Former President Bill Clinton is telling the House Oversight Committee that he had ‘no idea’ of Jeffrey Epstein’s crimes as his deposition kicks off in Chappaqua, New York.

Clinton is in the hot seat for the committee’s bipartisan investigation into the late financier and sex trafficker for what is expected to be an all-day session of questions into his relationship with Epstein and his accomplice Ghislaine Maxwell.

‘Now, let me say what you’re going to hear from me. First, I had no idea of the crimes Epstein was committing. No matter how many photos you show me, I have two things that, at the end of the day, matter more than your interpretation of those 20-year-old photos,’ Clinton said, according to his prepared opening remarks.

‘I know what I saw and more importantly, what I didn’t see. I know what I did and more importantly, what I didn’t do. I saw nothing and I did nothing wrong.’

Clinton also warned lawmakers, ‘You’ll often hear me say that I don’t recall,’ but said he would not speculate when asked questions.

‘That might be unsatisfying, but I’m not going to say something I’m not sure of. This was all a long time ago, and I’m bound by my oath not to speculate or to guess. This is not merely for my benefit, but because it doesn’t help you for me to play detective 24 years later,’ Clinton said.

Meanwhile, House Oversight Committee Chairman James Comer, R-Ky., suggested he had an abundance of questions for the former president ahead of the deposition.

‘I think everyone’s seen that there are a lot of photos that have been released by the Department of Justice (DOJ) as well as the Epstein estate. There are a lot of email correspondence that included President Clinton,’ Comer said when asked what he needed to hear.

‘Secretary Clinton confirmed this yesterday: Jeffrey Epstein was in the White House 17 times while Bill Clinton was president. We know that Bill Clinton flew on Jeffrey Epstein’s plane at least 27 times. So those are questions that we’re going to ask.’

But Clinton said in his opening remarks that he would not have ridden on the plane if he knew the illicit things that took place there.

‘As someone who grew up in a home with domestic abuse, not only would I have not flown on his plane if I had any inkling of what he was doing — I would have turned him in myself and led the call for justice for his crimes, not sweetheart deals,’ Clinton said.

‘But even with 20/20 hindsight, I saw nothing that ever gave me pause. We are only here because he hid it from everyone so well for so long, and by the time it came to light with his 2008 guilty plea, I had long stopped associating with him.’

Comer also said questions would pertain to Epstein and to Clinton’s relationship with Ghislaine Maxwell, the late financier’s accomplice who is serving out a prison term in Texas after being convicted on federal sex trafficking charges.

Comer told reporters that his list of questions for Clinton had ‘increased’ in the wake of former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s own deposition before the committee on Thursday.

‘Mrs. Clinton deferred a lot of questions to her husband today. There were at least a dozen times when she said, ‘You’ll have to ask my husband that. I can’t answer that,” the chairman said.

He said that many of those deferrals had to do with the Clintons’ nonprofit work.

‘There are so many examples in the evidence the Department of Justice released, in correspondence where Epstein bragged about how involved he was initially in setting up the Clinton Global Initiative and the Clinton Foundation,’ he said.

‘We asked those questions to Secretary Clinton yesterday, and she kept saying she was in the Senate at that time. She wasn’t focused on it. ‘You’ll have to ask my husband.’ So a lot of the Clinton Global Initiative questions yesterday went unanswered because Mrs. Clinton deferred to her husband.’

The former president defended his wife during his opening statement as well, telling lawmakers that ‘before we start, I have to get personal.’

‘You made Hillary come in. She had nothing to do with Jeffrey Epstein. Nothing. She has no memory of even meeting him,’ Clinton said. ‘She neither traveled with him nor visited any of his properties. Whether you subpoenaed 10 people or 10,000, including her, was simply not right.’

Like Hillary Clinton did in her opening remarks, he said Epstein’s victims deserve both ‘justice’ and ‘healing,’ telling lawmakers that it was for them that he was appearing before the committee.

Clinton’s deposition began a few minutes after 11 a.m. on Friday, a person familiar with planning told Fox News Digital.

Comer told reporters on Thursday after Hillary Clinton’s sitdown that he expected the ordeal to be ‘even longer’ on Friday. 

Her deposition lasted roughly six hours from start to finish, with a brief lunch break in between.

Neither of the Clintons has been accused of anything related to Epstein’s crimes. But the former president’s name appears multiple times in documents released by the DOJ and the House Oversight Committee pertaining to the investigation into Epstein.

Like his wife’s testimony, Clinton will speak to the committee behind closed doors and under oath. 

The interview will be transcribed, with a video likely to be released within a week of its conclusion.

Related Article

Clintons cave: Comer says Bill and Hillary to testify in Epstein probe

Former President Bill Clinton is sitting Friday for a deposition over the Epstein scandal nearly 29 years to the date of an infamous encounter with an intern that sparked a famous public denial.

On February 28, 1997 — 29 years from Saturday — Clinton allegedly had his ‘blue dress’ encounter with then-intern Monica Lewinsky at the White House.

The official report from independent counsel Kenneth Starr to Congress lists the date in its section laying out ‘Physical Evidence.’

‘Physical conclusively establishes that the president and Ms. Lewinsky had a sexual relationship,’ the referral from Starr to the House of Representatives reads.

‘After reaching an immunity and cooperation agreement with the Office of the Independent Counsel on July 28, 1998, Ms. Lewinsky turned over a navy blue dress that she said she had worn during a sexual encounter with the President on February 28, 1997.’

Starr’s report went on to say that when Lewinsky next pulled the blue dress from her closet she ‘surmised that the stains’ then appearing on it ‘were the president’s semen.’

That discovery led Starr’s office to request a blood sample from Clinton, which he provided to a physician in the White House Map Room on August 3, 1998, in the presence of an FBI agent and one of Starr’s attorneys.

Two subsequent tests concluded the president’s DNA was found on the dress and that ‘genetic markers’ on the semen were characteristic of 1 out of 7.87 trillion Caucasian males.

When Clinton was deposed in the Paula Jones matter, he was asked whether he had sexual contact with Lewinsky, which he denied. The February 28 encounter, however, was later used by Starr to argue that Clinton had lied under oath.

Clinton publicly denied the affair at the end of an unrelated January 26, 1998, press conference:

‘I want to say one thing to the American people: I’m going to say this again. I did not have sexual relations with that woman, Miss Lewinsky,’ Clinton said.

‘I never told anybody to lie. Not a single time. Never. These allegations are false, and I need to go back to work for the American people.’

Clinton was later impeached by the House, but the Senate voted against removing him from office.

A painting depicting Clinton wearing Lewinsky’s blue dress and sitting in a provocative pose was recorded on page EFTA00000862 of the Justice Department’s Epstein Files cache.

The painting was originally reported in 2019 to have been photographed inside Epstein’s Manhattan townhouse. It was not commissioned by Clinton and is not a White House image. Clinton himself also denied knowledge of the unique work.

Also on February 28 — this time in 1989 — federal authorities effectively shut down the financial firm that ultimately led to the Whitewater investigation. On February 28, 1989, federal authorities placed Madison Guaranty Savings & Loan, owned by Clinton ally Jim McDougal, into conservatorship. The entity became the genesis of Kenneth Starr’s Whitewater investigation, which later expanded to include the Lewinsky matter. While scrutinizing Bill and Hillary Clinton’s connection to the real estate dealings beginning in 1994 — for which they were both exonerated — Starr ultimately uncovered a presidential affair with an intern and the public deceit that followed.

What resulted in Clinton’s 1998 impeachment began more than a decade earlier, as Starr examined real estate transactions in a resort community project called Whitewater Estates in the Ozarks that involved a company formed by the future first couple and their politically-connected friends Jim and Susan McDougal.

The Clintons and McDougals wanted to sell lots for vacation homes, but in 1979 interest rates rose to nearly 20%, leaving potential buyers wary, according to the Encyclopedia of Arkansas.

Jim McDougal eventually took control of a rural bank later renamed Madison Guaranty Savings & Loan.

Starr ultimately investigated whether loans from Madison were improperly connected to Whitewater, and whether or what political influence benefitted McDougals financial dealings.

The Clintons were both investigated but never charged in connection with the bank or Whitewater, but the McDougals were, along with Clinton’s gubernatorial successor Gov. Jim Guy Tucker.

The Clinton Foundation did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

Related Article

House Oversight GOP rejects Hillary Clinton demand for public Epstein hearing: ‘No one is buying their claims’

The ongoing standoff over Homeland Security funding is raising concerns about the potential impact on Homeland Security Investigations (HSI), the agency that has helped bring cases against high-profile figures, including Sean ‘Diddy’ Combs and Sinaloa cartel co-founder Joaquín ‘El Chapo’ Guzmán.

HSI is one of several agencies under the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) threatened by the ongoing government shutdown.

That branch of DHS acts as the investigative arm for Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) — the agency that Democrats want to rein in and reform — and handles investigations into human and sex trafficking, drug trafficking, immigration-related crimes, child exploitation and several other areas.

Sen. Katie Britt, R-Ala., who was anointed the lead negotiator for Senate Republicans in the ongoing DHS funding back-and-forth, told Fox News Digital the agency’s work is ‘critically important.’

‘When you think about interior enforcement, I mean, HSI is a critical component of that,’ Britt said. ‘You look at what they’ve done, you look at the bad actors they’ve been able to hunt down and hold accountable for human trafficking, drug trafficking, sex trafficking, child pornography, trafficking, all kinds of things.’

Other big names whom HSI has played a role in investigating or indicting include R. Kelly, Josh Duggar, Sinaloa cartel co-founder Ismael ‘El Mayo’ Zambada and Jared Fogle.

While ICE and other immigration enforcement operations like HSI were funded in part through Republicans’ ‘big, beautiful bill,’ the lapse in ongoing appropriations could threaten supplies in the field and travel, hampering investigations already underway.

A DHS spokesperson told Fox News Digital that HSI was continuing to function during the shutdown, with arrests and investigations still happening. But as the current 14-day shutdown continues, delays in supply procurement and travel for ‘critical personnel to move around the country’ could be impacted.

‘Our national security and ability to get criminals, including pedophiles and other public safety threats, off the streets could be impacted the longer this Democratic shutdown continues,’ they said.

Senate Democrats and the White House have so far tried and failed to reach a deal to fund DHS after trading offers and counteroffers in a slow back-and-forth over the last two weeks.

Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., charged that ICE had been ‘unleashed without guardrails’ throughout the country.  

‘This is not border security, this is not law and order, this is chaos — created at the top and felt in so many of our neighborhoods,’ Schumer said.

And with lawmakers gone from Washington, D.C., for the weekend, the shutdown is guaranteed to stretch into its third week. Senate Democrats want stringent reforms to ICE, including requiring agents to obtain judicial warrants, unmask and provide thorough identification — all demands that are red lines for the Republicans and the White House, who fear that doing so would increase the chances of ICE agents being doxxed.

While Republicans and the administration raised concerns about HSI and other ICE functions, Sen. Chris Murphy, D-Conn., countered that from his understanding, ‘most everybody at HSI is gone.’

‘They’ve all been deployed to the interior,’ he told Fox News Digital. ‘Not many, if not most, redeployed to interior enforcement. So the administration has gutted HSI.’

‘My impression is that HSI has been one of the agencies that has been essentially turned into ICE Junior,’ Murphy said.

Related Article

DHS shutdown drags into week two as Iran threat, SOTU clash complicate Hill talks

White House chief of staff Susie Wiles’ attorney in 2023 is disputing claims that he agreed to let the Biden-era FBI record a call with his client without her knowledge, according to a report.

‘If I ever pulled a stunt like that I wouldn’t – and shouldn’t – have a license to practice law,’ the unidentified attorney said, according to Axios. ‘I’m as shocked as Susie.’ 

The denial comes as scrutiny intensifies around the FBI’s use of subpoenas and investigative tools during special counsel Jack Smith’s Trump-related probes ahead of President Donald Trump’s 2024 re-election.

Reuters first disclosed the subpoenas Wednesday, reporting that the Biden FBI subpoenaed Wiles’ and now-FBI Director Kash Patel’s phone records in 2022 and 2023, when both were private citizens. Smith was investigating claims Trump worked to overturn the 2020 election and his handling of classified documents at his Mar-a-Lago, Florida, resort. 

At least 10 FBI employees were fired Wednesday over the matter, Fox News Digital previously learned. 

Amid the revelations, two FBI officials said that FBI agents recorded a phone call between Wiles and her attorney in 2023. Wiles’ attorney was aware the call was being recorded and consented, but Wiles was not informed, the officials claimed. 

The lawyer, whose name has not been publicly released, pushed back that he ‘categorically denies he allowed his client to be recorded by the FBI,’ according to Axios reporter Marc Caputo. 

Wiles reportedly ‘believes him & that the Biden-era FBI may have lied about it,’ Caputo wrote on X. 

Fox News Digital reached out to the White House and Wiles for comment, but did not immediately receive replies. Fox News Digital also reached out to the FBI for comment Friday morning. 

The report sparked conservatives and Trump allies to back the unidentified lawyer and balk at the case overall. 

‘I know the long time lawyer ….and I believe him – This is a violation of basic constitutional rights every American by right – has. We need accountability and we need action,’ Trump 2024 co-campaign manager Chris LaCivita posted to X. 

‘So the lawyer Biden’s FBI eavesdropped on during a call with Susie Wiles said he had no idea it happened,’ OutKick founder Clay Travis posted to X. ‘This is a huge story. Biden’s FBI spied on Trump’s campaign manager in the 2024 campaign.’ 

Wiles was reportedly stunned by the news of the subpoenas, with Axios reporting that she told associates Thursday, ‘I am in shock.’

Patel issued a similar statement on Wednesday.

‘It is outrageous and deeply alarming that the previous FBI leadership secretly subpoenaed my own phone records — along with those of now White House chief of staff Susie Wiles — using flimsy pretexts and burying the entire process in prohibited case files designed to evade all oversight,’ he said in a statement obtained by Fox News Digital. 

Related Article

JONATHAN TURLEY: Jack Smith’s secret surveillance of Patel and Wiles should alarm us all

President Donald Trump has lost his tariff case in the Supreme Court. However, with careful and prudent use of the tariff powers he does have, he can turn this into a win for his policies and for America.

The Supreme Court has just ruled in Learning Services v. Trump that the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) does not authorize the president to impose tariffs. While the act unquestionably gives him the power to regulate imports in the event of unusual and extraordinary emergencies, the dispute was whether tariffs – a kind of tax – are legally and constitutionally ‘regulation.’

While there were reasonable arguments on both sides, six of the nine justices ruled they are not, and that the IEEPA does not empower the president to impose tariffs. What are the likely economic consequences of this ruling, and what should it imply for future Trump trade policy?

First, note that as economic policy, tariffs are a bad idea. International trade raises incomes and promotes economic growth in every country that trades. Trade is mutually beneficial, win-win for all trading parties. It is a popular myth that trade destroyed American manufacturing. American manufacturing has steadily increased since 1970, more than doubling, as shown by data collected by the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis.

On the other hand, roughly 90% of the costs of the ‘liberation day’ tariffs have been borne by American businesses and consumers, as shown in analysis by economists at the New York Federal Reserve. The American economy has had solid growth and low unemployment under Trump, but this is owing to his excellent energy and deregulation policies, which have reduced regulatory burdens. Tariff costs are another burden on the economy. Removing this drag should further encourage economic growth and employment.

It is also a popular myth that a trade deficit is a loss for a country. The trade deficit, or current account, is balanced the capital and financial accounts, that is, foreigners investing in America. There are two reasons why foreign investment flows into America. One is that America’s security and dynamism make it an attractive place to invest, a good thing. The other is the Federal government’s growing appetite for borrowing to cover its burgeoning deficits, a bad thing. Tariffs and trade restrictions make America’s economy less dynamic and do nothing to curb the government’s fiscal irresponsibility. There is no good economic argument for tariffs.

However, for foreign policy and national security purposes, tariffs can have an important role. Numerous other laws authorize the president to impose such tariffs. For example, the Trade Act of 1974, Section 122 (under which Trump has now imposed 10% tariffs) authorizes tariffs in the event of severe balance-of-payments deficits. The Trade Expansion Act of 1962, Section 232, authorizes tariffs on goods for national security purposes.

Numerous other laws authorize the president to impose tariffs. However, all of these include various reasonable conditions and limits. For example, if the president imposes a national security tariff, Section 232 gives the administration 270 days to develop a study justifying the tariff. Trump still holds broad power to impose tariffs, but now it is more constrained and requires transparent reasons for any particular exercise of this power.

While this constrains Trump somewhat, he can turn this into a win for his presidency. Tariff power can be useful as a foreign policy tool, and by using a more nuanced and targeted approach to tariff policy, he can accomplish a lot of good for the American economy.

For example, the European Union is attempting to impose its ESG (Environmental, Social, and Governance) standards on American firms doing business in Europe, via the EU’s Corporate Due Diligence and Sustainability Mandates. EU mandates would apply to all of a firm’s activities everywhere, not just those in Europe.

Similarly, the EU has attempted to impose its Digital Services Act on American media platforms such as X (formerly Twitter) and Meta. This would require firms to monitor and censor free speech, despite America’s First Amendment protections. Targeted tariffs could be a very useful tool for punching back at this, protecting free commerce and defending American firms from such attacks. This would have the effect of strengthening America’s economy and position in the world.

President Trump has lost a round in the Supreme Court and his ability to impose tariffs is constrained. But with judicious use of the powers he retains, he can turn this into an opportunity to make America stronger and his presidency a greater success.

Related Article

Trump gives grudging praise to liberal trio who helped sink his tariffs

A man was arrested after a statue of late United Kingdom Prime Minister Winston Churchill was defaced with red graffiti in London, the Metropolitan Police noted in a post on X.

Photos show the statue and its base defaced with messages such as ‘NEVER AGAIN IS NOW,’ ‘ZIONIST WAR CRIMINAL’ AND ‘GLOBALISE THE INTIFADA!’

‘Overnight, the Winston Churchill statue in Parliament Square was graffitied with red paint,’ the police noted in the post on Friday.

‘Officers were on scene within two minutes of being alerted shortly after 4am. A 38-yr-old man is in custody having been arrested on suspicion of racially aggravated criminal damage,’ the police added.

A Dutch activist group claimed credit for the graffiti. 

‘On the morning of 27th February, the statue of Winston Churchill at Parliament Square was defaced with red paint. This protest was organised and executed by @freethefilton24nl,’ a post on Instagram claims.

The post features a pre-recorded statement in which a man says, ‘My name is Olax Outis. I am a citizen of the Netherlands.’ 

He identifies himself as ‘part of a Dutch action group called Free the Filton 24 NL,’ explaining, ‘I’ve come to the United Kingdom to deface statue of one of history’s most well-known war criminals, Winston Churchill.’

Related Article

Former UK ambassador to US released on bail after arrest in Epstein misconduct investigation

The ongoing standoff over Homeland Security funding is raising concerns about the potential impact on Homeland Security Investigations (HSI), the agency that has helped bring cases against high-profile figures, including Sean ‘Diddy’ Combs and Sinaloa Cartel co-founder Joaquín ‘El Chapo’ Guzmán.

HSI is one of several agencies under the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) threatened by the ongoing government shutdown.

That branch of DHS acts as the investigative arm for Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) — the agency that Democrats want to rein in and reform — and handles investigations into human and sex trafficking, drug trafficking, immigration-related crimes, child exploitation and several other areas.

Sen. Katie Britt, R-Ala., who was anointed the lead negotiator for Senate Republicans in the ongoing DHS funding back-and-forth, told Fox News Digital the agency’s work is ‘critically important.’

‘When you think about interior enforcement, I mean, HSI is a critical component of that,’ Britt said. ‘You look at what they’ve done, you look at the bad actors they’ve been able to hunt down and hold accountable for human trafficking, drug trafficking, sex trafficking, child pornography, trafficking, all kinds of things.’

Other big names whom HSI has played a role in investigating or indicting include R. Kelly, Josh Duggar, Sinaloa Cartel co-founder Ismael ‘El Mayo’ Zambada, and Jared Fogle.

While ICE and other immigration enforcement operations like HSI were funded in part through Republicans’ ‘big, beautiful bill,’ the lapse in ongoing appropriations could threaten supplies in the field and travel, hampering investigations already underway.

A DHS spokesperson told Fox News Digital that HSI was continuing to function during the shutdown, with arrests and investigations still happening. But as the current 14-day shutdown continues, delays in supply procurement and travel for ‘critical personnel to move around the country’ could be impacted.

‘Our national security and ability to get criminals, including pedophiles and other public safety threats, off the streets could be impacted the longer this Democratic shutdown continues,’ they said.

Senate Democrats and the White House have so far tried and failed to reach a deal to fund DHS after trading offers and counteroffers in a slow back-and-forth over the last two weeks.

Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., charged that ICE had been ‘unleashed without guardrails’ throughout the country.  

‘This is not border security, this is not law and order, this is chaos — created at the top and felt in so many of our neighborhoods,’ Schumer said.

And with lawmakers gone from Washington, D.C., for the weekend, the shutdown is guaranteed to stretch into its third week. Senate Democrats want stringent reforms to ICE, including requiring agents to obtain judicial warrants, unmask and provide thorough identification — all demands that are red lines for the Republicans and the White House, who fear that doing so would increase the chances of ICE agents being doxxed.

While Republicans and the administration raised concerns about HSI and other ICE functions, Sen. Chris Murphy, D-Conn., countered that from his understanding, ‘most everybody at HSI is gone.’

‘They’ve all been deployed to the interior,’ he told Fox News Digital. ‘Not many, if not most, redeployed to interior enforcement. So the administration has gutted HSI.’

‘My impression is that HSI has been one of the agencies that has been essentially turned into ICE Junior,’ Murphy said.

Related Article

DHS shutdown drags into week two as Iran threat, SOTU clash complicate Hill talks

Rep. Eric Swalwell’s, D-Calif., gubernatorial campaign continues to be bankrolled by Keliang ‘Clay’ Zhu despite concerns over his ties to China and the Chinese Communist Party (CCP). 

Zhu donated another $25,000 to Swalwell’s campaign earlier this month after he had already donated $5,000 to Swalwell’s gubernatorial campaign in November and previously donated over $10,000 to his House campaigns. 

Zhu is a partner at DeHeng Law Offices PC, a top Beijing law firm that has deep ties to the Chinese Communist Party, and has also donated thousands to Swalwell’s gubernatorial campaign. The law firm’s website shows their lone ‘Silicon Valley Office,’ located in Pleasanton, Calif., appears to only have a single lawyer who works there – Zhu, who has a history of fighting for Chinese interests in the U.S.  

‘Once again, Congressman Swalwell got caught with his hand in the CCP cookie jar,’ lamented Michael Lucci, a top China expert and the founder and CEO of State Armor Action. ‘It’s simply outrageous that Congressman Swallwell would take even more money from Keliang Zhu after Zhu’s connections to the CCP were made public.’

A Fox News Digital review in January revealed that the law firm Zhu is a partner in was founded as the China Law Office, which was a subsidiary firm established by the CCP’s Ministry of Justice in the early 1990s before being renamed the DeHeng Law Offices in 1995. 

While the firm, which has over two dozen offices in China, portrays itself as independent, the firm and its lawyers continue to have longstanding cooperation with the Chinese government’s departments and major state-owned enterprises. Many of the firm’s China-based attorneys also have a history of working in Chinese politics.

Zhu, who is originally from China, touts several examples of how he has helped Chinese state-owned enterprises and other Chinese companies get a foothold in the United States, according to his bio on the law firm’s website. 

For example, he touts representing an ‘investment fund of a major state-owned enterprise in acquiring majority shares in one data analytics software company in the Silicon Valley,’ which he valued at $100 million. Another bio for Zhu touts how he ‘has assisted Chinese companies and funds to complete more than $9 billion investments in the fields of chips, unmanned vehicles, new energy, artificial intelligence, industrial automation, and biopharmaceuticals in the United States.’

‘On behalf of Chinese enterprises, he has negotiated with the U.S. Department of Commerce, the U.S. Department of Treasury and other organizations for many times and achieved compliance plans, which greatly reduced the compliance risks for Chinese clients in the United States,’ the bio continued.

The bios also indicate Zhu helped advise ‘a governmental investment fund from Shenzhen for its compliance with CFIUS regulations in the U.S.’ and represented ‘WeChat users in a historic lawsuit that sued President Trump and successfully stopped his WeChat ban in 2020.’ 

At the time, Trump’s first administration sounded the alarm over WeChat and said the ‘data collection threatens to allow the Chinese Communist Party access to Americans’ personal and proprietary information’ and was concerned that the CCP would use data to stalk dissenters or control messaging inside the United States, such as launching disinformation campaigns. Similar efforts to restrict WeChat have occurred in countries like Australia and India, according to the White House.

Meanwhile, after a federal judge dismissed a lawsuit intended to stop a Texas law banning Chinese nationals from owning or leasing land in the state, Zhu described the legislation as ‘unfair, unconstitutional and un-American,’ according to AsAmNews, a daily news site focused on Asian-American and Pacific-Islander communities. Zhu similarly expressed disfavor with a Florida law meant to prevent individuals from countries that are foreign adversaries to the United States, such as China, from buying up land.

DeHeng Law Office’s other China-based attorneys have a history of working in Chinese politics as well. This has largely been through the Chinese People’s Political Consultative Conference (CPPCC), which is a ‘key mechanism for multi-party cooperation and political consultation’ under the leadership of the CCP, according to the CPPCC website, and is a crucial tool of the United Front strategy to influence U.S. policy.

For example, Zhixu Wu, who is a ‘Director and Senior Partner’ of the Kunming, China-based office of DeHeng Law Offices, is a member of the ‘Standing Committee of the 13th Kunming Committee of the CPPCC’ and a member ‘of the 12th Yunnan Committee of the CPPCC.’ His bio also says he was previously awarded in 2017 with ‘the title of ‘Excellent League Member’ for the second assistance event of the National Lawyers Service Group,’ which was approved by the ‘Eight Bureau of United Front Work Department of CPC Central Committee, Guidance Department of Lawyer’s Notarization Work of the Ministry of Justice.’

Swalwell’s ties to China have come under scrutiny before, particularly after Chinese national, Christine Fang, also known as ‘Fang Fang,’ gained special access to him and his campaign. She was deemed by U.S. officials to be part of a counterintelligence effort linked to China meant to influence and get close to U.S. political figures.

Swalwell has repeatedly claimed he cut off ties as soon as U.S. intelligence officials warned him of the threat and a congressional ethics investigation into the matter eventually found no wrongdoing on Swalwell’s behalf. However, he was ultimately removed by Republicans from his post on the House Intelligence Committee, with then-House Speaker Kevin McCarthy citing Swalwell’s past run-in with a suspected Chinese spy.

Fox News Digital uncovered a previously unreported 2013 Facebook post by China’s San Francisco consulate last month showing Swalwell touting ‘great potential’ for U.S.-China cooperation during a meeting with a senior CCP diplomat early in his career, which came during the same time period when Swalwell was allegedly targeted by Chinese espionage efforts.

The Facebook post was also ‘liked’ by Fang Fang, Fox News Digital’s review found.

‘First, Swalwell had a fiery romance with Fang Fang, a CCP honeypot. Then he was caught taking campaign money from China’s favorite big law firm. Congressman Swalwell is either totally oblivious to the dangers of flirting with CCP operatives, or he doesn’t care and would take a check from Xi Jinping himself,’ Lucci told Fox News Digital. ‘Congress should pass a law to prohibit campaign cash from Communist China before Swalwell’s sweet tooth has him hunting for another CCP honey pot or cookie jar.’

The Swalwell campaign did not respond to Fox News Digital’s request for comment.

Related Article

Swalwell governor bid hit with residency questions after court filing alleges he doesn’t live in California

President Donald Trump warned that Iran is working to build missiles that could ‘soon reach the United States of America,’ elevating concerns about a weapons program that already places U.S. forces across the Middle East within range.

Iran does not currently possess a missile capable of striking the U.S. homeland, officials say. But its existing ballistic missile arsenal can target major American military installations in the Gulf, and U.S. officials say the issue has emerged as a key sticking point in ongoing nuclear negotiations.

Here’s what Iran can hit now — and how close it is to reaching the U.S.

What Iran can hit right now

Iran is widely assessed by Western defense analysts to operate the largest ballistic missile force in the Middle East. Its arsenal consists primarily of short- and medium-range ballistic missiles with ranges of up to roughly 2,000 kilometers — about 1,200 miles.

That range places a broad network of U.S. military infrastructure across the Gulf within reach.

Among the installations inside that envelope:

• Al Udeid Air Base in Qatar, forward headquarters for U.S. Central Command.
• Naval Support Activity Bahrain, home to the U.S. 5th Fleet.
• Camp Arifjan in Kuwait, a major Army logistics and command hub.
• Ali Al Salem Air Base in Kuwait, used by U.S. Air Force units.
• Prince Sultan Air Base in Saudi Arabia.
• Al Dhafra Air Base in the United Arab Emirates.
• Muwaffaq Salti Air Base in Jordan, which hosts U.S. aircraft.

U.S. forces have drawn down from some regional positions in recent months, including the transfer of Al Asad Air Base in Iraq back to Iraqi control earlier in 2026. But major Gulf installations remain within the range envelope of Iran’s current missile inventory.

Multiple U.S. officials told Fox News that staffing at the Navy’s 5th Fleet headquarters in Bahrain has been reduced to ‘mission critical’ levels amid heightened tensions. A separate U.S. official disputed that characterization, saying no ordered departure of personnel or dependents has been issued.

At the same time, the U.S. has surged significant naval and air assets into and around the region in recent days. 

The USS Abraham Lincoln Carrier Strike Group is operating in the Arabian Sea alongside multiple destroyers, while additional destroyers are positioned in the eastern Mediterranean, Red Sea and Persian Gulf. 

The USS Gerald R. Ford Carrier Strike Group is also headed toward the region. U.S. Air Force fighter aircraft — including F-15s, F-16s, F-35s and A-10s — are based across Jordan, Saudi Arabia and Bahrain, supported by aerial refueling tankers, early warning aircraft and surveillance platforms, according to a recent Fox News military briefing.

Iran has demonstrated its willingness to use ballistic missiles against U.S. targets before.

In January 2020, following the U.S. strike that killed Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps Gen. Qassem Soleimani, Iran launched more than a dozen ballistic missiles at U.S. positions in Iraq. Dozens of American service members were later diagnosed with traumatic brain injuries.

That episode underscored the vulnerability of forward-deployed forces within reach of Iran’s missile arsenal.

 Can Iran reach Europe?

Most publicly known Iranian missile systems are assessed to have maximum ranges of around 2,000 kilometers. 

Depending on launch location, that could place parts of southeastern Europe — including Greece, Bulgaria and Romania — within potential reach. The U.S. has some 80,000 troops stationed across Europe, including in all three of these countries.

Reaching deeper into Europe would require longer-range systems than Iran has publicly demonstrated as operational.

Can Iran hit the US?

Iran does not currently field an intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM) capable of striking the U.S. homeland.

To reach the U.S. East Coast, a missile would need a range of roughly 10,000 kilometers — far beyond Iran’s known operational capability.

However, U.S. intelligence agencies have warned that Iran’s space launch vehicle program could provide the technological foundation for a future long-range missile.

In a recent threat overview, the Defense Intelligence Agency stated that Iran ‘has space launch vehicles it could use to develop a militarily-viable ICBM by 2035 should Tehran decide to pursue the capability.’

That assessment places any potential Iranian intercontinental missile capability roughly a decade away — and contingent on a political decision by Tehran.

U.S. officials and defense analysts have pointed in particular to Iran’s recent space launches, including rockets such as the Zuljanah, which use solid-fuel propulsion. Solid-fuel motors can be stored and launched more quickly than liquid-fueled rockets — a feature that is also important for military ballistic missiles.

Space launch vehicles and long-range ballistic missiles rely on similar multi-stage rocket technology. Analysts say advances in Iran’s space program could shorten the pathway to an intercontinental-range missile if Tehran chose to adapt that technology for military use.

For now, however, Iran has not deployed an operational ICBM, and the U.S. homeland remains outside the reach of its current ballistic missile arsenal.

US missile defenses — capable but finite

The U.S. relies on layered missile defense systems — including Terminal High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD), Patriot and ship-based interceptors — to protect forces and allies from ballistic missile threats across the Middle East.

These systems are technically capable, but interceptor inventories are finite.

During the June 2025 Iran-Israel missile exchange, U.S. forces reportedly fired more than 150 THAAD interceptors — roughly a quarter of the total the Pentagon had funded to date, according to defense analysts.

The economics also highlight the imbalance: open-source estimates suggest Iranian short-range ballistic missiles can cost in the low hundreds of thousands of dollars apiece, while advanced U.S. interceptors such as THAAD run roughly $12 million or more per missile.

Precise inventory levels are classified. But experts who track Pentagon procurement data warn that replenishing advanced interceptors can take years, meaning a prolonged, high-intensity missile exchange could strain stockpiles even if U.S. defenses remain effective.

Missile program complicates negotiations

The ballistic missile issue has also emerged as a key fault line in ongoing diplomatic efforts between Washington and Tehran.

Secretary of State Marco Rubio has said Iran’s refusal to negotiate limits on its ballistic missile program is ‘a big problem,’ signaling that the administration views the arsenal as central to long-term regional security.

While current negotiations are focused primarily on Iran’s nuclear program and uranium enrichment activities, U.S. officials have argued that delivery systems — including ballistic missiles — cannot be separated from concerns about a potential nuclear weapon.

Iranian officials, however, have insisted their missile program is defensive in nature and not subject to negotiation as part of nuclear-focused talks.

As diplomacy continues, the strategic reality remains clear: Iran cannot currently strike the U.S. homeland with a ballistic missile. But U.S. forces across the Middle East remain within range of Tehran’s existing arsenal — and future capabilities remain a subject of intelligence concern.

Related Article

Iran announces test of new naval air defense missile in Strait of Hormuz as US military buildup continues

The Department of Justice on Thursday sued five additional states, requesting that their election data be shared with the Trump administration amid its push for access to voter rolls from states across the country.

Four states President Donald Trump carried in the last three presidential elections — Utah, Oklahoma, Kentucky and West Virginia — were slapped with the latest legal action, along with New Jersey.

The DOJ has now sued more than two dozen states in efforts to access election records, with most of the states being controlled by Democrats.

Assistant Attorney General for Civil Rights Harmeet Dhillon suggested that state election officials were ‘choosing to fight us in court rather than show their work’ with voter roll access.

‘We will not be deterred, regardless of party affiliation, from carrying out critical election integrity legal duties,’ she said in a statement on Thursday.

‘The Justice Department will continue to fulfill its oversight role dutifully, neutrally, and transparently wherever Americans vote in federal elections,’ Dhillon said.

The Trump administration has intensified its efforts to take over elections in recent months even though the U.S. Constitution gives states, not federal officials, the authority to run elections. Most states have their secretary of state oversee elections.

Access to election information varies by state, but election officials generally release redacted versions of their voter rolls to the public and government agencies, according to Politico. However, the DOJ has demanded that states give the federal government unredacted files, including voters’ private data such as their driver’s license numbers and the last four digits of their Social Security numbers.

‘Accurate, well-maintained voter rolls are a requisite for the election integrity that the American people deserve,’ Attorney General Pam Bondi said in a statement. ‘This latest series of litigation underscores that this Department of Justice is fulfilling its duty to ensure transparency, voter roll maintenance, and secure elections across the country.’

The DOJ has argued the states are in violation of the Civil Rights Act of 1960, which affirms that the attorney general can request voter records from election officials, but state officials contend that the department is seeking an escalation of the administration’s wider attempts to become involved in state election proceedings.

‘Neither state nor federal law entitles the Department of Justice to collect private information on law-abiding American citizens. Utahns can be assured that my office will always follow the Constitution and the law, protect voters’ rights, and administer free and fair elections,’ Utah Lt. Gov. Deidre Henderson said in a statement to Politico.

Kentucky Secretary of State Michael Adams also criticized the lawsuit, saying the state’s elections were ‘a national success story.’

‘Kentucky law protects voters’ personal information, and I will not voluntarily commit a data breach by providing Kentuckians’ personal data to the federal bureaucracy unless a court order tells me to,’ he said in a statement to the outlet.

West Virginia Secretary of State Kris Warner’s office said it had not yet been served with a lawsuit.

‘Regardless, I think Secretary Warner’s comments to the DOJ were pretty clear. Bring it on! The federal government is not going to get any personal information on West Virginia voters as long as Kris Warner is Secretary of State,’ spokesperson Mike Queen said in a statement to Politico.

Earlier this month, the FBI executed a search warrant at an election office in Fulton County, Georgia, seizing ballots and other voting records from 2020, according to local officials. The Peach State went to former President Joe Biden in 2020, but Trump carried the state in 2024.

In efforts to ensure only American citizens are voting, Trump has also urged Congress to pass the SAVE America Act, which would require voters in federal elections to prove citizenship by providing a photo ID and other documentation, such as a passport or birth certificate.

Related Article

Georgia’s Fulton County files motion seeking return of 2020 election materials seized by FBI