South Korea's impeached President Yoon Suk Yeol was arrested at his presidential residence on Wednesday morning local time following an hours-long standoff, images from the scene show.
Why it matters: It's the first time an incumbent president has been detained in South Korea and marks the second attempt by anti-corruption investigators to arrest him for questioning related to his brief martial law declaration last month that triggered protests and shocked allies.
Members of the Corruption Investigation Office for High-ranking Officials and police officers make their way towards the presidential residence in Seoul to serve a warrant to detain Yoon on Jan. 15. Photo: Chung Sung-Jun/Getty Images
Yoon's many guards and supporters prevented the last attempt earlier this month.
The big picture: South Korean police are investigating Yoon for possible insurrection in connection with his declaration that saw him impeached and suspended from presidential duties.
He has via lawyers, denied the allegations and maintains he took the emergency action to counter "pro-North Korean" elements in the country.
Yoon could face life in prison or the death penalty if he were charged and convicted of the offenses he's accused of as presidential immunity doesn't extend to insurrection or treason in South Korea.
At least two wildfires ignited in Southern California during critical fire weather and triggered fresh evacuations on Tuesday, one week after deadly blazes first erupted across Los Angeles County.
The big picture: The fires have killed at least 25 people and the "Particularly Dangerous Situation Red Flag Warning" that the National Weather Service's L.A. office issue remains in effect until Wednesday afternoon.
Threat level: "Southern California continues to see ingredients for high fire danger: strong wind gusts in the 45-70 mph range and relative humidities in the 8-15 % range," per an NWS forecast discussion.
Santa Ana winds were weaker than expected Tuesday. But the National Weather Service's L.A. office said on X: "We are not out of the woods yet. Please stay on guard for a fast-moving fire."
It added: "The winds underperformed today, but one more enhancement could happen tonight-tomorrow."
The high fire risk extends into the San Diego County, where peak wind gusts had also exceeded well over 50-60 mph in several places, per a post from the local NWS office Tuesday. Sill Hill recorded a gust of 74 mph — hurricane intensity.
The winds are expected to subside after that, but the fire threat remains due to extremely dry conditions as firefighters continue to tackle California's biggest blazes — the Palisades and Eaton fires, which are already among the state's most destructive on record.
Evacuation orders remain in effect for both of those fires, which ignited as Santa Ana winds arrived last Tuesday.
Situation report: The Palisades Fire has killed at least eight people and destroyed thousands of structures over an estimated 23,713 acres as of Tuesday evening. It was at 17% containment, per Cal Fire.
The Eaton Fire has killed at least 17 people and destroyed thousands of structures over an estimated 14,117 acres over the same period. That fire was 35% contained.
Meanwhile, authorities issued evacuation orders in response to the Scout Fire that's burned at 0% containment across an estimated two acres in Riverside County since igniting during Santa Ana winds at lunchtime Tuesday.
Angeles National Forest announced on X that another Riverside County wildfire that ignited in Hemet on Tuesday, the Stone Fire, had been "knocked down at 1/2 acre."
What we're watching: "Although winds have overall trended lighter than initially expected, NE to E winds may create large breaking waves to Avalon and Two Harbors Late tonight into Wednesday late morning," per an NWS LA forecast discussion.
This could potentially create "hazardous conditions and possible minor coastal flooding."
Former first lady Michelle Obama won't attend President-elect Trump's inauguration next week, her office announced on Tuesday.
Why it matters: All other living first ladies and presidents have confirmed they will follow the tradition of attending the presidential swearing-in ceremony, including her husband, former President Obama.
Representatives for former President Clinton and ex-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, Trump's 2016 presidential rival, have confirmed their attendance at Monday's ceremony — as have former President George W. Bush and ex-first lady Laura Bush.
Michelle Obama was also notably absent from former President Carter's funeral.
Driving the news: "Former President Barack Obama is confirmed to attend the 60th Inaugural Ceremonies," per a media statement from the Obamas' office.
"Former First Lady Michelle Obama will not attend the upcoming inauguration," added the statement, without elaborating further.
Representatives for the Obamas did not immediately respond to Axios' request for comment Tuesday evening.
OpenAI is rolling out a beta feature called Tasks to ChatGPT that lets users schedule future actions and reminders.
Why it matters: Tasks is a step toward making ChatGPT a more helpful AI companion, reducing reliance on other apps such as Apple's Siri and Amazon's Alexa for reminders.
This comes amid reported plans to release an autonomous computer-controlling agent called "Operator."
Zoom in: Tasks, which is available to some ChatGPT Plus, Team and Pro users starting today, lets subscribers schedule actions ahead of time.
OpenAI hasn't specified whether Tasks will eventually come to free users.
If a free user asks ChatGPT to set a reminder, it suggests they use Siri, Google and Alexa.
How it works: Select the "GPT-4o with scheduled tasks" model from the menu and then send a message about what you'd like it to do and when. This will create the task.
Some examples of tasks could be "give me a daily weather report for Queens, NY every morning at 7am" or "remind me three months from now that I have a dentist appointment at 4pm."
ChatGPT will send push notifications on the web, desktop (macOS) and mobile. It also sends an email notification of the task.
A user can have up to 25 active reminders at a time.
Users can manage and name tasks by selecting the Tasks option in the profile menu on web. ChatGPT may also suggest tasks based on a user's chats, and users can choose to accept them or not.
Editor's note: This story was updated with additional features about email notifications and active reminders.
The Trump transition proved today that it can impose its will on the Hill, even with a nomination that looked cooked before the holidays.
Why it matters: Not a single Republican showed signs on Tuesday of opposing Defense nominee Pete Hegseth. Now he's got a clear path to the Pentagon.
"Pete Hegseth hit a home run," Sen. Jim Banks (R-Ind.) said on Fox News after the hearing.
Senate Majority Leader John Thune (R-S.D.) told reporters Tuesday that Hegseth did well and expects he'll be quickly confirmed.
Here's the formula:
Survive the first two weeks: Trump's team got past the news cycles about Senate Republicans being quietly concerned about Hegseth's nomination. They've told us for a month that if he can get to his nomination hearing, he'll be fine.
Sic MAGA foot soldiers on anyone suspected of falling out of line. Sen. Joni Ernst (R-Iowa) was noticeably friendly at today's hearing. Ernst told local radio on Wednesday that she'll vote to confirm Hegseth.
Stonewall the Dems: Only the committee's top Democrat — Sen. Jack Reed (D-R.I.) — was allowed to see Hegseth's background check. Democrats were denied second rounds of questioning today. Hegseth didn't meet with any of the rank-and-file Dems ahead of today's hearing.
Take advantage of the media's shattered glass: Today's most TV-ready moments from Senate Dems — Tim Kaine's hypotheticals on Hegseth's red lines and his behavior … Kirsten Gillibrand's condemnation of his comments on women in the military … Mazie Hirono's questions on his drinking — are unlikely to reach MAGA viewers.
Zoom in: If you look past the spicy back-and-forth on Hegseth's character, there was a strong line of questions about whether he can do the job.
The most prominent: Sen. Tammy Duckworth (D-Ill.) tried to pin down Hegseth on whether he's ever led a major negotiation. She asked if he's familiar with high-level pacts like ASEAN.
The Republicans on the panel were very clear that this isn't a dealbreaker. They even suggested that his lack of traditional experience running bureaucracies would benefit someone trying to clean house at the Pentagon.
They backed him as he suggested he'd purge top brass and cut hundreds or thousands of civilian support staff in the Pentagon.
"The Dems struggled to land a blow or a gotcha moment," Banks told Axios after the hearing.
"With today's performance, I believe Pete Hegseth's path to confirmation has been assured," Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) said in a statement.
A progressive group that bolstered Robert F. Kennedy Jr. during the 2024 presidential campaign is also supporting a new war room that wants to scuttle his nomination for Health and Human Services Secretary.
Why it matters: The two tracks of support from the Sixteen Thirty Fund — which can accept unlimited and anonymous contributions— show how the dark money group takes a flexible approach to countering President-elect Trump's MAGA agenda.
During the campaign, a super PAC it funded, Retire Career Politicians, tried to boost RFK, with ads claiming he "isn't afraid to tell the truth about vaccines." Republicans were convinced the effort was part of a broader scheme to siphon votes away from Trump.
More recently, the Sixteen Thirty Fund is accepting donations on behalf of a new "Stop RFK War Room" effort, run by Protect Our Care, a liberal group that's running ads accusing RFK of spreading "deadly lies about vaccines."
Driving the news: Protect Our Care plans to spend close to $1 million on its new war room, which is running digital ads and coordinating opposition to the RFK nomination ahead of his confirmation hearing, according to a person familiar with the matter.
Its executive director, Brad Woodhouse, a longtime Democratic strategist, told Politico that RFK's ideas are '"too dangerous" not to counter.
Zoom out: The Sixteen Thirty Fund acts as a clearinghouse for progressive causes, funneling unrestricted money — around $400 million in the 2020 campaign, according to the New York Times — to various organizations.
Organized as 501(c)(4), contributions to the Sixteen Thirty Fund are not tax-deductible. But donors' names remain confidential.
The group can spend up to 49% of its budget on political activities, including transfers to super PACs.
Zoom in: In the 2024 cycle, Sixteen Thirty Fund gave some $2 million to Retire Career Politicians, a super PAC that spent most of its $18 million on trying to defeat Sen. Deb Fischer (R-Neb.).
The Sixteen Thirty Fund's relationship with Protect Our Care goes back longer. It has been providing "fiscal support" for several years. Protect Our Care launched its "Stop RFK War Room" in November.
What they are saying: "We are proud to provide administrative and back-office services to support their (Protect Our Care) work to ensure that Americans can get the high-quality health care they need and deserve," said a spokesperson for the Sixteen Thirty Fund.
"With regard to Retire Career Politicians PAC, Sixteen Thirty Fund provided the organization with unrestricted contributions in 2024. That is the extent of the relationship," the spokesperson said.
"Neither of these efforts are at odds with the values of Sixteen Thirty Fund to achieve progressive outcomes."
The bottom line: It is difficult to estimate the total amount that Sixteen Thirty Fund spent on political activities in 2024.
But they have been involved with both pro- and anti-RFK efforts.
The Securities and Exchange Commission sued Elon Musk on Tuesday, alleging he failed to properly disclose his purchase of Twitter shares before eventually buying the company.
Why it matters: The suit comes just days before President-elect Trump's inauguration as president, amid uncertainty over what legal scrutiny "first buddy" Musk might face in the new administration.
Zoom out: The SEC, in a suit filed in federal court in Washington, alleges that Musk did not file disclosures in a timely manner in March 2022 as he was acquiring shares of Twitter, now known as X.
Because investors did not know the size of his holdings, that allegedly let him buy stock at "artificially low prices," the SEC said, underpaying by an estimated $150 million.
What they're saying: "Today's action is an admission by the SEC that the they cannot bring an actual case — because Mr Musk has done nothing wrong and Everyone sees this sham for what it is," his attorney Alex Spiro said in a statement.
Spiro went on to call the case a "single-count ticky tak complaint."
Zoom in: The complaint requests an order forcing Musk to give up his "unjust" profits and pay unspecified civil penalties.
Flashback: Musk said he was joining Twitter's board in April 2022, after he'd already purchased 9% of the company's stock.
He later backed out of the board seat and acquired the company outright.
Pete Hegseth, President-elect Trump's pick for secretary of Defense, dodged several questions during his often contentious Senate confirmation hearing Tuesday.
The big picture: Republicans' narrow Senate majority means they can only lose a handful of votes, and Democrats used the hearing to air Hegseth'sallegations of sexual misconduct, financial mismanagement and excessive drinking and question how far he would go on Trump's behalf.
The former Fox News host and U.S. Army veteran, who some national security officials have cautioned may not have enough experience, traversed a tumultuous path to Tuesday's hearing.
He's blamed a "smear campaign" for threatening to derail his nomination but has solidified support from key members of the GOP.
Here are some of the questions Hegseth dodged during his hearing:
Will he resign if he drinks?
Sen. Mazie Hirono (D-Hawaii) pressed Hegseth on accusations of excessive drinking, pointing to his vow not drink on the job if confirmed.
He said he "absolutely" made that promise to Republican lawmakers.
Yes, but: Hegseth did not answer whether he would resign if he does drink, instead saying, "I've made this commitment on behalf of the men and women I'm serving because it's the most important deployment of my life."
Should domestic violence be disqualifying?
As part of a fiery exchange with Sen. Tim Kaine (D-Va.), Hegseth would not say whether violence against a spouse should be disqualifying for a secretary of Defense.
He repeatedly told Kaine he "absolutely" had never committed physical violence against any of his three wives.
He called Kaine's question "a hypothetical."
Would he use the military against Americans?
Sen. Elissa Slotkin (D-Mich.) pressed Hegseth on whether he'd support using the U.S. military against American citizens — and Hegseth's answer seemed inconclusive.
"If Donald Trump asked you to use the 82nd Airborne in law enforcement roles in Washington, D.C., would you ... convince him otherwise?" she asked.
"I'm not going to get ahead of conversations I would have with the president. However, there are laws and processes inside our Constitution that would be followed," Hegseth replied.
Zoom out: As part of Hirono's questioning, Hegseth did not directly answer whether he'd approve of shooting protesters in the legs, in reference to the suggestion former defense secretary Mark Esper said Trump gave him in 2020.
"Senator, I was in the Washington, D.C., National Guard unit that was in Lafayette Square during those events," Hegseth replied, "holding a riot shield on behalf of my country."
Would he seize Greenland by force?
Hegseth sidestepped another inquiry from Hirono, who asked whether he would comply with an order to claim Greenland or the Panama Canal by force, as Trump has threatened.
What he's saying: Hegsethapplauded Trump for "never strategically tipping his hand" in response to Hirono's question, adding he would not provide details in "this public forum."
"That sounds to me like that you would contemplate carrying out such an order to basically invade Greenland and take over the Panama Canal," Hirono replied.
Should the U.S. follow the Geneva Conventions?
Hegseth did not appear to commit to upholding the laws of combat governed by the Geneva Conventions during questioning from Sen. Angus King (I-Maine).
What he's saying: "We have laws on the books from the Geneva Conventions into the Uniform Code of Military Justice, and then underneath that, you have layers in which standard or temporary rules of engagement are put into place," Hegseth said. "We fight enemies ... that play by no rules."
Pressed by King, he said, "We don't need burdensome rules of engagement that make it impossible for us to win these wars."
Zoom in: Asked if the conventions' ban on torturing prisoners still applies, Hegseth called the conventions "incredibly important" but said how wars are fought has evolved.
"Your position is torture is OK, is that correct?" King asked.
Hegseth contended that was not what he said, adding, "I've never been party to torture."
Later, when pressed on past comments he made seemingly endorsing waterboarding, Hegseth responded, "The law of the land is that waterboarding is not legal."
President-elect Trump's administration will be intently focused on making the U.S. border more secure and deporting people who are in the country illegally, but may prove more open to legal immigration of highly skilled workers.
Done right, that would be an economic boon, a new paper argues.
Why it matters: The report, out Tuesday morning from the centrist Economic Innovation Group, finds that when some of the world's most talented and entrepreneurial people are allowed into the United States, the results are faster growth, higher wages for native-born citizens, and lower fiscal deficits.
It is America's "not-so-secret weapon," they write, while identifying numerous weaknesses in current policy that prevent those benefits from fully accruing.
State of play: MAGA world has been roiled in recent weeks by a clash between Trump allies (led by Elon Musk and Vivek Ramaswamy) who want more legal immigration of highly skilled workers and the nativist right (including Steve Bannon and Laura Loomer) who want less.
While that conversation specifically focused on the H-1B visas, it implies some broader openness to rethinking how America might open its doors to the world's best and brightest, as Musk and Ramaswamy seek.
By the numbers: The authors calculate that under the current H-1B program, the typical skilled immigrant pays more than $32,000 per year in federal taxes, while consuming only about $3,500 worth of government services.
Zoom in: "Our high-skilled immigration system should be designed first and foremost to advance the national interest of the United States and the interests of its communities and workers," write Adam Ozimek, Connor O'Brien and John Lettieri.
"Designed well, immigration policy can make our workers more productive, make American industry more globally competitive, spark new growth in left-behind parts of the country, and improve living standards nationwide," they add.
They argue that the system should be based on bringing in workers with the highest earnings, as opposed to the lottery system used in the H-1B program or offering visas based on education.
This, they argue, would ensure it's the immigrants with unique skills and the greatest ability to add to economy-wide productivity who are allowed in — not just undercutting wages of native-born workers.
The authors also advise abandoning quotas by country, further pushing toward a system based on merit that brings in tippy-top talent.
What they're saying: "The fact that the president-elect has reaffirmed his support for high-skilled immigration presents a very interesting moment where what has been an afterthought in our broader immigration has a chance to become a centerpiece, as we think it should be," Lettieri, the president of EIG, tells Axios.
"There's enormous pressure to turn the tide on the fiscal outlook of the country and to find ways to boost the economy that don't carry a huge price tag," he adds. "There are very few levers to pull that meet those criteria."
The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) says it will challenge state laws that make it easier for President-elect Trump to adopt his mass deportation plan and urge other states to put up legal roadblocks to slow mass raids.
Why it matters: The ACLU — the nation's largest civil liberties organization — has the reach to mobilize activists, with chapters in many states, and is expected to be the main litigate to lawsuits against mass deportations.
The big picture: ACLU officials at its southern border affiliated chapters vowed Tuesday it would undergo legal challenges to the construction of new mass detention centers and any effort to erase due process for immigrants facing deportation.
Officials also say the ACLU will launch a "robust challenge" to expedite removals of immigrants that Trump plans to expand.
During the first Trump term, the ACLU sued to stop his Muslim travel ban and fight allegations of abuse at immigration detention centers. It brought more than 400 cases against the first Trump administration.
State of play: Arizona and Texas have passed state laws that will make it easier for any mass deportation plan, ACLU advocates say.
Case in point: Texas Gov. Greg Abbott signed a law in 2023 that authorizes state officials to arrest and seek the deportation of migrants who have crossed the U.S.-Mexico border without legal authorization.
The other side: Abbott and other GOP governors say the state laws were needed because the federal government under President Biden wasn't doing enough to enforce federal immigration laws.
Reality check: U.S. immigration courts are on pace to decide record numbers of deportation cases— and order the most removals in five years — under Biden's push to fast-track asylum decisions.
The intrigue: ACLU officials say they expect some Democrats in Congress to support the Trump administration's harsh immigration policies, such as the Laken Riley Act.
That law would require the detention of undocumented immigrants arrested for certain non-violent crimes such as theft.
The ACLU says it will embark on a public campaign to highlight immigrant voices and "change the narrative."
The ACLU's Border Humanity Project launched last week a new multimedia campaign in southern border states highlighting the stories of asylum seekers who have fled Mexico, El Salvador and Cameroon.
The "Letters to America" campaign uses the voices and images of immigrants who have escaped violence in their former countries.
ACLU staff also are conducting "know your rights" workshops in various cities to educate immigrants and advocates on how they can defend themselves.
Behind the scenes: The ACLU is pushing its "Firewall for Freedom" initiative, which advises cities, states, and district attorneys on how they can limit collaboration with federal immigration authorities.
The plan suggests that governors and legislatures can protect immigrant communities through legal assistance funds, pardon processes and new laws.
President-elect Trump on Tuesday promised to create an "External Revenue Service" to oversee tariffs and other potential foreign revenue.
Why it matters: It's yet another sign Trump is serious about his promised widespread tariff program, despite recent reports it might be pulled back.
Driving the news: In a Truth Social post, Trump blasted the country's existing trade agreements and its reliance on income taxes for revenue.
"I am today announcing that I will create the EXTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE to collect our Tariffs, Duties, and all Revenue that come from Foreign sources. We will begin charging those that make money off of us with Trade, and they will start paying, FINALLY, their fair share," he posted.
He said Jan. 20, his inauguration day, would be the "birth date" of the ERS.
Between the lines: Customs and Border Protection currently collects tariffs at points of entry. It's unclear if Trump intends to create a new government entity to replace CBP.
The Trump transition team did not immediately return requests for comment.
The intrigue: Though Trump insists foreign countries pay when the U.S. levies tariffs, in fact importers pay the tariffs when they bring goods in.
Economists fear massive, negative market reactions if Trump follows through with threats to impose broad, heavy tariffs on U.S. trading partners.
The New Year's Day attack injured 57 people, the FBI said Tuesday, increasing its latest count from 35.
The latest: The suspect's internet history, the FBI said in its update, also revealed that he had researched Mardi Gras, how to get onto a Bourbon Street balcony and reviewed details about recent New Orleans shootings.
Between the lines: Investigators have not updated the number of people killed in the attack — 14 innocent victims, plus the suspect, Shamsud-Din Jabbar, who died in a shootout with New Orleans police.
The FBI counted 136 total victims, including two damaged businesses.
Zoom in: The FBI, which is leading the criminal investigation into the vehicle attack, revealed additional details about Jabbar's motivations in its Tuesday update.
"Jabbar became a more devout Muslim in 2022," the FBI said. "During this time, Jabbar began isolating himself from society. Around the spring of 2024, Jabbar began following extremist views."
Previous FBI revelations had uncovered some of Jabbar's travels, including trips to New Orleans where he appeared to be scouting the French Quarter around Halloween.
Tuesday's update filled in some gaps on a one-day trip a short time later, on Nov. 10, 2024.
On that trip, the FBI says, Jabbar took a train from Houston to New Orleans, returning that night on a bus.
But while Jabbar was in the city, he looked at an Orleans Street apartment that was for rent. Some days later, he applied for the apartment, but later told the landlord he'd changed his mind, the FBI says.
Jabbar's web history also revealed that, hours before he used a rented truck to drive through a crowded Bourbon Street in New Orleans, he searched for information about the car used in a similar attack 10 days previously at a German Christmas market.
President-elect Trump engaged in an "unprecedented criminal effort" to overturn the results of the 2020 election, Special Counsel Jack Smith alleged in the final report of his investigation into Trump's election subversion case.
Why it matters: The report's release early Tuesday came despite Trump's legal efforts to block it, making the Justice Department's findings public less than a week before Trump's inauguration.
What they're saying: Trump lambasted the report in a Truth Social post Tuesday, claiming he was "totally innocent" and calling Smith a "lamebrain prosecutor who was unable to get his case tried before the Election."
State of play: Trump was indicted and charged with conspiracy to defraud the U.S. and other counts for his purported role in the Jan. 6 Capitol riot and the events leading up to it.
However, the case was dismissed in November following Trump's 2024 victory, in light of longstanding DOJ policy that a sitting president can't be prosecuted.
Here are the top takeaways from the 174-page report:
Conviction at trial
Smith remained convinced he could have convicted Trump for his alleged efforts to subvert to the 2020 election if the case had gone to trial.
A Justice Department policy prohibiting the prosecution of a sitting president doesn't change the "gravity of the crimes charged, the strength of the Government's proof, or the merits of the prosecution," Smith wrote.
"But for Mr. Trump's election and imminent return to the Presidency, the Office assessed that the admissible evidence was sufficient to obtain and sustain a conviction at trial," he added.
Responsibility for Jan. 6
Smith drew a direct line from Trump's actions to the events of the Capitol riot.
After then-Vice President Pence refused to overturn the electoral college vote count in the Senate, Trump "took aim" at Pence, targeting him in his Jan. 6 rally speech and in a social media post.
"Taken together, these actions resulted in rioters at the Capitol on January 6 singling out Mr. Pence for their ire and chanting, 'Where is Pence? Bring Him Out!' and, 'Hang Mike Pence!'" the report said.
Trump's words also "inspired his supporters to commit acts of physical violence" by telling them to "fight like hell" against the purported election fraud.
Trauma of law enforcement officers
The report delved into the trauma experienced by law enforcement officers responding to the breach of the Capitol on Jan. 6.
140 law enforcement officers were assaulted during the Capitol riot and at least 123 rioters have so far been charged with using a deadly or dangerous weapon that day or causing serious bodily injury to a law enforcement officer, according to the report.
"This violence took a lasting toll," the report stated, noting that in addition to physical injuries many officers have experienced psychological trauma and depression as a result of the insurrection.
Prosecutorial independence
In a letter to Attorney General Merrick Garland attached to the report, Smith pushed back against Trump's claims the investigation was corrupt.
"I want it to be clear that the ultimate decision to bring charges against Mr. Trump was mine," Smith wrote, adding that "nobody within the Department of Justice ever sought to interfere with, or improperly influence, my prosecutorial decision making."
Trump's claims thatSmith'sdecisions while leading the case were in any way "influenced or directed by" the Biden administration or other political actors is "laughable," Smith noted.
Pete Hegseth, President-elect Trump'spick for Defense secretary, repeated his claim Tuesday that he is the target of a "smear campaign" when faced with pointed questions from lawmakers over his fitness to lead the military amid misconduct allegations.
The big picture: After Trump chose the former Fox News host for the Cabinet post,Hegseth was besieged with scandals that threatened to tank his nomination before he ever faced lawmakers.
The other side: Sen. Markwayne Mullin (R-Okla.) asked: "How many senators have showed up drunk to vote at night? ... Don't tell me you haven't seen it, because I know you have."
The audience, packed with military veterans and other Hegseth supporters, cheered. Some Democratic senators averted their gazes.
Driving the news: Hegseth's highly anticipated confirmation hearing, which lasted over four hours, began with him promising to be a "change agent" for the Department of Defense.
Before Hegseth spoke to the committee, Senate Armed Services Committee Chair Roger Wicker (R-Miss.) decried the "anonymous sources" behind the allegations that have hounded Hegseth, contrasting them with public pronouncements of support from his colleagues.
Sen. Tammy Duckworth (D-Ill.), an Iraq War veteran who lost both of her legs in combat, questioned Hegseth's qualifications in a contentious back-and-forth in which he could not name the number of nations or members of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN).
"I couldn't tell you the exact amount of nations," Hegseth said, adding, "but I know we have allies in South Korea and Japan and in AUKUS, with Australia, trying to work on submarines."
Duckworth replied: "None of those three countries that you mentioned are in ASEAN. I suggest you do a little homework before you prepare for these types of negotiations."
Asked by Sen. Jacky Rosen (D-Nevada) about his past characterization of NATO as "a relic" that should be "scrapped and remade," Hegseth claimed the country's allies have had "no better friend" than Trump.
He didn't answer about his own past comments about the alliance.
Rosen pressed Hegseth on whether Trump has a plan to rapidly end the years-long war in Ukraine as the president-elect has claimed he will do, to which Hegseth replied, "I will always give clear guidance ... best guidance to the president ... on matters like that."
During a heated exchange, Sen. Tim Kaine (D-Va.) refuted Hegseth's characterization that all the allegations against him were spurred by anonymous sources.
"They are not anonymous. We have seen more records with names attached to them," Kaine said.
Committee ranking member Jack Reed (D-R.I.) said he doesn't believe Hegseth is "qualified to meet the overwhelming demands of this job," citing the "extremely alarming" allegations and some of Hegseth's views, including on women serving in the military.
Reed implored the committee to make the FBI's background check available to all committee members, but Wicker rebuffed his request.
Questioned by Sen. Jeanne Shaheen (D-N.H.) about his previous derisive comments about women serving in combat roles, Hegseth maintained that he appreciated women's contributions to the military.
"It's not about the capabilities of men and women. It's about standards," he said.
Hegseth refused to rule out carrying out an order from Trump to take over Greenland or the Panama Canal — notions the president-elect has floated in recent weeks — when quizzed by Sen. Mazie Hirono (D-Hawaii).
State of play: In his opening statement, Hegseth vowed to "restore the warrior ethos" at the Pentagon.
"It is true that I don't have a similar biography to Defense Secretaries of the last 30 years," Hegseth said, before positioning himself as a "change agent."
"But, as President Trump also told me, we've repeatedly placed people atop the Pentagon with supposedly 'the right credentials' — whether they are retired generals, academics or defense contractor executives — and where has it gotten us?" Hegseth said in his opening statement.
A protester interrupted Hegseth's opening statement to call him a misogynist. That protester was one of several removed from the hearing.
Data: eMarketer; Note: "Other social" include Snapchat, Linkedin, Pinterest, Reddit and X. "Other channels" include display, search and retail ads. "Connected TV" does not include YouTube; Chart: Axios Visuals
Meta and Google are expected to be the biggest beneficiaries of a U.S. TikTok ban financially, according to a new analysis from eMarketer.
Why it matters: The growth of TikTok and retail giant Amazon has put real competitive pressure on Google and Meta, which for years have owned more than half of the U.S. advertising business.
Zoom in: If TikTok is banned, more than half of the ad dollars spent on the platform in the U.S. would go to Meta and Google-owned properties, eMarketer projects.
Instagram and Facebook would take 22.% and 17.1% of TikTok's reallocated ad spend, respectively. Google's YouTube would take roughly 10.7%.
Other social media platforms would also stand to benefit. Snapchat, Linkedin, Pinterest, Reddit and X would collectively take roughly 18.3% of reallocated TikTok ad spend. Some of those platforms have already begun to restructure their apps around their own TikTok-like short video products.
Connected TV companies, or streamers, and other digital media companies across social, search and retail advertising would collect roughly 30% of reallocated ad dollars.
Zoom out: Companies like Meta and Google have invested heavily in their TikTok rival products, Reels and Shorts, positioning them well to take advantage of a possible ban.
Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg told investors last year that Reels alone makes up more than 50% of user time spent on Instagram.
Google said last year that over 2 billion logged-in monthly users are watching YouTube Shorts.
Of note: eMarketer expects that advertising dollars will get reallocated immediately after a ban, as marketers have had many months to figure out alternative plans.
What to watch: For now, the ban seems likely, and the Supreme Court's arguments Friday led court watchers to expect it will uphold the ban law.
China has indicated for months that it wouldn't let ByteDance sell TikTok to a U.S. company to skirt a ban.
Yes, but: A Bloomberg report out Monday suggests Chinese officials are eyeing a possible deal to sell TikTok to Elon Musk.
If that were the case, Musk and X would likely stand to benefit enormously from the entire saga.
The Department of Justice's final report on President-elect Trump's dismissed federal election subversion case was published early Tuesday, revealing new details of special counsel Jack Smith's investigation.
Why it matters: Smith claims in the report less than two weeks from Trump's inauguration that he could have secured a conviction if the Republican leader hadn't won November's election and the case had gone to trial.
Trump wanted the final report kept secret, but Attorney General Merrick Garland defied the president-elect in one of his final acts in the Biden administration and sent the 137-page document to Congress.
Zoom out: The release of volume one of Smith's final report follows a lengthy legal battle after Trump's lawyers sought to stop it being made public.
Volume two of Smith's report, on Trump's federal classified documents case, remains sealed after U.S. District Judge Aileen Cannon barred the DOJ from releasing a final investigative report or any drafts.
Cannon, whom Trump appointed when he was in office, has been accused of bias in her handling of the case.
However, on Monday she ordered a hearing later this week on whether to release the second part of the report.
Flashback: Smith's original Jan. 6 indictment charged Trump with four counts, including "conspiracy to defraud" the U.S.
It was unsealed in 2023, less than two months after Smith first brought charges against the president-elect over his alleged mishandling of classified documents.
Last August, Smith filed a superseding indictment in the Jan. 6 case, paring down the original findings to account for the Supreme Court's July ruling that presidents have immunity for "official acts."
But after Trump won the 2024 election, Smith moved to drop his two federal cases against Trump, noting the longstanding DOJ policy that a sitting president can't be prosecuted.
Pete Hegseth, President-elect Trump's controversial pick for secretary of Defense, will have his confirmation hearing Tuesday before the Senate Armed Services Committee.
Why it matters: The former Fox News host and Army combat veteran likely faces a tough hearing due to allegations against him ranging from sexual assault to excessive drinking. Axios has obtained a prepared text of his opening statement.
Read the statement in full:
Thank you Chairman Wicker, Ranking Member Reed, and all members of this Committee for the opportunity today. I am grateful for, and learned a great deal from, this "advise and consent" process. Should I be confirmed, I look forward to working with this Committee — Senators from both parties — to secure our nation.
I want to thank the former Senator from Minnesota, Norm Coleman, for his mentorship and friendship in this process. And the incoming National Security Advisor, Congressman — and more importantly—Colonel Mike Waltz, for his powerful words. I am grateful for you both.
Thank you to my incredible wife Jennifer, who has changed my life and been with me throughout this entire process. I love you, sweetheart, and I thank God for you. And as Jenny and I pray together each morning, all glory — regardless of the outcome — belongs to our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ. His grace and mercy abound each day. May His will be done.
Thank you to my father, Brian, and mother, Penny, as well as my entire family — including our seven wonderful kids: Gunner, Jackson, Peter Boone, Kenzie, Luke, Rex & Gwendolyn. Their future safety and security is in all our hands.
And to all the troops and veterans watching, and in this room — Navy SEALs, Green Berets, Pilots, Sailors, Marines, Gold Stars and more. Too many friends to name. Officers and Enlisted. Black and White. Young and Old. Men and Women. All Americans. All warriors. This hearing is for you. Thank you for figuratively, and literally, having my back. I pledge to do the same for you. All of you.
It is an honor to come before this Committee as President Donald Trump's nominee for the office of Secretary of Defense. Two months ago, 77 million Americans gave President Trump a powerful mandate for change. To put America First — at home and abroad.
I want to thank President Trump for his faith in me, and his selfless leadership of our great Republic. The troops could have no better Commander-in-Chief than Donald Trump.
As I've said to many of you in our private meetings, when President Trump chose me for this position, the primary charge he gave me was — to bring the warrior culture back to the Department of Defense. He, like me, wants a Pentagon laser-focused on warfighting, lethality, meritocracy, standards, and readiness. That's it. That is my job.
To that end, if confirmed, I'm going to work with President Trump — and this committee — to:
Restore the Warrior Ethos to the Pentagon and throughout our fighting force; in doing so, we will reestablish trust in our military — and address the recruiting, retention and readiness crisis in our ranks. The strength of our military is our unity — our shared purpose — not our differences.
Rebuild our Military, always matching threats to capabilities; this includes reviving our defense industrial base, reforming the acquisition process (no more "Valley of Death" for new defense companies), modernizing our nuclear triad, ensuring the Pentagon can pass an audit, and rapidly fielding emerging technologies.
Reestablish Deterrence. First and foremost, we will defend our homeland — our borders and our skies. Second, we will work with our partners and allies to deter aggression in the Indo-Pacific from the communist Chinese. Finally, we will responsibly end wars to ensure we can prioritize our resources — and reorient to larger threats. We can no longer count on "reputational deterrence" — we need real deterrence.
The Defense Department under Donald Trump will achieve Peace Through Strength. And in pursuing these America First national security goals, we will remain patriotically a-political and stridently Constitutional. Unlike the current administration, politics should play no part in military matters. We are not Republicans or Democrats — we are American warriors. Our standards will be high, and they will be equal (not equitable, that is a very different word).
We need to make sure every warrior is fully qualified on their assigned weapon system, every pilot is fully qualified and current on the aircraft they are flying, and every general or flag officer is selected for leadership based purely on performance, readiness, and merit.
Leaders — at all levels — will be held accountable. And warfighting and lethality — and the readiness of the troops and their families — will be our only focus.
That has been my focus ever since I first put on the uniform as a young Army ROTC cadet at Princeton University in 2001. I joined the military because I love my country and felt an obligation to defend it. I served with incredible Americans in Guantanamo Bay, Iraq, Afghanistan and in the streets of Washington, D.C. — many of which are here today. This includes enlisted soldiers I helped become American citizens, and Muslim allies I helped immigrate from Iraq and Afghanistan. And when I took off the uniform, my mission never stopped.
It is true that I don't have a similar biography to Defense Secretaries of the last 30 years. But, as President Trump also told me, we've repeatedly placed people atop the Pentagon with supposedly "the right credentials" — whether they are retired generals, academics, or defense contractor executives — and where has it gotten us? He believes, and I humbly agree, that it's time to give someone with dust on his boots the helm. A change agent. Someone with no vested interest in certain companies or specific programs or approved narratives.
My only special interest is — the warfighter. Deterring wars, and if called upon, winning wars — by ensuring our warriors never enter a fair fight. We let them win and then bring them home. Like many of my generation, I've been there. I've led troops in combat…been on patrol for days … pulled a trigger downrange … heard bullets whiz by … flex-cuffed insurgents … called in close air support … led medevacs … dodged IEDs … pulled out dead bodies … and knelt before a battlefield cross. This is not academic for me; this is my life. I led then, and I will lead now.
Ask anyone who has ever worked with me — or for me. I know what I don't know. My success as a leader … and I very much look forward to discussing our many successes at my previous organizations, Vets for Freedom and Concerned Veterans for America. I'm incredibly proud of the work we did. My success as a leader … has always been setting a clear vision, hiring people smarter and more capable than me, empowering them to succeed, holding everyone accountable, and driving toward clear metrics. Build the plan. Work the plan. And then work harder than everyone around you.
The President has given me a clear vision, and I will execute. I've sworn an oath to the Constitution before, and — if confirmed — will proudly do it again. This time, for the most important deployment of my life.
I pledge to be a faithful partner to this committee. Taking input and respecting oversight. We share the same goals: a ready, lethal military; the health and well-being of our troops; and a strong and secure America.
Thank you for your time, and I look forward to your questions.
Pete Hegseth admits he's an unorthodox pick to lead the Pentagon — but says it's "time to give someone with dust on his boots the helm," according to his opening statement, obtained by Axios, for his confirmation hearing Tuesday.
Hegseth, one of President-elect Trump's most controversial Cabinet choices, plans to tell the Senate Armed Services Committee that he'll "[r]estore the warrior ethos to the Pentagon," give "new defense companies" a better chance to win contracts, and rapidly deploy emerging technologies.
So Hegseth, who calls his selection for Defense secretary "the most important deployment of my life," can expect a grueling hearing: Republicans tell us they expect Democratic senators will try to embarrass him and Trump.
The hearing room will be jammed with supporters from all phases of Hegseth's life.
The big picture: The opening statement doesn't directly address the allegations. Hegseth says in his testimony: "It is true that I don't have a similar biography to Defense secretaries of the last 30 years."
"But, as President Trump also told me, we've repeatedly placed people atop the Pentagon with supposedly 'the right credentials' — whether they are retired generals, academics or defense contractor executives — and where has it gotten us?"
"He believes, and I humbly agree, that it's time to give someone with dust on his boots the helm. A change agent. Someone with no vested interest in certain companies or specific programs or approved narratives."
Hegseth says his "only special interest is — the warfighter."
The backstory: Hegseth is "not pretending to be a standard issue SECDEF and wears that as a badge of honor," a source familiar with his thinking tells Axios.
"The standard-issue SECDEFs have degraded our readiness, our lethality and our ability to win wars. There's never been a singular focus on the warfighter, and that's why we're losing wars and deterrence capabilities."
Zoom in: Hegseth, a fierce DEI opponent, bluntly opposed women serving in combat roles in the military. But he softened that view during meetings with senators, saying he supports "all women serving in our military today."
Hegseth also has suggested that Gen. Charles Q. Brown, the first Black chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, should be fired over the Pentagon's efforts to diversify its ranks.
Brown and outgoing Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin, a decorated four-star general who also is Black, have rebuked the notion that the Pentagon has undermined its combat readiness with its focus on diversity.
"[W]e are American warriors," Hegseth says in his opening statement. "Our standards will be high, and they will be equal (not equitable, that is a very different word)," he continues.
"We need to make sure every warrior is fully qualified on their assigned weapon system, every pilot is fully qualified and current on the aircraft they are flying, and every general or flag officer is selected for leadership based purely on performance, readiness and merit."
Zoom out: Hegseth strikes an uncharacteristically humble, bipartisan tone in his opener, saying he looks "forward to working with this committee — senators from both parties — to secure our nation."
Hegseth — who became famous among conservatives as a "Fox & Friends Weekend" host, and is a bestselling author — is an Army veteran of Iraq, Afghanistan and Guantanamo Bay, and earned two Bronze Stars and a Combat Infantryman's Badge.
Between the lines: Hegseth, who's been married three times, portrays himself as a family man and devout Christian. He acknowledged in an interview with Megyn Kelly that he was a "serial cheater" before he found Christ.
"Thank you to my incredible wife Jennifer, who has changed my life and been with me throughout this entire process," his testimony says. "I love you, sweetheart, and I thank God for you. And as Jenny and I pray together each morning, all glory — regardless of the outcome — belongs to our Lord and savior Jesus Christ. His grace and mercy abound each day. May His will be done."
Naming his "seven wonderful kids, Hegseth adds: "Their future safety and security is in all our hands."
Hegseth emphasizes his popularity with many in uniform, saluting "all the troops and veterans watching, and in this room — Navy SEALs, Green Berets, pilots, sailors, Marines, Gold Stars and more. Too many friends to name. Officers and enlisted. Black and white. Young and old. Men and women. All Americans. All warriors."
"This hearing is for you," he says. "Thank you for figuratively, and literally, having my back. I pledge to do the same for you. All of you."
"Restore the warrior ethos to the Pentagon and throughout our fighting force; in doing so, we will reestablish trust in our military — and address the recruiting, retention and readiness crisis in our ranks. The strength of our military is our unity — our shared purpose — not our differences."
"Rebuild our military, always matching threats to capabilities; this includes reviving our defense industrial base, reforming the acquisition process (no more 'Valley of Death' for new defense companies), modernizing our nuclear triad ... and rapidly fielding emerging technologies."
"Reestablish deterrence. First and foremost, we will defend our homeland ... Second, we will work with our partners and allies to deter aggression in the Indo-Pacific from the communist Chinese. Finally, we will responsibly end wars to ensure we can prioritize our resources — and reorient to larger threats. We can no longer count on 'reputational deterrence' — we need real deterrence."
In a dig at the Biden administration, Hegseth vows that the Defense Department under Trump "will achieve peace through strength" and "will remain patriotically apolitical and stridently constitutional. Unlike the current administration."
"Leaders — at all levels — will be held accountable. And warfighting and lethality — and the readiness of the troops and their families — will be our only focus."
"That has been my focus ever since I first put on the uniform as a young Army ROTC cadet at Princeton University in 2001," Hegseth adds. "I served with incredible Americans in Guantanamo Bay, Iraq, Afghanistan and in the streets of Washington, D.C."
"This includes enlisted soldiers I helped become American citizens, and Muslim allies I helped immigrate from Iraq and Afghanistan. And when I took off the uniform, my mission never stopped."
Note: Compares President-elect Trump's selections for top Cabinet positions, which still have to go through a confirmation process, to seated Cabinet members for past presidents. Data: Axios research; Chart: Axios Visuals
Donald Trump is about to become the oldest person ever sworn in as president — but he hopes to have the youngest group of top Cabinet officials and advisers of any president in more than three decades.
Why it matters: Even as he's sought to regain his grip on power, the once and future president has tried to build the next generation of his MAGA movement, as seen in his choice of JD Vance, 40, as his vice president.
Driving the news: The average age of Trump's picks for VP, chief of staff, attorney general and secretaries of State, Treasury and Defense is 54.1 — the youngest since the start of George H.W. Bush's presidency in 1989, an Axios analysis found.
The elder Bush — who was 64 when he took the oath of office — had a top staff with an average age of 51.5, the youngest in nearly half a century.
Like Trump, Bush also picked a considerably younger VP: Dan Quayle, then 41.
Between the lines: The Cabinet Trump envisions is an average of five years younger than his Cabinet at the start of his first term in 2017.
Vance will be the third-youngest VP in U.S. history.
If confirmed, Pete Hegseth, 44, would be the youngest Defense secretary since Donald Rumsfeld during the Ford administration. Rumsfeld served at 43.
Outside of the core Cabinet positions, Trump chose Elise Stefanik, 40, and Tulsi Gabbard, 43, for top government roles.
Vivek Ramaswamy, 39, will also have a strong voice within the next administration as co-chair of the Department of Government Efficiency along with Elon Musk, 53.
Zoom in: Trump's chief of staff, Florida politics veteran Susie Wiles, is slightly older than most recent chiefs of staff at 67.
But Trump has filled other key White House positions with a crop of young advisers.
Stephen Miller, 39, will be deputy chief of staff for policy.
Karoline Leavitt, 27, is poised to be the youngest White House press secretary in history.
Zoom out: Age was a central theme of the 2024 campaign, with voters having deep concerns about President Biden's ability to start a four-year term at 82.
Biden's disastrous debate performance in June led to Vice President Harris, 60, replacing him at the top of the Democratic ticket.
The bottom line: Trump has broken the mold with many of his top Cabinet picks, often elevating loyalists who don't have significant relevant experience for their new roles.
Why it matters: Weather forecasters are struggling with how to communicate the dangers of extreme weather events as those events increase in frequency and ferocity with human-caused climate change.
This involves a mix of meteorology and climate science, along with social science research into how people respond to warning language and official advice.
The big picture: It's unclear if the public fully grasps the meaning of the National Weather Service's fire weather warnings or the criteria behind its terms, Stephen Bieda, chief of the service's Severe, Fire, Public and Winter Weather Services Branch, told Axios.
"There is a larger-scale conversation going on" about better aligning NWS' products with input from communications and social science professionals, he said.
Zoom in: There are some eerie similarities between the firestorm that began to engulf portions of LA County on Jan. 7 and recent hurricanes — such as Ian and Helene — that were accurately forecast but still led to a large loss of life.
In the case of Ian, some late shifts in the storm's path occurred, but it remained within the so-called "cone of uncertainty." Yet many were caught off guard when a storm surge roared across Sanibel Island and into Fort Myers Beach, killing dozens.
The fires began during a period when the National Weather Service was practically screaming about the fire threat from a rare high wind event in ALL CAPS text.
The consensus was that any fire start could grow "explosively" and be nearly impossible to contain even with the pre-staging of fire crews.
Sadly, four such fires occurred around the same time, overwhelming responders, many of whom had been prepositioned to act quickly.
Context: Red flag warnings were initially created for emergency managers and land management agencies in the 1990s, Bieda said.
Similarly, "Particularly Dangerous Situation" Red Flag warnings were implemented about five years ago — again primarily for the emergency management community to increase readiness rather than the public.
But, given the accessibility of information, those warnings are widely consumed, Bieda said.
He said their basic message is that forecasters have the highest-possible confidence that a worst-case combination of dry vegetation, or fuels, and strong winds will occur to produce a potentially devastating event.
Friction point: According to Amanda Stasiewicz, a researcher at the University of Oregon, and Stephanie Hoekstra, a wildfire social scientist at CIRA and NOAA, it's one thing to tell people to be prepared for potentially dire fire weather conditions.
But pinpointing fire ignitions ahead of time isn't currently possible — and they said that may limit forecasts' utility.
"You never know where the next fire is going to break out," Hoekstra told Axios. "Something that makes fires unique is that anywhere can be ground zero."
Both Stasiewicz and Hoekstra told Axios that so-called PDS Red Flag warnings are currently only used by some NWS forecast offices, including the LA office.
They're geared mainly to partners of the NWS such as emergency management agencies and elected officials at the state, regional and local levels.
Little research has been done on how they affect public preparation and response.
Between the lines: Social scientists who study responses to extreme weather watches and warnings — as well as evacuation orders — are limited by a lack of studies on wildfires, said Julie Demuth, who studies weather risks and decisions at the National Center for Atmospheric Research.
"A major challenge we have with answering these questions is that we often don't have the social science 'observations' we need to answer these event-specific questions," she told Axios via email.
Even evidence gleaned from other fire-prone areas is relatively sparse, Demuth and other experts told Axios.
The intrigue: The NWS proactively anticipated the fire weather threat on Jan. 7, as well as the ongoing threat Tuesday through Wednesday.
The first briefing for emergency managers on the Jan. 7 fire danger took place on New Year's Day, a Weather Service spokesperson said.
The service's LA office began briefings the next day but had first mentioned the threat in its forecast products as early as Dec. 30.
Watches and warnings were hoisted beginning four days in advance of the event, NOAA's timeline states.
What's next: Its potential shortcomings aside, the Weather Service's most dire fire weather warning, the PDS Red Flag Warning, is in effect for parts of LA and Ventura Counties through Wednesday at noon.
