Former President Donald Trump holds a slim advantage over President Biden after the two candidates secured their parties’ nominations, a new poll shows. 

The two politicians unofficially secured their respective parties’ nominations on Tuesday after both passed the required threshold of delegates.

The USA Today poll – conducted in partnership with Suffolk University – found that 40% of respondents favored Trump, compared to 38% for Biden.

A key finding of the survey was the number of registered voters who are open to changing their minds. 

Approximately 25% of those surveyed said they would consider switching their vote between now and the election – 14% of likely Biden voters and 15% of likely Trump voters.

Among those polled, 15% of respondents reported disliking both candidates, according to USA Today. Approximately 25% of these individuals leaned toward Trump, 18% toward Biden and 44% of them reported intending to vote for third-party candidates. 

With both Trump and Biden crossing the necessary threshold of delegates to all but guarantee their nominations on Tuesday, the public is expecting a 2020 rematch.

Both candidates have proven exceptionally unpopular with voters, and their presidencies have experienced similar tepidity in approval polls.

It is still unclear if Biden will accept Trump’s challenges for a public debate – the administration has thus far dodged questions on the topic.

The USA Today/Suffolk University poll surveyed 1,000 registered voters. Respondents were contacted via cellphone and landline.

It was conducted from March 8 to 11 and reports a margin of error of +/- 3.1%.

An American intelligence agency released an assessment that determined Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s tenure faces serious challenges, with one expert warning the report could give the appearance of trying to influence Israeli voters.

‘We didn’t need an intelligence assessment to read Israeli public opinion polls. Israel is a democracy and has a free press. The politics of Israel are on full display,’ Richard Goldberg, a senior adviser at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies and a former National Security Council official, told Fox News Digital. 

‘The fact that ODNI inserted this section and framed it in this manner reeks of an administration trying to meddle in Israeli democracy and put pressure on the government,’ Goldberg added. 

The Office of the Director of National Intelligence (ODNI)’s report noted that the already prevalent ‘lack of confidence’ in Netanyahu’s governance, which took a significant hit due to the Oct. 7 terrorist attack, has ‘deepened and expanded even more than before the war, and we are witnessing large protests demanding his resignation.’

‘A different and more moderate government is a possible scenario,’ the report stated. It also claimed Israel is expected to face increasing international pressure as a result of the humanitarian crisis in the Gaza Strip, The Jerusalem Post reported.

‘Netanyahu’s viability as leader, as well as his governing coalition of far-right and ultra-orthodox parties that pursued hardline policies on Palestinian and security issues, may be in jeopardy,’ the report said.

A senior Israeli official pushed back on the report, saying, ‘Those who elect the prime minister of Israel are the citizens of Israel and no one else. Israel is not a vassal state of the U.S. but an independent and democratic country whose citizens are the ones who elect the government,’ according to Axios.

‘We expect our friends to act to overthrow the terror regime of Hamas and not the elected government in Israel,’ a statement from the official sent to reporters Tuesday said, according to the Axios report. 

The ODNI report further discussed that armed resistance from Hamas will likely continue for years as the IDF works to eradicate all traces of Hamas tunnels and bases of operation. But it also claimed Israel and Iran have started to adjust their actions to prevent a wider conflict between the two countries, which could prove disastrous for the region. 

‘We assess that the Iranian leadership was not involved in the planning of the October 7 attack and that it had no prior information about the attack,’ the report said. 

Yair Lapid, former Israeli prime minister and leader of the opposition, has repeatedly urged the Knesset to hold elections and select a new leader in the face of Netanyahu’s failures. Lapid’s Yesh Atid party filed a ‘no confidence’ motion against Netanyahu in January, but the effort failed a vote in the Knesset. 

‘This government cannot continue to exist. It is a failure that costs human lives and the future of the country,’ Yesh Atid said after the Knesset passed a $14.5 billion budget that it argued ‘favors unnecessary offices and coalition funds over aid to evacuees, reservists and to strengthening the sense of security.’

Netanyahu has found himself facing some friction with President Biden after the U.S. president was caught on a hot mic moment following the State of the Union claiming he told his Israeli counterpart, ‘You and I are going to have a ‘come to Jesus’ moment,’ referring to a moment of major realization. 

At a White House press briefing Tuesday, though, it was revealed the two leaders may not have spoken in over a month. In response to a question from reporters, National Security Advisor Jake Sullivan insisted the two governments ‘have communicated throughout the month.’ 

‘Let’s see what happens [in Rafah]. … The issue is what happens on the ground and not what happens in the back and forth of words,’ Sullivan said.

Joe Biden is the most unpopular president since World War II. And yet, he could win reelection. Why? Because Democrats will continue to demagogue abortion politics and, especially in certain critical swing states like Arizona, the fight over abortion could mean a win for Joe. If they want to defeat Biden, Republicans must solve this problem. 

Nikki Haley could help. Haley, the former governor of South Carolina, lost the GOP primary race to former president Donald Trump but earned considerable support among women and centrist Republicans by adopting a moderate stance on abortion. She rightly says that Trump must now win over those voters; he will need the backing of his entire party to win, as well as a good percentage of Independents. Convincing Haley to become his ambassador on the issue of abortion, charged with touring the country and telling voters the truth about the Democrats’ extreme and heinous position on this issue, would help his cause. 

Democrats, though they deny it, want to allow abortion up to nine months; their position is disgusting and not popular with most Americans. That’s the law they passed in New York; that’s what they want nationwide. Haley has credibility on this issue; she could help convince voters that Democrats are the abortion extremists, not Republicans. 

Given the rancor and mud-slinging between the two, Trump will not ask Haley to be his running mate. But unless his former U.N. ambassador intends to run on a third-party ticket, which she has said she will not do, Haley will presumably want to engage in Republican politics in the future. Helping the GOP candidate win in November would go a long way towards rebuilding her battered standing in the party. 

For both Trump and Haley, a partnership would offer big dividends.

Donald Trump sees the light; he has signaled support for legalizing abortion up through 16 weeks of pregnancy, making exceptions for rape, incest or the health of the mother. This is the middle ground and is where the majority of the country falls.

The liberal media, however, will not have it. When news leaked of Trump adopting this widely-accepted position, a headline from Rolling Stone blared ‘Trump Wants to Ban Abortion Nationwide: Report’; others followed suit.

Nikky Haley declared herself throughout her campaign as ‘proudly pro-life’ but managed to craft a tolerant position on abortion that recognized the deeply personal nature of the decision some women make to end a pregnancy.

Haley commented in one GOP debate, ‘I don’t judge anyone for being pro-choice, and I don’t want them to judge me for being pro-life.’ She urged her rivals, ‘Let’s find consensus. … We don’t need to divide America over this issue anymore.’  

Haley and Trump recognize reality. They know that pro-choice advocates have won every single vote on abortion in every single state, including deep-red Kansas and that the issue drives turnout and funding for Democrats.  They fear that even as women are currently abandoning Joe Biden because they dislike his economic or immigration policies, come November those voters will choose pro-choice over pro-life.

How extreme are Democrats? In 2021, 49 Democrats in the Senate voted for H. R. 3755, the ‘Women’s Health Protection Act of 2021.’  The legislation was meant to (as the New York Times reported) ‘enshrine the landmark Roe v. Wade precedent in federal law.’ The Times failed to include a link to the actual legislation, perhaps because it is horrifying.  

The bill would have allowed abortion up through nine months of pregnancy, when, ‘in the good-faith medical judgment of the treating health care provider, continuation of the pregnancy would pose a risk to the pregnant patient’s life or health.’ 

Any health-care provider, including a ‘physician, certified nurse-midwife, nurse practitioner, [or] physician assistant’ could decide that the mother’s life was at risk, even a day before the baby was due. In other words, a woman claiming stress could convince a nurse practitioner that she needed to abort a baby at eight months. That position is abhorrent, but is actually what Democrats adopted in New York several years ago.  

Abortion will likely be on the ballot in several critical swing states, including Arizona. Pro-life activists in the state, who have launched a ‘decline to sign’ movement, probably cannot prevent pro-choice advocates from gathering the 400,000 signatures necessary to put an abortion petition up for a vote. Having abortion on the ballot will make it much, much harder for Donald Trump to win the state. 

Nevada, another toss-up state, may also include an abortion petition on their November ballot. Other states, like Maryland, could host an abortion vote which most likely would not impact the presidential race but could sideswipe the possibility of popular governor Larry Hogan picking up a senate seat for the GOP.

Anger over the dismantling of Roe v Wade cost the GOP what should have been a red wave rebuking an unpopular president in the 2022 midterm elections and has resulted in Republican losses in several special elections held since. 

Last year in Ohio, a state Donald Trump won by 8 points in 2020, voters approved by a 57% majority an amendment to the state’s constitution which would protect abortion rights. In that vote, the pro-abortion forces outraised the pro-life opponents nearly three-to-one, bringing in tens of millions of dollars from out-of-state groups. That win encouraged Democrats to ensure the issue is on the ballot in as many states as possible this fall. 

This effort should galvanize Republicans and the Trump campaign. They need to adopt a position and message to voters on abortion that will help defuse the issue. Haley could help.

Sen. Bob Menendez, D-N.J., was in court this week for another superseding indictment brought by federal prosecutors in the Southern District of New York. Rather than the four original counts, he now faces 18 counts with his wife, Nadine Arslanian Menendez, and alleged co-conspirators Wael Hana and Fred Daibes.

What is most notable is not the proliferation of counts but the lack of comparative charges in the pending case against Hunter Biden. Some of us have long raised concerns over the striking similarity in the alleged conduct in both cases, but the absence of similar charges against the president’s son. That contrast just got even greater.

The allegations in the two cases draw obvious comparisons.

Menendez is accused of accepting a 60,000 Mercedes-Benz as part of the corrupt practices. In Hunter’s case, it was a $142,000 Fisker sports car.  For Menendez, there were gold bars worth up to $120,000. For Biden, there was the diamond allegedly worth $80,000.

Underlying both cases are core allegations of influence peddling and corruption. However, the Justice Department threw the book at Menendez while minimizing the charges against Biden. 

That includes charging Menendez as an unregistered foreign agent under the Foreign Agents Registration Act (FARA). Many of us have said for years that the treatment of Hunter under FARA departs significantly from the treatment of various Trump figures like former Trump campaign chair Paul Manafort as well as Menendez.

Now, there is a new layer of troubling comparisons to be drawn in the two cases. 

The superseding indictment incorporates new charges after the plea and cooperation of Menendez’s former co-defendant and businessman Jose Uribe. 

Uribe appears to have supplied the basis for some of the new charges, including a telling account with Nadine Menendez. She allegedly asked Uribe what he would say to law enforcement about the payments used for a Mercedes-Benz convertible and Uribe said that he could say that the payment were a ‘loan.’  Nadine Menendez responded that ‘sounded good.’

The loan discussion hit a familiar cord with those of us who have written about the Biden corruption scandal. The Bidens have repeatedly referred to payment from foreign sources as ‘loans.’ That most notoriously included millions given by his counsel Kevin Morris. 

In some cases, foreign money was received by President Joe Biden’s brother James and then immediately sent to the president’s personal account marked as a loan repayment. James admitted that the $40,000 was coming from the Chinese.

The Justice Department in the Menendez case dismissed the claim of loans as merely a transparent effort to hide influence peddling. That includes not just the convertible payment but  more than $23,000 that one businessman made toward the senator’s wife’s mortgage. 

Menendez and Biden share the array of luxury gifts, cars, and loans. However, the most important common denominator was the underlying corruption. Both cases are classic examples of influence peddling, which has long been a cottage industry in Washington, D.C.

What they do not share is the same level of prosecution or press support. Menendez is a pariah in Washington and Hunter is the president’s son. 

Menendez is blamed by many inside the Beltway not for being corrupt but for being open about it. 

The fact that others have been prosecuted for conduct similar to his own has not stopped Hunter from claiming victim status. He has told courts that even the few charges brought against him are evidence of selective prosecution.

In the most recent filing, Special Counsel David Weiss dismissed many of Hunter’s claims as ‘patently false’ and noted that Hunter Biden virtually flaunted his violations and engaged in obvious efforts to evade taxes and hide his crimes. 

Weiss further noted that other defendants did not write ‘a memoir in which they made countless statements proving their crimes and drawing further attention to their criminal conduct.’

It was a devastating take-down of Hunter’s claims, but it did not address the conspicuous omission of charges brought against Menendez, including FARA charges.

It also does not address the fact that the Justice Department not only allowed the statute of limitations to run on major crimes, but sought to finalize an obscene plea agreement with no jail time for Hunter. It only fell apart when a judge decided to ask a couple of cursory questions of the prosecutor, who admitted that he had never seen an agreement this generous for a defendant.

Weiss noted in his filing that they filed new crimes only after Hunter’s legal counsel refused to change the agreement and insisted that it remained fully enforceable.

As Hunter continues to claim to be the victim of selective prosecution in various courts, judges need only to look over the Menendez case to see the truth of the matter. Hunter is not the victim of selective prosecution but the beneficiary of special treatment in the legal system.

Democratic Congressman Jamaal Bowman recently argued that a mural of Minister Louis Farrakhan should remain in a New York City suburb, prompting outrage from Jewish activists.

The ‘Squad’ Democrat from New York recently sparked controversy over comments he made regarding a Black Lives Matter mural that featured Black figures, including Farrakhan, who has infamously made disparaging comments about Jews, including calling them the ‘the synagogue of Satan’ and ‘termites.’ 

‘Regarding the minister, you know, he said many things that I fully disagree with, you know, period,’ Bowman said during an interview last year according to a New York Daily News report about the mural in Westchester County. ‘But he is a part of Black history, you know? That’s a fact. And if the Greenburgh community​ — particularly that section of Greenburgh​, you know — supports the mural, then the mural​ should be there as is.​’

Bowman’s position sparked strong pushback from Jewish advocates. 

‘Farrakhan has singlehandedly done more damage to the positive relations and cooperation among different minority groups that has existed since the civil rights movement,’ Brooke Goldstein, human rights attorney and executive director of The Lawfare Project, told Fox News Digital. 

‘Including Farrakhan on any sort of mural is nothing less than an attempt to whitewash his blatant racism, and to gaslight Americans into viewing him as anything other than a bigot,’ Goldstein said. ‘Jamal Bowman’s failure to acknowledge the trauma caused by Farrakhan, and unwillingness to act on this mural, shows indifference to the harm and an appalling lack of fitness to lead, especially when it comes to minority rights.’

‘Louis Farrakhan is an unabashed Jew-hater who has used his very public platform to spread abhorrent antisemitic stereotypes, while at the same time recruiting and developing a veritable army of followers indoctrinated into the cult of hatred towards Jews and marginalized communities,’ she continued.

‘Farrakhan – whose support for, and appreciation of, Islamist regimes like Iran, which deprive their own citizens of basic human rights while exporting global terrorism – has spread vitriol accusing Jews of, among many other things, seeking to manipulate and exploit Black people.’

Lizzy Savetsky, a Jewish activist in nearby New York City, told Fox News Digital that it is ‘unconscionable and reprehensible that Rep. Jamal Bowman would choose to glorify a blatant antisemite like Louis Farrakhan.’

‘This is not just an error in judgment; it’s a blatant endorsement of hate and antisemitism. Such actions should not only be condemned but also met with the sternest opposition to prevent any semblance of acceptance for hate-filled bigots. Rep. Bowman must resign immediately.’ 

Farrakhan has called Jewish people ‘termites’, praised Hitler, and has become one of the most controversial religious figures in the United States due to his derogatory comments about Israel.

‘Louis Farrakhan is one of the most notorious, vitriolic anti-semites in our country,’ Congressman Carlos Giménez, who represents Miami-Dade County which is home to one of the largest Jewish populations in the U.S. and the world, told Fox News Digital. 

‘It is entirely reprehensible for any public official to use their platform to venerate someone who has perpetuated hateful canards and tropes for the purpose of ostracizing, targeting, and relegating the Jewish community. Whether as Mayor of Miami-Dade County or as Member of Congress, I have been proud to stand with the Jewish community against anti-semitism and hate in all of its forms.’

Bowman’s office did not respond to a request for comment from Fox News Digital regarding the hotly debated taxpayer-funded mural. 

Bowman, who represents Greenburgh in Congress but did not at the time that the mural was constructed, told New York Daily News that Farrakhan has made ‘horrific’ and ‘despicable antisemitic’ comments but said ‘the local community living near the mural should have the power to decide how to move forward.’

Bowman, who has been a vocal advocate of a cease-fire in Gaza which he said was ‘uplifting deeply what it actually means to be Jewish’, is not a stranger to controversy stemming from supporting radical activists.

In 2014, Bowman honored a radical Black activist and convicted murderer during a special project at a New York City middle school he founded before he was elected to Congress.

The special project wall included former Rep. Cynthia McKinney, D-Ga., a known antisemite and promoter of conspiracy theories, such as that Jews were responsible for the September 11 terrorist attacks.

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

The Pentagon announced Tuesday it is sending around $300 million in weapons to Ukraine to help the beleaguered country in its ongoing fight against Russia.  

The security package is the Pentagon’s first for Ukraine since December, when it acknowledged it was out of replenishment funds, being deeply overdrawn and needing at least $10 billion to replenish all the weapons it has pulled from its stocks to help Kyiv.

Asked Tuesday to explain how the U.S. was able to scrounge up the aid, Maj. Gen. Pat Ryder said it was the result of the Department of Defense negotiating contracts to replenish those weapons in U.S. stockpiles. 

‘Because of those negotiations, we budgeted the full amount of appropriated funds for those contracts. But because of those negotiations, those contracts came in under budget. And so we have a modest amount of funding available,’ Ryder said, acknowledging that the DOD was still out of ‘replenishment funds.’ 

‘We’re able to use these cost savings to make up this modest amount of new security assistance available right now without significantly impacting military readiness because of the situation in Ukraine,’ Ryder added. ‘Obviously, they are in an existential fight. They have an urgent need for help. So, this is a way we can provide a small amount of assistance urgently right now.’ 

He could not say when the aid would arrive in Ukraine, but predicted that the weapons would last in the ‘weeks’ time frame’ – ‘nowhere even close to what they need to be able to continue to sustain this fight.’ 

U.S. officials have warned for months that Ukraine is running dangerously low on munitions. But efforts have stalled in the House over Republican opposition to efforts to tie Ukraine aid to border security. 

The replenishment funds have allowed the Pentagon to pull existing munitions, air defense systems and other weapons from its reserve inventories under presidential drawdown authority, or PDA, to send to Ukraine and then put contracts in order to replace those weapons, which are needed to maintain U.S. military readiness.

House Speaker Mike Johnson has refused to bring the $95 billion package, which includes aid for Ukraine, Israel and Taiwan, to the floor. 

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy has repeatedly implored Congress to help fight a vastly better-supplied Russia, but House Republican leadership has not been willing to bring the Ukraine aid to the floor for a vote, saying any aid must first address the U.S.’ border security needs.

The United States has committed more than $44.9 billion in security assistance to Ukraine since the beginning of the Biden administration, including more than $44.2 billion since the beginning of Russia’s invasion on Feb. 24, 2022.

Polish leaders were in Washington Tuesday to press the U.S. to break its impasse over replenishing funds for Ukraine at a critical moment in the war. Polish President Andrzej Duda met with Democratic and Republican leaders in the House and Senate and was to meet with President Joe Biden later in the day.

House Republicans are growing increasingly skeptical of whether their push to impeach President Biden will succeed.

‘I don’t think we have the will to impeach Joe Biden. … We just don’t. We’ve got a two-seat majority. You’ve got some guys in these tough districts that don’t want to alienate maybe independents or moderates,’ Rep. Troy Nehls, R-Texas, told Fox News Digital.

‘They’ve laid out a good case for impeaching Joe Biden … but I just don’t think we have the will to do it.’

Each of the GOP lawmakers who spoke with Fox News Digital expressed the belief that what the investigation has uncovered looks bad for Biden, but even those who think it rises to the level of high crimes and misdemeanors were unsure the House would see an impeachment vote.

Several noted that House Republicans’ razor-thin two-seat majority has made it difficult to pass significant legislation in the past. 

‘That’s always a question with everything,’ Rep. Greg Murphy, R-N.C., said of the numbers. ‘We have some folks who love to scream, rant and rave and have gotten all involved in their ego. You never know where those folks are going to come out one moment or the other.’

He added, ‘I do surely think there’s evidence there.’

Another GOP lawmaker granted anonymity to speak freely agreed the impeachment push has lost momentum, chalking it up to the hectic environment of a presidential election year.

‘I think it was always going to lose steam. I think as soon as we transitioned into a formal presidential election, I don’t know that it was going to continue with the same fervor,’ the GOP lawmaker said.

Asked about the amount of skepticism within the conference over actually voting to impeach Biden, they said, ‘I’m not the one to worry about, but there are dozens of others.’

Rep. Don Bacon, R-Neb., who represents a district Biden won in 2020, noted investigators have not yet uncovered a smoking gun but defended the inquiry as a fact-finding mission.

‘When the staff tells you that they can’t identify a particular crime, that’s a problem. But we should welcome the investigation. It’s more about letting the voters know the truth,’ Bacon said.

The House voted to formalize their impeachment inquiry into Biden in mid-December, with every member of the Republican Conference supporting the investigation. The House Oversight Committee is now leading a joint investigation with the House Judiciary and Ways and Means committees into whether Biden used his former position as vice president to enrich himself and his family – claims the White House has denied.

Fox News Digital reached out to the White House for comment.