President Joe Biden’s son Hunter was indicted on gun charges on Thursday bringing to the forefront frequent calls and moves from the president in recent years aimed at cracking down on illegal gun sales. 

Hunter Biden was charged in Delaware on Thursday with making a false statement in the purchase of a firearm, making a false statement related to information required to be kept by a federal firearms licensed dealer, and one count of possession of a firearm by a person who is an unlawful user of or addicted to a controlled substance. 

During his presidency, the Biden White House has repeatedly called for crackdowns on illegal gun purchases and signed executive orders aimed at preventing the sale of illegal guns.

‘The secondary consequences of the pandemic and the proliferation of illegal guns have led to increased violence over the past year and a half,’ a senior administration official said in 2021 as Biden was rolling out measures aimed at stemming the flow of firearms used in crimes, after pledging to push for sweeping changes to firearms laws.

Additionally, the Biden administration has cracked down on gun dealers by stripping licenses away from dealers who have made paperwork mistakes on background checks.

‘My message to you is this,’ Biden said in 2021, addressing gun dealers who ‘willfully’ break the law. ‘We will find you and we’ll seek your license to sell guns. We’ll make sure you can’t sell death and mayhem on our streets.’

In 2021, Biden’s Justice Department launched an anti-gun trafficking initiative meant to stem the flow of illegal guns throughout the United States.

‘I have already taken more executive action to reduce gun violence than any other president, and I will continue to pursue every legal and effective action,’ Biden wrote in an op-ed this spring. ‘But my power is not absolute. Congress must act, including by banning assault weapons and high-capacity magazines, requiring gun owners to securely store their firearms, requiring background checks for all gun sales, and repealing gun manufacturers’ immunity from liability. We also need more governors and state legislators to take these steps.’

In July, White House Press Secretary Karine Jean-Pierre was pressed by a reporter about President Biden’s steadfast support for stricter gun laws throughout his political career, and asked if he believed ‘someone who is charged with possessing a firearm illegally should be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law,’ referencing Hunter.

The reporter pressed Jean-Pierre, noting Biden’s previous work on gun legislation and his comments on getting ‘illegal firearms off of our streets.’ ‘So when someone possesses one illegally, what does the president believe should happen today?’ the reporter asked.

‘The president has been very clear. You just laid out where his position has been, what his policies have been, what he was able to pass into law. I’m going to be very mindful here. I’m going to be very careful because I see where this question is going,’ Jean-Pierre responded.

The White House did not immediately respond to a request for comment from Fox News Digital. 

Hunter Biden could potentially be sentenced to up to 25 years in prison if convicted on all charges.

Reuters and Fox News Digital’s Brandon Gillespie contributed to this report

FIRST ON FOX: A group of Senate and House Republicans introduced companion bills that would force the federal government to factor potential adverse effects into energy policy decisions.

The Energy Poverty Prevention and Accountability Act — introduced by Sen. Dan Sullivan, R-Alaska, and Rep. Harriet Hageman, R-Wyo. — is intended to prevent energy poverty and ‘ensure that at-risk communities have access to affordable energy,’ according to the bill’s text. Under the legislation, federal agencies would be required to assess impacts energy-related policies have on a wide variety of Americans.

‘The people most negatively impacted by the Biden administration’s war on American energy have been those in our rural, elderly, and lower-income communities,’ Sullivan told Fox News Digital in a statement. 

‘Under the guise of ‘environmental justice,’ the Biden administration’s hypocritical and short-sighted policies have increased costs on hard-working Americans and disproportionately harmed the very people, particularly Alaska Native communities, this administration so often claims to champion,’ he continued.

Sullivan noted recent actions from the Department of the Interior (DOI) axing oil and gas leases across 365,775 acres and proposing to ban future energy development on 13 million acres of land across the National Petroleum Reserve, an area in North Slope Borough, Alaska. The actions, Sullivan said, was starkly opposed by at-risk and indigenous communities in the region.

Critics argued the DOI’s decision to lock up millions of acres of land from energy development would threaten domestic energy security and was part of a broader climate agenda that will lead to higher prices in the future.

‘I’ve introduced the ‘Energy Poverty Prevention and Accountability Act,’ which requires federal agencies to be transparent about how their regulations drive up energy costs for at-risk communities,’ Sullivan said. 

‘Alaskans are faced with some of the highest energy costs in the nation,’ he told Fox News Digital. ‘This legislation will put a spotlight on how this administration’s reckless energy agenda harms our communities and will give them a voice to fight back.’

The legislation, which is designed to be a market-oriented solution, firstly requires the U.S. Comptroller General and Office of Management and Budget to issue a joint report to Congress at-risk communities experiencing energy poverty and offer recommendations for reducing such poverty. At-risk communities include, low-income, minority, rural, elderly and Native communities. 

The bill would also mandate the Congressional Budget Office, as part of its review process, to assess how any given legislation impacts an at-risk community’s access to affordable energy.

It would further direct the DOI to study on how any proposed executive action may alleviate energy poverty in at-risk communities. And the bill additionally requires all agencies issuing any energy-related rulemaking to certify the action won’t create energy poverty in at-risk communities.

‘Supply versus demand is the most basic economic concept,’ Hageman said in a statement to Fox News Digital. ‘Yet, Congressional majorities and presidential administrations led by climate crazed politicians, rather than statesmen, have artificially destroyed supply while demand for energy resources continues to grow.’

‘Whether it was President Biden or Obama, Speaker Pelosi or Leader Schumer, these so-called leaders have waged war against American coal and oil and gas, all the while knowing they cannot replace the very energy resources they are undermining,’ she continued. ‘These same officials roll out strategies promoting ‘environmental justice’ and ‘economic equity’ (while never defining either).’

The Energy Poverty Prevention and Accountability Act received endorsements from several energy industry groups including the U.S. Oil and Gas Association, Energy Workforce & Technology Council, Energy Poverty Prevention Project and Domestic Energy Producers Alliance.

‘Skyrocketing energy costs are crushing the livelihoods of vulnerable populations such as low-income, minority, rural, elderly, and indigenous communities,’ said Derrick Hollie, of the Energy Poverty Prevention Project. 

‘The Energy Poverty Prevention and Accountability Act is the right step toward curbing the out-of-control costs of regulation and government overreach driving the epidemic of energy poverty in this country.’

Sen. Mike Lee, R-Utah, and Reps. Dan Newhouse, R-Wash., Brandon Williams, R-N.Y., Lauren Boebert, R-Colo., Paul Gosar, R-Ariz., Tom Cole, R-Okla., Pete Stauber, R-Minn., and Garret Graves, R-La., were listed as cosponsors on the legislation.

Calls are growing for Democrats to find an alternative to President Biden before the next election. With the first primary contests a few months away, is it too late for them to find a viable replacement?

The short answer is no, but time is running out.

Biden would either need to face a serious primary challenge now or decide to step down later. Either method would make history in the modern era.

Pathway 1: The Democratic primary

Democrats already have a process in place to find a new candidate for the general election. That is the presidential primary. Democrat voters will head to the polls from January to June next year and select a presidential nominee.

Biden already faces competition from Robert F. Kennedy Jr. and Marianne Williamson for that nomination, but polling shows that Democrat voters are not enthusiastic about them.

Instead, a well-known candidate with broad appeal to the Democrat base would need to step up.

The most likely candidate is California Gov. Gavin Newsom, who has toured red states, called for a national referendum on guns, and challenged presidential candidate and Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis to a debate on Fox News.

Biden’s inner circle increasingly sees Newsom as a nuisance, according to reports, though advisers say publicly that they view him as a top surrogate.

Rumors are also swirling around the popular governor of Michigan, Gretchen Whitmer. And Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg, who ran for president in 2020 on the need for generational change, has maintained a high profile while serving in the Biden cabinet.

If any of these candidates want to mount a challenge, they have a few weeks left to join the race without compromising their ability to win.

Under the normal rules, many states require candidates to file a declaration by a certain date to appear on their primary ballot. Nevada has the earliest deadline on Oct. 15 – one month from today.

Fourteen more states have filing deadlines before the end of the year.

Each state awards nominating delegates to candidates, so the longer they wait to enter the race, the fewer total possible delegates they can receive.

And Nevada is one of the earliest states on the primary calendar, so it plays an outsized role in setting the direction of the race.

Filling out a declaration takes minutes, but launching a viable presidential campaign takes much more than that. Candidates must court donors, hire staff and develop policies, messaging and a strategy to win.

While that process plays out behind the scenes, media reporting about a new candidate often predates their announcement by weeks or even months. So far, there is no reporting to suggest that any notable candidate is preparing a bid.

In the modern era, an incumbent president has never lost his party’s nomination when running for a second term.

Pathway 2: The Democratic National Convention

Biden’s fate also rests in his own hands. 

While he will appear on the primary ballot and is by far the most likely candidate to win the nomination, he can decide to step down from the race at any point.

The ideal time to complete that process would be during the Democratic National Convention in August. Delegates are awarded to candidates during primaries throughout the first half of the year, but they won’t elect a candidate for president until they vote during that convention.

If Biden wins a majority of delegates but wants to step down, he could use a speech prior to the convention or even during the week to endorse another candidate.

Under Democratic Party rules, pledged delegates are not required to vote for the candidate they represent but are told to ‘reflect the sentiments of those who elected them,’ so an endorsement from Biden would be very influential.

If there are multiple candidates, but a majority voted in line with Biden’s wishes, that candidate would become the Democrats’ presidential nominee. This would be a variation on what is usually called a contested convention.

If Biden fails to convince a majority in this hypothetical, and no candidate wins the first ballot at the convention, a brokered convention would take place. Delegates are released from their pledges, so leading figures in the nominating process, like party leaders and congresspeople, would try to persuade delegates to support their preferred candidate instead.

Rounds of voting would take place until one candidate reaches a majority.

Even the cleanest version of this process is messy. Biden would have to decide between endorsing his own vice president, who is officially next in line for his job but unpopular with voters, or a less known and untested alternative.

Meanwhile, a brokered convention would mean chaos. The Democrats would look disunited and directionless during their week in the spotlight, and with less than three months until the general election.

Contested and brokered conventions are rare in the modern era. The last convention that approached ‘contested’ status was the 1980 Democratic race, when Senator Ted Kennedy tried to take the nomination from President Jimmy Carter. Republicans also came close in 1976; that contest was between then Governor Ronald Reagan and President Gerald Ford. Both parties had brokered conventions in 1952. 

This all makes a second Biden run the most likely outcome in 2024. If a candidate wants to change that, they would need to act now and accept that they are taking on an unprecedented challenge.

Democrats from across the political spectrum are expressing hesitancy toward accepting that President Biden and Vice President Kamala Harris represent the best chance for a Democratic presidential ticket to win in 2024.

This week, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi refused to say she believes Harris is Biden’s best running mate in 2024. 

‘He [Biden] thinks so,’ Pelosi said. ‘And that’s what matters.’ 

Pelosi added her name to a growing list of politicians and pundits on the left who have publicly expressed concerns over Biden’s age, his many gaffes, and Harris’ cratered favorability rating.

‘I don’t think Biden and Vice President Harris should run for re-election,’ Washington Post columnist David Ignatius, a favorite scribe of the liberal establishment, wrote on Tuesday, pointing to the fact that Biden would be 82 at the start of a second term. 

‘It’s painful to say that, given my admiration for much of what they have accomplished. But if he and Harris campaign together in 2024, I think Biden risks undoing his greatest achievement — which was stopping [former President] Trump.’ 

Rep. Dean Phillips, a Democrat from Minnesota, told NBC News recently that he believes ‘there are other candidates who have a far better chance and don’t have the actuarial risk that the president has.’

‘Why does everyone have blinders on? Why are we essentially being led to this cliff without knowing what’s on the other side?’ Phillps said. 

Former Democratic National Committee Chair Donna Brazile addressed the issue of Biden’s age over the weekend and acknowledged that Democrats should be ‘concerned’ and should be running like they are ’10 points behind’ in order to boost enthusiasm.

‘I’m not sleeping at night thinking all is well, OK?’ Brazile told ABC’s ‘This Week.’ ‘I have nieces and nephews who say, ‘Well why should I vote for this guy? He’s a little old.’ I say, ‘Your papa was old too, and look what he did to help you.’ So I think the Democrats have to continue to make the case. Democrats should be concerned.’ 

According to MSNBC’s Joe Scarborough, ‘every’ Democrat he has spoken to concedes that Biden is too old to run again. 

‘[Co-host] Mika [Brzezinski] and I, everybody we talk to, every political discussion, all it talks a lot about Trump, but when it comes to Joe Biden, people say, ‘Man, he’s too old to run, isn’t he?’’ Scarborough said on Wednesday.

‘When I say every discussion, I don’t mean 99% of the discussion — every discussion,’ Scarborough added. ‘I asked Reverend Al [Sharpton] if he was hearing it all the time on our show this past week. He’s hearing it as well.’

The White House did not respond to a request for comment from Fox News Digital but has repeatedly defended Biden’s age and mental acuity when asked by reporters.

‘Look, here’s what I know,’ White House press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre told Fox News’ Peter Doocy last week in response to a question about polling showing voter concerns over Biden’s age. ‘Here’s what I can speak to. I can speak to that – a president who has wisdom. I can speak to a president who has experience. I can speak to a president who has done historic – has taken historic action and has delivered in historic pieces of legislation. And that’s important.’

In an Associated Press poll this summer, 77% said Biden is too old to be effective for four more years with 89% of Republicans taking that position along with 69% of Democrats.

FIRST ON FOX: President Biden’s multibillion-dollar broadband internet investment meant for rural areas is primarily favoring affluent blue cities and states — even encompassing areas with million-dollar residences and beachfront properties — according to a new report from Sen. Ted Cruz, R.-Tx.

The report, exclusively obtained by Fox News Digital, found that the earmarked $42.45 billion in Broadband Equity, Access, and Deployment (BEAD) funding was allocated ‘despite repeated requests from lawmakers and communities across the country’ to scrutinize how the Biden administration’s telecommunications branch collects data to determine its funding decisions.

Biden, the leading 2024 Democratic candidate, implemented the program in June as part of his ‘Bidenomics’ campaign to promote his economic policies for the 2024 election.

Every state, along with Washington, D.C., and Puerto Rico, received a base amount of $100 million, while the remaining territories were granted at least $25 million each. Texas and California, the two most densely populated states in the country, lead the funding rankings with $3.3 billion and $1.9 billion, respectively.

KAMALA HARRIS SLIP-UP REVEALS HOW BIDENOMICS HURTING AMERICAN FAMILIES

However, the distribution has gone to states with fewer locations lacking service, and the allocation raises eyebrows when considering some peculiar instances of how the funds were distributed.

In Washington D.C., out of the 184 locations lacking broadband internet, 58 of them are clustered within the Smithsonian National Zoo, which includes popular spots like the Butterfly Garden, Lion-Tiger Hill, and the Otter Pond, the report found.

Another instance of odd distribution was in Delaware, when the state received nearly $108 million from the Biden administration in June to address 2,166 unserved locations in the state.

Among those unserved locations is the Biden Environmental Training Center, a state-operated facility for conferences, training, and retreats located just 11 miles north of Rehoboth Beach.

Washington, D.C., and Delaware, both characterized by small size and high population density, were allotted over $547,000 and $52,000 respectively for each location without broadband access. The national median allocation for areas without connectivity averages $5,600 per location.

‘Providing Washington, D.C., which appears to have almost no unserved locations, with such a disproportionately large amount of funding diverts BEAD funds from truly unserved areas of the country,’ said Cruz, ranking chair of the Senate commerce committee.

And the program did not consider whether locations would soon be served through funding from other federal programs already in motion, resulting in more than five million locations set to receive redundant funding.

‘As a result, the billions in taxpayer dollars sent to these states will be diverted to purposes other than connecting unserved Americans,’ Cruz wrote.

The federal government also favors fiber broadband, also known as fiber-optic broadband, an internet connection that uses fiber-optic cables made of thin strands of glass or plastic to transmit data using pulses of light. It is not an inexpensive feat.

‘This bias will drive up costs and waste taxpayer dollars, especially if the Biden administration’s implementation of other programs serves as precedent,’ Cruz wrote.

Officials may also need to take into account that different regions may require alternative internet technologies.

The report used Tuckernuck Island in Massachusetts as an example, where properties are listed at over $1 million. The island does not have wired internet, but it does have fast satellite internet. According to the FCC, it meets the speed requirements set by Congress for funding.

However, the Biden administration’s rules do not consider technologies like satellite as a ‘reliable broadband service.’

Because of this, the whole island is seen as a gap location and could receive new internet infrastructure, even though it already has a good connection, according to the report.

‘BEAD’s lack of consideration as to whether an unserved location truly needs taxpayer subsidies means that locations like Tuckernuck, will be prioritized to receive expensive fiber service,’ the report stated.

‘Further, some of the ‘unserved’ locations that will receive taxpayer-subsidized fiber-to-the-home service include mansions, beachfront resort communities, and mountain vacation homes,’ it said.

In the U.S., the Biden Administration estimates 8.5 million locations lack access to the internet. 

Big broadband companies like Verizon, Comcast, Charter Communications, and AT&T are reportedly hesitant to invest in providing service to sparsely populated rural areas due to the high costs and fewer potential customers.

‘The $42 billion Bidenomics broadband boondoggle is the latest example of the federal bureaucracy aimlessly throwing around taxpayers’ hard-earned money,’ Cruz said in a statement to Fox News Digital. ‘We can solve connectivity challenges across our country, but that does not mean taxpayer dollars should be spent bridging the ‘digital divide’ at the National Zoo and beachfront vacation homes in Nantucket.’

Cruz said the report — which is being sent to the White House — should be a ‘call to action’ for the Biden administration to evaluate regions that may have ‘duplicative’ and ‘wasteful’ spending. Fox News Digital has reached out to the White House for comment. 

House Speaker Kevin McCarthy set social media ablaze on Thursday after he pushed back against a reporter’s assertion that he launched an impeachment inquiry ‘without evidence.’

‘AP reported that McCarthy’s impeachment inquiry was launched ‘without evidence,’’ GOP operative Arthur Schwartz posted on X, formerly known as Twitter, on Thursday. ‘Here’s McCarthy forcing an AP reporter to admit that there was lots of evidence to support an impeachment inquiry.’

In the clip, AP reporter Farnoush Amiri asked McCarthy about fellow Republicans who have said that the investigation into President Biden has yet to show an impeachable offense at this point.

‘Is that an assessment you share?’ Amiri asked.

‘You know, an impeachment inquiry is not an impeachment,’ McCarthy responded, ‘What an impeachment inquiry is to do is to get answers to questions. Are you concerned about all the stuff that was recently learned?’

McCarthy then went through a list of instances that many have characterized as possible evidence of wrongdoing from the president. 

‘Do you believe the president lied to the American public when he said he’d never talked to his son about his business dealings?’ McCarthy asked ‘Yes or no?’

‘I can’t answer that,’ Amiri replied. 

‘Do you believe when they said the president went on conference calls? Do you believe that happened?’ McCarthy asked.

‘That’s what the testimony says,’ Amiri answered.

‘Do you believe the president went to Cafe Milano and had dinner with the clients of Hunter Biden, who believes he got those clients because he was selling the brand?’

‘That’s what the testimony said,’ Amiri answered.

‘Do you believe Hunter Biden, when you saw the video of him driving the Porsche, that he got $143,000 to buy that Porsche the next day? Do you believe that $3 million from the Russian oligarch that was transferred to the shell companies that the Biden’s controlled after the dinner from Cafe Milano took place?’ McCarthy asked.

McCarthy then asked Amiri again if she believed the president lied, to which she responded, ‘But is lying an impeachable offense?’

‘All I’m saying is I would like to know the answer to these questions,’ McCarthy said. ‘The American public would like to know.’

The clip was immediately picked up by conservatives on social media who slammed the narrative from many on the left who have claimed there is no evidence of wrongdoing related to President Biden and his family.

‘This is what happens when reporters follow the White House’s commands to engage as activists with the Republican inquiry instead of as journalists impartially seeking facts,’ GOP strategist Matt Whitlock responded on X.

‘It’s on days like today where we see what the left wing foundations that bankroll the Associated Press get for their money,’ former Ted Cruz spokesperson Steve Guest posted online.

‘’Is lying an impeachable offense,’’ The Spectator Editor Stephen L. Miller posted on X. ‘Oh you sweet summer child…’

In a statement to Fox News Digital, a spokesperson for The Associated Press said, ‘The Associated Press stands by reporter Farnoush Amiri, an established and respected journalist covering the U.S. Congress.’

McCarthy officially gave the go ahead for an impeachment inquiry on Tuesday after saying that House Republicans have ‘uncovered serious and credible allegations into President Biden’s conduct.’

‘Today, I am directing our House committees to open a formal impeachment inquiry into President Joe,’ McCarthy announced in a statement at the Capitol. ‘This logical next step will give our committees the full power to gather all the facts and answers for the American public.’ 

A group of House Democrats penned a letter Thursday to several top Biden administration and White House officials, demanding the immediate continuance of uninterrupted offshore oil and gas leasing.

The Democrats — led by Rep. Vicente Gonzalez, D-Texas — called for the Department of the Interior (DOI) to immediately issue its legally mandated plan for offshore fossil fuel lease sales, which the agency has delayed for more than 12 months. The lawmakers noted that the Inflation Reduction Act tethers new wind leases to oil and gas leases, meaning the former could be threatened without consistent fossil fuel leasing.

‘As members of Congress representing Americans across six districts in three states, we write to urge the U.S. Department of the Interior to take immediate action necessary to hold uninterrupted offshore oil and gas lease sales under the pending 2023-2028 National Outer Continental Shelf Oil and Gas Leasing Program to avoid the now expected offshore wind leasing cliff,’ they wrote in the letter.

‘Limiting oil and gas sales to one per year eliminates much needed flexibility and opens the possibility for unforeseen circumstances that would delay or cancel lease sales, including the possibility of future administrations holding offshore wind leasing hostage,’ the Democrats continued.

Under the 1953 Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act, the federal government is required to issue plans every five years laying out prospective offshore oil and gas lease sales. The most recent plan, which was implemented in 2017, expired in June 2022.

On July 1, 2022, the DOI published a draft proposal for a replacement five-year plan, which laid out multiple options for leasing between 2023 and 2028. The plan included an option with no lease sales during the time span and a maximum option of 11 lease sales. The plan ruled out any lease sales in the Atlantic or Pacific, mainly proposing Gulf of Mexico sales.

‘We urge the Department to quickly release a full five-year oil and gas leasing program that includes all eleven proposed sales and promptly take action to hold these sales without interruption,’ Gonzalez and the other lawmakers wrote. 

‘Following through on its Congressionally mandated obligations as passed in the IRA is the only way to ensure offshore wind energy has a clear path to leasing, permitting, development, and production,’ they added. ‘This means holding oil and gas lease sales under a robust, timely, and functioning five-year program as well.’

The delay in issuing a finalized plan represents a departure from precedent set by both Republican and Democratic administrations, which have historically finalized replacements immediately after previous plans expired. The option to hold no lease sales over the course of five years also represents an unprecedented departure. 

The most recent two plans, both formulated under the Obama administration, included more than 10 offshore oil and gas lease sales each. The Trump administration sought to hold a total of 47 lease sales across the Atlantic, Pacific, and Gulf of Mexico and off Alaska’s coasts between 2022 and 2027.

‘NOIA expresses our gratitude towards Congressman Gonzalez and his fellow Members of Congress for pushing for the timely completion of the next federal offshore oil and gas leasing program,’ National Ocean Industries Association President Erik Milito said in a statement Thursday.

‘The reinstatement of consistent and predictable offshore oil and gas lease sales is paramount, safeguarding against potential disruptions to future offshore wind opportunities during this pivotal juncture for the industry,’ Milito continued. ‘Sound energy policy stands as a cornerstone of our nation’s prosperity and should always serve as a unifying issue.’

The DOI is expected to propose its five-year offshore leasing plan in the coming weeks and finalize it either later this year or early next year.

In addition to Gonzalez, Reps. Henry Cuellar, D-Texas, Lizzie Fletcher, D-Texas, Jim Costa, D-Calif., Marc Veasey, D-Texas, and Mary Peltola, D-Alaska, signed the letter. The letter was sent to Interior Secretary Deb Haaland and copied to Energy Secretary Jennifer Granholm and White House Deputy Chief of Staff John Podesta among others.

A Virginia prosecutor who has received significant boosts from billionaire George Soros is facing accusations of accepting thousands of dollars in campaign contributions from an alleged foreign national, which a spokesperson for the donor denies.

Virginians for Safe Communities wrote to the state’s attorney general, Jason Miyares, and its board of elections, calling for an investigation into a $5,000 May donation from an individual named Merck Mercuriadis to Fairfax County Commonwealth’s Attorney Steve Descano’s campaign.

Within its letter, Virginians for Safe Communities says that Mercuriadis, who founded Hipgnosis Songs Fund and has managed famous musicians ranging from Guns N’ Roses to Beyoncé, is a music executive ‘who has had his personal and business life publicly detailed in profiles in the New York Times, Rolling Stone, and other publications’ and that his ‘legal residency and citizenship are repeatedly referenced as British and/or Canadian.’

Mercuriadis’ donation to Descano, which came shortly before his reelection in June, reports his address as being in London within filings.  

‘Mr. Mercuriadis is known to be a Canadian-born resident of the United Kingdom, listing a London UK address for himself and his employer,’ the group wrote in its letter. ‘His income is derived from his principal business which is a registered corporation in Britain.’

‘Further, Mr. Mercuriadis (or Mr. Descano’s treasurer) listed his address as ‘VA 99999’ potentially circumventing a software block on receipt of a foreign-sourced contribution,’ the group continued. ‘It is highly likely, based on Mr. Mercuriadis’ residency and business registration, that the contribution was drawn on a foreign bank account as well.’

Foreign nationals cannot donate to federal, state or local elections. However, a spokesperson for Mercuriadis said he holds joint citizenship and lawfully contributed to the campaign.

‘Mr Mercuriadis has joint US – UK Citizenship and is fully entitled to make political donations,’ his spokesperson told Fox News Digital in a statement. ‘He is a strong believer in civic responsibility and regularly donates to a variety of good causes both political and non-political.’

Virginians for Safe Communities also sent its letter to the Department of Justice and Federal Election Commission.

Descano is among the dozens of prosecutors nationwide who have received substantial boosts from George Soros’ money. In recent years, the Justice and Public Safety PAC, which Soros funds, has put hundreds of thousands of dollars behind his candidacy.

Descano’s campaign did not respond to an inquiry on the Mercuriadis donation by publication.

In his first speech since the indictment of his son, Hunter Biden, on federal firearms charges, President Biden addressed a crowd in Largo, Maryland to make the case for ‘Bidenomics.’ 

Biden devoted much of the speech to bashing Republicans’ economic agenda, which he pejoratively referred to as ‘MAGAnomics,’ after former President Donald Trump’s 2016 slogan: ‘Make America Great Again.’  

‘This is not your father’s Republican Party. This is a different deal,’ Biden said, before arguing that the Old Guard cared more about Democratic institutions than ‘MAGA’ Republicans. 

‘Their plan, MAGAnomics, is more extreme than anything America has ever seen before,’ the president said before bashing Republicans for threatening to default on the debt and doubling down on ‘trickle-down’ economics. 

‘Under their plan, the top 1% … of households that make over $4 million a year are going to get another tax cut worth more than two times what the typical American family makes in a single year,’ Biden said. 

At another point in the speech, Biden touted post-pandemic job recovery and appeared to fumble when pointing to record-low unemployment for African Americans and Hispanics. 

‘We’ve seen record lows in unemployment, particularly – and I’ve focused on this my whole career – for American Americans and Hispanics, and veterans. You know, workers without high school diplomas,’ he said. 

The president’s speech made no mention of his son’s legal woes. 

Just hours earlier, Hunter Biden was indicted on federal gun charges for allegedly lying about his drug use when he bought a firearm in October 2018. The indictment came weeks after the collapse of a plea deal that would have averted a criminal trial. 

The younger Biden’s attorneys argued that he didn’t violate the law and remains protected by an immunity provision that was part of the deal. 

He’s facing two counts of making false statements by checking a box falsely saying he was not addicted to drugs and giving it to the shop for their federally required records. A third count alleges he possessed the gun for about 11 days despite knowing he was a drug user. The counts are punishable by up to 25 years in prison. 

During the time of his purchase, the younger Biden has acknowledged struggling with an addiction to crack cocaine. 

Hunter Biden has been under investigation for his business dealings in Ukraine and China, and the special counsel has indicated that tax charges could be filed at some point in the future in Washington or in California, where he lives. 

The indictment comes after House Speaker Kevin McCarthy on Tuesday announced a formal impeachment inquiry against the president, seeking to tie the elder Biden to his son’s business dealings. 

The Associated Press contributed to this report.

The House voted Thursday afternoon in favor of legislation striking down environmental regulations in California mandating electric vehicle (EV) purchases.

In a 222-190 vote, the House approved the Preserving Choice in Vehicle Purchases Act with 214 Republicans and eight Democrats voting in favor. A group several Republican lawmakers led by Rep. John Joyce, R-Pa., first introduced the bill, which has been endorsed by the energy industry, in March, arguing EV mandates would hurt the economy and violate consumer choice.

‘The simple fact is that electric vehicles cannot meet the demands of my constituents,’ Joyce told Fox News Digital in an interview earlier this week. ‘Coupling the mountains with the harsh winters and the intense heat of summers makes driving an electric vehicle both unreliable and ultimately unrealistic for many of my constituents.’

‘This legislation, H.R. 1435, is an option. It is not an anti-electric vehicle legislation,’ he added. ‘For those who would like an electric vehicle, they should have the option of buying one. But it doesn’t help my constituents — it doesn’t help in any district to require an individual to buy an EV regardless of what they want and regardless of the demands of the market.’

The Preserving Choice in Vehicle Purchases Act, if enacted, would block the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) from issuing waivers to states seeking to ban or limit internal combustion engine vehicles. Under the Clean Air Act, the EPA is currently empowered to grant California a waiver to implement stricter emissions standards than the federal government.

In March 2022, the EPA reinstated California’s authority under the Clean Air Act to implement its own emission standards and EV sales mandates, and allowed other states to adopt California’s rules. The move came after the Trump administration revoked the state’s authority to pursue standards that run counter to federal rules.

Months later, on Aug. 25, 2022, the California Air Resources Board, a state environmental agency, announced new regulations banning gas-powered cars, and mandating electric cars, by 2035. California Gov. Gavin Newsom celebrated the regulations, saying the state would continue to ‘lead the revolution towards our zero-emission transportation future.’

In addition, another 17 states have laws in place that tether their vehicle emissions standards to those set in California, meaning the electric vehicle mandate would impact tens of millions of Americans nationwide. Overall, it is estimated that the states adopting California’s 2035 rule represent more than 40% of total U.S. car purchases.

‘This legislation is about ensuring Americans can continue choosing the vehicles that best suit their lives. It’s about making sure people have the option of driving practical, functional, and affordable cars,’ House Energy and Commerce Chair Cathy McMorris Rodgers, R-Wash., said in support of the bill. ‘And it’s about embracing the legacy of the American auto industry.’

‘The answer is not through restrictive government mandates,’ she continued. ‘Yet that is exactly what President Biden’s EPA, California, and others allies are trying to do.’

However, several Democratic lawmakers blasted the legislation ahead of the vote Thursday. The Democrats lauded California’s EV mandate, saying it would reduce pollution and help combat climate change.

‘The transportation sector is the single-largest contributor of greenhouse gas emissions and other dangerous air pollution,’ Energy and Commerce Committee Ranking Member Frank Pallone, D-N.J., said in a floor speech. ‘But once again, Republicans want to bury their heads in the sand and ignore reality, even while more than 100 million Americans are right now living in counties with unhealthy levels of air pollution.’

‘We should focus on supporting these policies, not weakening them. Sadly, H.R. 1435 would toss aside decades of legal precedent, upending the California waiver process and threatening innovation already underway,’ Rep. Paul Tonko, D-N.Y., the top Democrat on the Energy and Commerce Committee’s environment subcommittee, added in separate remarks.

The legislation was ultimately passed out of the Energy and Commerce Committee in late July, teeing up the floor vote Thursday. Companion legislation in the Senate was introduced by Sen. Markwayne Mullin, R-Okla., a month prior and is still making its way through the chamber.

In a statement of administration policy issued this week, though, the White House hinted that President Biden would veto the legislation if it made it to his desk.

‘The Administration strongly opposes passage of H.R. 1435, which would amend the Clean Air Act to preclude EPA from issuing federal preemption waivers for California pollution standards that directly or indirectly limit the sale or use of new motor vehicles with internal combustion engines,’ the White House said.