Rep. Chip Roy, R-Texas, is convinced that American voters care more about having secure elections than the politics of a possible government shutdown, he said Tuesday, 

‘My constituents want [honest elections], they want a secure border, they don’t really give two flying s—s about the government funding,’ Roy told Fox News Digital in an interview.

Members of Congress will be back in Washington, D.C., next week after their summer recess, returning with just three weeks to find an agreement to avoid a partial government shutdown by Oct. 1.

It’s all but certain that a short-term funding extension called a continuing resolution (CR) will be needed to buy negotiators more time to hash out spending priorities for fiscal 2025.

Roy and other conservative rebels in the House have been pushing Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., to pair a CR with the Safeguard American Voter Eligibility (SAVE) Act, a bill to require proof of citizenship for registering to vote. 

But the SAVE Act has been deemed a nonstarter by the White House and Senate Democrats, and both sides are wary about the optics of a partial government shutdown just weeks before Election Day.

Roy declined to say whether he would support a shutdown but told Fox News Digital the blame would be on Democrats rather than Republicans.

‘I’m not going to play the shutdown game … the press wants to make it about a shutdown. Democrats want to make this about a shutdown,’ Roy said. ‘Our point is pretty simple. We’re offering to fund the government – all manners of sin, by the way, in that government…we’re willing to do that, but these guys need to make sure our elections are secure.’

‘If [Democrats] want to shut the government down, that’s on them.’

Two sources told Fox News Digital on Tuesday that pairing the bill with a CR through March is at least one plan being discussed by House GOP leadership. 

Johnson’s office did not return a Friday request for comment on the record on whether that would be his plan. Fox News Digital followed up on Tuesday.

Former President Trump said on Monica Crowley’s podcast last week that House Republicans should ‘shut down the government’ if such a proposal isn’t passed.

Meanwhile, House Appropriations Chair Tom Cole, R-Okla., previously said he would support a CR through December but cast doubt on whether the SAVE Act would be attached, noting any final product would have to pass the Democrat-controlled Senate.

But Roy’s comments are an early warning sign that the fight to fund the government in the next fiscal year could be as messy as last year’s protracted battle that resulted in the ouster of ex-Speaker Kevin McCarthy, R-Calif.

In vitro fertilization (IVF) accounts for only 2% of all U.S. births, but that hasn’t stopped it from becoming a major campaign issue dividing some Republicans from their party standard-bearer, former President Trump, who recently indicated he would push for federally funding the procedures if elected.

But some Republicans and pro-life religious conservatives aren’t fully on board with federally funded IVF procedures.

Sen. Lindsay Graham, R-S.C., — a Trump ally — said on ABC’s ‘This Week’ on Sunday that he would rather support a tax-credit for IVF users ‘to encourage people to have children.’

‘We’ve been accused — the party has — of being against birth control,’ Graham, who voted with most Republicans against the Democrat-led Right to IVF Act this year that would have protected access to IVF this year, said. ‘We’re not. We’ve been accused of being against IVF treatments. We’re not.’

‘I’ll talk to my Democratic colleagues,’ he added. ‘We might be able to find common ground here.’

Meanwhile, Sen. Tom Cotton, R-Ark., said on NBC’s ‘Meet the Press’ Sunday that ‘all Republicans, to my knowledge, support IVF in Congress.’ 

‘And there’s no state that prohibits or regulates IVF in a way that makes it unacceptable,’ he said. ‘It is expensive for many couples. I understand that. So, it’s something I’m open to, [and] that most Republicans would be open to.’

Nearly all of California Republicans likewise voted against a Democrat-led bill last week aimed at expanding IVF access, too.

While former President Trump skirted attacks from his pro-life base last week for suggesting he may oppose Florida’s six-week abortion ban — calling it ‘too short’ — he later came out in opposition to Amendment 4, an initiative on the Sunshine State’s ballot this November that critics say would enshrine abortion rights into the state constitution.

Trump also said he’d subsidize the costly IVF treatments, because ‘we want more babies,’ despite leaving abortion access up to the states. The Trump campaign did not directly respond to what constitutes a state issue versus a federal one when asked via email last week.

‘President Trump also supports universal access to contraception and IVF. Contrarily, Kamala Harris and the Democrats are radically out of touch with the majority of Americans in their support for abortion up until birth and forcing taxpayers to fund it,’ Trump campaign press secretary Karoline Leavitt said in a statement.

IVF is a fertility treatment for couples struggling to have children that involves freezing eggs to use later for conception. But some religious pro-lifers believe the procedure is a moral dilemma. The treatments also cost tens of thousands of dollars per couple. 

Illume Fertility, a leading modern fertility treatment network, reported in May that when their clinic retrieves 12 eggs, approximately 80% — or nine to 10 eggs — are viable. Of these viable eggs, around 80% will successfully fertilize, resulting in about seven to eight embryos per patient, the report noted.

Eric Sammons, executive director of faith-based magazine Crisis Pub, said, ‘No child created via IVF is evil any more than a child created via rape is evil. But that fact doesn’t make the method of creation good.’

Live Action social media consultant Samantha D. wrote, ‘We still need to keep the pro-life pressure on Trump. Government funded IVF is CRAZY. So many lives will be lost.’

Lila Rose, the founder of Live Action, also sparked controversy last week for her comments suggesting she would not vote for Trump unless he made more public anti-abortion statements. She has also slammed the notion of funding IVF treatments. 

‘Trump just announced his admin would either pay for IVF with tax dollars or force all insurance companies cover it,’ Rose wrote last week on X, ‘How is this morally different than the contraceptive mandate under Obama?’

An Alabama Supreme Court ruling earlier this year established that frozen embryos created in the IVF process are considered children. However, IVF treatments have a success rate of around 50% for women under 35, dropping further with age. To increase the likelihood of a successful pregnancy, critics argue that clinics reportedly create more embryos than needed, leading to the freezing or disposal of millions of excess embryos.

Republican presidential nominee former President Trump is outperforming his 2020 support among Hispanics, who prefer him on immigration during the 2024 race, according to a new poll. 

Hispanic voters give Trump a 42% to 37% advantage over Democrat presidential candidate Vice President Harris regarding immigration policy, Reuters/Ipsos polling shows. 

Among the broader electorate, 46% preferred Trump on immigration over the 36% who preferred Harris, according to the Reuters/Ipsos poll conducted on Aug. 21-28. 

Hispanics, described as a diverse and fast-growing section of the electorate in the United States, prefer Harris’ approach over that of Trump by 18 points for health care and 23 points for climate change, according to the poll. On the economy, the survey found registered voters overall prefer Trump’s platform over that of Harris by 45% to 36%. 

But Trump and Harris drew equally on the economy among registered Hispanic voters, garnering 39% support from that base each. 

That means Democrats have gained some ground since Biden backed out of the race. In May, Reuters/Ipso polling showed Biden behind Trump by four points among Hispanic voters regarding the economy. 

Trump’s performance among Hispanics overall looks to see a significant improvement compared to 2020. Harris currently has a 13-point lead among registered Hispanic voters, the poll showed. The Hispanic vote went to Biden by 21 points four years ago, according to a 2020 Pew Research exit poll analysis. A 2020 Fox News Voter Analysis, conducted in partnership with the Associated Press, showed 35% of Hispanic or Latino voters preferred Trump while 63% preferred Biden.

In 2022, Census Bureau data showed Hispanics made up about 14% of voting-age U.S. citizens, an increase from the 9% for 2005-2009, Reuters reported. 

‘The Latino vote is probably the most pure swing group of voters in America right now and will be for a long time,’ Chuck Rocha, a Democrat strategist who advised Bernie Sanders’ 2016 campaign, told Reuters.

‘Hispanics have historically strongly favored the Democratic Party, so for Trump to be breaking even with Harris on the economy has to be seen as a win for him,’ said Giancarlo Sopo, a Republican strategist who handled Trump’s 2020 media outreach to Hispanic voters.

There are 63 days until Election Day on Tuesday, Nov. 5.

But if Americans vote like they did in the last two election cycles, most of them will have already cast a ballot before the big day.

Early voting starts as soon as Sept. 6 for eligible voters, with seven battleground states sending out ballots to at least some voters the same month.

It makes the next few months less a countdown to Election Day, and more the beginning of ‘election season.’

States have long allowed at least some Americans to vote early, like members of the military or people with illnesses. 

In some states, almost every voter casts a ballot by mail.

Many states expanded eligibility in 2020, when the COVID-19 pandemic made it riskier to vote in-person.

That year, the Fox News Voter Analysis found that 71% of voters cast their ballots before Election Day, with 30% voting early in-person and 41% voting by mail.

Early voting remained popular in the midterms, with 57% of voters casting a ballot before Election Day.

Elections officials stress that voting early is safe and secure. Recounts, investigations and lawsuits filed after the 2020 election did not reveal evidence of widespread fraud or corruption. 

The difference between ‘early in-person’ and ‘mail’ or ‘absentee’ voting.

There are a few ways to vote before Election Day.

The first is , where a voter casts a regular ballot in-person at a voting center before Election Day.

The second is , where the process and eligibility varies by state.

Eight states vote mostly by mail, including California, Colorado, Nevada and Utah. Registered voters receive ballots and send them back.

Most states allow any registered voter to request a mail ballot and send it back. This is also called mail voting, or sometimes absentee voting. Depending on the state, voters can return their ballot by mail, at a drop box, and/or at an office or facility that accepts mail ballots.

In 14 states, voters must have an excuse to vote by mail, ranging from illness, age, work hours or if a voter is out of their home county on Election Day.

States process and tabulate ballots at different times. Some states don’t begin counting ballots until election night, which delays the release of results.

Voting begins on Sept. 6 in North Carolina, with seven more battleground states starting that month

This list of early voting dates is for guidance only. For comprehensive and up-to-date information on voter eligibility, processes and deadlines, go to Vote.gov and your state’s elections website.

The first voters to be sent absentee ballots will be in North Carolina, which begins mailing out ballots for eligible voters on Sept. 6.

Seven more battleground states open up early voting the same month, including Pennsylvania, Georgia, Wisconsin, Michigan and Nevada.

September deadlines

In-person early voting in bold.

Sept. 6

North Carolina – Absentee ballots sent to voters

Sept. 16

Pennsylvania – Mail-in ballots sent to voters

Sept. 17

Georgia – Absentee ballots sent to military & overseas

Sept. 19

Wisconsin – Absentee ballots sent

Sept. 20

Arkansas, Montana, Nebraska, North Dakota, Ohio, Utah, Wyoming – Absentee ballots sent to military & overseas
Minnesota, South Dakota – In-person absentee voting begins
Virginia – In-person early voting begins
Indiana, Kentucky, West Virginia – Absentee ballots sent

Sept. 21

Alabama, Alaska, Colorado, Connecticut, Florida, Kansas, Massachusetts, Maryland, Michigan, New Hampshire, New York, Oregon, South Carolina, Washington – Absentee ballots sent to military & overseas
Indiana, New Mexico – Absentee ballots sent
Maryland, New Jersey – Mail-in ballots sent

Sept. 23

Mississippi – In-person absentee voting begins & absentee ballots sent
Oregon, Vermont – Absentee ballots sent

Sept. 26

Illinois – In-person early voting begins 
Michigan – Absentee ballots sent
Florida, Nevada – Mail-in ballots sent
North Dakota – Absentee & mail-in ballots sent

Sept. 30

Nebraska – Mail-in ballots sent

Oct. 4

Connecticut – Absentee ballots sent

Oct. 6

Michigan – In-person early voting begins 
Maine – In-person absentee voting begins & mail ballots sent
California – In-person absentee voting begins & mail ballots sent
Montana – In-person absentee voting begins
Nebraska – In-person early voting begins 
Georgia – Absentee ballots sent
Massachusetts – Mail-in ballots sent

Oct. 8

California – Ballot drop-offs open
New Mexico, Ohio – In-person absentee voting begins
Indiana – In-person early voting begins
Wyoming – In-person absentee voting begins & absentee ballots sent

Oct. 9

Arizona – In-person early voting begins & mail ballots sent

Oct. 11

Colorado – Mail-in ballots sent
Arkansas, Alaska – Absentee ballots sent

Oct. 15

Georgia – In-person early voting begins
Utah – Mail-in ballots sent

Oct. 16

Rhode Island, Kansas, Tennessee – In-person early voting begins
Iowa – In-person absentee voting begins
Oregon, Nevada – Mail-in ballots sent

Oct. 17

North Carolina – In-person early voting begins 

Oct. 18

Washington, Louisiana – In-person early voting begins
Hawaii – Mail-in ballots sent

Oct. 19

Nevada, Massachusetts – In-person early voting begins 
Alaska, Arkansas, Connecticut, Idaho, North Dakota, South Carolina, Texas – In-person early voting begins 
Colorado – Ballot drop-offs open

Oct. 22

Hawaii, Utah – In-person early voting begins 
Missouri, Wisconsin – In-person absentee voting begins

Oct. 23

West Virginia – In-person early voting begins

Oct. 24

Maryland – In-person early voting begins

Oct. 25

Delaware – In-person early voting begins

Oct. 26

Michigan, Florida, New Jersey, New York – In-person early voting begins 

Oct. 30

Oklahoma – In-person early voting begins 

Oct. 31

Kentucky – In-person absentee voting begins

While the Heritage Foundation’s latest Mandate for Leadership and its overarching Project 2025 have been turned into a right-wing-‘boogeyman’ style Democratic talking point and fodder for Trump critics, its founders and current leaders maintain that its work product past and present speak for itself.

President Donald Trump has also criticized the latest iteration and denied any involvement in its formation: ‘I disagree with some of the things they’re saying, and some of the things they’re saying are absolutely ridiculous and abysmal,’ Trump said last month.

From the Reagan administration through the present, the Heritage Foundation has published its Mandate for Leadership series almost every election cycle.

However, project leaders, including former Attorney General Edwin Meese III, who is now considered the preeminent ‘elder statesman’ of the conservative movement, contend there is nothing radical about the endeavor.

In an interview on Wednesday, Meese said the major difference between 1980 and 2024 is that the mechanics of the project have changed.

‘In the first one, in 1981, it was much more organizational, with information on structure and organizational norms, where – later on in 1989 – it was much more individual policy issues-based,’ he said. 

After then-President-elect Reagan named Meese director of his transition team, Meese recalled being invited to a dinner with members of the Heritage Foundation and other conservatives and being offered early proofs of the 1981 Mandate for Leadership itself.

Charles Heatherly, who worked on the first project during the 1980 cycle, said on Thursday that the Carter crew had been approached to discuss the initiative – appearing to debunk present-day claims the projects have been one-sided partisan affairs.

‘Both the Reagan campaign and the Carter campaign were invited to send a representative to that dinner. The Carter campaign never responded,’ he said.

Meanwhile, Meese said the 1981 project had been ‘particularly helpful’ in the Reagan years, because nothing of the sort had been done in a long time.

‘Years ago, there had been a coalition, I think, during the Johnson administration. That was quite some time before 1980. And, so it was really time [for this project]. . . .’

‘It was a really great effort [Heritage] made. They recruited authors who knew the [policy] topics because they had actually worked in those departments or in other [areas], which gave them the opportunity for knowledge about how the rest of the government worked.’

‘And each department or agency had a chapter in the book. It was about 500 some-odd pages, I remember. And so I was very much impressed with what had happened.’

Meese recalled telling Reagan about the new project and said the California Republican had been immediately eager to view the final product.

‘Reagan was so impressed that he had a meeting of his cabinet before the inauguration. And he put a copy of the book at every person’s desk.’

The meeting was held in the State Department’s conference center, and each secretary was told to ‘find your chapter,’ Meese said.

From that point on, what had started as a meeting of conservative experts began to have a positive effect on the efficiency and policymaking within the new conservative White House.

One excerpt reported by UPI recommended against affirmative action, in that the new 1981 administration should ‘base its civil rights policy on the notion that every person has an inherent right to obtain whatever economic or other rewards he or she has earned, by virtue of merit, and that it is inherently wrong to penalize those who have earned their reward by giving preferential treatment and benefits to those who have not.’

As for how the Reagan administration utilized the first project’s work, Heatherly said the then-president’s political appointees were a ‘mixed bag,’ which led to differences in consideration.

‘Some agencies took it more seriously than others,’ he said.

Heatherly also pointed to his recent Wall Street Journal column defending the project then and now:

He said he had recruited 20 teams of experts from previous White Houses, academic institutions and within then-fledgling Heritage itself. 

The 1980 cycle’s book project went on to make the Washington Post’s bestseller list for three weeks, he added.

Steve Groves served as an assistant special counsel in the Trump administration while the president was being probed by former FBI Director Bob Mueller.

He is also the co-editor of this term’s Mandate for Leadership – the policy book portion of Project 2025.

Groves pushed back on the idea that Project 2025 or its book were intentionally geared toward Trump. 

‘It’s just a lot of sloppy journalism,’ he said. ‘Most [journalists] don’t chase the facts to get them right.’

Groves said after Biden politically collapsed in the June debate, mentions of Project 2025 in the media ‘spiked through the roof.’

He said it was evidence that the media-liberal-political coalition needed a new narrative, which was to make the Mandate for Leadership into an ‘insane document.’ Groves said that many of the allegations, such as demands for the next president to outlaw abortion and end birthright citizenship, were entirely false.

‘They just wanted to change the subject,’ he said.

‘[The idea] it’s Trump’s project is a lie,’ Groves added, pointing to the fact the anthology came out in 2023 and had been crafted in 2022 when the presidential election was anyone’s game.

Groves and Heritage Foundation President Kevin Roberts echoed each other’s sentiments in that regard, as Groves noted that many of the chapters in this year’s work do not present a singular ideological viewpoint.

Regarding trade policy in particular, conservatives hold divergent views that both fall under the proverbial ‘big tent’ on the right.

As Groves noted, Trump ally Peter Navarro – who would be considered a ‘fair trade’ proponent – and the CEO of the pro-‘free-trade’ Competitive Enterprise Institute, Kent Lassman, co-authored that chapter. 

Groves said Lassman’s purview more closely aligns with Heritage’s longstanding platform – but that Navarro’s inclusion further deconstructs allegations the project is a pro-Trump, far-right piece of propaganda.

For his part, Roberts suggested that situations like the above are what sets Heritage and Project 2025 apart from actual partisan policymaking endeavors.

In the 2024 cycle, he said, Heritage offered Project 2025 materials to every candidate or prospective candidate in the 2022-2023 timeframe, including Biden, Trump, former South Carolina Gov. Nikki Haley and Robert F. Kennedy, Jr.

‘President Biden did not respond, but if he responded, I would have personally gone over to the White House very happily, not sarcastically, and offered him a briefing,’ Roberts said.

‘On the origins of the mandate, it’s always been the case that we offer it to any presidential candidate who is interested in a briefing. I mean, we offer congressional briefings to Democrats. Of course, here in Washington, fewer and fewer over the years have taken us up on that. But maybe one day we can see that happen again.’

Roberts said that another misconception is that Heritage has issued the same type of ‘project’ every election cycle. In two ways, he said, that claim is flawed.

One, in elections like 2004, there was no reason to completely rewrite the manual for conservatism for either George W. Bush or then-Sen. John Kerry, D-Mass., because a Bush re-election would have represented policy continuity.

Spencer Chretien, a Project 2025 associate director, said at the project’s inception that conservatism has also changed in the time since the 1980 election. Conservatives used to oppose things like the 1975 ‘Church Committee’ – a congressional panel led by then-Sen. Frank Church, D-Idaho, examining the inner workings and ‘abuses’ of the intelligence community. 

Church’s committee might now be welcomed by conservatives, who have grown weary of the left’s embrace of the ‘government’s vast power.’ No longer do many conservatives see the Church Committee as a ‘kooky leftist attack’ against brave public servants, as they now themselves seek accountability for the actions of unelected bureaucrats there, he said.

Project 2025 is in other ways more like the original 1980-81 iteration, Roberts argued, in that it represents a consortium of sometimes-conflicting viewpoints that all fall within the conservative realm rather than a singular Heritage-viewpoint-based policy document.

Roberts also spoke to right-wing concerns about the project, including the high-profile condemnation from Trump – as many of the authors of Project 2025, like Navarro, were former administration officials, while others like Lassman were not.

‘This speaks to the heart of the project,’ Roberts said. ‘The project is really candidate-agnostic – so it’s been interesting to see commentary ranging from ‘This is specific to Trump’ to ‘It’s not specific to Trump enough.’

‘That actually underscores the point about how serious we are about it being candidate-agnostic. It’s important, obviously, given our IRS designation, but more importantly, our own ethics of the thing as it relates to Mr. Trump’s distancing of his campaign from it. That’s totally understandable.’

Roberts noted how the media have turned Project 2025 into a ‘boogeyman.’ When Americans of all stripes are told exactly what is in the project, they’re more amenable to it than any critic claims they should be.

The Heritage leader also dispelled rumors that the July departure of co-editor Paul Dans had anything to do with Trump’s comments or the media’s condemnations. Dans’ work had ended, and he had moved on to other projects, Roberts said.

He also added that, just like when Heritage presented the first project to Meese and Reagan, there remains no presumption that a candidate – conservative or not – will implement it.

‘It’s the kind of work that Heritage does all the time. Our honest response about Trump’s reaction to it: We’re gratified to see that it looks like a lot of that has calmed down,’ he said.

‘We want to wake up in a normal country. We want to wake up in a country where the American dream is alive. That’s what this project is about.’

Venezuelan authorities on Monday sought an arrest warrant for the opposition’s former presidential candidate Edmundo González, just over a month after election officials declared President Nicolás Maduro the winner of the disputed election that his opponents say he lost.

The prosecutor seeking the warrant in its request to a judge focused on terrorism-related crimes cites various charges against González, a former diplomat, including conspiracy, falsifying documents and usurpation of powers.

Ruling party-loyal electoral authorities declared Maduro the victor of the July 28 presidential elections hours after polls closed. They did not show any detailed results to back up their claim as they had offered in previous presidential elections. The lack of transparency has drawn international condemnation.

The opposition, however, managed to obtain more than 80% of vote tally sheets, which are printed by every electronic voting machine, and said they show Maduro lost by a wide margin against González.

Polling is a useful tool in politics, if somewhat blunt and slow, and this weekend Democrats were taking no small comfort in an ABC/Ipsos survey showing Kamala Harris leading Donald Trump by 4 points nationally.

But the important thing about this poll is not the margin. After all, Rasmussen has Trump up by 2 points. Nobody knows which is right. What’s important is that on Aug. 13, this same ABC poll also showed Harris up 4. Put another way, Harris’ momentum isn’t just gone, it’s been gone for a while.

I first clearly felt the air escaping the Harris balloon a little more than a fortnight ago, in San Francisco of all places, where one would think she’d be viewed as a hometown hero. But already, from almost everyone I met, there were creeping questions as to what she stands for, what she would do as president.

We have all seen the viral videos, even from the Democratic National Convention, of delegates asked what their favorite Harris policy is, only to stare off into the distance, looking for an answer that isn’t there as if they had been asked to conjugate some word in ancient Greek. 

I have now seen this expression more times than I can count, in red states, in blue states, in suburb, city and small town, even many of those committed to vote for the vice president admit it is kind of like buying a political scratch-off ticket. They aren’t sure what they are going to win.

Now, make no mistake, from the time that Nancy Pelosi shoved President Joe Biden, face first, off of the stage until just before the Democrats gathered in Chicago, the momentum was there, the vibes were real, and Harris’ numbers were going up.

I felt that distinctly, and palpably in the Democrats I spoke to, who had felt a kind of doom and gloom surrounding Grandpa Joe, but vibes are funny things and they tend to run out of steam. In fact, just after Trump survived his assassination attempt, it was Republicans who were convinced that the image of a bloodied and defiant Trump had already won them the election.

But not so fast.

So why did the wheels fall off of Harris’ vibe bus just as the joyride was getting started? There are a few missteps to point to, including her obstinate and bizarre refusal to answer questions or do interviews. 

This is where the slow nature of polling becomes a problem. For two weeks, I were told by the liberal media that Harris didn’t need to do any interviews. She was surging, they promised. But she wasn’t. 

And in that period, almost without fail, every voter I talked to said she needed to start answering questions. Today, it sure looks like the sponge bath she and Gov. Tim Walz received on CNN last week is too little, too late.

The bigger, related problem for Harris is that she simply does not have political chops. A candidate with political chops can do three interviews a day without breaking a sweat, they thrive on the unscripted moment that can be turned to their advantage.

Harris has none of these abilities, and she didn’t have to. Nobody without political chops and top notch instincts can win a competitive presidential primary, because they lose to better candidates, but Harris never had to face any other candidates and that lack of battle testing is showing its ugly head.

As the first orange leaves flutter groundward this week, we find ourselves where we were before Joe Biden’s inability to serve was spelled out in giant neon. This race is a toss up, the electorate is as divided as ever, and we are basically going into the fourth quarter all tied up.

For Donald Trump and JD Vance who have now blunted the short-lived Harris surge, this means more of the same, staying in the public eye as much as possible. You wouldn’t be surprised to see either of them with giant scissors at the grand opening of a Dairy Queen.

Harris and Walz, on the other hand, need a Second Act. Kamala describing how she makes collard greens and Tim eating pork chops on a stick at the state fair isn’t going to cut it. The American voters have questions, a lot of them, but do these untested Democratic candidates have any answers? We will soon find out.

The United States seized a plane owned by Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro in the Dominican Republic, Fox News has confirmed. 

Homeland Security Investigations (HSI) flew Maduro’s personal plane back to the United States Monday morning, when it landed in Fort Lauderdale, Florida, and is now in U.S. custody, a U.S. official told Fox News following an initial report by CNN.

The plane, described by officials as Maduro’s version of ‘Air Force One,’ is used for Maduro’s state visits around the world and was seized in the Dominican Republic after it was purchased through a straw company in violation of sanctions laws and export controls, the official said. U.S. authorities cited a specific violation of U.S. executive order 13884, signed by former President Donald Trump in 2019. 

The plane, valued at $13 million, is a Dassault Falcon 900-EX. The seizure was a result of a joint investigation with HSI and the U.S. Department of Commerce.

‘This morning, the Justice Department seized an aircraft we allege was illegally purchased for $13 million through a shell company and smuggled out of the United States for use by Nicolás Maduro and his cronies,’ U.S. Attorney General Merrick Garland said in a statement. ‘The Department will continue to pursue those who violate our sanctions and export controls to prevent them from using American resources to undermine the national security of the United States.’

‘Let this seizure send a clear message: aircraft illegally acquired from the United States for the benefit of sanctioned Venezuelan officials cannot just fly off into the sunset,’ Assistant Secretary for Export Enforcement Matthew Axelrod, of the Department of Commerce, added.  ‘It doesn’t matter how fancy the private jet or how powerful the officials – we will work relentlessly with our partners here and across the globe to identify and return any aircraft illegally smuggled outside of the United States.’

The seizure is expected to further frost relations between the U.S. and Venezuela.

In August 2019, Trump issued Executive Order 13884, which prohibits U.S. persons from engaging in transactions with persons who have acted or purported to act directly or indirectly for or on behalf of, the government of Venezuela, including as a member of the Maduro regime. To protect U.S. national security and foreign policy interests, the Department of Commerce has also imposed export controls for items intended, entirely or in part, for a Venezuelan military or military-intelligence end user, the Justice Department said Monday. 

In late 2022 and early 2023, persons affiliated with Maduro allegedly used a Caribbean-based shell company to conceal their involvement in the illegal purchase of the Dassault Falcon 900EX aircraft, which at the time was valued at approximately $13 million, from a company based in the Southern District of Florida, according to U.S. investigators.

Federal investigators say the aircraft was then illegally exported from the United States to Venezuela through the Caribbean in April 2023. Since May 2023, the Dassault Falcon, bearing tail number T7-ESPRT, ‘has flown almost exclusively to and from a military base in Venezuela and has been used for the benefit of Maduro and his representatives, including to transport Maduro on visits to other countries,’ the DOJ said. 

The Department of Commerce Bureau of Industry and Security Miami Field Office is investigating the case, along with the DHS, HSI El Dorado Task Force Miami. 

Fox News’ David Spunt contributed to this report.

Israeli President Isaac Herzog eulogized Israeli-American hostage Hersh Goldberg-Polin on Monday, apologizing ‘on behalf of the state of Israel’ after Hamas murdered six captives over the weekend.

‘Beloved Hersh, with a torn and broken heart, I stand here today as the President of the State of Israel, bidding you farewell and asking for your forgiveness, from you, and from Carmel, from Eden, from Almog, from Alex, and Ori, and from all your loved ones,’ Herzog said from the lecturn at Golberg-Polin’s funeral in Jerusalem. 

‘I apologize on behalf of the State of Israel, that we failed to protect you in the terrible disaster of October 7, that we failed to bring you home safely,’ Herzog continued. ‘I apologize that the country you immigrated to at the age of 7, wrapped in the Israeli flag, could not keep you safe. Rachel, Jon, dear Libby, and Orly, grandparents, and the whole family – I ask for your forgiveness, forgiveness that we could not bring Hersh back home alive. Your special light, Hersh, captivated all of us from the first glance, even through the posters crying out for his return.’ 

‘Most of us did not have the privilege of knowing you in life, but you have been so alive in us for eleven months now; together with many other brothers and sisters, held captive by cursed, monstrous murderers – since Simchat Torah – which turned into the day of our disaster,’ he said. ‘Know this: We are witnesses, and we will never forget. There is no door in the world on which your beloved family did not knock for you, for your rescue and well-being. There is no stone they left unturned, no prayer or plea they did not cry out – from one end of the world to the other – in the ears of God and man.’

Herzog told mourners that the state of Israel ‘has an urgent and immediate task.’ 

‘Decision-makers must do everything possible, with determination and courage, to save those who can still be saved, and to bring back all our sons and daughters, our brothers and sisters,’ he said. ‘This is not a political goal, and it must not become a political dispute. It is a supreme moral, Jewish, and human duty of the State of Israel to its citizens.

‘We did not fulfill this duty. And now – we have a sacred and shared obligation, to stand up and bring them all back to their homeland. For the spirit, resilience, and unity of Israel,’ Herzog added. ‘Of course, we do not forget for a moment our obligation to hold accountable the despicable murderers who butchered you, Hersh, your friends, our sisters, and our brothers. Here too, the mission is clear and binding: To continue fighting relentlessly against the murderous terrorist organization Hamas, which has once again proven that there is no end to its savagery and the crimes against humanity it is willing to commit.’ 

Thousands attended the funeral Monday for Goldberg-Polin, a 23-year-old native of Berkeley, California, according to The Associated Press. He was one of the most well-known hostages, and his parents had led a high-profile campaign for the captives’ release, meeting with President Biden and Pope Francis and addressing the Democratic National Convention last month.

Biden, who had been on vacation for two consecutive weeks, arrived back at the White House from Rehoboth Beach, Delware, on Monday morning. He and Vice President Kamala Harris convened in the Situation Room with a hostage deal negotiating team following the murder of Goldberg-Polin and five other hostages by Hamas on Saturday. 

Goldberg-Polin, a dual U.S.-Israeli citizen, was seized at a music festival in southern Israel during Hamas’ Oct. 7 attack. Israeli forces recovered his body in the tunnels under Rafah, along with Israelis Carmel Gat, Eden Yerushalmi, Alexander Lobanov, Almog Sarusi and Master Sergeant Ori Danino. Hamas terrorists murdered the six hostages as Israeli forces closed in during a rescue mission in Gaza, according to the Israeli military.

U.S. Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin spoke with Israeli Minister of Defense Yoav Gallant on Sunday, to pass ‘along his deepest condolences to the families of all of the slain hostages, and he expressed outrage at their vicious, illegal, and immoral execution at the hands of Hamas,’ the U.S. Defense Department said in a statement. ‘The Secretary affirmed that Hamas leaders must be held accountable for their crimes. And Secretary Austin and Minister Gallant reaffirmed their mutual commitment to swiftly reaching a ceasefire deal to secure the release of all of the hostages.’ 

Hamas still holds 101 hostages, including seven Americans, following the Oct. 7 attacks. 

The Associated Press contributed to this report.