Republican presidential candidate Nikki Haley said she thinks Hamas releasing two hostages Friday means the group is trying to “earn favor” with the United States and warned the Biden administration to “be smart” and not weaken its response.
“First I’ll say, two prayers have been answered and we’ve got 200 more to go,” Haley said on Fox News. “The second thing I’ll say to the Biden administration is don’t fall for it.”
President Biden said Friday that the U.S. has secured the release of two Americans taken hostage by Hamas during its attack against Israel on Oct. 7. Biden said Qatar and Israel secured the release of the Americans, named by the Israeli government as Judith Raanan and her 18-year-old daughter Natalie Raanan.
“This is what they do,” said Haley, the former U.S. ambassador to the United Nations. “They’re trying to earn favor with the United States.”
House Republicans look for reset after Jordan loses Speaker fight: Live coverage
Chesebro becomes second Trump lawyer to plead guilty in Georgia
Hamas releases American mother, daughter hostages; Biden says efforts to secure others are ongoing
House GOP abandons Jordan for Speaker after secret ballot loss
She added that Hamas is likely fearful of a ground attack from Israel, and Iran is worried that Hamas could lose the war.
“And so what they’re doing is they’re going to throw two hostages out there for one, to see if they can weaken us to keep Israel from going into Gaza and two, because they want to see if they can get something out of it,” Haley said.
Haley warned Biden that this is a crucial time: “This is a time to be smart.”
“Don’t let this weaken us,” she said. “We’ve got 200 more hostages in there and don’t forget what happened on Oct. 7.”
Approximately 1,400 Israelis have been killed in the first two weeks of the conflict in the Middle East, officials said, which began when Hamas attacked Israel earlier this month. The Hamas-run Gaza Health Ministry said responding strikes have killed nearly 3,800 Palestinians.
Republican presidential candidate Nikki Haley said she thinks Hamas releasing two hostages Friday means the group is trying to “earn favor” with the United States and warned the Biden administration to “be smart” and not weaken its response. “First I’ll say, two prayers have been answered and we’ve got 200 more to go,” Haley said…
President Donald Trump says the United States might one day get rid of federal income tax because of money the government collects from tariffs on imported goods. Tariffs are extra taxes the U.S. puts on products that come from other countries.
Trump has said that tariff money could become so large that it might allow the government to cut income taxes “almost completely.” He has also talked about possibly phasing out income tax over the next few years if tariff money keeps going up.
Right now, the federal government gets much more money from income taxes than from tariffs. Income taxes bring in trillions of dollars each year, while tariffs bring in only a small part of that total. Because of this gap, experts say tariffs would need to grow by many times to replace income tax money.
Many economists and tax experts doubt that tariffs alone could pay for the whole federal budget. They warn that very high tariffs could make many imported goods more expensive for shoppers in the United States. This could hit lower- and middle‑income families hardest, because they spend a big share of their money on everyday items.
The president can change some tariffs, but only Congress can change or end the federal income tax. That means any real plan to remove income tax would need new laws passed by both the House of Representatives and the Senate. So far, there is no detailed law or full budget plan on this idea.
For now, Trump’s comments are a proposal, not a change in the law. People and businesses still have to pay federal income tax under the current rules. The debate over using tariffs instead of income taxes is likely to continue among lawmakers, experts, and voters.
Former President Donald Trump has signed an executive order directing federal agencies to declassify all government files related to Jeffrey Epstein, the disgraced financier whose death in 2019 continues to fuel controversy and speculation.
The order, signed Wednesday at Trump’s Mar-a-Lago estate, instructs the FBI, Department of Justice, and intelligence agencies to release documents detailing Epstein’s network, finances, and alleged connections to high-profile figures. Trump described the move as “a step toward transparency and public trust,” promising that no names would be shielded from scrutiny.
“This information belongs to the American people,” Trump said in a televised statement. “For too long, powerful interests have tried to bury the truth. That ends now.”
U.S. intelligence officials confirmed that preparations for the release are already underway. According to sources familiar with the process, the first batch of documents is expected to be made public within the next 30 days, with additional releases scheduled over several months.
Reactions poured in across the political spectrum. Supporters praised the decision as a bold act of accountability, while critics alleged it was politically motivated, timed to draw attention during a volatile election season. Civil rights advocates, meanwhile, emphasized caution, warning that some records could expose private victims or ongoing legal matters.
The Epstein case, which implicated figures in politics, business, and entertainment, remains one of the most talked-about scandals of the past decade. Epstein’s connections to influential individuals—including politicians, royals, and executives—have long sparked speculation about the extent of his operations and who may have been involved.
Former federal prosecutor Lauren Fields said the release could mark a turning point in public discourse surrounding government transparency. “Regardless of political stance, this declassification has the potential to reshape how Americans view power and accountability,” Fields noted.
Officials say redactions may still occur to protect sensitive intelligence or personal information, but the intent is a near-complete disclosure. For years, critics of the government’s handling of Epstein’s case have accused agencies of concealing evidence or shielding elites from exposure. Trump’s order promises to change that narrative.
As anticipation builds, journalists, legal analysts, and online commentators are preparing for what could be one of the most consequential information releases in recent history.
On Friday, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu addressed the United Nations General Assembly in New York City, defending Israel’s ongoing military operations in Gaza. As he spoke, more than 100 delegates from over 50 countries stood up and left the chamber—a rare and significant diplomatic walkout. Outside the UN, thousands of protesters gathered to voice opposition to Netanyahu’s policies and call for accountability, including some who labeled him a war criminal. The protest included activists from Palestinian and Jewish groups, along with international allies.
The walkouts and protests were a response to Israel’s continued offensive in Gaza, which has resulted in widespread destruction and a significant humanitarian crisis. Many countries and individuals have accused Israel of excessive use of force, and some international prosecutors have suggested Netanyahu should face investigation by the International Criminal Court for war crimes, including claims that starvation was used as a weapon against civilians. At the same time, a record number of nations—over 150—recently recognized the State of Palestine, leaving the United States as the only permanent UN Security Council member not to join them.
The diplomatic walkouts and street protests demonstrate increasing global concern over the situation in Gaza and growing support for Palestinian statehood. Several world leaders, including Colombia’s President Gustavo Petro, showed visible solidarity with protesters. Petro called for international intervention and, controversially, for US troops not to follow orders he viewed as supporting ongoing conflict. The US later revoked Petro’s visa over his role in the protests, which he argued was evidence of a declining respect for international law.
The Gaza conflict is one of the world’s most contentious and closely-watched issues. It has drawn strong feelings and differing opinions from governments, activists, and ordinary people worldwide. The United Nations, as an international organization focused on peace and human rights, is a key arena for these debates. The events surrounding Netanyahu’s speech show that many nations and voices are urging new action—from recognition of Palestinian rights to calls for sanctions against Israel—while discussion and disagreement over the best path forward continue.
This episode at the UN highlights how international diplomacy, public protests, and official policy are all intersecting in real time as the search for solutions to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict remains urgent and unresolved.
How to Find Your Voice as a Filmmaker
How Misinformation Overload Breaks Creative Focus
From Seen to Secured: How Filmmakers Are Owning Their Value
7 Filmmaking Lessons From Michael B. Jordan’s Oscar Moment
This scene almost broke him. And changed his career.
The Timothée Chalamet Guide to Ruining Your Image
Stop Waiting for Permission — The Film Industry Just Rewrote the Rules
The machine isn’t coming. It’s aleady the room.
