stands in stark contrast with Brennan’s testimony to HPSCI that the dossier was not used in drafting the ICA. … Brennan’s testimony before the Committee on May 11, 2023, was a brazen attempt to knowingly and willfully testify falsely and fictitiously to material facts.’

This is a developing story. Please check back for updates

The top congressional Democrats want a meeting with President Donald Trump as the government shutdown stretches on.

Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., said that both he and House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries, D-N.Y., reached out to Trump on Tuesday to set up a confab with the president.

The top Senate Democrat said the duo ‘urged’ Trump to meet with them, and that they were open to setting up ‘an appointment with him any time, any place.’

‘Hakeem and I reached out to the president today and urged him to sit down and negotiate with us to resolve the healthcare crisis, address it and end the Trump shutdown,’ Schumer said. ‘He should sit — the things get worse every day for the American people. He should sit down with us, negotiate in a serious way before he goes away.’

Congressional Democrats, particularly Schumer and his Democratic caucus, have remained steadfast in their demands for an extension to expiring Obamacare subsidies. Though Senate Republicans have been open to holding a vote on the matter after the government reopens, Democrats want an ironclad guarantee that the subsidies will be extended well before their expiration at the end of this year.

Should Trump relent to their request, it would mark the first meeting among the trio since Schumer, Jeffries, Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D., and House Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., met in the Oval Office a day before the shutdown began.

Lawmakers left that meeting with no agreement to avert the shutdown, which has now dragged on for 21 days.

Senate Democrats have also blocked Thune and Republicans’ attempts to reopen the government 11 times. Another vote on the House-passed continuing resolution, which would reopen the government until Nov. 21, is expected on Wednesday.

And like the many attempts before, that latest effort is expected to fail.

Meanwhile, Senate Republicans met with Trump for lunch at the White House Tuesday afternoon.

Speaking to reporters afterward, Thune reiterated that Senate Republicans were united in their war of attrition strategy to continue putting the same bill on the floor again and again. He noted that Trump would likely agree to meet with Schumer and Jeffries, but only after Senate Democrats unlocked the votes needed to reopen the government.

‘We have negotiated. I don’t know what there is to negotiate. This is about opening up the government,’ Thune said. ‘We have offered them several off-ramps. Now, the Democrats want something that’s totally untenable. I mean, they want $1.5 trillion in new spending. They want free healthcare for people who are noncitizens in this country. That is just a flat nonstarter. It doesn’t pass the Senate. It won’t pass the House. It won’t be signed into law by the president.’

Fox News Digital reached out to Jeffries’ and the White House for comment but did not immediately hear back. 

A group of House Republicans is calling on Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., to deal with expiring Obamacare subsidies immediately after the government shutdown ends.

Thirteen House GOP lawmakers, led by Reps. Jeff Van Drew, R-N.J., and Jen Kiggans, R-Va., are sending a letter to Johnson on Tuesday thanking him for his leadership during the shutdown but maintaining that Obamacare must also be dealt with before the end of the year.

Obamacare, formally called the Affordable Care Act (ACA), has emerged as one of the main flash points in the ongoing fiscal standoff between Republicans and Democrats.

‘Every day the shutdown continues to hurt the very people we were elected to serve, including the men and women of our Armed Forces, the federal law enforcement officers who keep our communities safe, the agents who defend our nation’s borders, and the public servants who provide essential services to veterans, seniors and families,’ the Republicans wrote.

‘We also firmly believe that the government funding debate is not the time or place to address healthcare issues. Using the shutdown as leverage to force that debate only prolongs the harm and distracts from the immediate task of reopening the government. Once the government is reopened, however, we should immediately turn our focus to the growing crisis of healthcare affordability and the looming expiration of the enhanced Affordable Care Act (ACA) premium tax credits.’

Obamacare subsidies were enhanced under the Biden administration in 2021 during the COVID-19 pandemic in a bid to make healthcare more available to a wider swath of Americans. Democrats voted to extend those subsidies through 2025 in 2022 via the Inflation Reduction Act.

Democrats are now pushing to extend those subsidies now, using the ongoing government shutdown as leverage to force Republicans to deal with the issue.

Both House and Senate GOP leaders have signaled they are willing to discuss the expiring healthcare subsidies but rejected pairing them with their bill to fund the government — a short-term extension of fiscal year (FY) 2025 federal spending levels called a continuing resolution (CR).

But extending the Obamacare subsidies is expected to generate its own debates among Republicans. Conservatives like the House Freedom Caucus and their allies are skeptical of the move, arguing the enhanced healthcare credits were responsible for sending medical prices skyrocketing.

But the 13 Republicans who signed the letter maintain, ‘Millions of Americans are facing drastic premium increases due to short-sighted Democratic policymaking. While we did not create this crisis, we now have both the responsibility and the opportunity to address it.’

‘Allowing these tax credits to lapse without a clear path forward would risk real harm to those we represent. Nevertheless, we must chart a conservative path that protects working families in our districts across the country who rely on these credits,’ they wrote.

The lawmakers agreed with GOP leaders that reforms are needed to the system ‘to make these credits more fiscally responsible and ensure they are going to the Americans who need them most,’ but added, ‘Our Conference and President Trump have been clear that we will not take healthcare away from families who depend on it. This is our opportunity to demonstrate that commitment through action.’

House Freedom Caucus Chair Andy Harris, R-Md., ruled out accepting a straightforward extension of the Obamacare subsidies in comments to reporters on Monday.

‘You want a clean vote on a program that potentially is $400 billion, and you want to do it without any debate, any negotiation? That’s just insanity,’ Harris said.

Asked by Fox News Digital if he sees any pathway to compromise, he said, ‘It all depends on what the package is, how is it paid for, what other healthcare reforms are in it?’

‘But that’s stuff that you’re not going to negotiate in hours. It’s going to take weeks to negotiate,’ Harris said.

It’s also not immediately clear when the shutdown will end — while the House passed its CR on Sept. 19, Senate Democrats have sunk the bill in the upper chamber 11 times as of Monday.

Sen. Marsha Blackburn, R-Tenn., was one of nearly a dozen Senate Republicans allegedly probed by former Special Counsel Jack Smith, an investigation she wasn’t aware of until earlier this month.

She was one of several Senate Republicans that Smith allegedly surveilled as part of his investigation into the Jan. 6, 2021, Capitol riots. But it was only revealed earlier this month by the FBI — thanks to an oversight request by Senate Judiciary Chair Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa — that Smith allegedly requested phone records on her and others.

Blackburn told Fox News Digital in an exclusive interview that until the documents from Smith’s ‘Arctic Frost’ investigation were revealed, she had no idea that her phone records were being surveilled.

She believed the ‘common thread’ behind the former special counsel’s probe, which was carried out in 2023, was because ‘the eight of us are all Republicans. We all support President Trump.’

Blackburn and Sens. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., Ron Johnson, R-Wis., Josh Hawley, R-Mo., Cynthia Lummis, R-Wyo., Bill Hagerty, R-Wyo., Dan Sullivan, R-Alaska, Tommy Tuberville, R-Ala., and Rep. Mike Kelly, R-Pa., were all reportedly part of Smith’s investigation.  

In response, Blackburn and many of the others that were allegedly surveilled by Smith want to see him disbarred.

‘This is about making certain we have one tier of justice, and that we stop this two tiers of justice,’ Blackburn said. ‘And if they can do this to eight sitting U.S. senators, what could they possibly — I mean, think about how, what they must be doing to conservatives in this country.’

Last week, she and Graham, Tuberville, Sullivan and Kelly sent a letter to Attorney General Pam Bondi demanding an investigation into Smith, and that he be referred to the Department of Justice’s (DOJ) Office of Professional Responsibility.  

The end goal of the investigation is to see Smith disbarred from both New York and Tennessee, two states where he holds a license to practice law. Blackburn argued that Smith’s alleged spying on her and others was a ‘First Amendment and Fourth Amendment violation.’

Her latest push against the former special counsel came on the heels of another letter sent to AT&T, T-Mobile and Verizon demanding why the cellphone carriers allegedly allowed Smith and the FBI under the Biden administration to track their communications.

‘You would have thought that, because of the Stored Records Act and the First Amendment, the Fourth Amendment and the Speech and Debate Clause, that at least Verizon, who’s my wireless carrier, would have informed me that there was a request on my records,’ she said. 

‘But of course, there was nothing given to us, and it’s the reason that we sent the letter to Verizon and then followed it with a letter … to the DOJ on Jack Smith,’ she continued.

Smith is one of a handful of former officials that have been targeted by the DOJ under the Trump administration. He is currently under investigation by the Office of Special Counsel for alleged Hatch Act violations, which bars government employees from participating in political activities.

Then there are federal indictments against former FBI Director James Comey for allegedly making false statements and obstructing justice, and former National Security Advisor John Bolton for allegedly mishandling classified documents.

Blackburn was one of many Republicans that railed against so-called political witch hunts against President Donald Trump when he was out of office. When asked what the difference between the indictments against Trump and his allies compared to the latest crop of former officials, she said it was about accountability.

‘These need to be investigated so that this kind of stuff stops,’ Blackburn said. ‘And one of the differences, I think you see between Democrats and Republicans, is Democrats repeatedly circle the wagons, and they push things under the rug, and then they want two tiers of justice. And with Republicans, the focus is on accountability and transparency, and I think that is a major, major difference.’

A new conservative group working to untangle state laws concerning food and personal care ingredients by setting a national standard for ingredient transparency officially launched Tuesday, Fox News Digital learned. 

‘It is a simple concept to understand — Americans want to know that the ingredients in the products they’re buying for their families are safe,’ Americans for Ingredient Transparency leader and senior advisor Andy Koenig said in a statement to Fox News Digital. ‘This should not be a difficult standard to meet.’ 

‘Unfortunately, states are now implementing their own patchwork of contradictory ingredient rules that have caused widespread confusion among consumers,’ Koenig continued. ‘President Trump and his Administration are well-suited to make these determinations. Our goal is to cut through confusion and ensure everyone has access to clear information. Consumers want to know exactly what they are putting in and on their bodies. That is what we are working to achieve.’ 

Americans for Ingredient Transparency is a 501(c)(4) nonprofit comprised of ‘concerned Americans, policy experts, farmers, and business leaders’ who are advocating that the U.S. government establish a national standard for ingredients to apply ‘consistent, science- and risk-based principles to give Americans everywhere confidence in the safety of food, beverage and personal care products,’ Fox News Digital learned. 

The group argued that states have made well-intended efforts to enact transparency laws as they relate to ingredients in food and household products, but that the moves have created confusion with an ‘ever-expanding patchwork of disjointed food, beverage, and personal care regulations.’

Americans for Ingredient Transparency specifically aims to work with Congress and the Trump administration to incorporate Generally Recognized as Safe (GRAS) reform, front-of-package labeling reform, and QR code reform into federal law.

GRAS reform would establish a ‘nationally uniform regulatory approach for new ingredients used in food and beverage products,’ according to the coalition’s website. The front-of-package labeling reform would guide consumers to healthier choices, while the QR code reform would provide consumers with a scannable code on products to review product information, according to the group’s website. 

Julie Gunlock, a conservative policy advocate focused on nutrition and parenting, leads Americans for Ingredient Transparency with Koenig. She said in comment to Fox News Digital that the push for a national ingredient transparency standard is one rooted in protecting families and children. 

‘As an American, but most importantly a mom, I know firsthand how important it is to trust the products we consume and bring into our homes,’ Gunlock said. ‘Families deserve commonsense and science-backed transparency they can rely on. That’s why a national standard for food safety and labeling is of the utmost importance to ensure every parent can make safe, informed choices for their children – because protecting our families starts with the truth.’

Americans for Ingredient Transparency is backed by a handful of food and consumer groups, Fox Digital learned, including the Consumer Brands Association, American Beverage Association, Corn Refiners Association, and FMI- The Food Industry Association.

‘Every American deserves to know what’s in their food, beverages, and personal care items – and that they’re safe no matter where they live,’ an ad for the group released Tuesday states. ‘It’s time to fix the patchwork. It’s time to pass a national uniform standard.’

The announcement comes as the Trump administration and Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. continues its mission to ‘Make America Healthy Again.’ Kennedy has already addressed potential GRAS reforms, calling on the FDA in March to ‘explore potential rulemaking to revise its Substances Generally Recognized as Safe (GRAS) Final Rule and related guidance to eliminate the self-affirmed GRAS pathway.’

‘For far too long, ingredient manufacturers and sponsors have exploited a loophole that has allowed new ingredients and chemicals, often with unknown safety data, to be introduced into the U.S. food supply without notification to the FDA or the public,’ Kennedy said in March. ‘Eliminating this loophole will provide transparency to consumers, help get our nation’s food supply back on track by ensuring that ingredients being introduced into foods are safe, and ultimately Make America Healthy Again.’