Former President Barack Obama told a crowd Thursday night that some sacrifice might be necessary in order to resist President Donald Trump's policies.
Obama spoke at Hamilton College in Clinton, New York, on Thursday and accused the Trump administration of trying to destroy the post-World War II international order, according to the Washington Post.
During the speech, Obama called Trump's behavior "contrary to the basic compact we have as Americans" and called on students to do more in order to resist Trump's policies.
"It has been easy during most of our lifetimes to say you are a progressive, or say you are for social justice, or say you are for free speech, and not have to pay a price for it…And now we’re in one of those moments when…it’s not enough just to say you’re for something. You may actually have to do something and possibly sacrifice a little bit," Obama said.
Obama also said law firms and universities need to take a more active role in resisting Trump, arguing there would be massive pushback if he tried to sanction law firms.
"It’s unimaginable that the same parties that are silent now would have tolerated behavior like that from me or a whole bunch of my predecessors," Obama said.
Obama said he is "deeply concerned with a federal government that threatens universities if they don’t give up students who are exercising their right to free speech."
"All of you have grown up in an international order that was created by America after World War II. … This is an important moment because in the last two months, the U.S. government has been trying to destroy that order," Obama said. "Democracy is pretty recent in its vintage. An international order where you cooperate instead of fight is new. It's fragile."
A major part of a first-of-its-kind green energy project, which the Biden administration bragged about, is now lying in ruins and polluting some of America’s beautiful ocean and seashore in Nantucket, Massachusetts.
Exclusive images obtained by Fox News Digital show the shattered remains of what is left of an ocean wind turbine constructed by Vineyard Wind in a green energy project touted by the Biden administration.
The turbine was recently struck by lightning and destroyed just months after one of its blades dangerously fell into the Atlantic Ocean, dropping non-biodegradable fiberglass shards into the water, some of which washed ashore, forcing six Nantucket beaches to close.
The Cape Cod Times reported that the broken turbine was hit by lightning on Feb. 27 and "caught fire, and detached."
Today – just a few years after the Biden administration announced the project in 2021 – the turbine sits in ruins with its interior materials being exposed just about 14 nautical miles from Martha’s Vineyard, Massachusetts.
In May 2021, the Biden-era Department of Interior announced the approval of the construction and operation of the Vineyard Wind project, which it said would be the first large-scale, offshore wind project in the United States. The administration touted the project as contributing to their green energy goals.
Former President Joe Biden’s Secretary of the Interior Deb Haaland called the project an "important step toward advancing the Administration's goals to create good-paying union jobs while combating climate change and powering our nation."
She said it was "one of many actions we are determined to take to open the doors of economic opportunity to more Americans."
Biden's Secretary of Commerce Gina Raimondo said, "This project is an example of the investments we need to achieve the Biden-Harris administration’s ambitious climate goals, and I’m proud to be part of the team leading the charge on offshore wind."
However, after the project went down in literal flames, local residents had much more choice words to say about the Biden administration’s "ambitious climate goals."
"Everybody wants a healthy planet, but when the ones advocating for a green planet are the ones damaging it, it makes you pause," Barstool Sports President Dave Portnoy, a Nantucket homeowner, told Fox News Digital after the blade detached and fell into the ocean.
Portnoy lamented those who paid good money only to be unable to visit the closed beaches.
"Families save up for years to take a vacation to Nantucket only to have it ruined by negligence," he said.
Mary Chalke, another local resident, posted on X on Mar. 23 that she was continuing to find blade fiberglass debris washing ashore on a Nantucket beach on the south side of the island.
The Vineyard Gazette reported that the broken blade had a manufacturing defect that was not caught during inspections and that there were 66 other blades in the project that could potentially have the same problem. The outlet reported that Vineyard Wind has been ordered to remove all the potentially defective blades.
The outlet said that as of January, only one turbine of the 62 planned was running.
A source familiar with the project said its catastrophic failure is a "shining example of how these failed green energy projects pose a hazard to the environment."
"It wasn’t by chance that this wind turbine was struck by lightning just months after it fell apart into the ocean," the source said.
On his first day in office, President Donald Trump paused new or renewed approvals, rights-of-way, permits, leases or loans for offshore wind projects pending a review of federal wind leasing and permitting practices. He also issued a memorandum temporarily withdrawing the Outer Continental Shelf from offshore wind leasing.
For decades, President Donald Trump has remained a staunch advocate for tariffs — routinely declaring the word one of the most beautiful in the dictionary and regularly accusing foreign countries of ripping off the U.S.
Following through on 2024 campaign promises and building upon policies his first administration introduced, Trump unveiled a series of historic tariffs at the White House’s Rose Garden on Wednesday for a "Make America Wealthy Again" event as part of a day his administration dubbed "Liberation Day" for the U.S.
While some lawmakers on both sides of the aisle have voiced concern over the policy, tariffs are an area where Trump’s views have remained incredibly consistent over the years, as he has routinely decried that other countries have treated the U.S. unfairly in trade deals.
For example, Trump wrote in his 2011 book, "Time to Get Tough: Making America #1 Again!" that he backed a solid 20% tariff on all foreign items imported into the U.S. and singled out China as a high offender.
"I want foreign countries to finally start forking over cash in order to have access to our markets," Trump wrote in the book, according to an excerpt. "So here’s the deal: any foreign country shipping goods into the United States pays a 20 percent tax. If they want a piece of the American market, they’re going to pay for it. No more free admission into the biggest show in town — and that especially includes China."
Trump also boasted about the benefits of tariffs during his campaign in the election for his first run at president, when he outlined his trade priorities during a June 2016 Pennsylvania speech.
"Our original Constitution did not even have an income tax," Trump said at the event. "Instead, it had tariffs emphasizing taxation of foreign, not domestic, production. Yet today, 240 years after the Revolution, we've turned things completely upside down.
"We tax and regulate and restrict our companies to death, and then we allow foreign countries that cheat to export their goods to us tax-free," Trump said. "How stupid is this? How could it happen? How stupid is this. As a result, we have become more dependent on foreign countries than ever before. Ladies and gentlemen, it is time to declare our economic independence once again."
Following Trump’s victory in the 2016 election, Trump moved to impose a series of tariffs on countries and various products, including 25% duties on steel and 10% duties on aluminum from most countries, and others targeting China.In response to these tariffs, China issued its own retaliatory tariffs that cost the U.S. federal government billions of dollars in government aid to farmers who suffered financial losses due to the retaliation on their agricultural exports.
Critiques of other countries' trade practices have continued into Trump’s second administration, and he has routinely blamed them for allegedly engaging in unfair trade practices against the U.S.
He also argues that tariffs will help return manufacturing jobs to the U.S. As a result, he and his administration have called for employing tariffs to address the nation’s 2024 record $1.2 trillion trade deficit.
"For decades, our country has been looted, pillaged, raped and plundered by nations near and far, both friend and foe alike," Trump said Wednesday.
Earlier in 2025, the Trump administration imposed up to 25% tariffs on certain goods from Mexico and Canada, as well as a 20% tariff on shipments from China. The White House said that tariffs already imposed on Canada and Mexico will remain in place; however, new tariffs on China will be added on top of existing duties on Beijing.
Tariffs function as a tax that governments collect on foreign goods and services that manufacturers import, and are collected while undergoing customs clearance in foreign ports, according to the International Trade Administration.
The new tariff plan sets out a baseline duty of 10% on imports to the U.S., while customized tariffs are set for countries, like China, which have higher duties in place on American goods.
"If you want your tariff rate to be zero, then you build your product right here in America," Trump said Wednesday at the White House.
The tariffs are slated to impact a variety of goods, including electronics like iPhones that are predominantly manufactured in China, according to the Council on Foreign Relations. They are also expected to hit goods like wine and other alcohols originating from European Union countries like Italy.
Both parties in Congress have voiced opposition to the new tariffs and have warned that the tariffs will raise prices for American consumers.
For countries considering implementing their own tariffs against U.S. products in retaliation, Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent issued a simple message: "Don’t."
"My advice to every country right now: Do not retaliate," Bessent said in a Wednesday interview with Fox News Wednesday. "If you retaliate, there will be escalation."
Secretary of State Marco Rubio vowed Friday that the U.S. has "to reset the global order of trade" and that President Donald Trump is "absolutely right to do it."
Rubio, speaking at NATO headquarters in Brussels, made the remark after taking issue with a reporter’s claim that world economies are "crashing" in the wake of Trump’s "Liberation Day" tariffs.
"We have to be a country to think we're the largest consumer market in the world, and yet the only thing we export is services, and we need to stop that," Rubio said. "We need to get back to a time where we are a country that can make things, and to do that, we have to reset the global order of trade."
"So the president rightly has concluded that the current status of global trade is bad for America and good for a bunch of other people. And he's going to reset it, and he's absolutely right to do it," Rubio added.
The secretary of state said the "worst thing" the U.S. could do is leave the global trade system "the way it is forever."
"I mean, this is, just can't continue. We can't continue to be a country that doesn't make things. We have to be able to make things to provide jobs for Americans... it’s that simple," he added. "China, as an example. I mean, it's outrageous. I mean, they don't consume anything. All they do is export and flood and distort markets in addition to all the tariffs and barriers they put in place."
Rubio added "If you're a company and you make a bunch of your products in China and all of a sudden shareholders or people that play the stock market realize that it's going to cost a lot more to produce in China, your stock is going to go down, but ultimately the markets, as long as they know what the rules are going to be moving forward, and as long as you can sustain where you're going to be, the markets will adjust."
"Businesses around the world, including in trade and global trade, they just need to know what the rules are. Once they know what the rules are, they will adjust to those rules," he said. "So I don't think it's fair to say economies are crashing. Markets are crashing because markets are based on the stock value of companies who today are embedded in modes of production that are bad for the United States."
The House and Senate are a long way from approving President Donald Trump’s "big, beautiful bill" to cut spending, slash taxes and likely raise the debt ceiling.
But the next step in the process is now unfolding.
The Senate voted Thursday to proceed to a retooled budget framework. The framework is necessary under special budget rules the Senate is using to avoid a filibuster which would kill the bill.
That triggered a lengthy debate on the updated budget package prompting what’s called a "vote-a-rama" tonight. The Senate would presumably finish this step in the process and adopt the new framework in the wee hours of Saturday morning or perhaps during the day on Saturday.
A "vote-a-rama" is really just a very Senate way of saying "a really long vote series which probably runs all night." The Senate rifles through vote after vote for hours on end. Most vote-a-ramas run 10-15 hours. A 2008 vote-a-rama churned through a record 44 roll call votes. They are always related to the budget process. And, because of special budget rules, senators can offer an unlimited number of amendments. That’s why there are so many votes.
Republicans aim to get through this process as quickly as possible. That said, some conservatives may offer amendments for additional debt reduction or proposals related to the debt ceiling.
Democrats will likely offer a host of amendments to get vulnerable Republicans on the record about controversial issues like possible cuts to Medicare and Medicaid and even tariffs.
The bottom line is this:
There is high interest about where Congress stands advancing the "big, beautiful bill." It’s the touchstone of President Trump’s legislative agenda and probably the most significant piece of legislation to come before Congress over the next two years. But getting to a point where the House and Senate can actually try to approve the bill itself is an exhaustive process and months away. However, this incremental step is essential to getting there. And that’s why interested parties will focus on the vote-a-rama starting tonight and when it ends.
Also, why start this process so late on a Thursday and compel the Senate to meet on a Friday night and bleed into the weekend? Especially when the Senate has had multiple weekend sessions already this year and several overnight sessions? That includes the all-night, record-breaking speech by Sen. Cory Booker (D-NJ) earlier this week.
There is some method to the madness.
First, the Senate needs to get through this step. Time is of the essence. Second, Fox is told that holding off until later in the week could limit the length of the vote-a-rama if the Senate doesn’t start until Friday night. That isn’t to say the vote-a-rama won’t be long and tiring. But it could abbreviate the process.
Let’s take a step backward so we can look forward on what the House and Senate must still do to pass the tax cut and spending cut plan. There are potentially eight steps here. The Senate motion over the next few days is step three.
In February, the Senate adopted an initial budget outline so it could use the special budget reconciliation process and avoid a filibuster.
The House approved its own version of a budget outline in late February – even though the consequences of the filibuster mean nothing to the House. But the issue was that the House and Senate approved different budget frameworks. They still need to sync up.
So those were steps one and two of this protracted process.
The Senate’s vote-a-rama – culminating with the adoption of a new, updated budget blueprint – is step three.
Step four likely comes next week when the Senate’s updated package goes to the House. House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-LA) indicated Wednesday night he’d like the House to align with the Senate framework next week. So that entails another debate and vote. However, some archconservatives might look askance at the Senate’s spending cut numbers. Those close to the Senate process have told Fox that those figures represent a "floor" for spending cuts. Not a "ceiling." But the ultimate Senate number might not please as many House conservatives.
Why does the Senate do it this way? To comply with specific, strict Senate budgetary rules. If the Senate didn’t stretch it out like this, the bill would face a filibuster and the gig would be up.
Johnson seemed buoyed after he swore-in new Reps. Jimmy Patronis (R-FL) and Randy Fine (R-FL) after their special election victories in Florida.
"The margin is a little more comfortable. It's an embarrassment of riches. Now we can lose, what, three votes now or something," said Johnson.
"I vote for my Speaker," replied Patronis.
"Right!" piped up Johnson.
It’s possible the Speaker was glad to have some backup after one of the worst weeks of his tenure. The Speaker lost an internecine fight over proxy voting for Members who are pregnant or new moms. That blocked the House from considering other major bills focusing on voting security and reining-in federal judges. The contretemps forced Johnson to shut the House down for the rest of the week on Tuesday afternoon.
Regardless, if the House adopts the plan now before the Senate, they graduate to steps five and six. That’s where the House and Senate actually assemble, debate and presumably pass the bill itself. Those steps will be the most challenging set yet. And it likely involves yet another vote-a-rama in the Senate.
Then, we may have steps seven and eight. That’s where the House and Senate may need to take yet another set of votes to align again – if both bodies approved different versions of the legislation.
That’s why passing the "big, beautiful bill" may take until summer. And there will undoubtedly be additional hiccups along the way. Fox is told the House might not have the votes to pass the House bill. One source said the House may only have the votes to approve what’s called a "motion to go to conference" and try to blend the House and Senate frameworks together.
Martial arts star Bruce Lee died in 1973 before he could complete a film entitled, "The Game of Death." The premise is that Lee had to ascend to the top of a multi-level pagoda. But the test was making it past a singular martial artist guarding each floor of the structure. The sentries protecting each floor were masters of different martial arts disciplines and styles of combat. And each floor was tougher than the last. So Lee had to adjust his fighting methods when facing each guard.
In fact, 7’2" basketball legend Kareem Abdul-Jabbar guarded the top floor. That provided a special challenge for the 5’7" Lee.
The "Game of Death" is kind of what Congressional Republicans are going through now as they attempt to reach the top floor of the parliamentary pagoda and pass the President’s "big, beautiful bill." They are about to graduate to the third floor. And each level is growing increasingly tough in the level of difficulty.
The Senate rejected a proposal by Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., that would have blocked the Trump administration’s planned $8.8 billion arms sale to Israel.
Sanders’ proposal was split into two votes, each of which failed, with 15 senators voting for the measure.
Fourteen Democrats voted with Sanders. They were Sens. Richard Durbin, Ill., Martin Heinrich, N.M., Mazie Hirono, Hawaii, Ben Ray Luján, N.M., Tim Kaine, Va., Andy Kim, N.J., Ed Markey, Mass., Jeff Merkley, Ore., Chris Murphy, Conn., Brian Schatz, Hawaii, Tina Smith, Minn., Chris Van Hollen, Md., Elizabeth Warren, Mass., and Peter Welch, Vt.
Prior to the vote, Senate Foreign Relations Committee Chairman Jim Risch, R-Idaho, warned that in passing the resolutions, senators "would abandon Israel, our closes ally in the Middle East, during a pivotal moment for global security."
On Wednesday, Sanders released a video discussing his proposal, in which he demanded that the U.S. "end our complicity in these atrocities" in Gaza. He also accused Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s government of behaving in a "barbaric" fashion, saying that humanitarian aid has been blocked from reaching Gazans.
From Jan. 19, 2025 until March 2, 2025, while the Israel-Hamas ceasefire deal was in place, a total of 25,200 aid trucks entered Gaza, according to the Coordinator for Government Activities in the Territories. This included 4,200 weekly aid trucks.
Before it fell apart earlier last month, the ceasefire deal saw the release of 33 hostages and nearly 2,000 Palestinian prisoners.
Israel has long enjoyed bipartisan support in the U.S., but its latest war with Hamas has divided Democrats. Some, like Sen. John Fetterman, Pa., have been fierce defenders of Israel, while others, like Sanders, have been harsh critics.
Sanders introduced a similar proposal in November 2024 during the Biden administration, which also failed. Many of the same senators who voted in favor of his April 2025 proposal voted for the resolution under the Biden administration, except for Sens. Angus King, Maine, Jeanne Shaheen, N.H. and Raphael Warnock, Ga. Fox News Digital contacted their offices to inquire about what changed between November 2024 and now.
When speaking about his joint resolution of disapproval in November, Sanders claimed the Israeli government was controlled "not only by right-wing extremists, but by religious zealots." He also accused Netanyahu of violating international law.
Expect an all-night session tonight in the Senate as Republicans try to take the next step to pass President Donald Trump’s "big, beautiful bill."
The Senate is expecting up to 15 hours of round-the-clock voting starting tonight to approve a revamped budget framework to cut taxes, slash spending and raise the debt ceiling.
The voting marathon likely begins this evening and could run through the day on Saturday. The record is 44 consecutive roll call votes, set in 2008.
Democrats will try to force Republicans to take votes on amendments to cut Medicare and even tariffs. By getting Republicans on the record, Democrats will try to weaponize those votes against vulnerable GOPers in the 2026 midterms.
If the Senate approves the plan, the package goes back to the House, where it must sync up and adopt the retooled Senate version.
House Republicans received reinforcements this week, winning both special elections in Florida. However, a knowledgeable source expressed skepticism to Fox News that the House had the votes to pass the Senate version. The reason is that some conservatives don’t think the spending cuts are deep enough.
A Colorado Democrat likened parent groups to "the KKK" during an hours-long committee hearing for a controversial bill that could see parents accused of "coercive control" in custody fights for using a trans child's "deadname."
"I really am curious about how much stakeholdering went on both sides of the issue, and not just one side," Republican state Rep. Jarvis Caldwell said during the hearing, which began Monday night and ran into early Tuesday. "I'm curious with if the businesses in the community were included in these and if parent groups that are not part of the LGBT community if they were involved."
Later during the House Judiciary hearing, Democrat state Rep. Yara Zokaie said the committee that night had "heard a lot about stakeholding and who was left out of stakeholding" and that "this process is important for us to understand the implications of the bills that we are passing."
"But a well-stakeholdered bill does not need to be discussed with hate groups," Zokaie said. "And we don't ask someone passing civil rights legislation to go ask the KKK their opinion," she added as several in the committee room applauded.
The bill in question, HB25-1312, An Act Concerning Legal Protections for Transgender Individuals, requires courts to consider "deadnaming, misgendering, or threatening to publish material related to an individual's gender-affirming health-care services as types of coercive control" when making child custody decisions. It passed in a 7-4 vote out of the committee, clearing the first major hurdle to becoming law. It now goes to the Assembly for a second reading.
If the bill passes, it would make Colorado the first state to pass such legislation.
In California, similar legislation was passed in 2023 requiring courts to consider a parent's affirmation of a child's chosen gender identity in custody battles. However, liberal Gov. Gavin Newsom vetoed the bill.
The Colorado bill, which would create the Kelly Loving Act, named after a transgender man who was killed in the 2022 Colorado nightclub shooting by a nonbinary gunman, also prohibits Colorado courts from enforcing laws from other states that remove children from parents who allow transgender treatments for minors.
If a child in school wants to go by a different name other than their legal one, the bill says educators must be "inclusive of all reasons that a student might adopt a chosen name."
"If the individual provides a chosen name that is different from the individual's legal name, the chosen name must be used on all subsequent forms administered by the public entity," the bill text summary says.
After the hearing, Caldwell told Fox News Digital in a statement that Zokaie's reference to certain stakeholders was "deeply concerning" and "reckless."
"Particularly when it involves labeling parents – the people who care the most about the future of their children – as hate groups," he said. "Parents who stand up for their children's education and rights should be respected, not vilified."
Zokaie also said during the hearing, "There was a lot of discussion of folks losing their children, and I just want us to note that these are parameters for a judge to consider."
"The word 'consider' is used repeatedly. There are no mandates in this bill," she said.
Fox News Digital reached out to Zokaie for comment but did not receive a response by publication deadline.
EXCLUSIVE: California Gov. Gavin Newsom announced plans Friday morning directing the state to pursue "strategic" relationships with countries announcing retaliatory tariffs against the U.S., urging them to exclude California-made products from those taxes, Fox News Digital exclusively learned first.
"Donald Trump's tariffs do not represent all Americans," Newsom said in a video announcement posted to X. "And on behalf of 40 million Americans that live in the great state of California, the tentpole of the U.S. economy … the dominant manufacturing state in America, our state of mind is around supporting stable trading relationships around the globe."
Sources in Newsom's administration told Fox News Digital Thursday night the announcement was a direct response to President Donald Trump's "Liberation Day" tariff plan, which sets out a baseline duty of 10% on all imports to the U.S. and some higher percentages for other top traders.
Newsom added he's directed his administration to seek out new opportunities to "expand trade" and "remind trading partners around the world that California remains a stable partner."
The Newsom administration is worried that California's almond industry, a major agricultural exporter, will lose billions of dollars as nations like China, India and the European Union move to impose retaliatory tariffs.
"Gavin Newsom should focus on out-of-control homelessness, crime, regulations, and unaffordability in California instead of trying his hand at international dealmaking," White House spokesperson Kush Desai told Fox News Digital Friday morning.
Individual states do not have the legal authority to independently negotiate or make global trading deals regarding tariffs, according to the Constiution. Trade policy, including tariffs, is a power reserved for the federal government. Specifically, the Constitution grants Congress the authority to regulate commerce with foreign nations in Article 1 Section 8, and this includes the power to impose tariffs and negotiate trade agreements.
Almonds, California's most valuable food export, account for about 20% of the state's $23.6 billion in agricultural sales abroad and 2.5% of its total exports, according to the California Department of Food & Agriculture. The state produces 80% of the world's supply and exports the majority of its almond crop. Other top agricultural exports include dairy products, pistachios, wine and walnuts.
California boasts of being the fifth-largest economy in the world, a vital engine for much of U.S. economic growth, with a gross domestic product of $3.9 trillion — 50% larger than Texas, the nation's second-largest state. The Golden State is the largest importer and second-largest exporter among U.S. states, with more than $675 billion in two-way trade supporting millions of jobs, state officials said.
Trade with Mexico, Canada and China are also key partners for California, as nearly half of the state's imports come from these countries, totaling $203 billion of the more than $491 billion in goods imported by California last year.
A Newsom official said the new Trump tariffs also will affect access to critical supplies, like construction materials, needed to rebuild after the Los Angeles wildfires. The U.S. currently imposes a duty of over 14% on Canadian lumber, with the rate potentially rising to nearly 27% in 2025.
State officials charged the retaliatory tariffs will cause "major disruptions" to cross-border supply chains in the California-Baja region, arguing that if component goods are taxed each time they cross the border, the final price of the finished product will increase and be passed onto Californians.
"The markets are going to boom," Trump said Thursday leaving the White House. "The stock is going to boom, the country is going to boom, and the rest of the world wants to see is there any way they can make a deal."
"This is one of the most important days, in my opinion, in American history. It's our declaration of economic independence. For years, hardworking American citizens were forced to sit on the sidelines as other nations got rich and powerful, much of it at our expense," Trump said. "But now it's our turn to prosper, and in so doing, use trillions and trillions of dollars to reduce our taxes and pay down our national debt, and it'll all happen very quickly."
All but one Senate Republican voted on Thursday to confirm President Donald Trump's nomination of Harmeet Dhillon to serve as an assistant attorney general.
While the 52-45 vote was almost entirely along party lines, Sen. Lisa Murkowski, of Alaska, joined Democrats in voting against Dhillon's confirmation.
Fox News Digital reached out to a Murkowski spokesperson on Friday morning to request a comment from the lawmaker, but did not receive a response by the time of publication.
Then-President-elect Donald Trump announced in December that Dhillon was his choice to serve as assistant attorney general for civil rights at the Justice Department.
"I am pleased to nominate Harmeet K. Dhillon as Assistant Attorney General for Civil Rights at the U.S. Department of Justice. Throughout her career, Harmeet has stood up consistently to protect our cherished Civil Liberties, including taking on Big Tech for censoring our Free Speech, representing Christians who were prevented from praying together during COVID, and suing corporations who use woke policies to discriminate against their workers," Trump declared in his Truth Social post at the time.
"Harmeet is one of the top Election lawyers in the Country, fighting to ensure that all, and ONLY, legal votes are counted. She is a graduate of Dartmouth College and the University of Virginia Law School, and clerked in the U.S. Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals. Harmeet is a respected member of the Sikh religious community. In her new role at the DOJ, Harmeet will be a tireless defender of our Constitutional Rights, and will enforce our Civil Rights and Election Laws FAIRLY and FIRMLY. Congratulations, Harmeet!" he added.
Trump recently accused Murkwoski, Maine Sen. Susan Collins of Maine, and Kentucky Sens. Rand Paul and Mitch McConnell of having "Trump Derangement Syndrome."
Latest Political News and Updates from BBC
Latest Political News on Fox News
