Author

admin

Browsing

Harmony Gold Mining (NYSE:HMY,JSE:HAR) announced that it has approved development of its Eva Copper project in Queensland after completing an updated feasibility study, with an estimated capital of US$1.75 billion across a three-year window.

The South African miner said Monday (November24) that its board signed off on the Final Investment Decision for the Eva copper project, a 100-percent-owned project in northwest Queensland expected to deliver high margins and a long operating life.

Harmony plans to build a low strip-ratio open-pit mine capable of producing about 65,000 metric tons of copper concentrate annually during its first five years, with an average life-of-mine profile of roughly 60,000 metric tons of copper and 19,000 ounces of gold per year over an estimated 15-year span.

The mine will process about 18 million metric tons of ore per year and carry an all-in sustaining cost of approximately US$2.50 per pound.

CEO Beyers Nel said the feasibility results confirm the company’s shift toward a balanced gold-and-copper portfolio.

“The Eva Copper Feasibility Study delivers a strong, high-confidence outcome that positions Harmony for the next phase of growth as we continue building a high-quality, low-cost portfolio,” he said.

Nel also tied Eva Copper to Harmony’s expanding strategy, pointing to the company’s recently completed MAC Copper acquisition.

“Eva Copper, together with our recent MAC Copper acquisition, creates a compelling platform that brings together the enduring value of gold with the future-facing strength of copper, enhancing cash flow resilience across commodity cycles,” he said.

Last month, Harmony completed its US$1.01 billion acquisition of MAC Copper, giving the company full ownership of the high-grade CSA copper mine in New South Wales.

The company said the purchase builds on its strategic push to strengthen its copper position in Tier-1 jurisdictions. It also expects its two major Australian copper assets to deliver a combined 100,000 metric tons of copper annually once fully commissioned.

Meanwhile, the Eva Copper project was acquired by the company in October 2022 and has since completed 166,000 metres of drilling. The current two-million-metric-ton copper resource underpins the potential for future extensions to the mine’s life.

Harmony anticipates first production in the second half of 2028, a timeline it says aligns with a structural deficit in copper supply that could support stronger prices.

Board approval moves the project into the execution phase. Mobilization to site is expected in the third quarter of fiscal 2026, subject to amendments to the project’s Environmental Authority.

Securities Disclosure: I, Giann Liguid, hold no direct investment interest in any company mentioned in this article.

This post appeared first on investingnews.com

In its 2025 federal budget, the Canadian government lays out a bold blueprint to foster competition, innovation and inclusion in the financial sector by accelerating open banking adoption.

With the Big Six banks holding 93 percent of banking assets, this consumer-driven reform aims to dismantle longstanding barriers, giving Canadians and small businesses greater control over their financial data and choices.

The promise of open banking in Canada

Open banking, also known as consumer-driven banking, enables secure, reliable and affordable sharing of financial data between banks and third-party service providers. The goal of this framework is to empower consumers by bringing them more customized and transparent financial products and services.

The Canadian government’s recent announcements, including legislative proposals and an oversight shift from the Financial Consumer Agency of Canada (FCAC) to the Bank of Canada (BoC), signal a serious commitment to delivering a competitive and consumer-centric financial ecosystem. Boms explained that, if implemented correctly, open banking could drive innovation and inclusion across Canada’s financial sector.

“It means a more holistic picture of your total financial life, including your investment portfolios,” he commented. “It’s also something that every other G7 country has and has had for quite some time, and so it provides the basis for a more competitive, more innovative and more efficient financial system.”

One shift in the proposed framework that Boms said is vital is the BoC taking control of regulatory oversight.

‘The FCAC, where (oversight) lived originally, really didn’t have any experience in creating a regulatory framework for non-banks,’ he said. In contrast, the BoC has direct experience in licensing for non-banks serving consumers. It oversees fintech firms such as Wealthsimple, Koho, Brim Financial and Venn under the Retail Payments Activities Act.

Smaller financial institutions, including credit unions, will stand to benefit significantly from this change, leveling the playing field with the Big Six banks, which, as mentioned, currently dominate banking assets.

However, Boms emphasized the importance of a risk- and size-based regulatory approach to ensure these smaller players can innovate without undue burdens: “You have to recognize that fundamentally smaller financial institutions, smaller fintechs, don’t have the same resources as bigger incumbents.”

Canadian budget measures supporting competition

This year’s Canadian federal budget introduces several important measures to enhance competition and give consumers more choice beyond the dominant bank oligopoly. One of the flagship promises is to ban transfer fees for investment and registered accounts, fees that currently cost Canadians around C$150 per account.

Draft regulations are expected by spring 2026 to enforce this ban, reducing friction and costs for consumers. Additionally, the budget includes initiatives to simplify switching primary chequing accounts between financial institutions, further lowering barriers for Canadians to move their banking relationships.

The budget also targets cross-border transfer fees by improving transparency, including fees related to foreign exchange margins, so consumers can better understand the costs of sending money internationally.

Accessibility to cheque funds will be improved by raising the dollar threshold and shortening hold periods on cheque deposits, benefiting Canadians who rely on cheques.

To support smaller lenders and foster broader financial inclusion, legislative amendments will make it easier for federal credit unions to scale and for provincial credit unions to enter the federal regulatory regime.

“If (smaller financial institutions) can get access to consumer data digitally, they can then become much more competitive without having to build the same type of infrastructure the biggest banks can afford to build,” said Boms.

A voluntary code of conduct is planned to improve smaller financial institutions’ access to brokered deposit channels, a vital funding source for growth. Furthermore, changes to the Bank Act and Canada Deposit Insurance Corporation Act will raise public holding requirement thresholds for smaller institutions.

That will allow them more flexibility to grow before triggering changes in ownership structure.

While Canada is still rolling out its open banking framework, countries like the UK and Australia demonstrate how open banking adoption fuels economic resilience and consumer benefits.

“Canada has learned from the experiences of (other) jurisdictions, good and bad, and taken those learnings and implemented (them) into what we see here,’ said Boms.

The future of open banking in Canada

With a 2026 target for full read access, market participants are gearing up for a transformative shift in how financial data is handled. This initiative marks a pivotal move toward democratizing financial data and services in Canada.

The BoC’s expanded oversight role, coinciding with the launch of the real-time rail payment infrastructure and phased “write access” capabilities by mid-2027, will accelerate the system’s rollout.

This evolving infrastructure will facilitate instant payments and empower consumers with the ability to initiate actions like bill payments and account switching seamlessly.

Boms and FDATA Canada stand ready to guide this transformation, ensuring that open banking in Canada not only enhances competition, but also maintains safety, security and consumer protection.

Open banking’s architecture also presents fresh opportunities for digital currencies, with new legislation introduced requiring stablecoin issuers to maintain adequate high-quality reserves, clear redemption policies and robust risk management and security standards. Stablecoins could complement open banking by enabling faster, cheaper cross-border payments and settlements, especially for consumers and small businesses.

As open banking takes shape, Canadians and small businesses will gain unprecedented control over their financial lives, a change poised to ignite innovation, unlock economic potential and reshape the country’s banking landscape.

Securities Disclosure: I, Meagen Seatter, hold no direct investment interest in any company mentioned in this article.

This post appeared first on investingnews.com

BTU METALS CORP. (‘BTU’ or the ‘Company’) (TSXV:BTU)(OTCQB:BTUMF) announces that, further to the news release of November 11, 2025, the Company has closed the previously announced, over-subscribed non-brokered private placement of flow-through common shares by the issuance of 17,700,000 flow-through shares at a price of $0.05 per FT Share (the ‘FT Offering’), for gross proceeds of $885,000.

Each flow-through unit shall be comprised of one common share of the company issued on a flow-through basis and one-half of one common share purchase warrant to be issued on a non-flow-through basis. Each whole warrant shall entitle the holder thereof to acquire one common share of BTU at a price of $0.09 for a period of 12 months following the closing of the offering. The flow-through shares will qualify as flow-through shares (within the meaning of Subsection 66(15) of the Income Tax Act (Canada) and Section 359.1 of the Taxation Act (Quebec).

In connection with the oversubscribed offering, the company paid finders’ fees to eligible finders consisting of $58,450 in cash and 1,106,000 non-transferable common share purchase warrants. Each finder warrant is exercisable to acquire one common share in the capital of the company at an exercise price of $0.05 per common share for a period of 12 months from the date of issuance. Closing of the offering is subject to approval of the TSX Venture Exchange. The securities issued under the offering, and any Shares that may be issuable on exercise of any such securities, will be subject to a statutory hold period expiring four months and one day from the date of issuance of such securities.

‘The overwhelming response for this financing demonstrates strong market support for BTU’s portfolio of Ontario-based exploration projects in both the prolific Red Lake and Wawa mining districts,’ stated Paul Wood, CEO. We look forward to advancing all of our projects immediately and into 2026.’

About BTU
BTU Metals Corp. is a junior mining exploration company. BTU’s primary assets are the Dixie Halo Project located in Red Lake, Ontario (optioned to Kinross) immediately adjacent to the Kinross Great Bear Project, the Dixie East project and its gold and critical minerals properties in the active Wawa gold district. The Company continues to look to acquire high quality exploration projects to add to its portfolio for the benefit of its stakeholders. The Company has no debt and minimal property obligations.

ON BEHALF OF THE BOARD

Paul Wood

Paul Wood, CEO, Director
pwood@btumetals.com
BTU Metals Corp.
Telephone: 1-604-683-3995
Toll Free: 1-888-945-4770

Cautionary Statement
Trading in the securities of the Company should be considered highly speculative. No stock exchange, securities commission or other regulatory authority has approved or disapproved the information contained herein. Neither the TSX-V nor its Regulation Services Provider (as that term is defined in the policies of the TSX-V) accepts responsibility for the adequacy or accuracy of this release.

Forward-Looking Statements
This news release contains certain ‘forward-looking information’ within the meaning of applicable Canadian securities laws that are based on expectations, estimates and projections as at the date of this news release. The information in this release about future plans and objectives of the Company is forward-looking information. Other forward-looking information includes but is not limited to information concerning: the intentions, plans and future actions of the Company.

Any statements that involve discussions with respect to predictions, expectations, beliefs, plans, projections, objectives, assumptions, future events or performance (often but not always using phrases such as ‘expects’, or ‘does not expect’, ‘is expected’, ‘anticipates’ or ‘does not anticipate’, ‘plans’, ‘budget’, ‘scheduled’, ‘forecasts’, ‘estimates’, ‘believes’ or ‘intends’ or variations of such words and phrases or stating that certain actions, events or results ‘may’ or ‘could’, ‘would’, ‘might’ or ‘will’ be taken to occur or be achieved) are not statements of historical fact and may be forward-looking information and are intended to identify forward-looking information.

This forward-looking information is based on reasonable assumptions and estimates of management of the Company at the time it was made, and involves known and unknown risks, uncertainties and other factors which may cause the actual results, performance or achievements of the Company to be materially different from any future results, performance or achievements expressed or implied by such forward-looking information. Such factors include, among others: risks relating to the global economic climate; dilution; future capital needs and uncertainty of additional financing; the competitive nature of the industry; currency exchange risks; the need for the Company to manage its planned growth and expansion; the effects of product development; protection of proprietary rights; the effect of government regulation and compliance on the Company and the industry; reliance on key personnel; global economic and financial market deterioration impeding access to capital or increasing the cost of capital; and volatile securities markets impacting security pricing unrelated to operating performance. The Company has also assumed that no significant events occur outside of the normal course of business. Although the Company has attempted to identify important factors that could cause actual results to differ materially, there may be other factors that cause results not to be as anticipated, estimated or intended. There can be no assurance that such statements will prove to be accurate as actual results and future events could differ materially from those anticipated in such statements. Accordingly, readers should not place undue reliance on forward-looking information. The Company undertakes no obligation to revise or update any forward-looking information other than as required by law.


Source

This post appeared first on investingnews.com

President Donald Trump and former President Barack Obama are polar opposites in many ways, but, as with anyone who has sat behind the Resolute Desk, they do share some similarities.

One thing both have in common is overseeing government shutdowns — one under Obama and two under Trump. And even in that sparse similarity, both men operated differently, particularly in the most recent, 43-day closure.

While both congressional battles were centered on Obamacare, Obama put his shutdown at the center of attention, while Trump kept it at more of an arm’s length.

Romina Boccia, director of budget and entitlement policy at the Cato Institute, told Fox News Digital that a major difference in the Obama and Trump administrations’ approaches to their respective shutdowns was that in 2013, Obama wanted the pain of shutdown to be felt by Americans, while Trump kept the focus centered on Washington, D.C.

‘During the Obama shutdown, it was more to make it extremely visible, shut down beloved functions — even if you didn’t have to — that affect average Americans,’ she said.

Boccia at the time worked for the conservative think-tank the Heritage Foundation and recalled the barricades that were swiftly erected around Washington, D.C.’s many national parks.

Those barricades, both concrete and human, spilled out beyond the nation’s capital and were placed around the hundreds of national parks across America as a stark reminder that the government was closed.

Boccia noted that a direct comparison of the two shutdowns would be difficult given the differing lengths, but that the Trump administration, at least early on, sought to inflict direct pain on congressional Democrats and the federal government.

That was carried out largely by the Office of Management and Budget Director Russ Vought, who ordered mass firings of furloughed workers and withheld or canceled billions in federal funding to blue cities and states.

‘It’s not that this wasn’t a shutdown, it’s just that the choices the administration made were an attempt to focus the impacts of the shutdown this round on the government itself,’ Brittany Madni, executive vice president of the Economic Policy Innovation Center, told Fox News Digital.

‘This was showmanship from President Obama,’ Madni continued. ‘And if you look at what happened over the last 40 something days, it was the exact same playbook by congressional Democrats.’

Madni argued that discussions and debate during the 2013 shutdown were centered largely in Washington, D.C. The latest closure saw some of that, but it also saw Trump continuing to work on trade deals, particularly during his high-profile visit to Asia, which was a point of contention for Democrats on the Hill.

‘He was doing his job,’ Madni said. ‘He was doing his job. Meanwhile, congressional Democrats, quite simply, were not.’

Still, there was a shared thread in both shutdowns: Obamacare.

In 2013, congressional Republicans wanted to dismantle Obama’s signature piece of legislation. Fast-forward, Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., led his caucus to push extensions to enhanced Obamacare subsidies.

Boccia said that played a large part in why Obama was at the vanguard during his shutdown.

‘He was front and center in the media talking about the shutdown, and because it was over his legacy achievement,’ she said.

It was because his key legislative achievement was under fire that Obama took such a central role in the shutdown, Boccia argued, but for Trump, who tried during his first administration to gut and replace Obamacare, it wasn’t a priority.

‘The fact that it was over the Obamacare COVID credits, I think, made the president less necessary and perhaps interested in being the face of the shutdown,’ she said. ‘It was really a congressional battle.’

Madni disagreed that the latest shutdown wasn’t a direct bid by congressional Democrats to go after one of his legislative achievements.

Before the climactic failed vote in the Senate in late September that ushered in the longest shutdown in history, Democrats offered a counter-proposal that would have stripped several provisions from Trump’s ‘big, beautiful bill,’ which has so far been the crowning legislative achievement of his second term.

‘It’s really important that everyone remembers the subsidy request was one request in a laundry list of radical, incredibly expensive ideas that added up to $1.5 trillion,’ Madni said. ‘Another item in that list was dismantling key portions of the One Big Beautiful Bill Act.’

‘If this was really about the subsidies, then the Democrats would have been willing at any point during the last 43 days to adjust their asks and just make it about subsidies,’ she continued. ‘Not once did they.’

This post appeared first on FOX NEWS

A former TV anchor-turned entrepreneur convicted of stealing millions of dollars in a COVID-era fraud scheme will spend the next decade behind bars at the same Texas prison camp as infamous sex trafficker Ghislaine Maxwell. 

Earlier this year, a federal grand jury found Stephanie Hockridge, 42, guilty of one count of conspiracy to commit wire fraud. On Friday, Hockridge was sentenced to 10 years in lockup at a Federal Prison Camp in Bryan, Texas, the New York Post reported. She was also ordered to pay over $63 million in restitution.

Hockridge was convicted ‘in a scheme to fraudulently obtain over $63 million in Paycheck Protection Program (PPP) loans guaranteed by the U.S. Small Business Administration (SBA) under the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security (CARES) Act,’ according to the Department of Justice (DOJ).

Hockridge co-founded lender service provider Blueacorn in April 2020, ostensibly to help small businesses and individuals secure PPP loans during the COVID-19 pandemic, the DOJ said. She previously worked as a TV news anchor for KNXV in Phoenix, the Post wrote.

Screenshots of internal messages within Blueacorn show Hockdridge instructing staff to prioritize what were known as ‘VIPPP’ clients over regular PPP borrowers.

‘To get larger loans for certain PPP applicants, Hockridge and her co-conspirators fabricated documents, including payroll records, tax documentation and bank statements,’ the DOJ wrote in a press release. ‘Hockridge and her co-conspirators charged borrowers kickbacks based on a percentage of the funds received.’

Hockridge, however, claimed Blueacorn was a ‘sincere effort to support small businesses’ during the coronavirus pandemic, according to the Post. 

The PPP was implemented to provide small businesses with funds to keep their workers on payroll, hire back employees who may have been laid off and cover applicable expenses like rent, utilities and mortgage interest during the pandemic. 

Maxwell is serving her 20-year sentence at the same prison camp in Bryan for her role in a scheme to sexually exploit and abuse multiple minor girls with Jeffrey Epstein over the course of a decade.

Theranos fraudster Elizabeth Holmes and former ‘The Real Housewives of Salt Lake City’ star Jennifer Shah are also serving time at the same facility.

Neither Hockridge’s attorney nor the Federal Bureau of Prisons immediately returned Fox News Digital’s requests for comment.

This post appeared first on FOX NEWS

Rep. Eugene Vindman, D-Va., is demanding that President Donald Trump release a 2019 call with Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman, saying the American people ‘deserve to know what was said’ in the aftermath of Jamal Khashoggi’s murder.

Vindman, a retired Army colonel who once served on Trump’s National Security Council, said the call was one of two that deeply concerned him — the other being the 2019 conversation with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy that triggered Trump’s first impeachment. 

Standing beside Hanan Elatr Khashoggi, the slain journalist’s widow, Vindman said Trump ‘sidelined his own intelligence community to shield a foreign leader’ and that transparency is owed to both the Khashoggi family and the country.

‘The Khashoggi family and the American people deserve to know what was said on that call,’ Vindman said Friday. ‘Our intelligence agencies concluded that Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman ordered the murder of Mr. Khashoggi’s husband. When the president sidelined his own intelligence community to shield a foreign leader, America’s credibility was at stake.’

Vindman’s name already is polarizing in Trump-era politics. 

He and his twin brother, Lt. Col. Alexander Vindman, became central figures in the first impeachment attempt against Trump, when their internal reporting of Trump’s Ukraine call led to accusations from conservatives that they had undermined an elected president. To Trump’s allies, Eugene Vindman’s demand to release the 2019 Saudi call feels like a replay of that fight — another attempt by a former National Security Council insider to damage the president under the banner of transparency.

Still, his comments land at a revealing moment. Washington’s embrace of bin Salman underscores a familiar trade-off in U.S. foreign policy: strategic security and economic interests over accountability and human rights.

Secretary of State Marco Rubio said: ‘The U.S.-Saudi friendship is now a partnership for the future. President Trump’s historic agreements with the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, from defense to investment, will create quality jobs for Americans and will grow our economy. No virtue-signaling. No lecturing. Only results for the American people.’

White House relations

Trump’s latest visit with bin Salman brought sweeping defense and investment deals, even as questions over 9/11 and Khashoggi’s murder continue to test that balance. The United States granted Saudi Arabia major non-NATO ally status, formally elevating the kingdom’s defense and intelligence partnership with Washington and clearing the way for expedited arms sales and joint military programs.

Bin Salman also pledged nearly $1 trillion in new Saudi investments across U.S. industries, including infrastructure, artificial intelligence and clean energy. The commitments were announced alongside a Strategic Defense Agreement that includes purchases of F-35 fighter jets, roughly 300 Abrams tanks and new missile defense systems, as well as joint ventures to expand manufacturing inside Saudi Arabia.

Administration officials said the initiatives would create tens of thousands of American jobs and strengthen the U.S. industrial base.

During his appearance with Trump at the White House, reporters shouted questions about Saudi Arabia’s alleged role in the Sept. 11 attacks and the 2018 killing of Khashoggi at the Saudi consulate in Istanbul — marking a rare moment of public pressure on the crown prince, who typically avoids unscripted exchanges with the press.

Trump accused the press of trying to ’embarrass’ his guest, but the crown prince offered what sounded like regret for the killing of Khashoggi, even as he denied involvement.

‘A lot of people didn’t like that gentleman that you’re talking about,’ Trump said. ‘Whether you like him or don’t like him, things happen, but he knew nothing about it … We can leave it at that. You don’t have to embarrass our guest by asking a question like that.’

ABC reporter Mary Bruce had told bin Salman that U.S. intelligence determined he’d signed off on the killing and that 9/11 families were ‘furious’ about his presence in the White House. ‘Why should Americans trust you?’

‘It’s been painful for us in Saudi Arabia,’ bin Salman said of the killing, calling it ‘a huge mistake.’ ‘We’ve improved our system to be sure that nothing happens like that again,’ he added.

A 2021 report by the Office of the Director of National Intelligence stated: ‘We assess that Saudi Arabia’s Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman approved an operation in Istanbul, Turkey, to capture or kill Saudi journalist Jamal Khashoggi.’ 

Bin Salman has repeatedly denied approving the killing, though he said in 2019, ‘It happened under my watch, I take full responsibility as a leader.’

Sept. 11, 2001

The question of Saudi Arabia’s involvement in the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks remains one of the most sensitive and unresolved issues in the U.S.-Saudi relationship. While 15 of the 19 hijackers were Saudi nationals, the U.S. government has never concluded that the Saudi state or senior Saudi officials had prior knowledge of or directed the attacks.

Families of 9/11 victims condemned bin Salman after he invoked Osama bin Laden during his White House remarks, saying the al-Qaeda leader used Saudi nationals to drive a wedge between Washington and Riyadh.

‘We have to focus on reality,’ the crown prince said. ‘Reality is that Osama bin Laden used Saudi people in that event for one main purpose: to destroy the American–Saudi relationship. That’s the purpose of 9/11.’

‘The Saudi crown prince invoking Osama bin Laden this afternoon in the White House does not change the fact that a federal judge in New York ruled a few short months ago that Saudi Arabia must stand trial for its role in the 9/11 terrorist attacks that murdered 3,000 of our loved ones,’ said Brett Eagleson, president of 9/11 Justice, a group representing victims’ families.

In August 2025, U.S. District Judge George B. Daniels issued a landmark ruling bringing Saudi Arabia under U.S. federal jurisdiction for a 9/11 trial. The court found evidence of a network of Saudi officials inside the U.S. who allegedly provided logistical support to the hijackers, citing ‘prior planning’ and ‘constant coordination.’ 

Among the materials described in the ruling was a drawing seized from a Saudi government operative showing an airplane with flight-path equations — evidence prosecutors said suggested advance knowledge of the attacks.

Saudi Arabia has denied any role, calling the allegations ‘categorically false.’ 

But for bin Salman, who came to Washington seeking to highlight new security and economic ties, the families’ sharp rebuke was a reminder that the 9/11 case still looms large in the public eye, even as the Trump administration deepens its partnership with Riyadh.

This post appeared first on FOX NEWS

President Donald Trump’s administration is rejecting claims that its most recent plan for a peace deal in Ukraine was really a Russian ‘wish list.’

Confusion arose regarding the deal after lawmakers on Capitol Hill claimed they were told by White House officials that the deal was a proposal from the Russian side. Secretary of State Marco Rubio has since pushed back on that claim, however.

‘[Rubio] made it very clear to us that we are the recipients of a proposal that was delivered to one of our representatives,’ Sen. Mike Rounds, R-S.D., said at a press conference. ‘It is not our recommendation. It is not our peace plan. It is a proposal that was received, and as an intermediary, we have made arrangements to share it — and we did not release it. It was leaked.’

According to The Associated Press, Sen. Angus King, I-Maine, said that Rubio told him and his colleagues that it ‘was not the administration’s plan’ but a ‘wish list of the Russians.’

Rubio responded to this narrative with a post on social media, writing that the peace proposal ‘was authored by the U.S.’

‘It is offered as a strong framework for ongoing negotiations. It is based on input from the Russian side. But it is also based on previous and ongoing input from Ukraine,’ he added.

Rounds released another statement through his press office after Rubio’s response.

‘I appreciate Secretary Rubio briefing us earlier today on their efforts to bring about peace by relying on input from both Russia and Ukraine to arrive at a final deal,’ Rounds wrote.

The White House did not immediately respond to a request for comment from Fox News Digital.

Rubio traveled to Geneva on Sunday to meet with Ukrainian officials alongside Army Secretary Dan Driscoll, where they are expected to hash out Kyiv’s misgivings regarding the deal.

Trump himself lashed out at Ukraine over the peace talks in a Sunday statement.

‘UKRAINE ‘LEADERSHIP’ HAS EXPRESSED ZERO GRATITUDE FOR OUR EFFORTS, AND EUROPE CONTINUES TO BUY OIL FROM RUSSIA,’ Trump wrote on Truth Social.

While the current agreement has not been made public, a leaked draft has been reported to include terms that would halt the fighting in Ukraine while giving Russia concessions like control over Ukrainian territory that the Russian military does not yet control, as well as barring Ukraine from membership in NATO.

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy did not reject the plan outright in an address last week, but he insisted on fair treatment while pledging to ‘work calmly’ with Washington and other partners in what he called ‘truly one of the most difficult moments in our history.’

Fox News’ Jennifer Griffin and The Associated Press contributed to this report.

This post appeared first on FOX NEWS

President Donald Trump kicked off the week meeting with Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman and closed the week meeting with New York City Mayor-elect Zohran Mamdani. 

He also signed legislation ordering the Justice Department to release files related to the late financier and convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein. 

Here’s a look at what happened this week. 

Epstein files 

Trump announced Wednesday evening that he put his stamp of approval on a bill instructing the Justice Department to release files related to Epstein — after Congress passed the measure Tuesday.

‘I HAVE JUST SIGNED THE BILL TO RELEASE THE EPSTEIN FILES!’ Trump wrote in a lengthy message on the Truth Social platform. ‘As everyone knows, I asked Speaker of the House Mike Johnson, and Senate Majority Leader John Thune, to pass this Bill in the House and Senate, respectively. Because of this request, the votes were almost unanimous in favor of passage. 

‘At my direction, the Department of Justice has already turned over close to fifty thousand pages of documents to Congress. Do not forget — The Biden Administration did not turn over a SINGLE file or page related to Democrat Epstein, nor did they ever even speak about him.’

Trump’s ties to Epstein had faced increased attention after Trump’s Justice Department and FBI announced in July it would not unseal investigation materials related to Epstein, and that the agencies’ investigation into the case had closed.

However, Trump announced Nov. 16 that he backed releasing the documents, claiming that he had ‘nothing to hide.’

Ultimately, the House voted Tuesday to release the files by a 421–1 margin, following pressure for months from the measure’s ringleaders, Reps. Thomas Massie, R-Ky., and Ro Khanna, D-Calif., and other Democrats.

The Senate passed the measure by unanimous consent later Tuesday.

Mamdani meeting 

Mamdani visited Trump at the White House Friday, and the two appeared chummy and ready to launch a fresh start in their relationship. The two said they discussed addressing affordability issues and improving conditions in New York. 

Trump said the two had more in common than he anticipated, and that he would be ‘cheering’ for Mamdani as he leads the city. 

‘I expect to be helping him, not hurting him — a big help,’ Trump said.

Trump also brushed off Mamdani’s comment labeling him a despot in his victory speech following the Nov. 4 election, with the president claiming Friday he’s encountered worse and that he believes Mamdani will change his tune as the two work together. 

‘I’ve been called much worse than a ‘despot,’ so it’s not, it’s not that insulting,’ Trump said. ‘I think he’ll change his mind after we get to working together.’ 

Saudi crown prince meeting

Trump also met with the Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman at the White House Tuesday, an occasion that included a red carpet rolled across the South Lawn, military honor guard, and an Air Force flyover to elevate the formal state-level welcome.

During bin Salman’s visit, the U.S. announced that it would sell F-35 jets to Saudi Arabia, and that it would now be a ‘major non-NATO ally’ to facilitate military cooperation between the two countries. 

‘President Trump approved a major defense sale package, including future F-35 deliveries, which strengthens the U.S. defense industrial base and ensures Saudi Arabia continues to buy American,’ the White House said in a statement. 

Trump’s reception of bin Salman is a departure from the Biden administration, who said in 2019 during his presidential campaign that he would make Saudi Arabia ‘the pariah that they are’ because of the death of Washington Post journalist Jamal Khashoggi.

U.S. intelligence agencies concluded in 2021 that bin Salman gave the green light on the operation that took Khashoggi’s life. Khashoggi, a Saudi dissident, was brutally murdered in Istanbul at the Saudi consulate in 2018.

But Trump defended bin Salman Tuesday, and accused a reporter who asked about U.S. intelligence reports linking the prince to Khashoggi’s death of embarrassing bin Salman.

‘A lot of people didn’t like that gentleman that you’re talking about,’ Trump said Tuesday. ‘Whether you like him or didn’t like him, things happen, but he knew nothing about it. And would you leave it at that? You don’t have to embarrass our guest by asking a question.’

Even so, bin Salman has dismissed the reports as false. When asked Tuesday about Khashoggi, bin Salman said it’s ‘painful’ to hear of the death of anyone for ‘no real purpose,’ and ‘we are doing our best that this doesn’t happen again.’

This post appeared first on FOX NEWS

Rep. Eugene Vindman, D-Va., is demanding that President Donald Trump release a 2019 call with Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman, saying the American people ‘deserve to know what was said’ in the aftermath of Jamal Khashoggi’s murder.

Vindman, a retired Army colonel who once served on Trump’s National Security Council, said the call was one of two that deeply concerned him — the other being the 2019 conversation with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy that triggered Trump’s first impeachment. 

Standing beside Hanan Elatr Khashoggi, the slain journalist’s widow, Vindman said Trump ‘sidelined his own intelligence community to shield a foreign leader’ and that transparency is owed to both the Khashoggi family and the country.

‘The Khashoggi family and the American people deserve to know what was said on that call,’ Vindman said Friday. ‘Our intelligence agencies concluded that Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman ordered the murder of Mr. Khashoggi’s husband. When the president sidelined his own intelligence community to shield a foreign leader, America’s credibility was at stake.’

Vindman’s name already is polarizing in Trump-era politics. 

He and his twin brother, Lt. Col. Alexander Vindman, became central figures in the first impeachment attempt against Trump, when their internal reporting of Trump’s Ukraine call led to accusations from conservatives that they had undermined an elected president. To Trump’s allies, Eugene Vindman’s demand to release the 2019 Saudi call feels like a replay of that fight — another attempt by a former National Security Council insider to damage the president under the banner of transparency.

Still, his comments land at a revealing moment. Washington’s embrace of bin Salman underscores a familiar trade-off in U.S. foreign policy: strategic security and economic interests over accountability and human rights.

Secretary of State Marco Rubio said: ‘The U.S.-Saudi friendship is now a partnership for the future. President Trump’s historic agreements with the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, from defense to investment, will create quality jobs for Americans and will grow our economy. No virtue-signaling. No lecturing. Only results for the American people.’

White House relations

Trump’s latest visit with bin Salman brought sweeping defense and investment deals, even as questions over 9/11 and Khashoggi’s murder continue to test that balance. The United States granted Saudi Arabia major non-NATO ally status, formally elevating the kingdom’s defense and intelligence partnership with Washington and clearing the way for expedited arms sales and joint military programs.

Bin Salman also pledged nearly $1 trillion in new Saudi investments across U.S. industries, including infrastructure, artificial intelligence and clean energy. The commitments were announced alongside a Strategic Defense Agreement that includes purchases of F-35 fighter jets, roughly 300 Abrams tanks and new missile defense systems, as well as joint ventures to expand manufacturing inside Saudi Arabia.

Administration officials said the initiatives would create tens of thousands of American jobs and strengthen the U.S. industrial base.

During his appearance with Trump at the White House, reporters shouted questions about Saudi Arabia’s alleged role in the Sept. 11 attacks and the 2018 killing of Khashoggi at the Saudi consulate in Istanbul — marking a rare moment of public pressure on the crown prince, who typically avoids unscripted exchanges with the press.

Trump accused the press of trying to ’embarrass’ his guest, but the crown prince offered what sounded like regret for the killing of Khashoggi, even as he denied involvement.

‘A lot of people didn’t like that gentleman that you’re talking about,’ Trump said. ‘Whether you like him or don’t like him, things happen, but he knew nothing about it … We can leave it at that. You don’t have to embarrass our guest by asking a question like that.’

ABC reporter Mary Bruce had told bin Salman that U.S. intelligence determined he’d signed off on the killing and that 9/11 families were ‘furious’ about his presence in the White House. ‘Why should Americans trust you?’

‘It’s been painful for us in Saudi Arabia,’ bin Salman said of the killing, calling it ‘a huge mistake.’ ‘We’ve improved our system to be sure that nothing happens like that again,’ he added.

A 2021 report by the Office of the Director of National Intelligence stated: ‘We assess that Saudi Arabia’s Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman approved an operation in Istanbul, Turkey, to capture or kill Saudi journalist Jamal Khashoggi.’ 

Bin Salman has repeatedly denied approving the killing, though he said in 2019, ‘It happened under my watch, I take full responsibility as a leader.’

Sept. 11, 2001

The question of Saudi Arabia’s involvement in the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks remains one of the most sensitive and unresolved issues in the U.S.-Saudi relationship. While 15 of the 19 hijackers were Saudi nationals, the U.S. government has never concluded that the Saudi state or senior Saudi officials had prior knowledge of or directed the attacks.

Families of 9/11 victims condemned bin Salman after he invoked Usama bin Laden during his White House remarks, saying the al Qaeda leader used Saudi nationals to drive a wedge between Washington and Riyadh.

‘We have to focus on reality,’ the crown prince said. ‘Reality is that Usama bin Laden used Saudi people in that event for one main purpose: to destroy the American–Saudi relationship. That’s the purpose of 9/11.’

‘The Saudi crown prince invoking Usama bin Laden this afternoon in the White House does not change the fact that a federal judge in New York ruled a few short months ago that Saudi Arabia must stand trial for its role in the 9/11 terrorist attacks that murdered 3,000 of our loved ones,’ said Brett Eagleson, president of 9/11 Justice, a group representing victims’ families.

In August 2025, U.S. District Judge George B. Daniels issued a landmark ruling bringing Saudi Arabia under U.S. federal jurisdiction for a 9/11 trial. The court found evidence of a network of Saudi officials inside the U.S. who allegedly provided logistical support to the hijackers, citing ‘prior planning’ and ‘constant coordination.’ 

Among the materials described in the ruling was a drawing seized from a Saudi government operative showing an airplane with flight-path equations — evidence prosecutors said suggested advance knowledge of the attacks.

Saudi Arabia has denied any role, calling the allegations ‘categorically false.’ 

But for bin Salman, who came to Washington seeking to highlight new security and economic ties, the families’ sharp rebuke was a reminder that the 9/11 case still looms large in the public eye, even as the Trump administration deepens its partnership with Riyadh.

This post appeared first on FOX NEWS