Category

Latest News

Category
Read this article for free!
Plus get unlimited access to thousands of articles, videos and more with your free account!
Please enter a valid email address.
By entering your email, you are agreeing to Fox News Terms of Service and Privacy Policy, which includes our Notice of Financial Incentive. To access the content, check your email and follow the instructions provided.

The White House said in July 2021 that a ‘system’ had been ‘established’ to ensure the identities of those who bought Hunter Biden’s artwork would remain anonymous for ethical reasons. 

However, the first son’s art dealer testified that a new agreement to stop the disclosure of Biden’s art buyers was not set up for several months following that statement and said the first son knew the identities of approximately 70% of those buyers.

George Bergès, the art dealer for Biden, took part in a closed-door, transcribed interview before both the House Judiciary and Oversight Committees earlier this month as part of the House impeachment inquiry against President Biden.

Fox News Digital reviewed a transcript of Bergès’ interview.

House investigators, during his interview, showed Bergès a statement made by then-White House press secretary Jen Psaki on July 9, 2021.

‘After careful consideration, a system has been established that allows for Hunter Biden to work in his profession within reasonable safeguards,’ she said. ‘All interactions regarding the selling of art and the setting of prices will be handled by a professional galleries, adhering to the highest industry standards. Any offer out of the normal court would be rejected out of hand.’

Psaki added, ‘The galleries will not share information about buyers or prospective buyers, including their identities, with Hunter Biden or the administration, which provides quite a level of protection.’ 

When pressed further, Psaki stressed that ‘it would be challenging for an anonymous person who we don’t know and Hunter Biden doesn’t know to have influence — so that’s a protection.’ 

However, Bergès testified that at the time of the White House’s July 2021 statement, he had an agreement with Hunter Biden which called for him, instead, ‘to disclose to Hunter Biden who the purchasers of his art were.’ Bergès said that contract was agreed to in December 2020.

Bergès said that it was not until September 2021 that a new agreement with Hunter Biden was created. That agreement stated that ‘the gallery will not disclose the name of any buyers of artist’s artwork to artist or any agent of artist.’

Bergès stressed, though, that there was not a ‘White House-involved agreement,’ and that Hunter Biden did know the identities of approximately 70% of the buyers of his art.

Meanwhile, Bergès testified that he had spoken to President Biden both on the phone and in person.

Bergès told lawmakers that he spoke to the president ‘at the White House wedding during Hunter’s — Hunter’s daughter getting married.’ 

Hunter Biden’s daughter, Naomi Biden, got married at the White House on Nov. 19, 2022.

As for his phone conversation with the president, Bergès said, ‘My daughter finished camp, and he called to, you know, wish her, congratulate her for finishing camp and I answered the phone.’

Bergès’ testimony comes after the House formalized the impeachment inquiry against President Biden.

The inquiry is being led by House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jim Jordan, Oversight Committee Chairman James Comer and Ways & Means Committee Chairman Jason Smith.

House Republicans are investigating any foreign money received by the Biden family, whether President Biden was involved in his family’s foreign business dealings and steps allegedly taken by the Biden administration to ‘slow, hamper, or otherwise impede the criminal investigation into the President’s son, Hunter Biden, which involves funds received by the Biden family from foreign sources.’

Republican investigators have suggested they are suspicious over whether Hunter Biden’s art career, which began in recent years, has led to any conflicts of interest between wealthy buyers and the White House.

‘The Biden White House appears to have deceived the American people about facilitating an ethics agreement governing the sale of Hunter Biden’s art,’ Oversight Committee Chair James Comer, R-Ky., said in a statement earlier this month, calling the agreement a ‘sham.’

This post appeared first on FOX NEWS
Read this article for free!
Plus get unlimited access to thousands of articles, videos and more with your free account!
Please enter a valid email address.
By entering your email, you are agreeing to Fox News Terms of Service and Privacy Policy, which includes our Notice of Financial Incentive. To access the content, check your email and follow the instructions provided.

A federal appeals court has rejected a request to block Special Counsel Jack Smith from accessing former President Trump’s then-Twitter feed as part of his election interference case.

The U.S. Court of Appeals for Washington, D.C., ruled on the matter and denied further review. The decision comes after an appellate panel had rejected the original request.

Twitter, now ‘X,’ had initiated the appeals, seeking to block special counsel access to the records the company held.

Smith had noted he could have gotten the material from the National Archives, which gained the material after Trump left office, but that would have triggered notice to Trump, so a search warrant was requested through the company under seal and with a non-disclosure notice. That, in turn, prevented Trump from raising any executive privilege claims over the digital communications.

The four conservative judges on the appeals court dissented and would have granted en banc review.

Judge Rao, a Trump bench appointee, wrote a statement, saying the executive privilege claims should have been addressed.

‘The absence of a presumptive privilege particularly threatens the Chief Executive when, as here, a third party holds presidential communications. See Mazars, 140 S. Ct. at 2035. And to be sure it aggrandizes the courts, which will have the power to determine whether executive privilege will be considered before its breach. Without a presumption for executive privilege, new questions will invariably arise, particularly because nothing in the panel’s opinion is limited to a former President. What if, in the course of a criminal investigation, a special counsel sought a warrant for the incumbent President’s communications from a private email or phone provider? Under this court’s decision, executive privilege isn’t even on the table, so long as the special counsel makes a showing that a warrant and nondisclosure order are necessary to the prosecution. And following the Special Counsel’s roadmap, what would prevent a state prosecutor from using a search warrant and nondisclosure order to obtain presidential communications from a third-party messaging application? And how might Congress benefit from this precedent when it seeks to subpoena presidential materials from third parties in an investigation or impeachment inquiry?’

‘Upon consideration of appellant’s petition for rehearing en banc, the response thereto, the amicus curiae brief filed by Electronic Frontier Foundation in support of rehearing en banc, and the absence of a request by any member of the court for a vote, it is ordered that the petition be denied,’ the ruling states.

The former president and 2024 GOP presidential front-runner can now ask the Supreme Court to review the matter. 

Attorneys for the company, now named X Corp., attempted to block and delay the effort in January and February, leading one federal judge to speculate that X owner and one-time CEO Elon Musk was attempting to ally himself with Trump.

The social media giant ultimately lost the struggle, however, and was forced to hand over an extensive list of data related to the ‘@realdonaldtrump’ account, including all tweets ‘created, drafted, favorited/liked, or retweeted.’

The handover also included searches on the platform surrounding the 2020 election, devices used to log into the account, IP addresses used to log into the account, and a list of associated accounts.

Smith plans to use data from the cellphone that Trump used in his final weeks in office, including data revealing when Trump’s phone was ‘unlocked and the Twitter application was open’ on Jan. 6, 2021.

Unsealed court filings in August showed that Smith’s team obtained location data and draft tweets in addition to the former president’s messages.
 

This post appeared first on FOX NEWS
Read this article for free!
Plus get unlimited access to thousands of articles, videos and more with your free account!
Please enter a valid email address.
By entering your email, you are agreeing to Fox News Terms of Service and Privacy Policy, which includes our Notice of Financial Incentive. To access the content, check your email and follow the instructions provided.

Scotland’s ruling political group, the Scottish National Party (SNP), has proposed another series of laws that aim to shore up protection for transgendered people, including a ban on conversion therapy and jail time for parents who try to block their child’s transition. 

‘We have grave concerns that these plans will criminalize loving parents, who could face years in jail simply for refusing to sign up to the gender ideology cult,’ Marion Calder, a director for the group For Women Scotland, said of the proposal. 

‘They will also hand activists and social workers unprecedented powers to meddle in family life while having a chilling impact on therapists and counselors,’ Calder added. ‘If SNP and Greens insist on pushing this through, it is likely to go the same way as the toxic self-identification and named person laws and be blocked in the courts.’ 

People who try to ‘change or suppress’ another individual’s gender identity – in the process, causing them physical or psychological harm – would face criminal charges under the new proposals put forward on Tuesday, The Daily Telegraph reported. 

Such examples include preventing someone from ‘dressing in a way that reflects their sexual orientation or gender identity’ and controlling a person’s activities. Complaints must provide proof of intent or demonstrated harm to incur punishment. 

The law applies even when a person argues they have acted out of a ‘desire to help or protect the person.’ 

The SNP launched a consultation period that will last until April 2: Voters and concerned parties can review the proposal and lodge complaints. The Catholic Church in Scotland has already raised concerns over a ‘worrying lack of clarity’ in the proposals and announced it will prepare for legal action, The Guardian reported. 

The advocacy group Christian Action, Research and Education (CARE) accused the bill of laying the groundwork for ‘subjective policing of speech.’ 

‘At CARE for Scotland, we recognize that abusive or coercive ‘practices,’ ‘treatments’ or ‘therapies’ aimed at changing a person’s identity are wrong and a source of deep hurt to those who experience them,’ the group wrote in a statement issued after the proposal’s publication. ‘These things are rightly condemned, can already be reported to the police for investigation, and would already constitute a crime under existing provisions.’

‘The need for new legislation, and the wider impact of new laws must be carefully assessed,’ the group argued. ‘Senior legal professionals and others are concerned that the proposals in question risk being overbroad in their application, undermining human rights. In particular, the right to a private and family life, freedom of thought, conscience and religion, and freedom of expression.’

‘Given these concerns, and the efficacy of existing, well-understood laws targeting harmful behavior, we question the need for the proposed ban,’ the group said. 

Anyone breaching a civil order, such as the one proposed by the SNP, could see the offender face two years in jail, with the maximum punishment of up to seven years in jail or an ‘unlimited fine,’ according to the Telegraph. 

Scottish Minister for Equalities, Migration and Refugees Emma Roddick urged faith groups to engage with the government. No one will face punishment for ‘expressing concerns’ and ‘advising a child against medical interventions’ or ‘not actively supporting’ a child’s decision to dress for the gender they wish to express. 

The Guardian noted that the upcoming general election makes it less likely for Westminster to veto the proposal, as it had with Scotland’s effort to pass the gender recognition reform bill. 

The previous gender bill, put forward by former Scottish First Minister Nicola Sturgeon in 2023, would have allowed children as young as 16 to change gender. 

British Prime Minister Rishi Sunak shelved a planned ban in England on conversion therapy, with the Conservative party split over how to deal with the proposal, which former Prime Minister Theresa May had supported. 

Questions sent to the Scottish National Party for comment were not answered by press time.

This post appeared first on FOX NEWS

Former President Trump took a swipe at President Biden after winning the Iowa caucuses on Monday evening, saying the Democrat was the ‘worst president’ ever.

‘I don’t want to be overly rough on the president, but I have to say that he is the worst president that we’ve had in the history of our country, he’s destroying our country,’ Trump said of Biden after the Republican won 51% of the vote in Iowa.

Trump went on to claim that former President Carter – who is widely criticized for his poor handling of the economy, resulting in high inflation and high unemployment, as well as the 1979 Iranian hostage crisis – was ‘brilliant by comparison.’

He added: ‘You know, my wife attended the funeral two months ago of Rosalynn Carter and it was beautiful. And Jimmy Carter was there. And I thought to myself, Jimmy Carter is happy now because he will go down as being a brilliant president by comparison to Joe Biden. He’ll be a brilliant president,’ Trump continued. ‘He’s going to be known as brilliant by comparison.’

The comment came after Trump led Gov. Ron DeSantis, former Gov. Nikki Haley, Vivek Ramaswamy and the other 2024 Republican hopefuls in the country’s first nominating contest. The victory secured Trump the first 20 delegates in the race to become the Republican nominee.

During his speech, the former president also said he would emphasize securing the border. The issue was ranked number one among Iowan voters, even above the economy, which was second.

‘We’re going to seal up the border because right now we have an invasion and we have an invasion of millions and millions of people that are coming into our country. I can’t imagine why they think that’s a good thing. It’s a very bad thing,’ he said.

Trump then claimed ‘hundreds and hundreds of terrorists’ were coming from over the southern border into the U.S.

‘Nobody knows where they are. This is not a good thing. And we’re going to have to deport them,’ the Republican said. ‘We’re going to have a deportation level that we haven’t seen in this country for a long time, since Dwight Eisenhower actually.’

‘We have to stop the invasion,’ he added.

Trump will now head to New Hampshire, where he will look to continue his success toward securing the Republican nomination.

‘So it’s now off to New Hampshire, a great place,’ he said Monday. ‘We won it last time and we wanted it both times and we love it. The people in our country are great. They are great. They only want to see one thing: they want our country to come back. They’re embarrassed by what’s going on. Our country is left out all over the world. They’re laughing at us, and they want our country to come back.’

He won the state in 2016 and is looking to become just the second Republican ever to win both Iowa and New Hampshire and go on to win the presidency. Ted Cruz narrowly beat Trump in Iowa in 2016, denying him from winning both early states.

This post appeared first on FOX NEWS

Former President Trump leads President Biden in a potential head-to-head rematch among Georgia voters, according to a new poll.

A poll published by the Atlanta Journal-Constitution (AJC) found the Republican challenger holds a 45% to 37% lead over his successor. Just 7% of Georgia voters were unwilling to support either candidate, 6% said they were unsure of who they would ultimately support and 6% said they would not vote.

The poll comes the day after Trump won his first 20 delegates in the race for the Republican nomination after securing 51% of the vote in the Iowa Caucus, leading all other Republicans in the contest, including Ron DeSantis, Nikki Haley, Vivek Ramaswamy and Asa Hutchinson.

Biden trails Trump in part due to his historically low approval ratings and his ‘dismal’ support among independent voters, AJC’s Greg Bluestein and Michelle Baruchman wrote. Only 37% approved of the job he was doing in the White House.

As the Republican primary is officially underway, Trump’s support has swelled over recent months while Biden continues to falter in a state that helped dictate the results of their 2020 contest.

Nearly three-quarters of registered voters said they believed the U.S. was headed down the ‘wrong track’ and most disapproved of Biden serving at the helm.

In the new AJC poll, about 62% of registered voters disapproved of the president’s job performance. Among independents, Biden fared only slightly better, with a majority (54%) still disapproving of his performance.

In contrast, these same registered voters approve of their Republican governor, Brian Kemp.

‘About 57% of Georgia voters approve of his job performance, down slightly from this time last year. He has high marks among fellow Republicans (74%) and independents (52%). And, surprisingly, about 40% of Democrats and about 40% of Black voters view him positively,’ AFC Politics reported.

Trump’s current 8-point lead comes as he and Biden were virtually tied in the same poll conducted in November. At the time, Trump was at 45% to Biden’s 44%.

In 2020, Biden narrowly won Georgia over Trump by less than 12,000 votes. The result was the opposite outcome of the 2016 presidential contest when Trump carried the state over Hillary Clinton.

The AJC poll was conducted Jan. 3-11 by the University of Georgia’s School of Public and International Affairs and involved 1,007 registered voters. Its margin of error is 3.1 percentage points.

This post appeared first on FOX NEWS

Former two-term Arkansas Gov. Asa Hutchinson is bowing out of the race for the White House after finishing sixth in the Iowa caucuses.

Hutchinson on Tuesday suspended his long-shot campaign for the 2024 Republican presidential nomination.

‘I am suspending my campaign for President and driving back to Arkansas. My message of being a principled Republican with experience and telling the truth about the current front runner did not sell in Iowa,’ Hutchinson said in a statement.

He emphasized that ‘I stand by the campaign I ran. I answered every question, sounded the warning to the GOP about the risks in 2024 and presented hope for our country’s future.’

According to the unofficial  tabulation, Hutchinson won less than 200 votes out of more than 110,000 cast in Iowa’s Republican presidential caucuses.

Former President Donald Trump won a resounding victory on Monday night, topping 50% and winning  a majority of the vote and shattering the previous margin of victory in a the Iowa GOP caucuses as he cruised to a crucial first victory as he aims to recapture the White House in November’s election.

Hutchinson put his criticism of Trump front-and-center in his 2024 campaign.

At a major GOP presidential nomination cattle call in Florida in early November, Hutchinson was jeered for over a minute by the crowd after reiterating that ‘there is a significant likelihood that Donald Trump will be found guilty by a jury on a felony offense next year.’ 

‘That may or may not happen. Before you vote in March and it might not make any difference to you, but it will make a difference for our chances to attract independent voters in November. It will make a difference for those down ticket races for Congress and Senate, and it will weaken the GOP for decades to come. As a party, we must support the rule of law,’ he emphasized.

Hutchinson, a former federal attorney turned two-term congressman who served as Drug Enforcement Administration administrator and Department of Homeland Security undersecretary during then-President George W. Bush’s administration, launched his presidential campaign in late April in his hometown of Bentonville, Arkansas.

While he showcased his credentials as a conservative whose ‘mettle has been tested’ over his decades of political service, Hutchinson struggled with fundraising and his poll numbers never rose above the low single digits. 

Hutchinson reached the polling and donor thresholds at the last minute to qualify for August’s first GOP presidential nomination debate, but failed to make the stage at the ensuing showdowns.

And he struggled to stay relevant in a Republican presidential primary dominated by Trump and other rivals with great name recognition and larger war chests.

In late October, his campaign manager parted ways with Hutchinson over disagreements on the feasibility of a pathway towards the nomination. But Hutchinson marched on, with the help of just one or two staffers.

Hutchinson is the latest Republican presidential candidate to drop out of a race that now only has three major candidates left – Trump, Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis and former U.N. ambassador and former South Carolina Gov. Nikki Haley.

Former Vice President Mike Pence, who also struggled with fundraising, suspended his presidential campaign on Oct. 28, during his address to the Republican Jewish Coalition’s annual leadership summit in Las Vegas, Nevada.

Sen. Tim Scott of South Carolina ended his bid in November and North Dakota Gov. Doug Burgum suspended his campaign in early December.

Former New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie dropped out last week, and multi-millionaire biotech entrepreneur Vivek Ramaswamy called it quits Monday night after finishing fourth in Iowa’s caucuses.

Four lesser known candidates who all failed to qualify for the debates had already suspended their campaigns.

There are former CIA spy and former Rep. Will Hurd of Texas, Mayor Francis Suarez of Miami, Florida, business leader and quality control expert Perry Johnson, and 2021 California gubernatorial recall election candidate and former conservative talk radio host Larry Elder.

This post appeared first on FOX NEWS
Read this article for free!
Plus get unlimited access to thousands of articles, videos and more with your free account!
Please enter a valid email address.
By entering your email, you are agreeing to Fox News Terms of Service and Privacy Policy, which includes our Notice of Financial Incentive. To access the content, check your email and follow the instructions provided.

The Senate will vote on a resolution Tuesday afternoon by Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., that could potentially freeze U.S. aid to Israel unless the Biden administration reports to Congress within 30 days about whether Israel committed human rights violations during its war with Hamas.  

Sanders’ resolution is based on the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 that requires the State Department to examine the human rights conduct of nations receiving U.S. aid. The law prohibits U.S. aid to any foreign government ‘which engages in a consistent pattern of gross violations of internationally recognized human rights.’

Upon receiving the report, Congress will have the authority to reduce or end aid to Israel if violations are found. Any subsequent votes to modify security assistance will need a simple majority for approval. 

The resolution is reportedly opposed by the Biden administration, which has urged Congress to pass $60 billion more in aid to Israel, and many Democrats. But those in Congress who are part of the left’s more progressive flank have voiced support for a cease-fire and halting U.S. aid to Israel. 

‘This is a humanitarian cataclysm, and it is being done with American bombs and money. We need to face up to that fact – and then we need to end our complicity in those actions,’ Sanders previously said in a statement. 

The resolution, which faces an uphill battle that requires a simple majority needed to pass in the upper chamber, would request the administration’s 30-day report to detail steps taken by the U.S. government to promote human rights in Israel, limit risks to civilians, discourage harmful practices, and disassociate from such practices. Part of the resolution reaffirms Israel’s right to respond and defend itself against the deadly attack carried out by Hamas.

It would also require an assessment of whether ‘extraordinary circumstances’ exist to justify the continuation of security assistance aid for Israel, and if so, details of the circumstances that require ongoing funding. 

Many humanitarian organizations and the United Nations rely heavily on death toll data published by Hamas-run ministries in Gaza, which estimate more than 20,000 people in Gaza have been killed since the war began on Oct. 7.

Israel’s war against Hamas in Gaza, sparked by the terrorist group’s Oct. 7 attack on southern Israel, has prompted unprecedented destruction in the tiny coastal enclave and triggered a humanitarian catastrophe that has displaced most of Gaza’s 2.3 million population and pushed more than a quarter into starvation, according to the U.N.

Israel blames Hamas for the high death toll, saying its fighters make use of civilian buildings and launch attacks from densely populated urban areas.

After Hamas’ attack on Israel, 1,200 people were killed and around 250 people were taken hostage. As of this month, Israel believes more than 130 hostages are still in captivity in the Gaza Strip. 

Meanwhile, Democrats in Congress remain divided on the war. While some support more aid to Israel, others have called for a complete cease-fire to limit civilian casualties. Republicans have remained largely united in backing Israel. 

The Associated Press contributed to this report. 

This post appeared first on FOX NEWS
Read this article for free!
Plus get unlimited access to thousands of articles, videos and more with your free account!
Please enter a valid email address.
By entering your email, you are agreeing to Fox News Terms of Service and Privacy Policy, which includes our Notice of Financial Incentive. To access the content, check your email and follow the instructions provided.

Congress is expected to pass a short-term federal funding extension known as a continuing resolution (CR) this week aimed at avoiding a government shutdown.

It’s expected to pass with support from Republican and Democrat leaders who have agreed on little beyond the idea that shutting down the government is a bad idea both practically and politically.

The Republican majority in the House has experienced deep fractures over federal spending, with a growing bloc of conservatives declaring they prefer a government shutdown to an extension of the previous Democrat Congress’s spending priorities.

Within hours of the CR legislative text being made public, the hard-line right House Freedom Caucus panned it as a ‘surrender.’ Johnson, meanwhile, argued that the extra time will keep Republicans on track to secure conservative policy victories in the spending fight.

The ultra-conservative faction has had outsized influence on the House GOP majority for much of this Congress, particularly on bills that rely on Republican votes to pass. 

But two GOP aides who spoke with Fox News Digital anticipate that there’s little the Freedom Caucus and its allies can do about stopping the CR. 

It’s uncertain whether House GOP leaders will secure support from a majority of their own members, given the current political climate on spending, both aides suggested.

‘It’ll be a showdown for sure,’ one Republican aide told Fox News Digital. They said earlier, ‘The Freedom Caucus offers nothing more than criticism without a single suggestion to avert a government shutdown, and progressives want to spend more money than what this agreement represents.’

‘That leaves the typical coalition of Republicans and Democrats who will get this CR across the finish line,’ the aide predicted. ‘While this bill will pass on the House Floor, more Republicans than in the past will be forced to vote against this CR for political reasons.’

Meanwhile, a GOP aide to a moderate lawmaker blamed that political climate on the eight House Republicans led by Rep. Matt Gaetz, R-Fla., who ousted ex-Speaker Kevin McCarthy, R-Calif., in October.

‘Thanks to the Gaetz gang who were more concerned with getting political revenge on Kevin McCarthy with help from Democrats, the House will once again be forced to pass a CR rather than deliver the spending reform we promised,’ the second aide said.

The new CR would extend the two current government funding deadlines from Jan. 19 and Feb. 2 to March 1 and March 8.

This post appeared first on FOX NEWS

Donald Trump notched a commanding win in the Iowa GOP caucuses, more than doubling the 24% support he received in 2016. Caucusgoers braved subzero temperatures to deliver a resounding victory for the former president, whose 30-point win was the largest for a contested presidential caucus in modern Iowa history.

That’s according to our Fox News Voter Analysis of Iowa Republicans.

Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis edged out former South Carolina Gov. Nikki Haley for second place. The result was a much-needed boost for DeSantis, who visited every county and invested significant time and resources in the Hawkeye State.

Businessman Vivek Ramaswamy finished far behind with single-digit support, dropping out and endorsing Trump as the results became clear.

Underscoring the extent of his dominance, Trump won almost every demographic group by double-digit margins. He was particularly strong among some of the largest groups of Iowa Republican caucusgoers: those without a college degree, very conservative voters and rural voters.

TRUMP STRENGTHS

No College Degree             62%

Very Conservatives            58%

Rural Caucusgoers            58%

Trump won 55% of White evangelical Christians, a crucial bloc of Iowa voters, more than double DeSantis’ 24% and Haley’s 13%.

More than 6 in 10 caucusgoers consider themselves supporters of the Make America Great Again movement, and most of them (74%) backed Trump. In a hint of the next challenge for Trump – ensuring the full party is united behind him if he wins the nomination – non-MAGA voters backed Haley by 8 points, with DeSantis second. 

NON-MAGA SUPPORTERS

Haley       42%

DeSantis    34%

Trump       13%

DeSantis’ main sources of strength – the college-educated, very conservative voters and suburbanites – overlapped with both Haley’s and Trump’s. While he did not win any major demographic group outright, his advantages over Haley among White evangelicals (+11 points) and those who felt abortion should be illegal in all cases (+30 points) were enough to vault him into second place.

DESANTIS STRENGTHS 

College Degree                29%

Very Conservatives            28%

Suburban Caucusgoers         28%

Abortion Always Illegal       35%

Haley ran strongest among college graduates, suburban voters and political moderates. Despite her pro-life record, Haley had a notable 22-point advantage over DeSantis among voters who felt abortion should be legal in all or most cases. 

HALEY STRENGTHS

College Degree                30%

Moderates                     33%

Suburban Caucusgoers         28%

Abortion Should Be Legal      33%

The final few days of campaigning may have been decisive in the battle for second place, as DeSantis had an 8-point edge over Haley among those who made up their minds in the last few days. Trump held a massive 73-point advantage among those who knew who they would support all along.

DECIDED IN THE LAST FEW DAYS

DeSantis    32%

Trump       26%

Haley       24%

DeSantis had a 7-point advantage over Haley among those who had participated in previous caucuses, while first-time caucusgoers backed the South Carolinian by 8 points. Still, Trump won the lion’s share of first-timers (51%) and those who caucused in years past (51%).

Overall, 6 in 10 caucusgoers would be satisfied with Trump as the party’s eventual nominee. Far fewer would be satisfied with DeSantis or Haley.

SATISFIED IF CANDIDATE WINS NOMINATION

Yes, If Trump     61%

Yes, If DeSantis  42%

Yes, If Haley     35%

At the other end of the spectrum, 2 in 10 (20%) would be dissatisfied enough with Trump as the nominee that they would not pull the lever for him in November. Slightly more would not vote for DeSantis (26%) or Haley (30%) if they were the nominee.

Despite his resounding win, Trump has some work to do to unite the party in November. If he is the eventual nominee, two-thirds of Haley voters (68%) said they would be so dissatisfied that they would not support him. Fewer DeSantis supporters (25%) would refuse to back Trump.

More than one-third of Haley (41%) and Trump (35%) voters would return the favor by declining to support DeSantis if he is the eventual nominee.

If Haley wins the nomination, nearly half of Trump voters (45%) and 2 in 10 DeSantis backers (19%) would not support her in November.

Regardless of their preferred candidate, voters’ top priorities for their nominee were near-universal: having the mental capacity to serve as president, followed closely by being a strong leader. Despite Haley’s efforts to question Trump’s stamina, those who prioritized mental capacity backed the former president by 28 points.

Being able to win in November, caring about people like you and having the best policy ideas were second-tier priorities but very important to at least three-quarters of voters. Half were looking for a candidate who would work across party lines. 

‘VERY’ IMPORTANT REPUBLICAN NOMINEE

Is Mentally Fit?        94%

Strong Leader?          90%

Can Win?                82%

Has Best Policies?      75%

Cares?                  74%

Bipartisan?             52%

Rule Breaker?           16%

Few – just 16% – thought it was very important to nominate a candidate willing to break the rules in pursuit of their accomplishments.

Despite the array of legal challenges he faces, most caucus participants did not think Trump is a law-breaker. Roughly 2 in 10 (15%) felt he did something illegal regarding the events at the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021, in his alleged attempt to interfere with the vote count in the 2020 election (19%) or the classified documents found in his Florida home (21%).

All told, the one-quarter of voters who felt Trump was guilty of at least one criminal act went for Haley by 28 points, while Trump carried those who felt he hadn’t broken the law by an even wider 43-point margin.

TRUMP DID SOMETHING ILLEGAL ON AT LEAST ONE CHARGE

Haley       52%

DeSantis    24%

Trump       15%

Most caucusgoers felt the charges were political attempts to undermine Trump (80%) rather than legitimate investigations into wrongdoing (20%).

Perhaps as a result, only 4 in 10 said they had confidence in the integrity of the U.S. legal system.

More than half were confident in the integrity of elections nationwide and U.S. democracy in general, while almost all had confidence in Iowa’s electoral processes. 

CONFIDENT IN INTEGRITY OF…

Your State Elections    90%

U.S.~Elections?         57%

U.S.~Democracy          51%

U.S.~Legal System?      43%

Reflecting their mistrust of U.S. elections, 6 in 10 voters felt Biden was not legitimately elected. Trump won these voters by a massive 54-point margin, while Haley won those who thought Biden was fairly elected by 21 points.

Republican caucusgoers were united in their desire for change in how the country is run – hardly surprising with a Democrat in the White House. The lion’s share (56%) would prefer substantial change, while one-third (33%) were looking for complete and total upheaval in the country’s governance. Trump had an advantage among those looking for substantial change, but those looking for complete upheaval turned the caucuses into a blowout.

WANT TOTAL CHANGE IN HOW U.S. IS RUN

Trump       69%

DeSantis    16%

Haley       7%

Meanwhile, economic issues were also a driver of the desire for change. Most voters – 9 in 10 – said they were either holding steady or falling behind financially. 

FAMILY’S FINANCIAL SITUATION

Getting Ahead     11%

Holding Steady    57%

Falling Behind    32%

The economy was, predictably, among the top issues on voters’ minds, but more caucusgoers cited immigration as the top issue facing the country. These two issues dominated the issue landscape, with every other issue in single digits.

MOST IMPORTANT ISSUE FACING THE COUNTRY

Immigration             41%

The economy and jobs    33%

Foreign policy          7%

Health care             4%

Trump won immigration voters by 36 points, and his signature immigration policy – building a wall along the southern border – was almost universally popular with Iowa Republicans.

U.S.-MEXICO BORDER WALL

Favor       88%

Oppose      12%

Three-quarters of caucusgoers felt immigrants in the U.S. today do more to hurt the country than help it. Haley won by a sizable 21-point margin among those who feel immigrants generally help the country; Trump won by an even wider 39-point spread among the larger group who feel immigrants hurt the country.

Trump won economy voters by 33 points, thanks in large part to a 52-point edge among those who said they were falling behind financially. Voters who were breaking even financially backed him by 23 points, while the relatively small number who said they were getting ahead went for Haley by 13 points.

Foreign policy was far from the top of voters’ priority lists – just 7% said it was the most important issue facing the country – but it did provide a clear area of contrast between the candidates.

Four-in-ten voters preferred to continue aiding Ukraine in its war against Russia, and they favored Haley over DeSantis by 11 points. Trump won aid for opponents by 43 points.

There was more consensus on support for aiding Israel in its war against Hamas (67% support vs. 32% oppose). White evangelicals, who have traditionally been among the strongest U.S. supporters of Israel, backed continued aid by an even wider 54-point margin.

All told, a majority of caucusgoers felt the U.S. should take a less active role in world affairs.

IN SOLVING WORLD PROBLEMS THE U.S. ROLE SHOULD BE…

More active 19%

Less active 51%

About right 29%

School policy (3% most important issue) was an even lower priority than foreign policy, which hurt DeSantis, who sought to distinguish himself on the issue. Many Iowa caucusgoers agreed with the Florida governor in principle: 52% felt their local schools were too focused on racism, and three-quarters felt the same about lessons on sexual orientation (74%) and gender identity (76%). Unfortunately for DeSantis, he trailed Trump by nearly 30 points among those who felt schools were too focused on each issue.

While not a top priority for caucusgoers (3% most important issue), abortion is certain to be a major topic in the general election. Iowa Republicans largely felt abortion should be illegal in all (20%) or most cases (48%). Two-thirds backed a 6-week abortion ban (65% favor, 33% oppose), while far more were in support of a 15-week ban (78% favor, 20% oppose).

Methodology

The Fox News Voter Analysis is a survey of approximately 1,500 Iowa Republican caucusgoers conducted Jan. 9-15. Full methodological details are available here.

This post appeared first on FOX NEWS

Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis finished in second place in Iowa on Monday night as the race now shifts to New Hampshire and South Carolina with questions swirling about what the second place finish will mean for his campaign going forward. 

DeSantis outperformed some polling expectations on Monday night finishing at roughly 21% when the Real Clear Politics average of polls showed him at 15.7% before votes were cast. However, Trump won a decisive victory with over 50% of the vote, the largest margin of victory in Iowa Caucus history, in a state where DeSantis had gone ‘all in’ with his campaign’s time and resources.

The DeSantis campaign touted the performance by saying that the Florida governor ‘earned his ticket out of Iowa.’

Former Ambassador Nikki Haley, who many pundits believed was surging in Iowa and could potentially finish ahead of DeSantis, finished in 3rd place a couple of points behind DeSantis.

‘They threw everything at Ron DeSantis,’ a senior DeSantis campaign official told Fox News Digital late Monday night. ‘They couldn’t kill him. He is not only still standing, but he’s now earned his ticket out of Iowa. This is going to be a long battle ahead, but that is what this campaign is built for. The stakes are too high for this nation and we will not back down.’

During his Monday night speech, DeSantis struck a defiant tone while speaking to his supporters.

‘I can tell you, because of your support, in spite of all of that they threw at us, everyone against us, we’ve got our ticket punched out of Iowa,’ DeSantis said.

‘This is our responsibility to carry this torch and to preserve this sacred fire of liberty, DeSantis said. ‘We thank you for your effort. We thank you for your support. You helped us get a ticket punched out of the Hawkeye State. We have a lot of work to do, but I can tell you this as the next President of the United States, I am going to get the job done for this country. I am not going to make any excuses and I guarantee you this. I will not let you down.’

Despite the close 2nd place finish, questions about whether DeSantis has the momentum and funding to compete with Trump in future states are likely to continue. 

Kellyanne Conway, former senior advisor to President Trump, told Fox News before the caucuses on Monday night that DeSantis ‘should continue on whether he finishes second or third.’

Fox News Chief Political Analyst Brit Hume pointed out that a second place finish in Iowa has historically led to securing the nomination on the GOP side.

‘Let’s not forget that second place has led to a lot of people winning the nomination in Iowa, you finish second in Iowa it’s worth something,’ Hume said as the results were coming in on Monday night. ‘There are a lot of places where it wouldn’t be and in the coming races in the future it won’t be as much but out here when you win second you go on and who knows you might win the nomination.’

Some on social media have called for DeSantis, and the other candidates, to drop out of the race given Trump’s dominant and historic victory on Monday night winning by roughly 30 points. 

‘Deciding to drop out is the hardest decision a presidential candidate can make. It’s deeply personal and emotional, no matter how obvious or rational it seems,’ GOP strategist Alex Conant, founding partner at Firehouse Strategies, told Fox News Digital hours before the votes were cast in Iowa on Monday night.  

‘If DeSantis does not beat Trump in Iowa tonight, he won’t beat him anywhere and his campaign will be effectively over. But it will be up to him when to drop out, and that’s anyone’s guess.’

DeSantis, who will hold two campaign events in South Carolina on Tuesday before flying to New Hampshire to campaign, has said multiple times that he is staying in the race regardless of Monday’s outcome in Iowa.

‘This campaign is built for the long-haul,’ DeSantis Comms Director Andrew Romeo said on January 12. ‘We intend to compete for every single available delegate in New Hampshire, Nevada, South Carolina and then into March. That begins on Monday’s Iowa Caucus, and the next day we will kick our campaign into overdrive in both South Carolina and New Hampshire.’

‘We hope Donald Trump is ready for a long, scrappy campaign as we work to share Ron DeSantis’ vision across America. Game on.’

Because Iowa awards delegates proportionately, all of the top four candidates will receive delegates.

Trump currently holds large leads in the polls in both New Hampshire and South Carolina. The former president, according to the Real Clear Politics average of polls, holds a 14 point lead in New Hampshire and a 30 point lead in South Carolina.

The DeSantis campaign has touted his endorsements in Haley’s home state of South Carolina pointing out that he has earned more than she has.

‘Despite South Carolina being Nikki Haley’s home state, DeSantis has already built up an impressive grassroots organization,’ a campaign spokesperson recently told Fox News Digital. ‘He has endorsements from 74 current and former elected officials, while Haley has just 14. This includes 19 state legislators for DeSantis, compared to Haley’s 11.’

This post appeared first on FOX NEWS
Generated by Feedzy