Former FBI Director James Comey surrenders and appears in court over alleged threat against Trump

2026-04-29T16:56:39.583Z / CNN

By Hannah Rabinowitz, Holmes Lybrand, Katelyn Polantz, Emily Condon

Updated 3 hr ago
Updated Apr 29, 2026, 1:13 PM ET
PUBLISHED Apr 29, 2026, 12:56 PM ET

James Comey speaks onstage during Former FBI Director James Comey In Conversation With MSNBC’s Nicolle Wallace at 92NY in New York City, on May 30, 2023.

Dia Dipasupil/Getty Images

Former FBI Director James Comey surrendered Wednesday to law enforcement before his first appearance in federal court in the Eastern District of Virginia.

Comey, who is charged with making a threat against President Donald Trump by photographing seashells on a North Carolina beach, was allowed to leave court with no conditions of release after a brief hearing that lasted less than 10 minutes.

“I don’t see why they’d be necessary this time,” Judge William Fitzpatrick said, noting that there were no conditions set when the Justice Department first attempted to bring a case against Comey last year.

Comey’s latest indictment, which was brought Tuesday, comes as acting Attorney General Todd Blanche has picked up the pace in bringing cases that the president has publicly jockeyed for.

The new case represents a reinvigorated effort to satisfy Trump’s demands to investigate his foes, including Comey, who he sees as a key leader in the perceived effort to “weaponize” the justice system against him.

Related video The former FBI director was indicted Tuesday over an alleged “threat” to President Donald Trump made in a social media post. CNN’s Katelyn Polantz explains what Comey’s post meant and why this is his second time facing charges under the Trump administration. CNN Why James Comey is trending 1:42

Comey is now charged with making a threat against the president and transmitting a threat in interstate commerce.

The charges were brought in the Eastern District of North Carolina, but Comey’s first appearance was in a courthouse in Alexandria, Virginia as it’s closer to his home.

On Tuesday, Comey entered and exited the courtroom through a side entrance used by defendants. He wore a dark suit and did not speak during the hearing.

He was not asked to enter a plea on Wednesday.

Comey’s attorneys, however, told the judge they plan to file motions accusing the Justice Department of selectively and vindictively prosecuting their client.

No date has been set for Comey’s arraignment or first appearance in North Carolina.

The US Attorney from the Eastern District of North Carolina, Ellis Boyle, who will be overseeing this case as it moves to the federal court in New Bern, NC, was in the courtroom Wednesday.

The threat

Tuesday’s indictment is centered on a picture Comey posted on social media last May, of shells on a beach writing out the numbers “86 47.” He wrote in the caption, “Cool shell formation on my beach walk.”

Almost immediately following his post, Republicans and administration officials began criticizing Comey for what they said amounted to a death threat against President Donald Trump.

When used as slang, the number 86 can refer to getting rid of or tossing something out. Trump is currently the 47th president.

Related article NEW YORK, NEW YORK – MAY 30: James Comey speaks onstage during Former FBI Director James Comey In Conversation With MSNBC’s Nicolle Wallace at 92NY on May 30, 2023 in New York City. (Photo by Dia Dipasupil/Getty Images) Dia Dipasupil/Getty Images/File Exclusive: Former FBI Director James Comey indicted over alleged ‘threat’ against Trump 6 min read

“This is not going anywhere. This is clearly not a punishable threat,” Eugene Volokh, a senior fellow at the Hoover Institution at Stanford University who specializes in First Amendment law, told CNN Tuesday.

This is the second time that Trump’s Justice Department brought charges against Comey.

In September of last year, the Justice Department first brought charges against Comey, accusing him of lying to Congress over leaks to the press.

The case was dismissed late last year by a federal judge who found that the interim US attorney for the Eastern District of Virginia had been improperly appointed, having skirted approval from the Senate.

This story was updated with additional information from the hearing.

Fed holds interest rates steady for third straight meeting, as Powell vows to remain as governor

April 29, 2026 / 4:08 PM EDT / CBS News

Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell said on Wednesday that he plans to remain as a board governor after his term ends in May, announcing the move after the central bank again left its benchmark interest rate unchanged amid rising inflation due to the Iran war.

Powell had previously said he would stay on as Fed chair until the Department of Justice ended an investigation into his oversight of renovations of the Fed’s Washington, D.C., headquarters, calling the inquiry politically motivated. Jeanine Pirro, U.S. Attorney for the District of Columbia, said on April 24 that her office would end the probe into Powell.

“I’m waiting for the investigation to be well and truly over with transparency and finality,” Powell said on Wednesday when asked in a press conference when he would leave his post as a Fed governor.

“The institution is battered”

Powell added that he is concerned about the Fed’s ability to maintain its independence amid political challenges, such as President Trump’s attempt to fire Federal Reserve Governor Lisa Cook. The Supreme Court is expected to issue a ruling later this year on whether the president has the authority to remove a Federal Reserve official.

“The institution is battered — we have had to go to the courts,” Powell said. “It’s not over.”

Powell said the central bank’s ability to set policy without political pressure is essential to maintaining low inflation and full employment, the two sides of the Fed’s dual mandate.

“You want people to make monetary policy and set interest rates to benefit the general public, and focus only on that and ignore political considerations,” he said. “This isn’t bipartisan — it’s nonpartisan.”

Powell’s decision to remain as a Fed governor underlines his commitment to preserving the central bank’s independence, noted Bankrate financial analyst Stephen Kates.

“This is a bold departure from the norm of chairs exiting after their chairmanship term ends,” Kates said in an email. “Powell has not shied away from facing political and legal pressure head-on, and this move signals that he remains steadfast in his commitment to preserving Fed independence through continued service.”

Elevated inflation

Powell’s remarks came as the Fed maintained the federal funds rate — what banks charge each other for short-term loans — in its current range of 3.5% to 3.75%. The decision to keep rates steady was widely expected by investors, with the CME FedWatch tool forecasting a 100% probability that officials would maintain the current rate.

In explaining its decision to maintain the current rate, the Federal Open Market Committee (FOMC), the Fed’s rate-setting panel, cited developments in the Middle East in pointing to “a high level of uncertainty about the economic outlook.” The central bank also said “elevated” inflation is tied to the “recent increase in global energy prices.”

Kevin Warsh, Mr. Trump’s nominee to replace Powell after his term as chair ends on May 15, will inherit a Federal Reserve facing pressures ranging from President Trump’s repeated demands for lower interest rates to an inflation reading that jumped last month to its highest level in almost two years. Because interest rate cuts can spur inflation, many economists now predict the Fed will hold off on reductions until later in 2026 or even 2027.

“The FOMC met expectations and held rates steady today,” said Atsi Sheth, chief credit officer at Moody’s Ratings, in an email. “As the effects of the Middle East conflict become more pronounced, the case for maintaining policy rates rests on rising inflation risks, while risks to U.S. growth appear contained for now.”

In its statement, the FOMC reiterated its goal of achieving a 2% annual inflation rate. The Consumer Price Index stood at 3.3% in March.

Powell noted that the central bank believes the current benchmark rate provides flexibility if economic conditions change, although he added that “nobody is calling for a hike right now.”

“We feel we’re in a good place to move in either direction,” he said.

Dissenting members

Four FOMC members dissented from the Fed’s statement, with Fed Governor Stephen Miran voting in favor of a 0.25 percentage-point cut. Three other members supported maintaining the current rate, but opposed wording in the statement that signaled a bias toward lowering rates.

“But it is notable that the press release still refers to the Committee ‘considering the extent and timing of additional adjustments’ to rates and hence maintains a bias towards further cuts ahead,” noted Brian Coulton, chief economist at Fitch Ratings, said in an email. “This wording was clearly a topic of much debate given the oil price shock, with three members deciding not to support the inclusion of an easing bias in the statement.”

Asked about the dissents, Powell said that he viewed it as a natural outcome given the challenges facing the economy.

“We’re in an unusually difficult situation,” he said. “We’ve had four supply shocks — the pandemic, the invasion of Ukraine, the tariffs and now Iran and the oil spike.”

He added, “Every supply shock has the capability of driving inflation up and unemployment up. The central bank has a really hard time deciding what the right thing is to do.”

No rate cuts in 2026?

The Fed last cut rates in December 2025, when the Consumer Price Index stood at 2.7% on an annual basis — above the Fed’s 2% target but down sharply from the pandemic-era high of 9.1% in June 2022.

Since the Iran war began on Feb. 28, global energy costs have spiked, pushing the average U.S. price for a gallon of gasoline to $4.23 on Wednesday, about $1.25 more than before the conflict. Economists now forecast that April’s inflation rate could jump to 3.9% annually due to higher oil and gas prices, according to FactSet.

Higher energy costs are leading some U.S. consumers to hold off on buying big-ticket items, noted Oxford Economics in an April 28 report.

“We expect higher oil prices will hit consumers’ real disposable income growth and weigh on spending on durable goods and discretionary services the most,” the investment advisory firm said.

A dip in spending would pose risks for the economy, which relies on consumer purchases for 70 cents of every $1 in gross domestic product.

So far, the U.S. economy remains resilient, Powell said, but the Fed is closely watching whether consumers pull back on spending due to higher gas and energy prices.

Uneven job growth

The Fed is also keeping an eye on the labor market, which has idled amid economic uncertainty, uneven payroll gains and the emergence of artificial intelligence.

Some companies have announced large layoffs, citing AI, although economists say the technology doesn’t yet appear to be causing widespread job cuts.

Signs of a weaker job market could persuade some Fed officials to dial back borrowing costs for consumers and businesses. Powell has recently described the employment market as relatively balanced, while acknowledging that young college grads face obstacles in finding work.

“Any refinement in how the Fed describes labor market conditions, particularly wage pressures and hiring demand, could carry implications for expectations around future rate policy,” noted Ameriprise chief market strategist Anthony Saglimbene in an April 27 research note.

Thomas leaves nothing left unsaid on racial gerrymandering decision: ‘Go further’

Kagan’s dissent warns the decision ‘renders Section 2 all but dead letter’ for minority voting protections

April 29, 2026 2:45pm EDT / Fox News

By Ashley Oliver

NEW You can now listen to Fox News articles!

Listen to this article

3 min

Justice Clarence Thomas said Wednesday the Supreme Court should go further than its latest Voting Rights Act ruling, arguing the law’s key anti-discrimination provision was divisive and should never apply to redistricting cases.

“As I explained more than 30 years ago, I would go further and hold that [section two] of the Voting Rights Act does not regulate districting at all,” Thomas, who was joined by Justice Neil Gorsuch, wrote in a concurrence.

Thomas’ remarks came as part of the Supreme Court’s 6-3 decision in Louisiana v. Callais, which upheld a finding that one of the state’s majority-Black congressional districts was an unconstitutional racial gerrymander.

The decision had broad implications, serving to narrow section two of the Voting Rights Act, a civil rights-era law making it illegal for voting policies to discriminate based on race. The ruling already makes it more difficult for states to justify using race when drawing majority-minority districts, but Thomas’ concurrence went further, saying the statute should not be used for redistricting under any circumstances.

CHICAGO MAYOR BRANDON JOHNSON TAKES JAB AT CLARENCE THOMAS WHILE DEFENDING CITY’S REPARATIONS TASK FORCE

U.S. Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas appears before swearing in Pam Bondi as U.S. attorney general in the Oval Office at the White House in Washington, D.C., on Feb. 5, 2025.(Andrew Harnik/Getty Images)

“Today’s decision should largely put an end to this ‘disastrous misadventure’ in voting-rights jurisprudence,” Thomas wrote, quoting himself from a 1994 concurrence.

Thomas argued the high court’s prior interpretations of section two of the Voting Rights Act have encouraged states to engage in discriminatory race-based map drawing. He said the text of section two covers access to ballots and voting procedures, not how states draw district lines, and that it should therefore not be used in lawsuits about maps.

Thomas, an appointee of President George H. W. Bush, has long advocated gutting the Voting Rights Act provision. The conservative justice, the second Black justice in history after Justice Thurgood Marshall, said in the 1994 case, Holder v. Hall, that people who use section two of the law to claim redrawn districts have diluted racial minorities’ votes are reading it incorrectly.

“The assumptions upon which our vote dilution decisions have been based should be repugnant to any nation that strives for the ideal of a color blind Constitution,” Thomas wrote at the time.

REVISITING JUSTICE SCALIA’S SAME-SEX MARRIAGE DISSENT: PROPHETIC OR INFLAMMATORY?

Voting rights activists protest outside the U.S. Supreme Court in Washington on Oct. 15, 2025, as the court prepares to hear arguments challenging Louisiana’s congressional map.(Bill Clark/CQ-Roll Call, Inc/Getty Images)

The majority opinion, authored by Justice Samuel Alito, stopped short of Thomas’ position. Alito wrote that while compliance with the Voting Rights Act could sometimes involve the use of race, the law did not require Louisiana to create a second majority-Black district, meaning its map was unconstitutional.

“‘Our acceptance of race-based state action has been rare for a reason,’” Alito wrote, saying Louisiana had “no compelling interest” in packing Black voters into the district.

The yearslong case arose from Louisiana’s redistricting efforts after the 2020 census, during which the state added a second majority-Black district after a lower court said the Voting Rights Act required it. That new map was then struck down as a racial gerrymander, setting up the new lawsuit that rose to the Supreme Court.

Supreme Court Justice Elena Kagan participates in a discussion at George Washington University Law School in Washington, D.C., on Sept. 13, 2016.(Mark Wilson/Getty Images)

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

The three liberal justices argued in a dissent, authored by Justice Elena Kagan, an Obama appointee, that the majority’s decision, and Thomas’ more stringent view, stripped protections against diluting racial minorities’ votes.

The decision “renders Section 2 all but dead letter,” Kagan wrote.

“Under the Court’s new view of Section 2, a State can, without legal consequence, systematically dilute minority citizens’ voting power,” she wrote.

Ashley Oliver is a reporter for Fox News Digital and FOX Business, covering the Justice Department and legal affairs. Email story tips to ashley.oliver@fox.com.

Pentagon’s Hegseth defends Iran war, says it is not a quagmire

2026-04-29 16:31:28 / Reuters

WASHINGTON, April 29 (Reuters) – U.S. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth sought to defend the Iran ​war in fiery remarks to Congress on ‌Wednesday, saying it was not a quagmire and attacking Democratic lawmakers as “feckless” for criticizing the unpopular conflict.

Hegseth was ​testifying before Congress for the first time ​since the U.S. and Israel launched a ⁠war against Iran on February 28 that ​has led to a surge in gasoline prices.

The Reuters Iran Briefing newsletter keeps you informed with the latest developments and analysis of the Iran war. Sign up here.

​Trump’s popularity has taken a pounding since the conflict began and just 34% of Americans approve of the U.S. ​conflict with Iran, down from 36% in ​mid-April and 38% in mid-March, the Reuters/Ipsos poll found.

U.S. Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth leaves after a briefing on the Iran war, amid a ceasefire between the U.S. and Iran, at the Pentagon in Washington, D.C., U.S., April 24, 2026. REUTERS/Kevin Lamarque

Democrats ‌peppered ⁠Hegseth with questions about the open-ended conflict, with Rep. John Garamendi of California calling it a “quagmire” and “political and economic disaster at every level.”

Hegseth ​responded angrily.

“You ​call it ⁠a quagmire, handing propaganda to our enemies? Shame on you for that ​statement,” Hegseth said in response to Garamendi, ​and slammed “reckless, ⁠feckless, and defeatist” Congressional Democrats.

“Don’t say: ‘I support the troops on one hand, and then a two-month ⁠mission ​is a quagmire.’ … Who are you ​cheering for here? Who you pulling for?”

Reporting by Phil Stewart, Idrees ​Ali and Ismail Shakil; editing by Michelle Nichols

Our Standards: The Thomson Reuters Trust Principles.

James Comey’s ‘86 47’ indictment would seem to be bad news for lots of people — including Trump

2026-04-29T16:46:14.415Z / CNN

Analysis by

Aaron Blake

3 hr ago

PUBLISHED Apr 29, 2026, 12:46 PM ET

Former FBI director James Comey answers questions during an interview forum at the Washington Post, on May 8, 2018.

Win McNamee/Getty Images/File

The Trump administration’s second indictment of former FBI Director James Comey appears to be perched on a very slippery slope.

Comey’s alleged criminal offense is posting an image of seashells arranged to spell out “86 47.” The “86” terminology is slang typically used to describe throwing out or eliminating something, and Donald Trump is the 47th president. The administration argued from the beginning that it was a threat against Trump.

Except many Americans, including some prominent Trump allies, could be charged or at least investigated under that logic.

It’s also ironic that Trump’s Justice Department is now investigating and issuing indictments over vaguely threatening-sounding content, given Trump’s own lengthy history with such rhetoric.

It is theoretically possible there is some damning piece of evidence showing Comey understood his post to be a true threat (which the DOJ must prove). The Justice Department’s three-page indictment doesn’t go into much detail.

Back in May, when the administration initially raised this issue, Comey said he didn’t realize “86” could have some potentially violent connotations and quicky deleted the post.

But Occam’s razor would seem to point to this being a thinly constructed case. Trump has previously made clear he wants Comey indicted and, when the first indictment against the former FBI director didn’t pan out, the president and other administration officials quickly declared the seashell post was a threat before any investigation was actually conducted. Plus, this isn’t the first thin case against a Trump foe.

Even some conservative legal scholars and Trump allies have been quite skeptical of the Comey charges.

Part of the government’s problem could be proving that this isn’t selective prosecution. Many others have used the “86” formulation without it being interpreted as a threat.

Perhaps the most prominent example is pro-Trump influencer Jack Posobiec in 2022 posting “86 46.” That’s the same thing Comey posted, except substituting Biden (the 46th president) for Trump. (Posobiec has claimed Comey’s post was a call for assassination, but his post about Biden remains live to this day.)

This now-deleted Instagram post from James Comey shows seashells spelling out the numbers “86 47.”

James Comey/Instagram

Two years later, fellow pro-Trump influencer Scott Adams posted, “The Simulation says it is time to ‘86’ Biden.”

There is no evidence either man has been investigated for potential threats. Adams died in January.

Nor is there evidence of a similar investigation of Democratic Michigan Gov. Gretchen Whitmer, who appeared on TV in 2020 with “86 45” displayed next to her. (Trump, of course, was also the 45th president.)

Other Trump allies have also used “86” in political contexts in ways that make clear it’s not an obvious threat.

Republican former Rep. Matt Gaetz of Florida in 2024 celebrated having “86’d” a series of Republicans who had been removed from leadership positions, not killed.

And, similar to Posobiec, Fox News host Jesse Watters last year concluded that Comey’s use of “86” meant he had “put a hit out on Trump.” But months later, Watters used the same term for two different people who were merely ousted from their political jobs.

And then there is just the sheer volume of “86” merchandise that’s out there. Online retailers like Amazon have been selling things with “86 47,” “86 46,” “86 45” and even “86 44” (for former President Barack Obama) emblazoned on them for years. Those items — many of which are marketed as calls to remove presidents from office, not to kill them — remain available to this day.

Is the DOJ going to investigate the people who sold and purchased such apparel?

When pressed this week on the other examples — specifically the Posobiec and Whitmer ones — acting Attorney General Todd Blanche suggested Comey’s case is somehow different, without detailing how.

Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche speaks, as FBI Director Kash Patel listens, at a press conference regarding the investigation of former FBI Director James Comey’s social media photo, at the Department of Justice, on April 28.

Tasos Katopodis/Getty Images

“The mere fact there’s a similar photo posted or similar statement made — that’s true every day,” Blanche told CBS News on Wednesday, adding: “Every one of those are not indicted. It depends on the facts of every case.”

But Blanche conceded that he had “no idea whether there was an investigation into the other times that that post has been made and whether that investigation yielded different results.”

This is also not the first time the Trump Justice Department could plausibly be accused of treating friends and foes differently while pursuing Trump’s retribution campaign.

Last year, the administration scrutinized a series of Trump foes for potential mortgage fraud, including Sen. Adam Schiff of California, New York Attorney General Letitia James (who was indicted before the case was dismissed) and Federal Reserve Governor Lisa Cook (who Trump has tried to fire from her post over the allegations). But there is no evidence similar scrutiny has been applied to Republicans with very similar potential mortgage problems, like Texas Attorney General and Senate hopeful Ken Paxton and some Trump Cabinet officials.

The other key point here is that the Comey prosecution standard would seem to be a troubling one for Trump himself.

Trump, after all, has frequently said and posted vaguely threatening-sounding things.

• In 2016, Trump referenced how “Second Amendment people” might prevent then-Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton from appointing judges.
• In 2020, he posted a video of one of his supporters saying, “The only good Democrat is a dead Democrat.”
• In 2023, Trump posted a news article that featured an image of himself wielding a baseball bat, juxtaposed with an image of Manhattan prosecutor Alvin Bragg. Trump’s own lawyer called it “ill-advised.”
• In early 2024, Trump shared an image of a truck with a tailgate illustrated as if to show Biden hogtied in the truck bed.
• Late in the 2024 campaign, Trump mused about a circumstance in which Liz Cheney would be “standing there with nine barrels shooting at her”.
• And he has repeatedly suggested his opponents might deserve to be executed.

This is only a small portion of Trump’s violent rhetoric, focused on things that could plausibly be argued were threatening to specific people — particularly if you’re using the newfound Comey standard.

It seems unlikely the Comey prosecution will lead to a conviction. But it could tell us a lot about how desperate the administration is getting in its quest to target Trump’s foes.

As Republican Sen. Thom Tillis of North Carolina told CNN on Wednesday: “I just think it’s another example of where we’re going to regret this, because we’re setting a fairly low bar.”

Ex-FBI chief Comey released after court appearance on alleged Trump threat

2026-04-29 4:16 PM UTC / Reuters

By Mike Scarcella and Andrew Goudsward

April 29, 2026 4:16 PM UTC Updated 5 mins ago

节点运行失败

FBI Director James Comey waits before testifying at a House Intelligence Committee hearing into alleged Russian meddling in the 2016 U.S. election, on Capitol Hill in Washington, U.S., March 20, 2017. REUTERS/Joshua Roberts/File Photo Purchase Licensing Rights, opens new tab

* Summary

* Comey claims innocence, attorney calls prosecution politically motivated
* Instagram post with ’86 47′ seashells cited as basis for threat charges
* Previous DOJ case against Comey for lying to Congress was dismissed by federal judge

ALEXANDRIA, Virginia, April 29 (Reuters) – Former FBI Director James Comey appeared in federal court in Virginia on Wednesday, a day after being indicted over a social media ‌post that prosecutors allege threatened President Donald Trump.

Comey turned himself in on two charges, including threatening the life of the president and transmitting threats across state lines. The former FBI director did not speak during a brief court appearance. His attorney, Patrick Fitzgerald, said he would argue that the case is a vindictive prosecution, meaning it was brought to ​punish Comey for exercising his legal rights.

Jumpstart your morning with the latest legal news delivered straight to your inbox from The Daily Docket newsletter. Sign up here.

Advertisement · Scroll to continue

U.S. Magistrate Judge William Fitzpatrick of the Eastern District of Virginia ordered Comey released and did not ​impose any special conditions. His next court appearance is expected in North Carolina, where a federal grand jury returned ⁠the indictment on Tuesday. Members of Comey’s family entered the courthouse shortly before the proceeding began.

Comey has said he is innocent and will fight ​the accusations in court.

The indictment continues the Trump Justice Department’s pursuit of Comey, who was unsuccessfully prosecuted last year in a separate case, and marks a ​renewed push to target perceived political enemies of the president with criminal prosecution. Trump last year by name in a social media post calling for criminal charges against his adversaries.

Advertisement · Scroll to continue

Comey listened in court on Wednesday as Fitzpatrick read aloud the charges, which carry a maximum penalty of five years in prison.

SEASHELL POST

The charges relate to a ​post Comey made on Instagram last May showing seashells arranged on a beach to form the numbers “86 47.”

The number “86” is a slang term originating ​in the restaurant industry that can mean to “get rid of” or throw someone out. Forty-seven is a possible reference to Trump as the 47th U.S. president.

The indictment alleged ‌that a ⁠reasonable recipient of the message would interpret it as a threat to Trump.

Trump told reporters on Wednesday that he viewed “86” as a “mob term.”

“People think of it as something having to do with disappearing, but the mob uses that term to say when they want to kill somebody,” Trump told reporters at the White House.

Asked whether he thought the post put his life in danger, Trump responded, “Probably. I don’t know.”

Comey deleted the post shortly after it was ​published, saying he viewed it as a ​political message and was not ⁠aware that the number could be associated with violence.

Comey, a longtime Trump foe, has now faced two criminal cases from the Justice Department during Trump’s second administration. A previous case accusing him of lying to Congress was dismissed ​by a federal judge.

TRUMP RAINED AGAINST COMEY

Trump has for years railed against Comey over his role overseeing an ​FBI investigation into ⁠alleged ties between Trump’s first presidential campaign and Russian officials in 2016.

Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche has moved quickly to carry out Trump’s demands for criminal cases. Blanche’s predecessor, Pam Bondi, was ousted in part for not moving fast enough on them.

Since Blanche took over the top post earlier this month, the Justice Department ⁠has brought criminal ​charges against the Southern Poverty Law Center, reinstated the firing squad and electrocution as options for ​the federal death penalty, released a critical report on past prosecutions of anti-abortion activists and indicted an aide to Dr. Anthony Fauci, former director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, ​for allegedly concealing records related to COVID-19 research.

Reporting by Mike Scarcella and Andrew Goudsward; Additional reporting by Susan Heavy; Editing by Scott Malone and David Gregorio

Our Standards: The Thomson Reuters Trust Principles., opens new tab

Trump’s behind-the-scenes enforcer pulls back the curtain in rare public move

April 29, 2026 1:54pm EDT / Fox News

Trump’s top aide says she welcomes ‘different viewpoints’ and will share ‘insights and information’

By Ashley J. DiMella Fox News

White House Chief of Staff Susie Wiles details her path to the West Wing and comments on the success of the second Trump administration on ‘My View with Lara Trump.’

NEW You can now listen to Fox News articles!

Listen to this article

2 min

White House chief of staff Susie Wiles, one of President Donald Trump’s most influential but least public-facing advisers, launched an X account Tuesday to share updates from inside the administration.

“I’m joining X to share occasional updates about the work we do at the White House. We are relentlessly focusing on advancing President Trump’s agenda and delivering on promises to the American people,” her first post read. “I welcome different viewpoints. Follow along for insights and information.”

Her newly formed account has amassed nearly 300,000 followers since its launch this week. Wiles is seen very often with the president, sitting in on high-level meetings and standing by his side at events, but Trump’s chief of staff rarely speaks directly to the public.

WHO IS SUSIE WILES, TRUMP’S WHITE HOUSE CHIEF OF STAFF? 5 THINGS TO KNOW

White House chief of staff Susie Wiles launched her own X account on Monday.(Brendan Smialowski/AFP)

Her account only follows six users, all media outlets: Fox News, The Wall Street Journal, CNN, ABC News, The New York Times, and CBS News.

“NEW MUST FOLLOW: White House Chief of Staff @SusieWiles47,” the White House’s Rapid Response account shared her first post writing.

JOE CONCHA: MY TOP FIVE ‘CRINGE’ JEAN-PIERRE MOMENTS

The White House directed Fox News Digital to her first post when approached for additional comment.

Wiles worked on all three of Trump’s presidential campaigns.(Jabin Botsford/The Washington Post)

Trump made history when he appointed the first woman to serve as his chief of staff, saying Wiles was integral to his 2016 and 2020 campaigns.

FOX NEWS POLITICS NEWSLETTER: TRUMP DECLARES HIMSELF VENEZUELA’S ‘ACTING PRESIDENT’

Wiles has been dubbed the “Ice Maiden” by Trump, which he noted in his 2024 victory speech, for hard-nosed approach to handling business.

Susie Wiles is the first female chief of staff.(Yuri Gripas/Abaca/Bloomberg)

Wiles is a longtime Trump ally, first throwing her support behind him in 2015 when she became the Trump campaign’s co-chairwoman in Florida.

“As a card-carrying member of the G.O.P. establishment, many thought my full-throated endorsement of the Trump candidacy was ill-advised — even crazy,” Wiles told the New York Times in a rare public statement back in 2016.

Ashley J. DiMella reports on politics for Fox News Digital.

FEMA’s disaster relief fund hits red zone ahead of hurricane season

2026-04-29T12:21:00-0400 / CBS News

By

Updated on: April 29, 2026 / 12:30 PM EDT / CBS News

Washington — With hurricane season just weeks away, FEMA has officially entered a financial danger zone — forcing the agency to limit spending to only the most urgent, life-saving needs amid the partial government shutdown.

The move, known as Imminent Needs Funding, is triggered when FEMA’s Disaster Relief Fund drops below $3 billion.

And the timing couldn’t be worse.

“Disasters are unpredictable. They’re very costly. We don’t know what could happen between now and June 1,” said FEMA Associate Administrator Victoria Barton.

FEMA hasn’t stopped working outright, but the disaster agency must now sharply narrow how it spends federal disaster dollars — prioritizing immediate emergency response, direct aid to survivors and critical infrastructure protection, while delaying many reimbursements and longer-term recovery projects.

FEMA’s funding strain also impacts the pay of its own essential workers. Roughly 10,000 staff — including permanent employees and disaster-response personnel hired under the Stafford Act — are paid out of the Disaster Relief Fund, even during a government shutdown. Those payroll costs alone run between $300 million to $400 million per month, according to congressional and agency budget estimates, which makes staffing costs one of the largest ongoing draws on the fund, even as FEMA shifts into its red zone.

Spending tightens before trigger

Even before formally entering that status, officials had begun slowing or selectively approving some payments as they approached the cutoff.

Reimbursements tied to past disasters — including billions in outstanding pandemic-related aid — were increasingly handled on a case-by-case basis, rather than at normal speed.

“A lot of those reimbursements are for rural hospitals … but now that we’re in immediate needs funding, those payments are going to be paused,” Barton told CBS News.

Uncharted territory during shutdown

FEMA has used Imminent Needs Funding nine times over the past two decades. But officials say entering that posture during an active government funding lapse would be unprecedented, adding new uncertainty about how long disaster operations could be sustained.

The risk grows if funding continues to fall. In an extreme scenario, officials acknowledge that a fully depleted disaster fund could eventually halt not only recovery payments but also affect staffing funded through the account.

If multiple disasters hit — or a major hurricane strikes — the system could be pushed to its limits.

“The potential response efforts … could be wiped out if there’s no disaster relief funding,” Barton warned.

Disaster costs can escalate quickly. Major disasters routinely run into the tens or even hundreds of billions of dollars — with Hurricane Katrina causing about $160 billion in damage and Hurricane Harvey about $125 billion.

FEMA itself does not cover all of those expenses, but it plays a central role in helping communities recover. Under federal law, the agency typically reimburses at least 75% of eligible disaster costs for state and local governments, including debris removal, emergency response and infrastructure repair — with the federal share sometimes rising even higher after the most catastrophic events.

Hurricane season raises stakes

The timing is particularly concerning with hurricane season beginning June 1.

The funding threshold FEMA uses is designed to ensure the agency can respond to at least one major catastrophic event. Dropping below that level increases the risk that multiple disasters — or overlapping national security events — could strain available resources.

Officials warn that entering hurricane season with reduced reserves could leave communities more exposed if major storms or other emergencies occur in quick succession.

Broader operational impacts

Beyond funding, the shutdown is disrupting FEMA’s broader preparedness efforts.

Training programs for emergency managers and first responders have been curtailed, affecting tens of thousands of participants each week. The agency has also scaled back coordination with state and local partners and has already missed key preparedness events ahead of hurricane season.

FEMA has also been absent from key national coordination events ahead of hurricane season, including the National Hurricane Conference and National Emergency Management Association Midyear Forum. These gatherings, often overlooked outside emergency management circles, are where plans are refined and relationships forged before disasters strike.

Meanwhile, DHS officials say the National Flood Insurance Program is operating under severe limitations, delaying policy renewals and disrupting real estate markets in flood-prone regions.

Those disruptions are compounding financial pressures as officials race to maintain readiness while operating with limited resources and staffing uncertainty.

FEMA officials say the solution isn’t just refilling the disaster fund — it’s restoring full funding across the entire Department of Homeland Security.

“We really need to think about funding the entire organization so that we can properly serve the American people,” Barton said.

By Laura Coates and Manu Raju, CNN

Published 12:53 PM EDT, Wed April 29, 2026

Video Ad Feedback

Laura Coates: Supreme Court ruling makes Voting Rights Act ‘not just a toothless tiger, you’ve got no tiger’

Inside Politics

CNN’s Chief Legal Analyst and anchor Laura Coates joins “Inside Politics” after the Supreme Court ruled to limit the reach of the Voting Rights Act. Coates tells Manu Raju, “All you have now is the theory that you have to trust people who are in power to do things that are in the best interest of those who are not.”

1:31 • Source: CNN

Leaked audio shocker: UK envoy says US ‘special relationship’ not with Britain, but another ally

2026-04-29T12:34:16-04:00 / Fox News

Sir Christian Turner’s leaked remarks to students come as King Charles visits Washington amid US–UK diplomatic strains

By Efrat Lachter Fox News

Published April 29, 2026 12:34pm EDT

Leaked remarks from Britain’s ambassador to the U.S. suggesting Washington’s “one true special relationship” is with Israel — not the United Kingdom — have sparked political backlash in London.

Sir Christian Turner reportedly told a group of British students earlier in 2026 that the United States’ one true “special relationship” is “probably Israel,” not the United Kingdom, according to leaked audio first reported by the Financial Times.

The remarks, made privately but leaked publicly during King Charles III and Queen Camilla’s high-profile visit to Washington and New York amid efforts to repair strained relations, have placed fresh scrutiny on Britain’s standing in Washington at a particularly sensitive diplomatic moment.

Turner reportedly stressed that Britain’s ties with the U.S. remain deeply intertwined, particularly on defense and security.

‘TRUMP EFFECT’ ON DISPLAY AS UK’S STARMER BOOSTS DEFENSE SPENDING ON EVE OF US VISIT

“There is a deep history and affinity between us. Particularly on defence and security, we are intertwined,”according to leaked audio cited by British media. “The relationship will carry on, if you want, being ‘special,’ but I think it’s going to have to be different.”

President Donald Trump met with Britain’s King Charles III in the Oval Office of the White House in Washington on Tuesday, April 28, 2026, during a state visit. Britain’s Ambassador to the U.S. Christian Turner, Foreign Secretary Yvette Cooper, Vice President JD Vance and Secretary of State Marco Rubio were also present.(Alex Brandon/AP)

Turner also said, according to the transcript, that Britain and Europe must “work to redefine” their relationship with Washington, particularly in terms of defense, rather than relying on a U.S. security umbrella.

The leak comes after recent strains between Trump and British Prime Minister Keir Starmer, including disagreements over Britain’s posture toward U.S.–Israeli military action against Iran. Trump previously criticized Starmer publicly, saying he was “not Winston Churchill.”

An embassy spokesperson and a U.K. Foreign Office spokesperson sought to distance the government from the leaked remarks, telling Fox News Digital: “These were private, informal comments made to a group of U.K. sixth-form students visiting the U.S. in early February. They are certainly not any reflection of the U.K. government’s position.”

The wide-ranging informal discussion, the spokesperson explained, focused on diplomacy and the political issues of the day that students asked questions about, stressing that the remarks were clearly never intended as on-record statements of government policy.

PRINCE WILLIAM VIEWS TRUMP RELATIONSHIP AS KEY TO MONARCHY’S FUTURE: EXPERT

President Donald Trump speaks with Britain’s King Charles III during a state dinner in the East Room of the White House in Washington, D.C., April 28, 2026.(Aaron Schwartz/AFP)

Still, the controversy raises broader questions that extend beyond diplomatic optics: whether the symbolic “special relationship” between Washington and London has been eclipsed by more immediate U.S. strategic priorities, particularly Israel’s central role in American Middle East security calculations.

Barak Seener, senior fellow at the London-based Henry Jackson Society, said Turner’s remarks reflected a hard strategic reality rather than a diplomatic blunder.

“Ambassador Christian Turner was giving a realistic assessment that echoed President Trump’s criticism of NATO, calling it a ‘paper tiger’ for not contributing to joint U.S.-Israel-led operations against Iran,” Seener told Fox News Digital.

Seener pointed to his recent report, “Israel 2048: A Blueprint for an Asymmetric Geopolitical Power,” arguing that Israel’s expanding military capabilities increasingly function as a force multiplier for U.S. regional interests. By contrast, Seener argued, Britain’s modern strategic value has weakened despite its historic rhetoric.

“King Charles, in his recent speech to the U.S. Congress, was forced to emphasise the U.K. and U.S.’s shared culture and history rather than recent military contributions simply because the U.K.’s naval and military capabilities have been completely hollowed out,” Seener said.

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

King Charles made history as the second British monarch to address Congress, after his mother, the late Queen Elizabeth, first did so in 1991.(Henry Nicholls/POOL/AFP via Getty Images)

He added that Charles’ invocation of past joint sacrifices “does not bear any relevance to today” given Britain’s reported refusal to allow U.S. use of Royal Air Force bases for strikes on Iran.

The White House, however, emphasized continuity over controversy, telling Fox News Digital that, “President Trump has enjoyed welcoming Their Majesties to the White House this week, including yesterday morning, when he highlighted the historic, special relationship between the United States and the United Kingdom,” White House spokesperson Anna Kelly said.

“The events of this visit are unprecedented in scope and spectacle, and the President enjoyed hosting a beautiful State Dinner yesterday evening,” she added.

Efrat Lachter is a foreign correspondent for Fox News Digital covering international affairs and the United Nations. Follow her on X @efratlachter. Stories can be sent to efrat.lachter@fox.com.