Thom Tillis said he would oppose efforts to confirm a new Federal Reserve chair if current Chair Jerome Powell is removed from his position. Tillis’ comments come amid reports that Powell is under investigation related to past testimony about renovations at the Federal Reserve’s Washington headquarters.
In a post on X, Tillis expressed concern about what he described as potential political interference involving the central bank and the Justice Department. He stated that until the legal matter involving Powell is resolved, he would vote against confirming any new nominee to lead the Federal Reserve.
Tillis’ position is significant because he serves on the Senate Banking Committee, which oversees Federal Reserve nominations. Powell’s current term as chair is set to expire in May, though he is expected to remain on the Federal Reserve Board of Governors until 2028 unless removed earlier.
The reported investigation involves testimony Powell gave to lawmakers regarding renovation costs at the Federal Reserve’s headquarters. According to reports, the inquiry is being handled by the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the District of Columbia and is examining whether Powell accurately described the scope and funding of the project. The Federal Reserve’s renovation efforts are funded internally rather than through congressional appropriations.
Powell has denied any wrongdoing and has suggested the matter is connected to broader disagreements over monetary policy. Meanwhile, some lawmakers, including Elizabeth Warren, have raised concerns about maintaining the Federal Reserve’s independence. The situation continues to unfold as policymakers debate leadership and oversight of the central bank.
Mike Johnson announced that he has concerns about ongoing negotiations in Washington over a potential spending package aimed at preventing a government shutdown. According to Johnson, discussions led by Chuck Schumer and Senate Democrats are taking place as lawmakers work to reach an agreement before funding deadlines expire.
Among the debated provisions is a proposal related to health coverage eligibility for certain non-citizens. Critics argue that expanding benefits could place additional strain on public resources, while supporters say the measure addresses humanitarian and public health considerations. The issue has become a focal point in the broader debate over immigration and federal spending priorities.
The reported package also includes approximately $500 million in funding for National Public Radio (NPR). Supporters contend that public broadcasting provides educational and informational programming nationwide, while opponents question whether the funding level is appropriate given other budget pressures.
Another key point of contention is the overall cost of the proposal, which some lawmakers estimate could increase federal spending by roughly $1.5 trillion. Fiscal conservatives have raised concerns about the potential impact on the national deficit and inflation, while others argue that certain expenditures are necessary to maintain government operations and economic stability.
As negotiations continue, Republican leaders including Johnson are urging a more limited spending approach, while Democratic leaders maintain that a comprehensive agreement is needed to avoid disruption. The debate reflects broader partisan divisions over federal priorities, deficit management, and the scope of government programs.
Mike McDonnell announced that he is switching his party affiliation from Democrat to Republican ahead of the elections. In interviews explaining his decision, McDonnell said his pro-life stance on abortion was a major factor behind the change. He stated that his position, which he says is rooted in his religious beliefs, created ongoing tension within his former party.
McDonnell said he had asked fellow Democrats to respect his views but felt he was penalized because of them. According to the lawmaker, local party members declined to seat him as a delegate and withheld certain party resources. He also said the state Democratic Party voted to censure him over his abortion stance. McDonnell emphasized that his Christian faith and membership in the Roman Catholic Church were central to his decision.
“Being a Christian and pro-life is more important to me than being a registered Democrat,” McDonnell said when announcing the switch. He described the move as difficult but necessary, citing what he characterized as a lack of tolerance for differing viewpoints within the party on the abortion issue.
McDonnell’s party change strengthens the Republican majority in the Nebraska Legislature, potentially affecting upcoming legislative debates. One issue under consideration is LB 764, a proposal that would shift Nebraska’s presidential electoral vote system to a winner-take-all format rather than allocating votes by congressional district.
Jim Pillen has voiced support for the bill, saying it would align Nebraska with most other states and create a unified approach to presidential elections. The proposal continues to be debated by lawmakers as the state weighs potential changes to its electoral system.
Maria Salazar is facing criticism from some conservative commentators after discussing immigration reform during a recent appearance on Fox News. Her remarks centered on the need for a broader national conversation about undocumented immigrants who have lived in the United States for years. The comments sparked debate within Republican circles, particularly among supporters of former President Donald Trump and his border enforcement policies.
Salazar argued that once border security is strengthened, lawmakers should address the legal status of long-term undocumented immigrants. Critics, however, expressed concern that such proposals resemble past immigration reforms that paired enforcement promises with pathways to legal status. Supporters of stricter immigration policies say they remain wary of reforms they believe could incentivize future unlawful migration.
The legislation at the center of the debate is the Dignity Act, which Salazar co-sponsored with Veronica Escobar. The bill proposes a structured program allowing certain undocumented immigrants to apply for legal status if they meet specific conditions, including paying fees, passing background checks, and complying with other requirements. Salazar has stated that the measure is not an amnesty program but rather an attempt to balance border enforcement with practical solutions.
The proposal also includes significant funding for border security measures, including technology and infrastructure investments. Supporters say the bill combines accountability with enhanced enforcement, while opponents argue that any pathway to legal status for individuals who entered the country unlawfully raises concerns about fairness and long-term immigration policy impacts.
Immigration remains a central issue in national politics, with lawmakers sharply divided over how to address border security, asylum procedures, and the status of undocumented residents. As debate over the Dignity Act continues, the discussion reflects broader tensions within Congress and among voters about how best to approach comprehensive immigration reform.
BREAKING: Iran Strikes Own Shadow Fleet Tanker in Hormuz Chaos – Oil Markets on Edge
Iran reportedly struck the Palau-flagged tanker Skylight with a drone attack off Oman’s Musandam peninsula, near the entrance to the Strait of Hormuz.
Four crew members were reported injured out of a 20-person crew (15 Indian nationals and 5 Iranian nationals). The entire crew was evacuated. Footage circulating online shows the vessel ablaze, with thick black smoke rising from the deck.
The incident marks the first reported tanker strike in or near the Strait amid Iran’s retaliatory actions following US-Israeli strikes on Iranian targets. Iran had previously declared the Strait closed to international navigation. Some reports suggest the vessel may have been part of a so-called “shadow fleet” used to transport sanctioned Iranian oil, though details remain fluid and independently unconfirmed.
Shipping activity in the region has slowed sharply. Reports indicate dozens of crude and product tankers idling in the Gulf to avoid entering the high-risk zone. Major shipping firms are reassessing transit routes. Brent crude prices have risen amid fears of prolonged disruption, with analysts warning of further spikes if instability continues.
The Strait of Hormuz remains one of the world’s most critical energy chokepoints, carrying roughly 20 percent of global oil flows. Any sustained disruption could have broad economic ripple effects across energy, shipping, and financial markets.
Markets are now closely watching whether the situation stabilizes—or escalates further.
Ahmadinejad, born in Tehran in 1956, rose through Iran’s conservative political establishment and previously served as mayor of Tehran before winning the presidency in 2005. His 2009 re-election sparked widespread protests amid allegations of electoral irregularities. During his time in office, he was known internationally for his confrontational rhetoric toward Israel and the West, as well as for expanding Iran’s nuclear program.
After leaving office, Ahmadinejad’s political influence declined. He publicly disagreed at times with Iran’s Supreme Leader, Ali Khamenei, and was disqualified from running in subsequent presidential elections. In later years, he served as a member of Iran’s Expediency Discernment Council, holding a more limited role in the country’s political structure.
The reported strike occurred amid escalating regional hostilities involving Iran, Israel, and the United States. Military operations have included airstrikes targeting strategic sites and retaliatory missile and drone launches affecting multiple countries in the region. Officials in several nations have confirmed impacts on both military and civilian areas, though full casualty figures remain fluid.
Governments involved have issued sharply worded statements, and military activity remains ongoing. Shipping routes near the Strait of Hormuz have also experienced disruptions amid the broader conflict. As of now, officials continue to assess damage and casualties, and the situation remains highly volatile.
Reports from Iranian state-affiliated media claim that Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, who served as Iran’s president from 2005 to 2013, was killed in an airstrike that targeted his residence in Tehran’s Narmak neighborhood on March 1. According to those outlets, Ahmadinejad died along with members of his security detail. Independent confirmation from international authorities has not been publicly released.
Ahmadinejad, born in Tehran in 1956, rose through Iran’s conservative political establishment and previously served as mayor of Tehran before winning the presidency in 2005. His 2009 re-election sparked widespread protests amid allegations of electoral irregularities. During his time in office, he was known internationally for his confrontational rhetoric toward Israel and the West, as well as for expanding Iran’s nuclear program.
After leaving office, Ahmadinejad’s political influence declined. He publicly disagreed at times with Iran’s Supreme Leader, Ali Khamenei, and was disqualified from running in subsequent presidential elections. In later years, he served as a member of Iran’s Expediency Discernment Council, holding a more limited role in the country’s political structure.
The reported strike occurred amid escalating regional hostilities involving Iran, Israel, and the United States. Military operations have included airstrikes targeting strategic sites and retaliatory missile and drone launches affecting multiple countries in the region. Officials in several nations have confirmed impacts on both military and civilian areas, though full casualty figures remain fluid.
Governments involved have issued sharply worded statements, and military activity remains ongoing. Shipping routes near the Strait of Hormuz have also experienced disruptions amid the broader conflict. As of now, officials continue to assess damage and casualties, and the situation remains highly volatile.
Iran’s Supreme Leader, Ali Khamenei, has reportedly died following an Israeli strike in Tehran, according to a senior Israeli official who spoke to Fox News Digital. The official said Khamenei’s compound was heavily damaged in the attack. Iranian authorities have not publicly confirmed the report, and independent verification has not been released.
Khamenei led the Islamic Republic for more than three decades, becoming one of the Middle East’s longest-serving heads of state. Analysts have described him as a deeply ideological figure who prioritized preserving Iran’s political system and regional influence. Behnam Ben Taleblu of the Foundation for Defense of Democracies told Fox News Digital that Khamenei combined firm ideological commitments with calculated political strategy.
Born on April 19, 1939, in Mashhad, Iran, Khamenei was an active participant in the 1979 revolution that overthrew Shah Mohammad Reza Pahlavi. He later became a close ally of Ruhollah Khomeini, the Islamic Republic’s founding leader. Khamenei served as Iran’s president from 1981 to 1989 and was appointed supreme leader after Khomeini’s death.
During his tenure, Khamenei oversaw Iran’s political, military, and judicial institutions, consolidating significant authority within the office of the supreme leader. His leadership period included tensions with the United States and Israel, as well as domestic unrest. Critics have pointed to restrictions on political opposition and social freedoms, while supporters have credited him with maintaining the continuity of the Islamic Republic’s governing system.
One of the most significant internal challenges to his leadership occurred in 2009, when disputed presidential election results led to widespread protests across Iran. The demonstrations marked one of the largest waves of unrest since the 1979 revolution and were met with a government crackdown. Khamenei remained in power through subsequent regional conflicts, economic sanctions, and shifting geopolitical dynamics.
Hillary Clinton Addresses Questions About Ghislaine Maxwell During Congressional Deposition
Former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton answered questions from reporters following a closed-door deposition before the U.S. House Committee on Oversight and Accountability, including inquiries about why Ghislaine Maxwell attended her daughter Chelsea Clinton’s wedding in 2010.
Several well-known Republican figures are frequently mentioned as possible contenders. Some voters favor experienced leaders with national recognition, while others are looking for a new generation of conservative leadership. Economic policy, border security, inflation, taxes, national security, healthcare, and government spending continue to rank among the issues many Republican voters say are most important.
The deposition, which lasted more than six hours, was part of an ongoing congressional review examining matters related to public records, government oversight, and historical events involving prominent public figures.
Clinton Explains Maxwell’s Presence at Wedding
During a media availability following the session, Clinton was asked about Maxwell’s attendance at Chelsea Clinton’s wedding, which took place on July 31, 2010, in Rhinebeck.
Clinton stated that Maxwell attended the event as a guest accompanying technology entrepreneur Ted Waitt, who had received an invitation to the wedding.
According to Clinton, Maxwell was present as a “plus one” and was not personally invited by the family. The wedding included several hundred guests from political, business, philanthropic, and social circles.
Photos from the event have received renewed attention in recent years following increased public interest in Maxwell’s associations and activities.
Clinton Denies Knowledge of Criminal Conduct
Clinton reiterated that her interactions with Maxwell were limited and stated that she had no knowledge of the criminal conduct that later became associated with Maxwell and Jeffrey Epstein.
She also emphasized that she never met Epstein and had no involvement with his activities.
“I answered every one of their questions as fully as I could based on what I knew,” Clinton told reporters. She further stated that she never traveled on Epstein’s private aircraft and never visited his residences.
Representatives for the Clinton family have previously made similar statements regarding Epstein, maintaining that they were unaware of any criminal behavior during the periods when public events occasionally placed the individuals in overlapping social settings.
Congressional Review Continues
Thursday’s deposition took place at the Chappaqua Performing Arts Center in New York and was conducted behind closed doors.
The proceedings were briefly interrupted after Rep. Lauren Boebert reportedly shared a photograph from inside the deposition room. Questioning later resumed and continued throughout the day.
The Oversight Committee has not publicly released detailed information regarding the substance of the testimony.
Bill Clinton Scheduled for Separate Session
Former President Bill Clinton is expected to participate in a separate closed-door interview with congressional investigators as part of the committee’s ongoing review.
Lawmakers have indicated that the broader inquiry seeks to gather information from multiple individuals connected to events and matters under examination.
As the investigation continues, additional testimony and records could become part of the public discussion in the months ahead.
Why This Matters
Congressional oversight investigations often attract significant public attention because they involve questions of transparency, accountability, and public trust.
While the committee’s review remains ongoing, testimony from current and former public officials can help lawmakers establish factual records and assess whether further action or recommendations are warranted.
The proceedings also highlight how historical associations and public events can continue to draw scrutiny years later when new information emerges or public interest increases.
Opinion: Transparency Benefits Everyone
From a conservative perspective, congressional oversight plays an important role in ensuring transparency and accountability among public officials, regardless of political party.
Supporters of strong oversight argue that elected leaders and former government officials should be willing to answer questions about matters that generate legitimate public interest. At the same time, they emphasize that conclusions should be based on evidence rather than assumptions or guilt by association.
Many conservatives believe that transparency strengthens public confidence in government institutions and helps ensure that important questions receive clear and factual answers. Whether the investigation produces significant findings or not, supporters argue that public accountability remains an essential part of a healthy democratic system.
Kristi Noem said that Elon Musk and members of his Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) team assisted in identifying unauthorized surveillance software on devices used by her and other political appointees at the United States Department of Homeland Security.
During an interview with Patrick Bet-David, Noem stated that a small number of DHS staff members had allegedly installed monitoring software on government-issued phones and computers. She said the issue was uncovered as part of a broader internal review and that the matter was referred to legal counsel for further evaluation.
Noem also said her team identified secure rooms containing documents that were turned over to attorneys. While she did not provide technical details about the software or publicly identify the employees involved, she indicated that those connected to the matter are no longer working at the department.
Musk has not released a separate public statement specifically addressing the claim. The reported discovery comes as DOGE has conducted reviews of operational systems at multiple federal agencies in an effort to improve efficiency and oversight.
Noem previously stated that President Donald Trump authorized Musk’s access to certain DHS systems for evaluation purposes. Additional details about the incident have not been disclosed.
New Jersey Gov. Mikie Sherrill received a mixed reaction Wednesday night at the Prudential Center during a pregame ceremony honoring Olympic gold medalist Jack Hughes. Sherrill took part in a ceremonial puck drop as Hughes returned to the ice following his performance with Team USA.
When she was introduced over the arena’s public address system, portions of the crowd responded with boos. The reaction also extended to her husband, Jason Hedberg, who accompanied her on the ice. The evening, however, was primarily focused on celebrating Hughes and other players who represented their countries at the Olympics.
The game marked Hughes’ first appearance back with the New Jersey Devils after helping Team USA secure a gold medal. Fans cheered loudly for the players, and chants of “U-S-A!” echoed throughout the arena. Hughes thanked supporters during remarks to the crowd, expressing pride in representing both his NHL team and the state of New Jersey.
Following the event, Sherrill shared photos from the ceremony on social media, where reactions were mixed. Some users criticized her presence, while others defended the governor. The moment reflected the broader intersection of sports and politics, particularly when elected officials participate in high-profile public events.
Sherrill has faced political scrutiny in recent years, including debate over aspects of her early career and policy positions as governor. More recently, the United States Department of Justice filed a lawsuit challenging certain New Jersey immigration policies. Despite the political backdrop, the night’s celebration remained centered on Hughes and Team USA’s Olympic achievement.
Leave a Reply