California Governor Gavin Newsom is traveling to Republican states he banned official travel to with a new political action committee (PAC) as rumors of a presidential run swirl.

Newsom and his family are traveling to Alabama, Arkansas, and Mississippi this week to boost Democrat gubernatorial candidates in the deep-red states with his new PAC, the Campaign for Democracy.

The California Democratic governor’s travels come as his name is thrown around blue circles as a potential front-runner for the party, should President Biden opt out of running for re-election in 2024.

By traveling to red states to promote blue governor candidates, Newsom is testing the political waters while positioning himself to either be a fundraising force for Democrats in 2024 or try to take the White House for himself if the path seems clear.

What Newsom will become for the Democrats in 2024 is unclear, but it will be heavily influenced by whether Biden decides to try and keep his job at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue.

Newsom’s travel also posed a unique risk for the vehemently pro-choice blue governor: the Democrat candidate for governor in Mississippi, Brandon Presley, is very pro-life.

The California governor recently cut ties between the Golden State and pharmacy company Walgreens due to the company’s refusal to distribute an abortion drug in 20 states.

However, Presley and Newsom did not meet, with the governor instead spending the day with Jackson Mayor Chokwe Antar Lumumba. Presley said he did not meet Newsom due to Palm Sunday services.

However, the governor’s plans — while not official travel — violate the spirit of the widely-panned political ban on state-sponsored and state-funded travel to 23 GOP-run states.

Fox News Digital asked Newsom’s office if the governor’s travel involved state-funded security and if Newsom believed his travels violated the spirit of his own law.

Newsom’s office did not respond.

Newsom’s spokesperson Anthony York told the Washington Free Beacon the governor’s trip had nothing to do with a state Democrat’s attempt to repeal the law and that ‘no state paid staff will be on his trip.’

The California governor dropped $10 million into the new PAC last week, making wild claims about Republicans in the states, including calling their governors ‘authoritarian leaders.’

Newsom claimed in his video announcing the PAC that Republican states ‘criminalize doctors,’ ‘intimidate librarians, kidnap migrants,’ ‘target trans kids,’ ‘stoke racism,’ ‘condone antisemitism,’ among other wild accusations.

The California governor, who famously broke his own draconian COVID-19 lockdown measures for a friend’s birthday dinner at the French Laundry restaurant in California, also claimed the state’s leaders ‘ignore the will of the people and make it harder to vote and easier to buy assault weapons.’

Georgia saw record voter turnout in the 2022 midterm elections after the enactment of the state’s voting law that Democrat critics falsely claimed suppressed voters.

Newsom has also taken to bashing states that rival his own, frequently attacking Texas and the Lone Star State Governor Greg Abbott.

Newsom has attacked Texas over its conservative values and laws on guns, abortion and taxes, even going so far as to put up billboards in the state promoting abortion access while running for re-election in California.

‘Texas doesn’t own your body. You do,’ one billboard depicting a woman in handcuffs said.

Another ad that Newsom ran in Texas said, ‘If Texas can ban abortion and endanger lives, California can ban deadly weapons of war and save lives. If Gov. Abbott truly wants to protect the right to life, we urge him to follow California’s lead.’

Former President Donald Trump was photographed exiting his ‘Trump Force One’ aircraft and, later, entering Trump Tower on Monday afternoon ahead of his expected court appearance in New York City this week.

The former president departed Palm Beach International Airport in south Florida en route to New York hours earlier. Shortly after Trump’s motorcade left the airport, he was pictured waving to crowds outside Trump Tower in New York City before entering the building where he maintains a residence.

Trump is slated to appear before a New York judge on Tuesday for an arraignment hearing. Trump was indicted by a Manhattan grand jury Thursday evening as part of the Manhattan District Attorney’s Office’s years-long investigation into his alleged hush money payments to adult film actress Stormy Daniels and former Playboy model Karen McDougal.

Trump’s lawyers, though, said Sunday that they expected to file a motion to dismiss all charges stemming from Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg’s investigation.

‘We will take the indictment. We will dissect it. The team will look at every, every potential issue that we will be able to challenge, and we will challenge. And of course, I very much anticipate a motion to dismiss coming because there’s no law that fits this,’ Trump’s attorney Joe Tacopina told CNN. 

‘And you have a situation where, you know, the federal government, the Department of Justice, turned this matter down,’ Tacopina added. ‘The FEC, which governs federal election laws, said there’s no violation here. Yet somehow a state prosecutor has taken a misdemeanor and tried cobble together to make it a felony by alleging a violation of federal campaign violations. And the FEC said that doesn’t exist.’

Hush money payments made to both McDougal and Daniels were revealed and reported by Fox News in 2018. Those payments had been investigated by the U.S. Attorney’s Office in the Southern District of New York and by the Federal Election Commission. 

However, federal prosecutors opted against charging Trump in the case.

Fox News Digital reporter Houston Keene contributed to this report.

Former Chicago Public Schools CEO Paul Vallas and Cook County Commissioner Brandon Johnson face off in the city’s runoff election for mayor on Tuesday, vying to replace outgoing incumbent Lori Lightfoot.

Vallas has positioned himself as a moderate and has the backing of the Chicago police union and major business groups. Johnson is a former teacher and union organizer backed by the Chicago Teachers Union.

Vallas finished first and Johnson was second in the February municipal election, which proceeded to a runoff because no candidate received over 50% of the vote. Lightfoot was eliminated from contention after placing third.

Here’s a look at what to expect on election night:

Election Day

Polls close at 8 p.m. ET.

How Chicago Votes

Voting is open to all voters, who can register on election day.

The AP will declare a winner in the race for Chicago mayor. The AP will also tabulate 14 races for Chicago alderperson but will not call winners in those races until after the results are certified.

In the February election, the AP first reported results in Chicago at 8:19 p.m. ET. The final election night update for overall results came just after 12 a.m. ET, with 90% of votes counted. Election officials separately released ward-level results, a process that continued until about 2 a.m.

Decision Notes

The AP does not make projections and will only declare a winner when it’s determined there is no scenario that would allow the trailing candidates to close the gap.

Should a candidate declare victory or offer a concession before the AP calls a race, we will cover newsworthy developments in our reporting. In doing so, we will make clear that the AP has not yet declared a winner and explain why.

The board of elections doesn’t expect to release ward-level results until around 1 a.m. Before those results are released, the AP will analyze each update in the citywide vote count to see if either candidate has a big enough lead to withstand late-counted votes in areas that may support the trailing candidate.

Once ward-level results are released, the AP will analyze how the candidates are doing in the areas they won in the February election, when Vallas carried the city’s northwest and southwest wards and Johnson carried the northeast part of the city. The AP will also analyze how the candidates are doing in wards that were won by Lightfoot and Jesús ‘Chuy’ García in the February election, to see if there is any path for the trailing candidate to catch the leader.

The AP may call a race in which the margin between the top two candidates is 0.5% or less, if we determine the lead is too large for a recount and legal challenge to change the outcome. In Illinois, there are no automatic recounts. Trailing candidates can request recounts if they receive at least 95% of the total votes of the winning candidate.

However, recounts in Illinois are for the purposes of legal discovery only and cannot by themselves change the results of an election.

Q: What Do Turnout and Advance Vote Look Like?

A: As of Feb. 28, there were 1.6 million registered voters in Chicago. As of Sunday, 246,188 voters had cast advance ballots.

In the February election, 52% of Chicago voters cast their ballots before election day. Mail-in ballots can arrive as late as April 18 and be counted so long as they are postmarked by election day.

Q: How Long Does Counting Usually Take?

A: Chicago counts a significant number of votes after election day, which could delay race calls in a competitive election. In the February election, the city counted 10% of ballots after election day.

Election officials said they plan to start releasing citywide results shortly after polls close at 8 p.m. ET. However, they don’t expect to start releasing results by ward until around 1 a.m. ET.

Following election day, the Board of Elections plans to update results several times each day on Wednesday and Thursday, and then periodically through the April 18 deadline to receive mail ballots.

Voters in Wisconsin will pick a Supreme Court justice on Tuesday, choosing between Democratic-backed Milwaukee County Circuit Judge Janet Protasiewicz and Republican-backed former Wisconsin Supreme Court Justice Dan Kelly in a race that will determine control of the court in a key political battleground.

Though the race is officially nonpartisan, the court currently has a 4-3 conservative majority. With a conservative justice retiring, the outcome of the election will decide control of the court, with wide-ranging implications for issues including abortion, election rules and the drawing of districts for elected office in the state. The court came within one vote of overturning President Joe Biden’s win in the state in 2020.

Protasiewicz and Kelly were the top two candidates in the February primary, receiving 46% and 24% of the vote, respectively. Another conservative candidate, Waukesha County Circuit Judge Jennifer Dorow, came in third at 22%, while another liberal, Dane County Circuit Judge Everett Mitchell, came in fourth at 7%.

Protasiewicz outraised Kelly in the final campaign finance reporting period, $12.4 million to $2.2 million. Both candidates have also received significant support from outside groups.

Here’s a look at what to expect on election night:

Election Day

Polls close at 9 p.m. ET.

How Wisconsin Votes

Voting is open to all voters, who can register on election day.

The AP will declare a winner in the race for Supreme Court justice and in five additional races, including three ballot measures, a special election for state Senate and a Court of Appeals seat. In the February primary election, the AP first reported results in Wisconsin at 9:06 p.m. ET. The final election night vote update came just after midnight, at which point more than 99% of votes had been counted.

Decision Notes

The AP does not make projections and will only declare a winner when it’s determined there is no scenario that would allow the trailing candidates to close the gap.

Should a candidate declare victory or offer a concession before the AP calls a race, we will cover newsworthy developments in our reporting. In doing so, we will make clear that the AP has not yet declared a winner and explain why.

In the February primary, Protasiewicz ran up big margins in Milwaukee and Dane counties. She also did better than Kelly in his home county of Waukesha, a suburb of Milwaukee. (Dorow came in first in Waukesha.) Kelly split votes with Dorow in many of the Republican-leaning counties.

In Tuesday’s election, the AP will analyze whether Kelly is able to pick up Dorow’s votes and expand turnout in the Republican-leaning counties, or whether Protasiewicz can run up an insurmountable lead in the more urban counties.

In the past, heavily-Democratic Milwaukee City has released the results of mail-in ballots late in the night. If Protasiewicz is leading before those results are released, it could be an early race call. If Kelly is winning, the AP will analyze whether his lead is large enough to hold up against those Democratic-leaning votes.

The AP may call a race in which the margin between the top two candidates is 0.5% or less, if we determine the lead is too large for a recount and legal challenge to change the outcome. In Wisconsin, there are no automatic recounts. Trailing candidates can request recounts if they lose by a margin of less than 1%, but must pay for it if the margin is greater than .25%.

Q: What Do Turnout and Advance Vote Look Like?

A: As of March 1, there were 3.6 million registered voters in Wisconsin. As of Monday, 409,755 voters had cast advance ballots. In the February election, 24% of Wisconsin voters cast their ballots before election day. Mail-in ballots must arrive by election day to be counted.

Q: How Long Does Counting Usually Take?

A: Wisconsin counts nearly all its votes on election night, with most outstanding votes added to the count the next day.

Teachers in North Dakota can still refer to transgender students by the personal pronouns they use, after lawmakers on Monday failed to override the governor’s veto of a controversial bill to place restrictions on educators.

House lawmakers fell short of the two-thirds majority needed to block the veto. This happened days after Republican Gov. Doug Burgum’s office announced the veto and the Senate overrode it.

The bill would have prohibited public school teachers and employees from acknowledging the personal pronouns a transgender student uses, unless they received permission from the student’s parents as well as a school administrator.

It would have also prohibited government agencies from requiring employees to acknowledge the pronouns a transgender colleague uses.

Republican lawmakers across the U.S. have drafted hundreds of laws this year to push back on LGBTQ+ freedoms, particularly seeking to regulate aspects of transgender people’s lives, including gender-affirming health care, bathroom use, athletics and drag performances.

‘The teaching profession is challenging enough without the heavy hand of state government forcing teachers to take on the role of pronoun police,’ Burgum had said in a letter to state lawmakers announcing his veto. The First Amendment already protects teachers from speaking contrary to their beliefs, and existing law protects the free speech rights of state employees, he added.

Lawmakers who supported the bill have said in debates that it would free teachers from worrying about how to address each student and create a better learning environment.

Opponents have said the bill targets transgender students who already have disproportionately high risks of suicide.

In 2021, Burgum vetoed a bill that would have barred transgender girls from playing on girls’ teams in public schools. Lawmakers didn’t override that veto, but they are considering new legislation this session to replicate and expand that bill — including at the college level.

Spending on the high stakes Wisconsin Supreme Court race has topped $42 million, nearly triple the previous national record for a court race, with the Democratic-backed candidate having a roughly $6 million advantage, according to a report released on Monday just before polls opened.

The winner in Tuesday’s election between Democratic-backed Janet Protasiewicz and Republican-backed Dan Kelly will determine majority control of the court, with issues like abortion access, redistricting and more than a decade of Republican priorities, hanging in the balance.

The court has been under conservative control for 15 years, helping to enshrine priorities of the GOP-controlled Legislature and former Gov. Scott Walker. Liberals have cast the race as a defining moment for their side to exert power and potentially overturn the state’s 1849 abortion ban law and redraw maps created by Republicans that have led to them increasing their control of the Legislature.

The winner will also set majority control of the court ahead of the 2024 presidential election. The current court came one vote short of overturning President Joe Biden’s win in Wisconsin in 2020.

As of Monday, Protasiewicz and her backers have spent about $23.3 million compared with about $17.6 million for Kelly and his supporters, according to a report from the Wisconsin Democracy Campaign, which tracks campaign spending.

The previous record high for spending in a court race was $15 million in Illinois in 2004.

Protasiewicz has spent nearly $12 million compared with Kelly’s more than $2.2 million. Protasiewicz’s campaign has received nearly $9 million from the state Democratic Party, based on the latest campaign finance reports. Kelly, who previously worked for the state and national Republican parties, has also gotten financial backing and in-kind contributions in this race from the state GOP and county parties.

Special interest groups backing Kelly have spent nearly $15.4 million, compared with $11.3 million for Protasiewicz, according to the Democracy Campaign.

The liberal group A Better Wisconsin Together led all special interest spending at $6.2 million, followed by Wisconsin Manufacturers & Commerce, the state chamber of commerce, at $5.2 million in support of Kelly. Fair Courts America, a conservative group backing Kelly that’s funded by GOP mega-donor Richard Uihlein, was next at just over $5.3 million.

After those big three, no other special interest group had spent more than $2 million on the race.

Protasiewicz is a Milwaukee County judge. Kelly previously served on the Supreme Court from 2016 to 2020 before being defeated that year. The winner will serve a 10-year term beginning in August, replacing retiring conservative Justice Pat Roggensack.

Former President Donald Trump’s indictment has drawn comparisons in recent days to the failed hush-money case against former Democratic senator and presidential candidate John Edwards.

In 2011, Edwards faced six felony charges relating to campaign finance law violations for accepting $1 million from donors to obscure his affair during his 2008 presidential campaign. In 2012, a jury acquitted Edwards on one count of receiving illegal campaign contributions and deadlocked on the others, which the Justice Department declined to pursue again.

A Manhattan grand jury indicted Trump last Thursday as part of the Manhattan District Attorney’s Office’s years-long investigation into his alleged hush-money payments to adult film actress Stormy Daniels and former Playboy model Karen McDougal.

While Edwards faced federal charges and Trump now faces state charges, experts see similarities in both cases, which they say could benefit Trump.

Fox News Digital spoke with several experts – including a law professor, former Federal Election Commission members and a former federal prosecutor – who spelled out why Edwards’ case could be bad news for Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg.

Here’s what they had to say.

Bradley Smith – Josiah H. Blackmore II/Shirley M. Nault designated professor at Capital University School of Law and former Federal Election Commission member

‘The Edwards scenario is relevant for two reasons. First, as much as I criticize the theory of District Attorney Bragg, it’s worth noting that the federal district court judge in the Edwards case let the case go to trial on basically what was that theory – that friends of the candidate were paying a woman off to be quiet that counted as a campaign expenditure,’ Smith told Fox News Digital in a phone interview.

‘The other point about it is the jury found in favor of Edwards. They hung on some charges, and on others, they acquitted,’ he continued. ‘I think that illustrates the tremendous difficulty of winning this kind of case both on the law and the facts.’

‘In the Edwards case, they were actually trying a federal case. Here, they’re not actually trying a federal case,’ Smith said. ‘If they go ahead to go to trial and find Trump guilty, he’s not going to be found guilty of federal campaign finance violations; he’s going to be found guilty of violating the New York state law on altering business records in order to cover up other crimes, which are allegedly these campaign finance crimes.’

‘So, the prosecutor has sort of a case within a case,’ Smith added. ‘He’s got to prove Trump committed this New York crime, but to prove Trump committed this New York crime, he’s going to have to prove that had he been the U.S. attorney, he would have brought this federal crime and won on that.’

‘That’s a very tough thing for a prosecutor to do, but on the other hand, it could be a helpful thing,’ Smith said. ‘If you get [to] the jury, you don’t have to show the federal crime beyond a reasonable doubt; you just have to [get the] jury thinking, ‘Trump’s probably a bad guy and probably did it,’ then maybe that’s enough, and they convict on the state crime.’

Hans von Spakovsky – Senior legal fellow at Heritage Foundation and former Federal Election Commission member

‘I think that what it foreshadows is that Alvin Bragg is trying to make out that there was a violation of federal of campaign finance law, but when the Justice Department moved against John Edwards – and remember the claim was that big political donors of Edwards didn’t give money to the campaign but gave money directly to his mistress that was somehow a violation of campaign finance law – and they failed,’ Spakovsky told Fox News Digital. ‘The jury didn’t buy that.’

‘I think that shows that the one time the Justice Department tried to pursue a case like this, it failed,’ he continued. ‘That was probably the biggest reason why the Justice Department and the FEC didn’t go after Trump because they didn’t believe that it was – based on prior experience – a violation of federal campaign finance law, and that’s the biggest flaw in this whole case.’

‘The FEC long ago established what they call the ‘irrespective test,’ which is the way the FEC determines whether something is a campaign-related expense and, therefore, is covered by all the laws and regulations – ‘would that expense exist irrespective if you’re running for office?”

‘That’s why you can’t use campaign money, for example, to pay the mortgage on your house, buy a car, because all those expenses would exist whether or not you were running for office or not,’ Spakovsky added.

‘I think here, a settlement of a personal injury claim – because that’s essentially what this was – that claim would exist irrespective of whether you’re running for office or not. It might be more important because you’re running for office, but when you apply the FEC’s test to it, it’s not a campaign-related expense and, therefore, none of the federal rules apply to it.’

Katie Cherkasky – Former federal prosecutor and criminal defense and civil rights attorney

‘The John Edwards case is the exact same type of charge, except the Edwards case was much stronger from a criminal prosecutorial perspective than this Trump case,’ Cherkasky told Fox News Digital.

‘Even in that case, they obviously were not able to get a conviction,’ Cherkasky said. ‘The reason for that is when you’re charging these campaign finance violations, it’s a specific intent crime. The prosecution has to prove the individual not only failed to properly account for campaign finance funds but that the reason that they did that was for purposes of campaign fraud, not for some other purpose.’

‘When you’re looking at the Edwards case, the reason they likely couldn’t get a conviction on that was because of the intent for the payment – remember, hush-money payments are lawful; it’s just a matter of how they’re reported if that’s what they’re for – the intent for those payments could have very well been for a personal purpose to avoid embarrassment to his wife, who was very ill at that time, and any other option besides the fact that it was solely for the purpose of impacting an election – that’s going to get you an acquittal,’ Cherkasky said.

‘The Edwards case was a prime example of this being tried by a prosecutor, and that case was much stronger because there was no dispute that the money had been paid and Edwards was personally involved with that. Trump is not even conceding that much,’ she added.

‘The prosecution in the Trump case has even more hurdles to get over. Even if they were able to get to the point where they could show Trump was directly involved with those payments, they still have those intent problems: ‘Why did he pay her off?”

‘If it was a nuisance payoff or anything other than an intent to interfere with the election, then they’re going to have a problem with their proof,’ Cherkasky said.

Fox News Digital’s Andrew Murray and Thomas Catenacci contributed to this report.

Former New York Yankees’ third baseman Alex Rodriguez was spotted Monday outside of Trump Tower as crowds waited for the arrival of former President Trump, who will be arraigned in court on Tuesday.

A-Rod was seen walking in Manhattan near Trump Tower as press gathered outside to catch Trump’s arrival.

It’s unclear why A-Rod was in Manhattan by Trump Tower. Representatives for A-Rod did not immediately respond to Fox News Digital’s request for comment.

Trump is slated to arrive at Trump Tower Monday afternoon ahead of his Tuesday court appearance following his indictment in a matter related to hush money payments made to porn star Stormy Daniels leading up to the 2016 election.

On Monday, New York City Mayor Eric Adams, joined by NYPD Commissioner Keechant Sewell, hosted a briefing regarding security preparations ahead of Trump’s arraignment. They said that as of midday Monday, there have ‘been no specific, credible threats to our city at this time.’

‘Control yourselves,’ Adams warned at City Hall, recognizing anticipated protests and the unique nature of the situation. ‘New York City is our home, not a playground for your misplaced anger. We are the safest large city in America because we respect the rule of law in New York City. And although we have no specific threats, people like Marjorie Taylor Greene, who is known to spread misinformation and hate speech, says she’s coming to town.’

‘While you in town be on your best behavior. As always, we will not allow violence or vandalism of any kind. And if one is caught participating in any act of violence, they will be arrested and held accountable no matter who you are,’ Adams said.

Trump is expected to arrive at the New York City courthouse at 11 a.m. on Tuesday, hours ahead of his scheduled arraignment in front of Judge Juan Merchan at 2:15 p.m. The proceedings are expected to take 15 to 30 minutes and extensive security around the building is expected to search everyone in the courtroom twice.

Critical drug shortages in the U.S. are on the rise due to a deal that gave China dominance over the global supply chain, posing a national security threat, Sen. Josh Hawley told Fox News.

Drug shortages in the U.S. increased 30% in 2022 compared to the year prior, according to a Senate Homeland Security & Governmental Affairs report released last month. Some antibiotics, anesthetics, cancer treatments, emergency room supplies and kids’ medicines are among the drugs facing shortages. 

‘We are dependent on China overwhelmingly for our critical medical supply chains,’ Hawley, who sits on the committee, said. ‘You talk about being dependent, you talk about a national security threat, that’s a national security threat.’

‘That is a direct threat to our independence and to the health of our people,’ he said.

CHINA CONTROLLING THE GLOBAL DRUG SUPPLY CHAIN THREATENS U.S. NATIONAL SECURITY: HAWLEY

In some cases, 90% of the key ingredients originate in China or India, according to the Senate report. It also found that active drug shortages peaked in the U.S. at the end of 2022. 

‘We are dependent on China overwhelmingly for our critical medical supply chains,’ Hawley said. ‘You look at the precursors, the key precursors for making pharmaceutical drugs, prescriptions that Americans rely on, 60% of those are made in China or India.’

‘We should make these drugs, including the precursors in the United States of America,’ the Missouri Republican told Fox News. ‘We can start by withdrawing China’s most favored nation status, the sweetheart trade deal that we gave them 20 years ago.’

The U.S. Senate granted China most favored nation status ahead of Beijing joining the World Trade Organization. In practice, the U.S. is obligated to provide China with preferential treatment for trade deals and tariffs. 

Hawley recently proposed a bill that would rescind China’s most favored nation trade status. The legislation would also ‘subject imports from China to higher tariff rates,’ according to his office.

‘During COVID, China threatened to withhold a key precursor drug, a key precursor element for cancer treatments,’ Sen. Hawley told Fox News. ‘If they had gone through and done that, it would have cut our supply in half at all of our [Department of Veterans Affairs] hospitals across the country overnight.’ 

Additionally, the number of FDA-approved pharmaceutical ingredient manufacturers based in China more than doubled between 2010 – 2015, according to the Senate report. 

Bringing domestic drug manufacturing back to the states is also gaining bipartisan momentum in the House of Representatives.

Two Republicans and two Democrats last month launched the Domestic Pharmaceutical Manufacturing Caucus, which is intended ‘to reduce American reliance on foreign adversaries, head off potential supply chain disruptions, and ensure a steady supply of pharmaceuticals in the event of public health emergencies or natural disasters,’ according to a press release. 

‘Currently, only about 10% of our critical prescription drugs or their precursors are made in America, 90% made somewhere else,’ Hawley told Fox News. ‘Listen, not only is that bad for patients, it’s bad for workers.’

Bringing high-paying pharmaceutical jobs back to the U.S. would help the economy while simultaneously cutting reliance on Chinese manufacturing, the senator said. But building domestic drug manufacturing facilities could take years, which, in the case of any future world conflicts, could pose a threat.

‘If we don’t do anything now, ahead of the curve, we will be at their mercy,’ he told Fox News. ‘We need to bring good-paying jobs back to this country, making these critical supplies that we literally rely on to live.’

To watch the full interview with Hawley, click here.

Sen. Joe Manchin, D-W.Va., said Sunday that Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg must ‘remove all doubt’ in the American judicial process after a grand jury voted Thursday to indict former President Trump following the DA’s years-long investigation.

During an appearance on CNN’s ‘State of the Union,’ Manchin argued that the indictment risks further dividing Americans and battering their trust in the justice system.

‘It’s a very sad time for America to go through what we’re going through now,’ he said. ‘People are being divided, and they think that justice might be biased. We have to make sure that we wait to see what comes out next week, and I hope they do their job. And I’ve said this, no one’s above the law, but no one should be targeted by the law, especially through the political process. So we’ll just wait and see next week. I hope they are very thorough.’

CNN anchor Dana Bash asked Manchin to clarify whether he thinks Trump, who is the current front-runner in the 2024 Republican presidential race, is being targeted by Bragg for political reasons.

‘Is that what you think is going on here? That he is a political target?’ she asked.

‘No, I’m saying you have to remove all doubt,’ Manchin replied. ‘You have to remove all doubt. You have to make sure you cross every t and dot every i, as they say. But you know that no person, the president, myself or anybody else in Congress, no matter what your status is, in the United States of America, you’re not above the law. And on the other hand, no person should be targeted by the law either. So let’s make sure that’s cleared up, and let’s see where it goes.’

There’s a ‘segment of society who believes that maybe it’s biased, that the system doesn’t work for all,’ Manchin said during a subsequent appearance on NBC News’ ‘Meet the Press.’

‘We must come together. The American people want us to do our job,’ he continued. ‘Let’s wait until what comes out next week. Let’s see the direction this goes. But the bottom line is it’s a very sad time in America. You have geopolitical unrest around the world. Just think of the people who don’t wish our society or our form of democracy to work, whether it be China, Russia or whoever. They’re looking and saying, ‘Oh my goodness, let’s just sit back and kind of watch this melee unfold.’ Well, I want to show them that as Americans, we can work together.’

Trump raked in more than $5 million in donations in the 48 hours after he was indicted on Thursday. The exact charges of the indictment are still under seal, but Trump attorney Joe Tacopina said Thursday evening Trump could face more than 30 counts next week when he’s arraigned.

The charges relate to Trump’s role in sending alleged hush payments to adult film star Stormy Daniels in an effort to prevent her from speaking out about their relationship.

The former president is expected to travel from his home in Mar-a-Lago to New York City on Monday before spending his final night before his arraignment in Trump Tower.

The Secret Service will be attending him as New York authorities book the president, take his fingerprints and photograph him on Tuesday.

Fox News’ Anders Hagstrom contributed to this report.