Senate Judiciary Committee Democrats hammered attorney general pick Pam Bondi about her loyalty to President-elect Trump during her Wednesday confirmation hearing after she bolstered his false claims about the 2020 election being stolen.

Why it matters: If confirmed, Bondi's appointment would install a Trump loyalist in the nation's highest law enforcement role — empowering a MAGA overhaul of the DOJ, which could include investigating the president-elect's political enemies.

• "At issue I believe in this nomination hearing is not your competence nor your experience," Sen. Dick Durbin (D-Ill.), the ranking member on the panel, said during the hearing. "At issue is your ability to say no."

Driving the news: Asked by Sen. Chris Coons (D-Del.) what she would do should Trump give an illegal or unethical order, Bondi said she "will never speak on a hypothetical, especially one saying that the president would do something illegal."

• She again did not answer the hypothetical question of whether she would bring in a special prosecutor if she received credible evidence of a criminal violation by a White House official, including the president.
• "What I do know is special prosecutors have been abused in the past on both sides," she said, adding, "I will look at each situation on a case-by-case basis and consult the appropriate career ethics officials within the department."
• Coons, later in his questioning, said: "Refusing to answer a hypothetical when there is clear and concrete previous history raises some concerns for me."

Durbin pressed Bondi on if she has any doubts about the 2020 election, to which she replied, "President Biden is the President of the United States."

• She said she accepts the results of the election, but she pointed to her time as an "advocate" for the Trump campaign, saying she "saw many things" on the ground in Pennsylvania.
• "I think that question deserved a yes or no, and I think the length of your answer is an indication that you weren't prepared to answer yes," Durbin replied.
• Sen. Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.) similarly pressed Bondi on how she would handle potential White House interference at the Department of Justice. Bondi said she believes the DOJ "must be independent and must act independently."

Bondi vowed in her opening statement to "return the Department of Justice to its core mission of keeping Americans safe and vigorously prosecuting criminals."

• "America will have one tier of justice for all," she said, pledging to eradicate what she sees as "partisanship" and "weaponization" within the DOJ.
• Trump, who was convicted of falsifying business records in New York, has repeatedly sought to cast his various criminal cases as political prosecution by Democrats.
• Later during questioning, Bondi claimed prosecutors "targeted" Trump and his campaign dating back to 2016, adding that she will not "politicize" the DOJ or "target people simply because of their political affiliation."

Catch up quick: Bondi's hearing will be split across two days, picking up again Thursday at 10:15am ET.

• Bondi's hearing comes a day after Pete Hegseth's fireworks-filled appearance before the Senate Armed Services Committee, where Democrats pressed him on his qualifications to be Defense secretary and the slate of allegations against him.

Bondi, a veteran prosecutor and former Florida attorney general, was Trump's second pick for attorney general after his embattled first pick, former Rep. Matt Gaetz, withdrew his name from consideration.

• Bondi's confirmation chances appear far stronger than Gaetz's did — but that's not to say she won't face tough questioning during her hearing.
• Trump's nominees can only afford to lose a handful of votes given the GOP's narrow Senate majority.

Between the lines: Bondi is a longtime Trump ally who has been at his side on multiple occasions when he faced legal jeopardy, including as a member of his impeachment team in 2020.

Go deeper: Scoop: Schumer's plan to fire back at MAGA nominees

Editor's note: This story has been updated throughout with additional information from the hearing.

This chart helps explain why President-elect Trump won't have an easy time delivering on pledges to surge U.S. oil production — at least anytime soon.

State of play: The latest analysis from the Energy Department's independent stats arm sees just modest output growth this year and next (albeit from already record levels).

• It sees production rising less than 1% in 2026 "as operators slow activity due to price pressures."

Why it matters: Market fundamentals hold the cards on producers' decisions — and for now, they probably work against a U.S. surge.

• The Energy Information Administration sees global supply outstripping demand growth over the next two years.
• And it sees falling prices, with the U.S. benchmark WTI averaging $70 per barrel this year but falling to $62 in 2026.

Yes, but: These look-aheads change all the time. There's a reason major forecasting bodies do them monthly.

• Trump's vow to ease regulations could make more barrels economic to produce, though prices and investor goals are typically bigger drivers.

And the global picture is fluid. Think variables like the effect of new sanctions on Russian shipments; Trump's plan to tighten enforcement of Iranian sanctions; and whether OPEC+ adds barrels.

• The International Energy Agency this morning said expanded U.S. sanctions against Russia unveiled this month could "significantly disrupt" the country's supply.
• But for now, IEA is keeping its Russian supply forecast unchanged.

The big picture: It may take years to assess Trump's effect.

• One big thing to watch: efforts to expand oil and gas leasing in the Gulf of Mexico and frontier areas in Alaska.
• Those kinds of projects have decade-long timelines.

Stunning stat: Obviously the Permian Basin of Texas and New Mexico is the heart of American oil, but this is still wild: its share of total U.S. production should top 50% in 2026.

• "The expected production growth in the Permian in 2026 will be offset by contraction in other regions," EIA finds.
• It sees the Permian producing nearly 7 million barrels per day by the end of 2026. It was under 1 million 15 years ago.

What's next: Look for executive orders on Trump's first day that launch time-consuming bureaucratic work to loosen restrictions.

Inflation showed cooling signs at the end of 2024: The Consumer Price Index ticked up by 0.4% in December, but a measure that excludes food and energy prices slowed for the first time in four months, the Labor Department said on Wednesday.

Why it matters: Core inflation resumed a cooling trend, offering some optimism for policymakers ahead of an uncertain year.

• Officials at the Federal Reserve have projected fewer interest rate cuts in 2025 than previously estimated on the back of stickier inflation.

By the numbers: The Consumer Price Index rose at a slightly quicker pace than the 0.3% increase in the prior month, as energy prices surged by 2.6% in December alone. Gasoline prices shot up 4.4%.

• Over the year ending in December, CPI rose 2.9% — up from 2.7% in November.

Yes, but: Core CPI, a closely watched underlying measure of inflation that strips out food and energy costs, rose 0.2% in December. That breaks the four-month-long streak of 0.3% increases.

• Core CPI increased 3.2% in the 12 months through December, compared to the 3.3% in November.

The bottom line: Inflation has plunged from the sky-high levels seen in 2022. But the path to getting inflation to 2% — the level preferred by the Fed — has looked more arduous than previously thought.

• The data released on Wednesday offers a bit of hope after a months-long stall, though economists warn Trump's trade and immigration policies might further delay progress.

Editor's note: This story was updated with a new chart.

A deal has been reached in the negotiations between Israel and Hamas to release hostages being held in Gaza and establish a ceasefire, one U.S. official and one Israeli official tell Axios.

Why it matters: About 98 hostages are still being held in Gaza, among them seven Americans. Roughly half of the hostages, including three Americans, are believed to be still alive, according to Israeli intelligence.

• More than 46,500 Palestinians have been killed by Israeli forces since the Oct. 7, 2023 Hamas attack on Israel, according to the Ministry of Health in Gaza.

The latest: "There is a breakthrough in the hostage deal negotiations in Doha. Hamas' military leader in Gaza Mohammed Sinwar gave his OK," one Israeli official said.

• A second Israeli official said there is optimism that a deal could be announced by Thursday at the latest.
• The Israeli prime minister's office said in a statement that Hamas hasn't given it's approval for the deal.
• Hamas still hasn't issued an official statement, but a Palestinian source quoted by Al-Araby al-Jadeed website said the group and other factions in Gaza have a unified position and have given a positive response to the draft ceasefire agreement.

The big picture: The indirect negotiations between Israel and Hamas reached a critical point over the weekend, one week before President-elect Trump will be sworn into office.

• Trump has threatened there would be "hell to pay in the Middle East" if Hamas didn't release the hostages by the time he is inaugurated.

Israeli officials, Hamas officials and mediators from Qatar, Egypt and the U.S. have been working around the clock for several days in Doha to hammer out a deal.

• President Biden's top Middle East adviser Brett McGurk and Trump's envoy Steve Witkoff have both been in Doha since last week and have been working together to push for a deal.
• Earlier this week the mediators gave Hamas a final draft agreement.
• Hamas representatives in Doha gave their okay a few days ago but the parties waited for a response from Hamas' military leader in Gaza Mohammed Sinwar, which arrived on Wednesday afternoon local time.

Zoom in: According to the expected agreement, 33 hostages would be released in the first phase of the deal, including women, children, men over the age of 50 and men under the age of 50 who are wounded and sick.

• Hamas has not yet provided information on the condition of those 33 hostages, a senior Israeli official told reporters on Monday. Israel's assessment is that most are alive.
• The hostages would be released gradually throughout the first phase of the agreement, which would last 42 days. At the same time, there would be a ceasefire in Gaza.

During the first phase, Israeli Defense Forces would also gradually withdraw to a buffer zone in Gaza near the border with Israel, the official said. The IDF would leave the Netzarim corridor in the center of the Gaza Strip and the Philadelphi corridor on the border between Gaza and Egypt — two areas that have been a sticking point in past negotiations.

• But Israel won't completely withdraw from Gaza until all of the hostages are returned, the Israeli official said.

Palestinians would also be allowed to return to northern Gaza during the first phase of the deal. The Israeli official said there would be "security arrangements" to ensure no militants or weapons are moved to the northern part of the Strip.

• Hundreds of Palestinian prisoners would also be released, including those who murdered Israelis. The exact number of prisoners to be released will be determined only after Hamas clarifies which of the hostages to be released are alive, the official said.
• The Israeli official said Palestinian prisoners who murdered Israelis would not be released to the West Bank, but declined to say where they would be released to. Hamas members who participated in the Oct. 7 attack would not be released in the first phase.

Editor's note: This is a developing story. Check back for updates.

John Ratcliffe — who is Trump's pick for CIA, and was director of national intelligence for the final months of Trump's first term — will rail against the politicization of the intelligence community during his Senate Intelligence Committee hearing today, a transition source tells Axios.

• He'll vow to eliminate political biases and "wokeness" in the agency's workforce policies, and instead focus on "the mission."

Driving the news: Ratcliffe will portray tech as both a target (Where's China on hypersonics, quantum and AI?) and as a tool (How are analysts utilizing large language models and AI? How are spies beating ubiquitous technical surveillance?).

• Ratcliffe thinks the agency — with a complex matrix of tech-focused directorates, mission centers and positions — has struggled to keep pace with the rapid technological advancements in the private sector.
• He plans to accelerate efforts to coordinate with U.S. private-sector firms at the bleeding edge of technological advancement.

Ratcliffe will focus on China, as reported in a Wall Street Journal banger, "Trump's CIA Pick Expected to Push for Bare-Knuckle Spycraft Against China."

The world's CEOs are much more worried about global trade wars now that Donald Trump has been elected president than they were a year ago, according to a new survey from the Conference Board.

Why it matters: While no one knows exactly what tariffs the upcoming Trump administration is going to impose on which countries, the one certainty is that substantially all such tariffs will be met with retaliatory counter-tariffs. Or more simply: a trade war.

• As Axios noted on Monday, rapidly introduced tariffs could trigger speedy retaliation from major allies, including a broad-based 25% Canadian tariff on all U.S. imports.
• Such actions would make the 2018 trade war look minuscule.

Zoom out: The 2025 list of the top geopolitical worries also includes "foreign investment restrictions" and "greater risk of conflict in Asia-Pacific," both of which have risen sharply from their position last year.

The other side: Geopolitical worries don't seem to have dampened broader economic optimism.

• While 55% of U.S. CEOs said the risk of an economic downturn or recession was going to be a high-impact issue in 2024, that number has fallen to less than 40% in 2025.
• Similarly, the proportion of U.S. CEOs worried about high borrowing costs fell from 28% in 2024 to 16% in 2025.

Between the lines: As CEOs get more optimistic on the economy, a new Deloitte survey of North American CFOs shows a huge uptick in their risk appetite, too, since the election.

• 67% of CFOs say "now is a good time to take risks" — a six-year high.
• That figure is up from just 12% in the third quarter.

The bottom line: Global CEOs seem to have taken Baron Rothschild's admonition to heart: "The time to buy is when there's blood in the streets, even if the blood is your own."

President-elect Trump is being inundated with so much money from corporations and wealthy donors that his team expects to raise about $500 million by summer — even though he can't run again, sources in his operation tell Axios.

Why it matters: By stockpiling so much cash, Trump is signaling he doesn't want to be seen as a lame duck in his second term, and is ready to help political allies, punish opponents and help Republicans keep full control of Congress in 2026.

• "The money is just pouring in at Mar-a-Lago. Trump doesn't have to lift a finger. Everyone's coming to him," said a Trump adviser who was among five insiders to speak with Axios anonymously to describe the inner workings of Trump's operation.
• "We're looking at half a billion [dollars] by June, and we're on track," this adviser said. "It's sort of a target but it's just a realistic projection of what's happening."

Zoom in: Trump's donors are giving to a variety of accounts.

• They include the president-elect's inauguration account, the MAGA Inc. super PAC, a political nonprofit called Securing American Greatness, the Republican National Committee and Trump's presidential library fund.
• The donors run the gamut: from health care to agriculture, insurance, financial institutions, tech and cryptocurrency investors.
• "The crypto guys are just blowing it out," the Trump adviser said. "It used to be $1 million was a big number. Now we're looking at some folks giving like $10 [million] or $20 million."
• "If the tech guys are giving big, it makes everyone give," another Trump adviser added.

Catch up quick: The bumper crop of donors is a marked difference from this time four years ago, after the Jan. 6, 2021, riot at the Capitol by Trump supporters.

• Many major GOP donors and corporate interests vowed to either pause or stop donations to Trump or congressional Republicans because of the plot to try to overturn the 2020 presidential election.

Some of the donors resumed contributions later, but Trump has kept a grievance list of those who haven't, and he's reminding them he won in 2024 without their help.

• Insiders say Trump's even pulling out corporate balance sheets and referring to the companies' bottom lines as their executives — some carrying donations — come to meet him.

"You guys made this amount of money last year and you're gonna make so much more now because of me," Trump told the representatives of one company, according to a confidant who heard the story from the president-elect.

• "But when I needed you, where the f**k were you? You weren't with me and maybe you were with her," referring to Vice President Harris, whom Trump defeated in November.
• One company's consultant told Axios that he saw Trump in a meeting with a client and soon-to-be-donor "raking them over the coals" and asking them, "Where were you the last four years?"

Between the lines: Trump is transactional but not for sale, these sources say. In these meetings, they say, Trump has made it clear that this is a one-way street: They donate money to support his agenda, but he's not taking their money to support their agenda.

• "A lot of these guys are going down [to Mar-a-Lago] taking victory laps because he's taking their money and they're in for a rude awakening," the company consultant said. "Sure, he'll throw an inaugural party with their money but he owes them nothing."
• "He'll take your money and then tell you, 'I don't give a f**k what you want.' He did that during the campaign," said another Trump adviser. "He's going to do what he wants, what the base wants."

Even so, donors seem to be giving on the assumption that there's something in it for them.

• The reasons appear to vary: ideological alignment with Trump; getting favorable legislation in the upcoming "reconciliation" bill that Trump and the GOP-led Congress are putting together, or avoiding public criticism from Trump that can drive down a company's value.
• The new Elon Musk-led Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) has been cited by some as a new factor. It's now a verb in the political lexicon, meaning something that's on the chopping block.
• "We don't want to get DOGE'd," one lobbyist told Axios.

There also are competitors to consider: Some industries and companies are fighting each other, so they feel pressure to contribute if their rivals have.

• "The pharma guys came down and met with Trump and blamed a lot of problems on drug prices on the PBM guys," one Trump adviser said, referring to pharmacy benefit managers.
• "So now, the PBM guys are coming in to meet with Trump."

Democratic women senators grilled Pete Hegseth, President-elect Trump's pick for Defense secretary, during his Tuesday confirmation hearing over his stances on women in the military.

Why it matters: Hegseth, an Army combat veteran, previously said he doesn't believe women should serve in combat roles — and had to answer to women sharply questioning him on that and his subsequent change in stance.

What they're saying: "You will have to change how you see women to do this job well, and I don't know if you are capable of that," Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand (D-N.Y.) said.

Catch up quick: Hegseth said in a podcast hosted by Shawn Ryan on Nov. 7: "We need moms, but not in the military, especially in combat roles."

• He said in the same interview having women in combat roles "hasn't made us more effective."

Zoom in: Gillibrand referenced the statements during Hegseth's confirmation hearing.

• "Please explain these types of statements because they're brutal, and they're mean, and they disrespect men and women who are willing to die for this country," she said.
• Hegseth responded:  "I would point out I've never disparaged women serving in the military. I respect every single female service member that has put on the uniform past and present."
• He answered to Sen. Joni Ernst (R-Iowa) that he supports women serving in combat roles and said his critiques stemmed from specific instances of seeing lowered standards.

Sens. Jeanne Shaheen (D-N.H.) and Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) descibed Hegseth's responses as inconsistent.

• "On the one hand, you say that women are not competent, they make our military less effective," Shaheen said. "And on the other hand, you say 'oh no, now that I've been nominated to be the secretary of defense, I've changed my view on women in the military.'"
• Sen. Tammy Duckworth (D-Ill.), who lost both legs and partial use of her right arm while deployed to Iraq, said: "This hearing now seems to be a hearing about whether or not women are qualified to serve in combat, and not about whether or not you are qualified to be secretary of defense."

Zoom out: Sen. Mazie Hirono (D-Hawaii) also questioned Hegseth on sexual assault allegations against him.

• A woman told police Hegseth sexually assaulted her in 2017 after allegedly taking her phone, blocking the door to a hotel room and refusing to let her leave.
• His attorney has said a payment was made to the women as part of a confidential settlement.
• Hegseth has denied the sexual assault allegations.

Go deeper: Five questions Hegseth dodged at his Defense Department confirmation hearing

Some of the most destructive wildfires in California's history have killed at least 25 people in Los Angeles County, caused hundreds of thousands to evacuate and choked air quality across the region for the past week.

The big picture: The fires erupted in extremely dry conditions last Tuesday as powerful Santa Ana winds struck. As some assess damage in what's set to be among the most costly wildfire disasters ever in the U.S., parts of L.A. and Ventura counties face a "Particularly Dangerous Situation" Red Flag Warning into Wednesday.

Timeline: Wildfires threaten Southern California

Jan. 7

Jan. 8

Jan 9.

Jan. 10

Jan. 11

Jan. 12

Jan. 13

Jan. 14

Pete Hegseth, President-elect Trump's pick for Defense secretary, on Tuesday called the problem of extremism in the military "fake," but researchers warn there's a growing trend of military-linked terrorism.

The big picture: The rising number of people with military backgrounds engaging in domestic terrorism over the past three decades can partially be attributed to the difficulty transitioning from active duty to veteran status and a lack of community or purpose, experts say.

Driving the news: In the most recent high-profile cases, the New Year's Day attacks in New Orleans and Las Vegas were both carried out by Army veterans.

Zoom in: The FBI said Tuesday the suspect in the deadly New Orleans vehicle attack, Shamsud-Din Jabbar had been isolating himself from society and began following extremist views last year.

• Investigators believe the 42-year-old U.S. Army veteran was "radicalized online" and he "appears to have been inspired — from afar — by ISIS," retiring FBI Director Christopher Wray told CBS' "60 Minutes" in an interview broadcast Sunday.
• The Vegas suspect, Matthew Alan Livelsberger, 37, from Colorado Springs, was an active-duty U.S. Army soldier on approved leave when he died inside a Tesla Cybertruck that exploded outside the Trump International Hotel in the city, officials said.
• However, Hegseth said during his Senate confirmation hearing Tuesday that the Pentagon overreacted in attempting to combat extremism and characterized it as "peddling the lie of racism in the military."
• He added that efforts to weed out extremism pushed "rank-and-file patriots out of their formations."

By the numbers: A December report from the National Consortium for the Study of Terrorism and Responses to Terrorism found that from 1990 to 2023, 730 individuals with U.S. military backgrounds had committed criminal acts that were motivated by their political, economic, social or religious goals.

• There has been an incline in the past decade or so: From 1990-2010, an average of 7.1 people per year with U.S. military backgrounds committed extremist crimes. Since 2011, that number has grown to 44.6 per year.
• Some 84% were no longer serving in the military when they committed extremist crimes, per the report.

Zoom out: The National Institute of Justice said in analysis last year that people who encounter difficulties leaving the military may be attracted to the pull of domestic extremist groups.

• This is possibly because they can be introduced to additional combinations of risk factors for radicalization, according to Jeffrey Gruenewald, professor and director of the Terrorism Research Center at the University of Arkansas. These include a lack of purpose, social alienation or struggles with mental health.
• "Knowing this, terrorist groups may target individuals with military experience, as the ideologies underlying violent extremism have something to offer them, including a clear enemy to direct their anger, a sense of belonging and meaning, and a purpose bigger than themselves," he said.

Meanwhile, extremist groups are increasing recruiting online and specifically targeting veterans, Heidi Beirich, chief strategy officer and co-founder of Global Project Against Hate and Extremism, told PBS.

• The military has "not done a good job of rooting out extremism in its ranks in recent years," she added.

Yes, but: There isn't a single factor or profile that's predictive of radicalization to violence, Gruenewald told Axios.

• "Nonetheless, it is feasible that military experience for some can increase or exacerbate risk factors associated with radicalization to violence," he said.
• Being in the military may increase a person's chances of experiencing a significant personal loss, trauma, or feelings of social isolation and alienation, Gruenewald said.
• It could also exacerbate struggles with identity, mental health and grievances, he added.

Situation report: The Defense Department said in a 2021 report that it "has long prohibited Service members from actively engaging in extremist activities" but after a number of threat attacks, it built a program to "detect, deter, and mitigate such threats."

• This included efforts to combat extremist groups from recruiting military personnel and veterans.
• Defense Department spokesperson Sue Gough said even a single incident in which those in the military commit prohibited extremist activities "can have an outsized impact on the Department and its mission."
• She added in her email: "There is no place for prohibited extremist activities in the Department of Defense. Every attempt is made to ensure such behavior is promptly and appropriately addressed and reported to the authorities."

The bottom line: People with U.S. military backgrounds represent only 14.7% of the broader set of extremists who have committed criminal offenses in the United States since 1990, the National Consortium for the Study of Terrorism and Responses to Terrorism report found.

• "The problem is that somebody who has military training who gets radicalized can be far more deadly," Beirich said.
• "Mass attacks that are perpetrated by active-duty military or veterans are more lethal than those that aren't."

Go deeper: New Orleans attack mirrors global pattern of using vehicles as terror weapons

Flags at the U.S. Capitol will fly at full-staff during President-elect Trump's inauguration despite President Biden's directive that they remain at half-staff through January to honor former President Carter's death.

Why it matters: House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) and some Republican governors are promising to fly flags at full-staff Monday after Trump repeatedly complained about them being lowered for his swearing in.

Driving the news: Johnson announced Tuesday that flags at the Capitol will fly at full-staff for the inauguration and then return to half-staff the next day in honor of Carter.

Zoom out: An increasing number of Republican governors have ordered that flags at state buildings be flown at full-staff on Inauguration Day.

• These include Alabama Gov. Kay Ivey, Texas Gov. Greg Abbott, Nebraska Gov. Jim Pillen, North Dakota Gov. Kelly Armstrong, Tennessee Gov. Bill Lee, Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis and Iowa Gov. Kim Reynolds.
• Some cited a federal statute that calls for the flag to be displayed 24 hours a day on certain occasions for "patriotic effect," instead of from sunrise to sunset.
• "While we honor the service of a former President, we must also celebrate the service of an incoming President and the bright future ahead for the United States of America," Abbott's announcement said.

Between the lines: Flags at Trump's Mar-a-Lago club returned to full-staff days after Carter was buried in Plains, Georgia, AP reported.

• Trump took to Truth Social in early January to complain: "The Democrats are all 'giddy' about our magnificent American flag potentially being at 'half mast' during my inauguration," he wrote, incorrectly using the term to refer to a flag on a ship.
• "Nobody wants to see this, and no American can be happy about it," he added. "Let's see how it plays out."

Go deeper:

• Trump inauguration 2017 vs. 2025: What's changed
• Gov. Cox faces flag choice for Trump's inauguration during Carter mourning period

Editor's note: This story was updated with additional states that have said their flags will be full-staff on Inauguration Day.

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.

• 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.

In photos: How Yoon's arrest unfolded

Go deeper: South Korean president hit with travel ban after martial law mayhem

Editor's note: This article has been updated with more photos and details from the arrest.

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 18% 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."

Between the lines: Research suggests a climate-change related weather "whiplash" that saw two wet winters and an extremely, unusually hot spring, summer and fall helped contribute to the weeklong fires in L.A. county.

• "The evidence shows that hydroclimate whiplash has already increased due to global warming, and further warming will bring about even larger increases," per a statement from UCLA climate scientist Daniel Swain, lead author of a study published during critical fire weather in the L.A. area on Jan. 9.
• "This whiplash sequence in California has increased fire risk twofold: first, by greatly increasing the growth of flammable grass and brush in the months leading up to fire season, and then by drying it out to exceptionally high levels with the extreme dryness and warmth that followed."

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."
• The region may face more critical fire conditions next week, the NWS' Climate Prediction Center warned on Tuesday.

More from Axios:

• In photos: L.A. County endures a week of fires
• LA's wildfires sparked by rare collision of climate factors
• The psychological toll of California's catastrophic fires
• Weather Service struggles to convey fire warnings to public

Editor's note: This a breaking news story. Please check back for updates.

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.

Go deeper: Village People, Kid Rock to play at Trump inaugural rally

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 eventually plans to roll the feature to everyone with a ChatGPT account.
• 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.

Go deeper:

• Five questions Hegseth dodged
• Hegseth claims "smear campaign"
• Hegseth says he was blocked from working Biden inauguration over tattoo

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.).

• But the super PAC also spent some $400,000 on behalf of RFK. Some of that money was spent after RFK dropped out of the race and endorsed Trump.
• 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.

Go deeper: Elon Musk fight with SEC reaches tipping point

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's allegations 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: Hegseth applauded 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."

Go deeper: Scoop: Hegseth opening statement pledges Pentagon "warrior ethos"

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.

• Trump sided with the pro-skilled immigration crowd last month.
• 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."