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.»

TRUMP SECURES RELEASE OF AMERICAN TRAPPED IN SAUDI ARABIA FOR YEARS OVER ONLINE POSTS

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.

«Trump doesn’t give a fist pump. I grab that hand,» Trump told reporters Tuesday. «I don’t give a hell where that hand’s been — I grab that hand.» (Nathan Howard/Politico/Bloomberg via Getty Images)

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.

Jamal Khashoggi, pictured above with his wife Hanan Elatr. (@hananelatr via X)

TRUMP DESIGNATES SAUDI ARABIA AS MAJOR NON-NATO ALLY DURING CROWN PRINCE WHITE HOUSE VISIT

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.

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

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.

Vivir en grandes ciudades representa, para los científicos evolucionistas de la Universidad de Loughborough y la Universidad de Zúrich, un reto para la naturaleza humana. Según advierten, la acelerada urbanización desborda la capacidad de adaptación de nuestra especie y afecta el bienestar físico y mental.

El ser humano comenzó a modificar su entorno hace miles de años, pero la industrialización del siglo XVIII aceleró radicalmente la transformación del hábitat. En la actualidad, la mayor parte de la población mundial reside en áreas urbanas densas, expuesta a contaminación, ruido, luz artificial y con acceso limitado a la naturaleza.

En países como Canadá, Estados Unidos y Reino Unido, se estima que las personas pasan hasta el 93% del tiempo en espacios cerrados. Estas condiciones representan una ruptura drástica respecto de las que predominaron durante la evolución de la especie.

Según datos de la ONU citados en Biological Reviews, en 2018 el 55% de la humanidad ya vivía en ciudades y, para 2050, la cifra superará el 68%. Así, el Homo sapiens se ha convertido en una especie urbana, enfrentando desafíos que su biología no termina de asimilar.

La denominada hipótesis del desajuste ambiental advierte que la evolución humana, calibrada durante miles de generaciones en entornos naturales, no puede seguir el ritmo vertiginoso de las transformaciones urbanas.

“Nuestra biología fue moldeada por entornos naturales, pero la industrialización transformó el mundo más rápido de lo que nuestros cuerpos pueden adaptarse”, señaló Danny Longman, especialista en fisiología evolutiva humana de la Universidad de Loughborough, a Newsweek. Ese desfase —denominado “lag adaptativo”— expone al organismo a nuevos riesgos y desajustes para los que no está preparado.

• Función reproductiva: la fertilidad mundial desciende, y dos tercios de la población viven en países con tasas por debajo del reemplazo. Biological Reviews atribuye esta tendencia, entre otros factores, a la exposición cotidiana a contaminantes como pesticidas, microplásticos y productos químicos industriales. Estas sustancias alteran la producción hormonal y afectan la calidad del esperma y la salud reproductiva tanto de hombres como de mujeres.
• Función inmunológica: el sistema inmunitario humano resulta menos eficiente en contextos urbanos por la menor exposición a microorganismos beneficiosos y el aumento de agentes contaminantes en el aire, el ruido y la luz artificial. Esto favorece las alergias, enfermedades autoinmunes e inflamaciones crónicas. Estudios recientes indican que niños y adultos urbanos muestran más alergias y menor respuesta inmunitaria que quienes viven en contacto frecuente con la naturaleza.
• Cognición: la sobrestimulación digital, el ruido, la contaminación y la falta de áreas verdes impactan en la atención, la memoria y la flexibilidad mental. Investigaciones muestran que quienes crecen en barrios densamente urbanizados presentan desarrollos cognitivos más lentos y mayores riesgos de deterioro cerebral en la adultez. Incluso caminar en entornos urbanos puede disminuir el rendimiento intelectual frente al contacto con la naturaleza.
• Condición física: la fuerza y la resistencia físicas también se ven perjudicadas por el sedentarismo, la contaminación y la ausencia de espacios verdes. Niños y adolescentes urbanos tienen peor condición cardiovascular y muscular en comparación con sus pares rurales. En personas adultas, la debilidad y el declive funcional aparecen a edades más tempranas, relacionados con la exposición a partículas contaminantes y la falta de movimiento.

El estrés crónico es uno de los efectos más extendidos de la vida urbana. “El ruido constante, las multitudes, el tráfico, la sobrecarga digital y la escasez de escenarios naturales mantienen nuestro sistema de alerta en estado de activación permanente”, advierte Longman. Esto se traduce en aumento de ansiedad, alteraciones del sueño, trastornos cardiovasculares, síntomas inmunológicos y reproductivos, y deterioro cognitivo.

La evidencia científica lo respalda: Biological Reviews confirma que la exposición diaria a ambientes industrializados incrementa los biomarcadores de estrés y eleva la incidencia de trastornos psicológicos y físicos. Por el contrario, la presencia de espacios verdes en el entorno actúa como factor protector, moderando los efectos negativos del estrés y mejorando la salud integral.

El trabajo liderado por Longman y su equipo señala que la biología de nuestra especie está profundamente condicionada por la herencia evolutiva en contacto con la naturaleza, lo que vuelve difícil la adaptación a un entorno urbano hiperacelerado y artificial. Según los autores, el desajuste entre el diseño biológico y el hábitat citadino explica en buena parte la tendencia al aumento de problemas reproductivos, inmunológicos, cognitivos y físicos observados en poblaciones urbanas.

El análisis final sugiere que el proceso de urbanización, si bien aportó avances tecnológicos y sociales, también ha generado consecuencias imprevistas a nivel biológico. En síntesis, la especie humana enfrenta el desafío evolutivo de habitar ciudades que en muchos aspectos resultan incompatibles con su organismo.

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.

HOW CLOSED-DOOR NEGOTIATIONS AND A GUARANTEE ENDED LONGEST GOVERNMENT SHUTDOWN ON RECORD

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.

GOP UNITY SHATTERED BY CONTROVERSIAL MEASURE IN GOVERNMENT SHUTDOWN BILL

A welcome sign is seen at Yosemite National Park in California on Dec. 13, 2023. (Tayfun Coskun/Anadolu via Getty Images)

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.

SENATE REACHES TEMPORARY TRUCE TO END RECORD SHUTDOWN, BUT JANUARY BATTLE LOOMS

Senate Minority Leader Charles Schumer after a news conference in the U.S. Capitol on Nov. 5, 2025. (Tom Williams/Getty Images)

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.

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

«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.»