The exiled prince of Iran has proposed leading the country’s democratic transition to end the Islamic Republic in a new speech Monday. 

‘Today, it is clearer than ever: The Islamic Republic is collapsing,’ Reza Pahlavi, the eldest son of the late last shah of Iran, Mohammad Reza Shah Pahlavi, said. ‘Credible reports indicate that Ali Khamenei’s family – and the families of senior regime officials – are making preparations to flee Iran. The regime is on its last legs, in towns and cities across the country. The military is fractured. The people are united. The foundations of this 46-year tyranny are shaking.’

‘This is our Berlin Wall moment,’ Pahlavi said from a press conference he called in Paris.

Iranian Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei was reportedly hiding out in a bunker as the U.S. military pounded three Iranian nuclear sites over the weekend. Amid concerns that he could be assassinated, Khamenei has cut off all electronic communications to his commanders, relying on a trusted aide to relay orders, the New York Times reported.

Pahlavi, whose father was the last monarch overthrown during the 1979 Iranian Revolution, said Monday that Iran currently stands at a crossroads, warning that the West handing the current regime a lifeline would only result in more bloodshed. 

‘The difference in these two roads depends on one factor and one factor alone: whether the current regime in Iran is allowed to survive,’ he said. ‘If the West throws the regime a lifeline there will be more bloodshed and chaos – because this regime will not submit or surrender after it has been humiliated. It will lash out. As long as it is in power, no country and no people are safe: whether on the streets of Washington, Paris, Jerusalem, Riyadh or Tehran.’

He argued for a ‘peaceful and democratic transition’ and said the only way to achieve peace was through ‘a secular, democratic Iran.’ 

‘I am here today to submit myself to my compatriots to lead them down this road to peace and a democratic transition,’ Pahlavi said. ‘I do not seek political power, but rather to help our great nation navigate through this critical hour toward stability, freedom, and justice.’ 

Pahlavi accused Khamenei of using the Iranian people as ‘human shields’ by hiding out in his bunker. 

‘Seeing the images of the people of Tehran forced to flee our beautiful capital, the explosions in Isfahan, the fires along the Persian Gulf, all fill me with pain. But more than pain, I am filled with anger because this war is the result of the selfishness, hatred, and terror of one man: Ali Khamenei,’ he said. ‘While he directs this war from the safety of his hidden bunker, he uses our people as human shields. It is time to end the suffering.’

In a direct message to Khamenei, Pahlavi said, ‘Step down. And if you do, you will receive a fair trial and due process of law. Which is more than you have ever given any Iranian.’

He said other senior regime officials would have to face justice but promised not to ‘repeat the mistakes made in other failed transitions.’

‘To those of you who are loyal to the Iranian nation, and not the Islamic Republic: there is a future for you in a democratic Iran, if you join the people now,’ Pahlavi said. ‘The choice is yours to make. I know these officers, these soldiers, these brave men exist because they are reaching out to me and telling me they want to be part of this national salvation. But now, greater coordination is needed.’ 

Pahlavi announced that he is establishing ‘a formal channel for military, security, and police personnel to reach out directly to me, my team, and our expanding operation.’ He promised that it was a ‘secure platform to efficiently manage the growing volume of inbound communications and requests from those breaking with the regime and seeking to join our movement.’ 

He said the international community was right to be concerned about stopping nuclear weapons and securing regional stability. Although the destruction of the three nuclear sites at Natanz, Isfahan and Fordow has ‘diminished the regime’s domestic nuclear enrichment,’ Pahlavi warned that the U.S. strikes did ‘not diminish the regime’s intent to acquire and use nuclear weapons.’

‘The regime, enraged and emboldened, will be seeking revenge and can acquire nuclear weapons from other rogue regimes like North Korea,’ he said. ‘The destruction of the regime’s nuclear facilities alone will not deliver peace.’ 

Pahlavi said he was ‘stepping forward to lead this national transition – not out of personal interest but as a servant of the Iranian people.’ He said he has a ‘clear plan for transition and national renewal’ based on three core principles: Iran’s territorial integrity; individual liberties and equality of all citizens; and separation of religion and state. Pahlavi proposed convening a ‘national unity summit’ of activists, dissidents, business leaders, professionals, experts and other groups outside of politics. 

The goal would be for them to together develop a roadmap to democratic transition, and he said the ‘final form of this future democracy we seek will be for the Iranian people to decide in a national referendum.’ 

Pahlavi also said he developed a three-phase, comprehensive plan for the ‘economic reconstruction and social stabilization’ of the country. He promised that his team of experts ‘will publish the plans for the first 100 days after the collapse of the Islamic Republic based on this work.’ 

‘We are bringing together some of the world’s greatest investors, builders, entrepreneurs, and experts who care about Iran and see its immense potential,’ he said. 

Before opting for U.S. military intervention, President Donald Trump reportedly was working with Turkey to coordinate a diplomatic resolution to the Israel-Iran conflict and cut a nuclear deal, but the ayatollah did not engage. According to Axios, sources said Trump offered to send Vice President JD Vance and White House envoy Steve Witkoff for negotiations, and Trump offered to come to Turkey himself if it meant meeting with Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian. 

Turkey relayed the proposal to its Iranian counterparts, who reportedly could not reach Khamenei for hours. Without the ayatollah’s sign-off, the proposed meeting was called off. 

A top Trump White House official is looking to undercut Senate Democrats’ talking points on Medicaid, arguing that the GOP’s plan to reform the healthcare program would benefit rural hospitals, not harm them.

Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services Administrator Dr. Mehmet Oz told Fox News Digital that ‘special interests are pushing misleading talking points to try and stop the most ambitious healthcare reforms ever.’

Oz’s sentiment comes as Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D., and Senate Republicans sprint to finish their work on President Donald Trump’s ‘big, beautiful bill’ ahead of a self-imposed July 4 deadline.

Part of the bill from the Senate Finance Committee aims to make good on the GOP’s promise to root out waste, fraud and abuse within the widely used healthcare program by including work requirements and booting illegal immigrants from benefit rolls, among other measures.

Tweaks to the Medicaid provider tax rate have ruffled feathers on both sides of the aisle. Indeed, Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y. and Sens. Ron Wyden, D-Ore., and Jeff Merkley, D-Ore., sent a letter to Trump and the top congressional Republicans last week warning that changes to the Medicaid provider tax rate would harm over 300 rural hospitals.

And a cohort of Senate Republicans were furious with the change after the bill dropped last week.

But Oz contended that ‘only 5%’ of inpatient Medicaid spending happens in rural communities, and that the mammoth bill ‘instead targets abuses overwhelmingly utilized by large hospitals with well-connected lobbyists.’

‘We are committed to preserving and improving access to care in rural communities with a transformative approach that bolsters advanced technology, invests in infrastructure, and supports workforce — rather than propping up a system that mostly benefits wealthier urban areas,’ Oz said.

Schumer’s letter included data from a study recently conducted by the Cecil G. Sheps Center for Health Services Research at the University of North Carolina at his behest. He warned that if the bill is passed as is, millions of people would be kicked off of their healthcare coverage, and ‘rural hospitals will not get paid for the services they are required by law to provide to patients.’

Fox News Digital reached out to Schumer, Wyden and Merkley for comment.

However, another report from the Trump-aligned Paragon Health Institute argued similarly to Oz that special interest groups and healthcare lobbyists were ‘flooding the airwaves with claims’ that Republicans’ changes to Medicaid would shutter rural hospitals.

For example, they argued that a recent report from the Center for American Progress warned that over 200 rural hospitals would be at risk of closure, but that the findings were based on changes to the federal medical assistance percentage, or the amount of Medicaid costs paid for by the federal government.

Changes to that percentage were mulled by congressional Republicans but were not included in the ‘big, beautiful bill.’  

Still, the changes to the Medicaid provider tax rate, which were a stark departure from the House GOP’s version of the bill, angered the Republicans who have warned not to make revisions to the healthcare program that could shut down rural hospitals and boot working Americans from their benefits.

The Senate Finance Committee went further than the House’s freeze of the provider tax rate, or the amount that state Medicaid programs pay to healthcare providers on behalf of Medicaid beneficiaries, for non-Affordable Care Act expansion states, and included a provision that lowers the rate in expansion states annually until it hits 3.5%.

However, Sen. Susan Collins, R-Maine, is working on a possible change to the bill that would create a provider relief fund that could sate her and other Republicans’ concerns about the change to the provider tax rate.

Iran launched a retaliatory attack on Al-Udeid, the American airbase in Qatar, a U.S. defense official confirmed on Monday. 

‘I can confirm that al Udeid Air Base was attacked by short-range and medium-range ballistic missiles originating from Iran today,’ the official told Fox News. ‘At this time, there are no reports of U.S. casualties. We are monitoring this situation closely and will provide more information as it becomes available.’

Qatar’s foreign ministry called the attack ‘brazen aggression,’ but said it had successfully intercepted Iranian missiles. 

‘The State of Qatar strongly condemns the attack that targeted Al-Udeid Air Base by the Iranian Revolutionary Guard. We consider this a flagrant violation of the sovereignty of the State of Qatar,’ spokesperson Majed Al Ansari posted on X. 

‘We reassure that Qatar’s air defenses successfully thwarted the attack and intercepted the Iranian missiles.’ 

Explosions were heard in Doha, a source told Fox News. Iranian state media reported that ‘Operation Fatah’s Blessing against the American Al-Udeid base in Qatar has begun.’ After the strike, the U.S. embassy in Kuwait issued a security alert limiting base access to only essential personnel and the embassy in Bahrain shifted some of its employees to telework. 

Just before the attack, Iran’s President Mahmoud Pezeshkian issued a warning promising not to let Saturday’s strikes on its nuclear facilities go ‘unanswered.’ 

‘We neither initiated the war nor wanted it; but we will not leave the aggression against #GreaterIran unanswered. We will stand by the security of this #belovednation with all our being and respond to every wound on Iran’s body with faith, wisdom, and determination,’ he wrote on X. 

But Iran gave Qatari officials advanced notice of the attacks, Iranian sources told the New York Times. It would be a strategy similar to the response to the killing of Iranian Gen. Qassem Soleimani, where Iran needed to symbolically respond without escalating the conflict beyond what it could handle. 

A spokesperson for Iran’s armed forces said its Revolutionary Guard Corps carried out the attack: ‘We warn our enemies that the era of hit and run is over.’

Kuwait, Iraq, Bahrain and the UAE all closed their airspaces amidst the attack. 

The base is home to 10,000 American forces and is the U.S.’s largest military installation in the Middle East. Located southwest of Doha, it serves as a hub for logistical operations for the U.S. mission to fight ISIS in Iraq and Syria. It also hosts Central Command’s (CENTCOM) Forward Headquarters, as well as its air forces and special operations in the region. It also has been used as a headquarters for British involvement in airstrikes against ISIS in Iraq.

President Donald Trump visited Al Udeid last month on May 15, where he inked a $1 billion military sales agreement with Doha. 

Qatar has walked a tight line between friendly relations with the U.S., through efforts to expand the base, and with Iran. Prior to the attack, Qatar suspended all flights and promised to ‘take all necessary preventive measures.’ 

The attack was not entirely unexpected – satellite images showed the U.S. moved most of its unhangered aircraft out of Al Udeid last week. 

Iran vowed to retaliate against the U.S. after American B-2 bombers dropped 14 bunker buster bombs on three Iranian nuclear sites. 

‘The criminal US must know that in addition to punishing its illegitimate and aggressive offspring, the hands of Islam’s fighters within the armed forces have been freed to take any action against its interests and military, and we will never back down in this regard,’ Abdolrahim Mousavi, the new chief of staff of the Iranian armed forces, warned in a statement. 

But Trump warned Iran after Saturday’s strikes on its nuclear hubs: ‘Any retaliation by Iran against the United States of America will be met with force far greater than what was witnessed tonight.’

The air base also hosts an array of military assets: B-52 strategic bombers, C-17 Globemaster transports and RC-135 Rivet Joint reconnaissance aircraft, in addition to 379th Air Expeditionary Wing’s airlift, aerial refueling, and intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance capabilities. 

Fox News’ Thomas Ferraro and Liz Friden contributed to this report. 

The War on Terror led to regime change in Iraq and a briefly democratic Afghanistan — at least until former President Joe Biden’s disastrous withdrawal. More recently, a separate conflict between Israel and Iran saw the U.S. step in to help destroy nuclear facilities — but observers should pause before making any apples-to-apples comparisons between the two eras.

The image of then-White House chief of staff Andrew Card whispering in President George W. Bush’s ear during an elementary school reading event that the Twin Towers had been hit by terrorists began a continuing three decades of U.S. involvement in the Middle East.

The Middle East and the world writ-large was a different place back then, Heritage Foundation senior China and National Security Policy studies fellow Steve Yates told Fox News Digital.

Yates previously served in the Bush administration as a top national security affairs adviser to then-Vice President Dick Cheney. More recently, he co-chaired the 2016 RNC’s platform subcommittee on national security.

‘The world has changed an awful lot in 20 years,’ Yates said, when asked to compare the two administrations.

‘And I think that my perceptions of things have changed a great deal, in no small part, because I’ve had as a primary focus, among all other things in the world, what’s happening with China.’

During the Bush years, the Chinese Communist Party was led by Hu Jintao, who Yates quipped was the ‘definition of boredom’ compared to the feistier Xi Jinping.

The differences there and in the Mideast have presented challenges to the U.S., Yates said.

President Donald Trump leads essentially the first ‘post-globalist’ presidency as the world ‘awaken[ed] from’ its ‘globalist moment’ since the 1990s.

‘None of those things were factors in the early 2000s. And I think that context is vital to try to see how things are handled now,’ he said.

‘Frankly, I am a supporter of President Trump and what he’s been trying to do. I think he’s very clear that he’s willing to use decisive force when he judges it to be necessary.’

In the Middle East, American intervention during the War on Terror led to dictator Saddam Hussein being deposed, and a decades-long ground war ensued.

Iran, at the time, was led by Mahmoud Ahmadinejad — a more prominent president. Ayatollah Ali Hosseini Khamenei has become the more prominent global figure as of late, over current President Masoud Pezeshkian.

And, while the War on Terror led to boots on the ground, Yates noted Trump has been clear that he wants Mideast allies and their Western-friendly neighbors to carry their ‘fair share’ of risk and responsibility for what happens in the region — which has been marked by conflicts since the time of Jesus Christ.

‘In that, Israel has been very clear. They haven’t asked for American boots on the ground. To my knowledge to this point they haven’t asked for much of anything other than rhetorical support,’ he said, prior to the U.S. dropping MOP bombs from B-2s on Saturday night.

Yates foreshadowed that Trump has made clear he is ready to use ‘decisive American force’ if necessary to prevent Iranian nuclear proliferation.

‘That is a definable objective… That is not a war of occupation or trying to ‘remake Iran in our image’ as some [have] characterized Iraq, whether fairly or unfairly.’

‘So I think that the president has navigated this with deeper logic than most people give credit.’

The question at this time in history is more whether ‘the Old World’ will act on their shared interest in supporting a non-nuclear Iran or similar outcome in a meaningful way.

He referenced the ‘EU-3’ — Germany, Great Britain and France, the three largest European economic powers — and said they had previously been a ‘moderating force’ in negotiations that allowed Tehran to ‘mitigate sanctions’ and go back on promises made.

But the EU-3’s model failed to solve the problem, revealing that the early 21st century style of diplomacy — which often pulled the U.S. into conflicts — may no longer be effective. Israel’s decisive response to October 7 only underscored that point.

‘I still have a lot of gratitude and respect for my colleagues back in the Bush administration. I just see us as a world in a fundamentally different place,’ he said.

‘And I would give President Trump pretty high marks on how he’s balanced equities — keeping true to his definition of what America First means, but also true to standing by allies in times of need.’

Russia’s United Nations ambassador is claiming the Trump administration’s devastating airstrikes on Iran have opened a ‘Pandora’s box’ and could lead to a global ‘nuclear catastrophe.’ 

Vassily Nebenzia, speaking during an emergency meeting of the Security Council on Sunday, said Russia ‘vehemently condemns the irresponsible, dangerous, and provocative actions taken by the USA against the Islamic Republic of Iran, which is a sovereign country and a U.N. member state.’ 

‘Through its actions, the U.S. has opened Pandora’s box, and no one knows what new consequences this may lead to,’ Nebenzia said. 

‘I think it is obvious to everyone in this chamber that unless we stop the escalation, the Middle East will find itself on the brink of a large-scale conflict, which is fraught with unpredictable consequences for the entire international security architecture. And the whole world could find itself on the verge of a nuclear catastrophe,’ he added. 

Nebenzia also accused the Trump administration of being ‘completely unconcerned about either the radiological consequences or the threat to the lives and health of a huge number of civilians, including women and children, in the region and beyond’ following the airstrikes Saturday on Iran’s Fordow, Natanz and Isfahan nuclear facilities during Operation Midnight Hammer. 

‘We have persistently offered our American colleagues our mediation services so as to find a peaceful and mutually agreeable solution to the contradictions surrounding the Iranian nuclear program. But it appears that diplomacy is not what our U.S. colleagues currently need. Responsibility for all this falls squarely on the shoulders of the American leadership,’ Nebenzia said, calling for ‘all parties to exercise restraint and return into the fold of international diplomacy and negotiations.’ 

International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) Director General Rafael Grossi also said Monday, ‘Given the explosive payload utilized, and the extreme vibration-sensitive nature of centrifuges, very significant damage is expected to have occurred’ at Fordow. 

‘At the Isfahan nuclear site, additional buildings were hit, with the U.S. confirming their use of cruise missiles,’ he added. ‘Affected buildings include some related to the uranium conversion process. Also at this site, entrances to tunnels used for the storage of enriched material appear to have been hit.

‘At the Natanz enrichment site, the Fuel Enrichment Plant was hit, with the U.S. confirming that it used ground-penetrating munitions,’ Grossi said.

‘Iran has informed the IAEA that there was no increase in off-site radiation levels at all three sites,’ he added. 

Rep. Jasmine Crockett, D-Texas, launched another tirade against President Donald Trump over the weekend, while offering rare praise for one of her House GOP colleagues who is currently at odds with the commander in chief.

The Democratic firebrand took to Instagram Live late Saturday to criticize Trump’s strikes on Iran, while giving a ‘shout out’ to Rep. Thomas Massie, R-Ky., over his bipartisan resolution to rein in the president’s ability to conduct such operations.

‘So long story short, for those of you that are unaware, the mofo that resides in the White House has unilaterally, in my estimation, declared war,’ Crockett said in the video.

‘Mofo’ is often used as a shorthand term for the curse phrase ‘motherf—er.’

Crockett, an outspoken progressive, is part of the chorus of voices on the left accusing Trump of wrongly bypassing Congress in his military operation against Tehran’s nuclear sites.

Trump officials have maintained that they are in compliance with the War Powers Act.

‘We are living in this time in which there is someone who is occupying the White House who does not care about any rules, any norms, any laws, nor the Constitution. And we cannot be a civilized country if there is no law and order,’ Crockett said.

She then launched an attack on Trump’s crackdown on illegal immigration, accusing him of doing more harm with his strikes on Iran.

‘I know that they may claim, ‘We law and order, blah blah blah. So go get the undocumented people and let’s try to ship them out.’ Let me tell you something – they are not the people that are putting us in harm’s way,’ Crockett said.

‘It is him and his administration that is putting us in harm’s way.’

Crockett called on her supporters to confront Trump supporters, adding, ‘I literally need you to wake them the f— up, because everything since he has stepped into office has done nothing other than put us in harm’s way.’

Later in the roughly 20-minute video, Crockett asked her supporters living in Republican-held districts to reach out to their representatives in Congress.

‘We need action now, and that is going to take a few Republicans, like, getting on the right page,’ she said. 

‘And right now there’s only one Republican that I know I can count on for sure doing the right thing. And that’s going to be Thomas Massie. The rest of them, it’s a little bit questionable.’

Foreign entanglements, particularly when the U.S. military is involved, are an issue that’s made for strange political bedfellows in the past.

When the House passed emergency foreign aid last year in separate packages by region, each passed with bipartisan support – while also seeing ‘no’ votes from dovish progressives and conservatives wary of U.S. involvement overseas.

Trump’s weekend strikes on three Iranian nuclear facilities are no different. While the move gained wide support from Republican leaders and some pro-Israel Democrats, a small group of conservatives has expressed varying levels of concern.

Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene, R-Ga., posted on X that she could ‘support President Trump and his great administration on many of the great things they are doing while disagreeing on bombing Iran and getting involved in a hot war that Israel started.’

Rep. Warren Davidson, R-Ohio, commended the ‘strength and precision’ of the strikes to Fox News Digital on Sunday but argued Congress needed to regain its ‘war powers.’

‘While President Trump has legal precedent on his side, the legal reality underscores how far we’ve drifted from the constitutional order,’ Davidson said.

Massie, who has been one of the most consistent lawmakers in Congress regarding his skepticism of foreign entanglements, is leading a resolution alongside Rep. Ro Khanna, D-Calif., to limit Trump’s war powers on Iran.

He told Fox News Digital on Sunday that he hoped to force a vote on the bipartisan measure and signaled cautious optimism that it could succeed.

‘I think it could [pass the House], because we have such a tight majority. And the Democrats aren’t very consistent about war, but when there’s a Republican in the White House, they find their religion, their anti-war religion again,’ Massie said.

When reached about Crockett’s video the White House pointed Fox News Digital to comments by Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt.

‘The last time I checked, Jasmine Crockett couldn’t dream of winning such a majority of the public as President Trump did. And the America First movement, which President Trump has built, is filled of hardworking patriots, the forgotten men and women, business owners, law enforcement officers, nurses, and teachers. And middle America – as we all know, you know, from where you all grew up, outside of this beltway – that’s who makes up this president’s movement,’ Leavitt said. ‘Jasmine Crockett should go to a Trump rally sometime, and she can see it for herself.’

Meanwhile, a White House official told Fox News Digital, ‘The fact Jasmine Crockett is siding with Massie tells you everything you need to know about both of them!’

Fox News Digital also reached out to Massie’s office for comment on Crockett’s video.

The House Republican campaign committee is taking aim at congressional Democrats whom they charge are ‘pushing the largest tax hike in generations.’

As part of their aggressive messaging following the passage last month of the GOP’s landmark spending and tax cut bill – dubbed by President Donald Trump as his ‘big, beautiful bill’ – the National Republican Congressional Committee (NRCC) is launching ads on Monday against 25 House Democrats who likely face challenging re-elections in the 2026 midterms.

‘Democrats jacked up inflation, making life more expensive for all of us. We need help. Now, they’re pushing the largest tax hike in generations,’ charges the narrator in the digital ads, which were shared first with Fox News.

The narrator argues that the Democrats being targeted in the ads are ‘completely out of touch’ and urges viewers of the spots to tell the Democratic lawmakers to keep their ‘hands off your hard-earned money.’

The bill passed the House of Representatives last month by just one vote, along partisan lines. And Trump is pushing for a July 4 deadline for the measure to pass through Congress and land on his desk at the White House.

The GOP-crafted measure is stuffed full of Trump’s campaign trail promises and second-term priorities on tax cuts, immigration, defense, energy and the debt limit. It includes extending his signature 2017 tax cuts, which are set to sunset this year without action by Congress – and eliminating taxes on tips and overtime pay. 

But the measure, if signed into law, would likely even further fuel the nation’s massive budget deficit. The national debt currently sits at $36,215,397,741,847.76 as of June 18, according to FOX Business’ National Debt Tracker. 

The spots, backed by a modest ad buy, are targeting California Democrats Josh Harder (9th District), Adam Gray (13th), George Whitesides (27th), Derek Tran (45th) and Dave Min (47th), and Florida’s Darren Soto (9th) and Jared Moskowitz (23rd).

Also included are Reps. Frank Mrvan (1st) of Indiana, Jared Golden (2nd) of Maine, Kristen McDonald Rivet (8th) of Michigan, Don Davis (1st) of North Carolina, Nellie Pou (9th) of New Jersey, Gabe Vasquez (2nd) of New Mexico, Dina Titus (1st), and Susie Lee (3rd), and Steven Horsford (4th) of Nevada.

The NRCC ads also take aim at Reps. Tom Suozzi (3rd), Laura Gillen (4th) and Josh Riley (19th) of New York, Marcy Kaptur (9th) and Emilia Sykes (13th) of Ohio, Henry Cuellar (28th) and Vicente Gonzalez (34th) of Texas, Eugene Vindman (7th) of Virginia, and Marie Gluesenkamp Perez (3rd) of Washington state.

Democrats are working to win back control of the House in next year’s midterms, as the GOP defends its razor-thin majority in the chamber.

‘Out of touch House Democrats lit the fire of inflation and tried to slap Americans with the biggest tax hike in decades, all to fund their radical agenda. Voters won’t forget this betrayal – not now, not next November,’ NRCC spokesman Mike Marinella claimed.

A memo last month by the NRCC encouraged House Republicans to make the tax cuts a priority as they defended their votes on the tax and spending bill, and to take aim at Democrats for pushing to raise taxes on average Americans.

The memo highlighted that the bill ‘prevents tax increases to put more money in every American’s pocket.’

As Democrats attack the bill, they’re highlighting the GOP’s proposed restructuring of Medicaid – the nearly 60-year-old federal program that provides health coverage to roughly 71 million low-income Americans.

The changes to Medicaid, as well as cuts to food stamps, another one of the nation’s major safety net programs, were drafted in part as an offset to pay for extending Trump’s 2017 tax cuts. The measure includes a slew of new rules and regulations, including work requirements for many of those seeking Medicaid coverage.

Democrats have relentlessly attacked Republicans over what they say will be ‘huge cuts’ to Medicaid if the bill becomes law.

But the NRCC pushes back, saying in its memo that it is ‘protecting Medicaid by removing illegal immigrants and eliminating fraud.’

All eyes will be on the United States Senate this week as we endeavor to pass the shared Republican agenda of American strength, security, and prosperity.

With the Republican reconciliation bill, we have the opportunity to deliver. It is one that doesn’t come around often, and our country stands to benefit greatly by Republicans seizing this moment and getting this bill across the finish line.

In large part, this bill is the culmination of President Trump’s campaign promises and the promises that Republican senators have made to our voters. Chief among them is keeping the American people safe through strong border security and a military strong enough to deter threats and conflicts around the world before they begin. 

President Trump has achieved remarkable success in ending the Biden border crisis and removing the criminal illegal aliens that President Biden let walk into our country – but it hasn’t been cheap, and the administration has told us that resources are running out. This bill will fully fund the border wall and President Trump’s successful policies for the entirety of his presidency, removing any possibility that Democrats will hold those resources hostage to try to increase other government spending.

This same principle also applies to defense funding. Recent conflicts around the world should make clear the need to have a modern and lethal fighting force that can keep the American people safe. This means smart, generational investments like President Trump’s Golden Dome for America to defend against advanced drones, missiles, and hypersonics, as well as prioritizing building new ships and unmanned vehicles.

A nation cannot prosper unless it is secure, and with our borders and defense capabilities bolstered, the next key pillar of this bill is creating prosperity in America.

We do this through permanently extending President Trump’s signature achievement in his first term, the 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (TCJA). The American people are facing a hefty $4 trillion tax increase at the end of the year, the largest in American history. If we fail to act, the average family of four making the median income in the United States will face a $1,700 tax increase. Not only does this bill prevent that tax increase, it makes the TCJA’s low rates permanent – meaning Democrats can never again try to use a pending expiration as leverage for advancing wasteful government spending. 

The bill locks in the TCJA’s small business provisions for all time, which is crucial for economic growth, and it also delivers on President Trump’s tax promises: No tax on tips, no tax on overtime, relief from Social Security taxes for seniors, and no tax on interest for vehicles made in the United States.

In the wake of the Biden administration and Democrats exploding the growth of government spending on programs like Medicaid, we will make commonsense reforms to return to a fiscally sustainable path. That means kicking illegal immigrants off of health programs and introducing work requirements that even 50% of Democrats agree with – all to ensure that programs like Medicaid are strengthened and able to deliver for the American citizens the programs were designed to benefit.

Senators have worked to develop this bill for well over a year now. Now it is time to act. Border resources are drying up. National security needs have never been more apparent. And with each passing day, we move closer to reaching both our nation’s debt limit and the largest-ever tax increase on the American people. 

 Senators return to Washington today and we will remain here until this bill is passed. We know that Democrats will fearmonger and misrepresent our efforts, and we expect them to drag this debate long into the night with unrelated issues. However, I am confident we will get this bill across the finish line.

 On the Fourth of July, Americans celebrate our freedoms and the work of previous generations to keep this great American experiment going. By placing this historic bill on the president’s desk by the Fourth of July, Republicans will be ensuring that future generations of Americans can live in safety and prosperity.

The White House Office of Science and Technology on Monday directed federal agencies to implement ‘gold standard science’ principles to depoliticize science and restore public trust, Fox News Digital has learned.

White House Office of Science and Technology Policy Director Michael Kratsios sent guidance to federal research agencies Monday morning, incorporating President Donald Trump’s executive order on ‘Restoring Gold Standard Science.’

Fox News Digital exclusively obtained the guidance sent to federal agencies.

President Trump, in May, signed an executive order to restore ‘Gold Standard Science’ as the cornerstone of federal scientific research.

‘Gold Standard Science’ is ‘reproducible, transparent and falsifiable,’ according to the order. 

It is also ‘subject to unbiased peer review; clear about errors and uncertainties; skeptical of assumptions; collaborative and interdisciplinary; accepting of negative results as positive outcomes; and free from conflicts of interest.’ 

The executive order reinstated ‘the scientific integrity policies’ of the first Trump administration and ‘ensures that science is no longer manipulated or misused to justify political ends.’ 

‘President Trump’s Gold Standard Science EO will transform the conduct and management of federal science, from research design to public communication, in order to strengthen scientific inquiry, rebuild public trust, and ensure the U.S. continues to be the global leader in rigorous, evidence-based science,’ Kratsios told Fox News Digital. ‘But federal agencies are only one part of our nation’s research ecosystem.’

Kratsios added, ‘American universities, scientific journals, industry and philanthropic leaders all have a crucial role in improving the overall quality of research, and we encourage this executive action to serve as a model for the entire scientific enterprise.’

Kratsios sent the memo to federal agencies Monday morning to provide guidance to federal departments and agencies on implementing gold standard science ‘in the conduct and management of all aspects of their scientific activities, from research design to public communication.’

‘By adopting these standards, agencies will strengthen scientific inquiry, rebuild public trust, and ensure the United States continues as the global leader in rigorous, evidence-based science,’ the memo states.

Kratsios said that ‘Gold Standard Science’ represents a ‘commitment to the highest standards of scientific integrity, defined by nine core tenets: reproducible; transparent; communicative of error and uncertainty; collaborative and interdisciplinary; skeptical of its findings and assumptions; structured for falsifiability of hypotheses; subject to unbiased peer review; accepting of negative results as positive outcomes; and without conflicts of interest.’

‘These tenets ensure that federally-supported research and research used in federal decision-making is transparent, rigorous, and impactful, enabling federal decisions to be informed by the most credible, reliable, and impartial scientific evidence available,’ Kratsios wrote in the guidance.

But ‘Gold Standard Science’ is not limited to science, Kratsios said, saying that it is critical for tackling complex challenges in energy innovation and national security as well.

‘In an age of rapid technological progress and heightened public scrutiny, federally-funded and federally-performed science, and its use in Federal decision-making, must be beyond reproach,’ he wrote.

As for conducting science ‘without conflicts of interest,’ Kratsios said it is imperative to ensure that ‘research is designed, executed, reviewed, and reported free from financial, personal, or institutional influences that could bias outcomes or undermine objectivity.’

‘This approach is important for generating trustworthy and credible new knowledge, as it upholds scientific integrity, fosters public confidence, and ensures that results reflect evidence rather than external agendas,’ the memo states. ‘Maintaining freedom from conflicts of interest requires researchers, reviewers, and managers to disclose all relevant affiliations, funding sources, and relationships relevant to the science conducted, adhering to stringent ethical standards supported by strong institutional oversight, transparent reporting systems, and independent expert review mechanisms.’

Kratsios said agencies must ‘prioritize conducting and managing scientific research free from conflicts of interest to advance unbiased science,’ and must ‘require disclosure of all relevant conflicts of interest by researchers, reviewers, and agency officials involved in the funding or performance of Federal research.’

‘These efforts include requiring comprehensive, standardized disclosure of all financial, personal, or institutional interests in research proposals, publications, peer and merit reviews, and data repositories, with clear and standardized protocols to identify, mitigate, and manage potential biases,’ the memo states. ‘Agencies should mandate the use of independent oversight approaches and enforce strict conflict-of-interest policies.’

Agencies have 60 days to outline ‘Gold Standard Science’ implementation plans, including plans for training and resources to ensure agency personnel understand the new policy, and the use of artificial intelligence-driven tools when practical.

After Trump signed the May executive order to restore gold standard science, a senior White House official said there had been a decline in ‘disruptive research’ and investments in biomedical research, along with ‘serious cases’ of fraud and misconduct and the inability to reproduce scientific methods for the purpose of restoring public trust.

The official also blamed policy responses to the COVID-19 pandemic and ‘woke DEI initiatives’ for endangering the public’s trust in government scientists.

Now-retired National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases Director Dr. Anthony Fauci was repeatedly denounced for flip-flopping and obfuscating during his time engineering the federal response to COVID-19, leading many, particularly on the right, to disregard and dismiss the legitimacy of federal health authorities outright.

That order cites the fact the Biden administration included political edits from teachers’ unions in school-reopening guidance, instead of leading with any scientific evidence.

Meanwhile, in an exclusive interview with Fox News Digital in April, Kratsios echoed Trump, saying the U.S. is in the ‘golden age’ and that this special moment in time is ‘underpinned by unbelievable science and technology.’

With President Donald Trump’s extraordinary decision to attack three of the key/critical Iranian nuclear sites, two questions emerge: First, how will the Iranian populace react to the decision? Second, will this hurt or help the chances for regime change?

Of course, we will not get answers to these questions immediately. But I think it’s fair to say that history, in the not-so-distant past, offers an instructive guide to what could well happen. 

While it is challenging at this point to answer these questions with a high degree of certainty, there is one historical analogy which I was deeply involved in that may provide insights.

More than 24 years ago, while working in the Bill Clinton administration, I was one of the principal actors advising the State Department on the situation in Serbia. There, I led on-the-ground efforts to demonstrate to the Serbian opposition that President Slobodan Milosevic could be beaten.

At the time, many in both the U.S. and Serbia thought that nearly 80-days of NATO bombings and the 1999 Kosovo war had produced a rally around the flag effect in favor of Milosevic.

And yet, the polls I conducted conclusively demonstrated the opposite. 

The data revealed that, despite efforts by the regime to portray Milosevic as strong and popular, he was extremely weak, with a 70% unfavorable rating.

As was acknowledged in the Washington Post at the time, the strategic guidance I provided based on those polls led to the development of a campaign that soon toppled a regime few thought was quite so vulnerable.

There are striking parallels between Milosevic’s downfall and the situation the Khamenei regime finds itself in today.

In both, there are some who feel that foreign airstrikes would strengthen nationalist sentiment in favor of a regime that prioritizes projecting an aura of popularity despite being incredibly disliked by its citizens. 

Further, in Serbia, we found that there was pervasive anger towards the government, particularly over the poor state of the economy. In Iran, there is similar – if not even more intense – dissatisfaction with the regime’s chronic mishandling of economic and national policy.

To be sure, polling data from inside Iran is limited, although Stasis, a firm which specializes in conducting methodologically-sound surveys in the country, released a poll last October that is telling.

They found that nearly 8-in-10 (78%) Iranians feel that the government’s policies are to blame for the country’s economic struggles.

Additionally, in a country of 90 million, where roughly 60% are under the age of 30, the same poll shows that more than three-quarters (77%) of Iranians believe that ‘Iranian youth do not see prosperity for their future in Iran.’

All of this is to say that like Milosevic’s regime, the Iranian government appears to have strong popular support, but underneath the surface, is extremely weak and vulnerable.

For many, the idea that Israel – and especially Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu – could bring about regime change in Iran is hard to take seriously. 

But, a more detailed examination of the current situation, as well as Iran’s own recent history, supports the notion that Netanyahu could be more accurate than not.

Consider the history: Since 2009, there have been 10 nationwide protest movements, with millions of Iranians taking to the streets against the government.

And while there was a wide range of causes for those protests – from blatant election fraud to the most recent demonstrations set off by the killing of Mahsa Amini – they all underscore widespread opposition to the current regime. 

In that same vein, much like I saw in Serbia, the large number of protests and their various causes reveal a significantly large opposition that, under the right conditions, can effectively mobilize and pressure the regime. 

To that end, whereas we had to actively organize those movements in Serbia, those conditions are already evident in Iran, and on a much greater scale.

Aside from the bleak future facing Iran’s youth, the regime’s oppressive laws towards its nearly 44 million female citizens have turned virtually one-half of the population into second-class citizens with little to lose from rising up, as hundreds of thousands did during the 2022 Mahsa Amini protests. 

Underscoring just how deep the hatred is towards the regime, Iran International has reported receiving letters expressing personal thanks to Netanyahu, and the Jerusalem Post reported than an Iranian source told them, ‘This war has greatly strengthened and revived new optimism’ among Iranians for regime change.

The Post’s source inside Iran continued, saying that ‘conversations around the capital city (Tehran) are focused on the final days of the regime and that they brought it on themselves.’

Outside of Iran, the debate has already begun.

On one side are leaders such as Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, as well as journalists like former National Security Advisor John Bolton, and Yorktown Institute President Seth Cropsey.

Those men have argued – Bolton and Cropsey in the Wall Street Journal, and Netanyahu speaking to Fox News’ Bret Baier and in other forums – that this is the most opportune moment for regime change in Iran since the revolution in 1979.

Given the deep reservoir of anti-regime sentiment among the Iranian people, the argument goes, the best course of action is that Israel’s destruction of the regime’s military and symbols of power will give Iranians the courage to rise up, united, against the government.

On the other side of the debate are those such as French President Emmanuel Macron. Haunted by failed regime change efforts in Iraq and Libya, Macron cast doubt on the possibility for success in pursuing regime change, saying it would ‘result in chaos.’

Some have also argued that Israel’s actions could create a ‘rally around the flag’ effect and spark nationalism among the Iranian people.

To be clear, while both sides have legitimate arguments, based off my experience in Serbia, I believe that Netanyahu and those on his side have a much stronger case.

The Iranian government is weaker than ever before after Israel destroyed virtually its entire chain of command and remains in total control of Iranian skies.

Likewise, unlike Libya and Iraq, Iran has a well-organized opposition, with a much more established sense of national unity than either Iraq or Libya ever had.

Taken together, there is strong evidence underpinning Israel’s belief that the Iranian regime could fall, especially given Israel’s extreme caution in only targeting symbols of the regime in order to avoid stoking nationalism.

Of course, there are risks in encouraging regime change, and it’s not at all guaranteed that the next regime is the one the West wants. It could very well result in a more extreme government led by remnants of the Revolutionary Guard hard-liners.

However, it is a mistake of similar magnitude to dismiss this chance out of hand. History has shown that when an oppressed people, angry at their government, find their confidence and are supported – even only by air power – the outcome need not be chaos, or the survival of the current government. 

It has, and could again, result in genuine regime change.

In both cases of Iran and Serbia there was widespread bombing of the country and indeed the civilians, with collateral damage on the civilian population. In the Serbian case all of the net results was that it strengthened the resolve of the Serbian people to rid themselves of an authoritarian dictator – Milosevic. And in the Iranian case, if history is any guide, it will weaken an already fragile regime and hopefully provide an outlet for the millions of Iranians who want a greater measure of freedom and peace in their lives.