Potential U.S. military strikes on Iran could target specific individuals and even pursue regime change, a report said. 

Two U.S. officials who spoke to Reuters on condition of anonymity reportedly said those are options that have emerged in the planning stage, if ordered by President Donald Trump. They did not say which individuals could be targeted, but Trump, notably, in 2020 ordered the U.S. military attack that killed Iranian Gen. Qassem Soleimani, the head of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps’ elite Quds Force. 

Fox News Digital has reached out to the White House and the Department of War for comment. 

Trump already said Friday that he is «considering» a limited military strike on Iran to pressure its leaders into a deal over its nuclear program, when asked by a reporter at the White House.

BUILT FOR WEEKS OF WAR: INSIDE THE FIREPOWER THE US HAS POSITIONED IN THE MIDDLE EAST

Last week, when questioned if he wanted regime change in Iran, the president said, «Well it seems like that would be the best thing that could happen.» 

Trump on Thursday suggested the window for a breakthrough is narrowing in talks with Iran, indicating Tehran has no more than «10, 15 days, pretty much maximum» to reach an agreement. 

«We’re either going to get a deal, or it’s going to be unfortunate for them,» he said.

TRUMP GIVES IRAN 10-DAY ULTIMATUM, BUT EXPERTS SIGNAL TALKS MAY BE BUYING TIME FOR STRIKE

The USS Gerald R. Ford is heading to the Middle East as the U.S. is building up its military presence there, amid talks with Iran. (U.S Naval Forces Central Command / U.S. 6th Fleet / Handout via Reuters)

A Middle Eastern source with knowledge of the negotiations told Fox News Digital this week that Tehran understands how close the risk of war feels and is unlikely to deliberately provoke Trump at this stage.  

However, the source said Iran cannot accept limitations on its short-range missile program, describing the issue as a firm red line set by Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei.  

Iranian negotiators are not authorized to cross that boundary, and conceding on missiles would be viewed internally as equivalent to losing a war.

In 2020, the Pentagon said President Donald Trump ordered the U.S. military strike that killed Iranian Gen. Qassem Soleimani, left, in Iraq. (Getty Images)

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

The source indicated there may be more flexibility about uranium enrichment parameters if sanctions relief is part of the equation. 

Fox News’ Emma Bussey and Efrat Lachter contributed to this report. 

El dato principal de este fallo es que el establishment, que es eso lo que representa en sus máximas alturas la Corte Suprema norteamericana, comienza a poner límites definitivos a Donald Trump. Esa acción puede traducirse en diferentes niveles, pero en concreto sale a discutir el populismo proteccionista del magnate. Si bien no totalmente, voltea el sistema arancelario que definía esta presidencia y que ha sido el arma principal de Trump para intentar disciplinar el mundo violando el derecho constitucional del Congreso a fijar impuestos.

Pero aún peor. Cuando el mandatario se alza contra el fallo del Tribunal, insulta a los jueces y sugiera que hará lo que le venga en gana, edifica lo que la Corte precisamente pretendería neutralizar: la consolidación de una autocracia.

El presidente a su llegada impuso una dudosa emergencia nacional y desde entonces gobierna por decreto puenteando al legislativo. Es eso lo que se ha fracturado ahora, lo que promete una extraordinaria turbulencia en los mercados porque deja al gobierno notoriamente debilitado y erosiona el liderazgo y la personalidad del presidente.

Este golpe se produce desde un poder que ha sido muy cercano a las aventuras políticas del mandatario republicano. Esa alianza parece fracturarse. El liberalismo clásico estadounidense antimonárquico –vale señalarlo- reaparece con este gesto, que era previsible y que además puede disparar un efecto dominó en el oficialismo parlamentario, donde un amplio sector masculla desde hace tiempo en silencio su oposición a los modos y las medidas extremas de la Casa Blanca que arriesgan una derrota en las elecciones de medio término de noviembre.

El fallo aparece además en un momento de viento en contra para el mandatario. El crecimiento de la economía se desaceleró más de lo esperado en los últimos meses de 2025. Se expandió a una tasa anual del 1,4% en el trimestre de octubre a diciembre, un 2,2 % para el año completo, por debajo del ritmo calculado por los analistas. Trump escapó culpando a los demócratas, pero es una narrativa solo para su tribuna. Lo más interesante es la balanza comercial. Esta semana se informó que el saldo comercial de la potencia solo mejoró un 0,2% durante 2025. Las importaciones de bienes y servicios procedentes de otros países alcanzaron un nuevo máximo durante todo el año inaugural de Trump pese a su agresiva política comercial.

Recordemos que los aranceles que fijó Trump a las importaciones, con el argumento de que los déficit comercial implican abusos y estafas, son en la práctica impuestos internos que pagan los consumidores y las empresas que traen los productos o insumos. No los pagan los exportadores. En esa línea dejaron de constituir una herramienta puramente comercial para convertirse en una fuente masiva de ingresos fiscales. Ahí hay una explicación sobre el aumento de la inflación en diciembre, cuando registró 2,9% en tasa anualizada. El agravante de esta novedad es que el dinero recaudado deberá ser devuelto por el gobierno federal. Son más de 134 mil millones de dólares el año pasado y se esperaba una cifra similar aunque superior para este 2026.

Pero la mayoría de la Corte que firmó este dictamen, posiblemente no solo este analizando esos números. Lo que revela este fallo es la potencia de las dudas detrás del nacionalismo trumpista sobre si sus políticas garantizan la rueda de acumulación, un básico del sistema capitalista. El presidente y gran parte de su gabinete son lo que en EE.UU. se denomina i-liberales, no liberales, con asesores como Peter Navarro que cuestionan el libre comercio que ha sido una bandera histórica del partido republicano.

Son estos halcones lo que han quebrado las alianzas del país con socios clave como los europeos asombrando al mundo, han reivindicado a Rusia por encima de Ucrania y creado un culto personalista del mandatario con ribetes soviéticos.

Trump tiene a mano algunas alternativas, pero no será ya lo mismo. Según informes del Financial Times, el gobierno pude utilizar capítulos de la Ley de Comercio de 1974 que permite imponer aranceles de solo 15% pero por 150 días. Es lo que acaba de anunciar Trump. Existe otra ley de 1930 que permite al gobierno fijar gravámenes de hasta 50% a un país que discrimine contra el comercio estadounidense.

Sin embargo, señala ese diario, aunque la Casa Blanca podría reconstruir un muro arancelario, las vías legales alternativas limitarían las capacidades de Trump para subir y bajar rápidamente los aranceles, como herramienta de presión.

“Con otras leyes, el gobierno tendrá que justificar el uso de aranceles. Será menos del estilo, ‘me desperté y decidí que estoy molesto con este aviso de la tele canadiense asique voy a subir los aranceles’”, dijo al Financial Lori Walach, del grupo Rethink Trade. Recordaba un hecho real de un castigo por una publicidad en Ontario, un estilo autoritario que tiene como antecedente en la región el 50% aplicado a Brasil porque se disgustó con el proceso por golpismo contra Jair Bolsonaro o los gravámenes contra Suiza porque no le gustó como le habló la entones presidente de ese país.

FIRST ON FOX: Former President Barack Obama once declared that his presidential center would be a «gift» to Chicago, but taxpayers are on the hook for hundreds of millions of dollars in hidden costs related to the beleaguered project.

A Fox News Digital investigation shows taxpayers are now stuck footing the bill for surging public infrastructure costs required to support the project — and no government agency can provide an accounting of the total public cost, despite months of queries and FOIA requests. 

«Illinois Republicans saw this coming a mile away. Now, right on cue, Illinois Democrats are leaving taxpayers high and dry and putting them on the hook for hundreds of millions of dollars to support the ugliest building in Chicago,» Illinois GOP Chair Kathy Salvi told Fox News Digital. «Illinois’ culture of corruption is humming along with pay-to-play deals to their allies and friends while lying to Illinois voters.»

When the project was approved in 2018, Obama pledged to privately fund construction of the expansive 19.3-acre campus in historic Jackson Park through donations to the Obama Foundation – a commitment that remains in place as the center’s construction continues to be privately financed.

But the extensive infrastructure required to make the campus operationally viable — including redesigned roads, stormwater systems, and relocated utilities — is publicly financed, and without those changes, the center could not function.

At the time, projections placed public infrastructure costs at roughly $350 million, split between the state of Illinois and the city of Chicago.

OBAMA PRESIDENTIAL CENTER DEPOSITS JUST $1M INTO $470M RESERVE FUND AIMED TO PROTECT TAXPAYERS

Eight years later, the Illinois Department of Transportation (IDOT) told Fox News Digital that approximately $229 million in infrastructure spending was tied to the site, up from its earlier estimate of roughly $174 million. 

The $229 million figure reflects state-managed spending, which may include federal transportation funds routed through IDOT.

Meanwhile, Chicago officials have failed to produce a reconciled total showing how much city taxpayers have committed or how current spending compares to the roughly $175 million discussed when the project was approved.

A paper trail without a total

Fox News Digital submitted records requests and press inquiries to every agency involved in the infrastructure work, including the Illinois Department of Transportation (IDOT), Chicago’s Department of Transportation (CDOT), the Office of Budget and Management (OBM), the Mayor’s Office and Gov. J.B. Pritzker’s administration.

Not a single office provided a unified, up-to-date accounting of total public infrastructure spending tied to the project. The investigation involved months of FOIA requests, partial disclosures and repeated follow-ups.

No single agency appears to oversee the full scope of the infrastructure work, and neither the state nor the city has assembled a reconciled accounting — a fragmentation that has made the overall public cost difficult to determine.

Instead, agencies provided partial figures, declined to clarify whether city and state totals overlap or insisted that no consolidated total exists.

The Illinois Attorney General’s Public Access Counselor (PAC) is reviewing whether multiple agencies complied with state transparency laws following Fox News Digital FOIA requests. 

Exterior view of the Obama Presidential Center tower under construction in Chicago. (Fox 32 Chicago)

Construction costs soar

The center sits on 19 acres of historic public parkland carved out in a controversial transfer for just $10 under a 99-year agreement, making the question of public infrastructure spending particularly sensitive. Legal challenges to the land transfer, including lawsuits arguing the arrangement was not in the public interest, were ultimately dismissed, although the merits of the arguments were not adjudicated on.

The center — though commonly referred to as a presidential «library» — will not function as a traditional facility operated by the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA), and former President Obama’s official records will be maintained by NARA at a federal site in Maryland.

While the Obama Presidential Center in Chicago is expected to provide digital access to archival materials, it will not serve as a federally operated records repository.

Instead, the Chicago complex will be operated privately, without rent payments, by the Obama Foundation, the former president’s nonprofit organization, which oversees leadership programs and civic initiatives aligned with his values and policy priorities.

Construction costs for the facility itself have ballooned from early estimates of roughly $330 million to at least $850 million, according to the foundation’s 2024 tax filings, although these expenses are being borne by private donors.

Meanwhile, a $470 million reserve fund — known as an endowment — that the foundation promised to fill to protect taxpayers should the project go belly-up, has received only $1 million in deposits, Fox News Digital previously reported.

OBAMA LIBRARY, BEGUN WITH LOFTY DEI GOALS, NOW PLAGUED BY $40M RACIALLY CHARGED SUIT, BALLOONING COSTS

A before-and-after aerial graphic shows the footprint of the Obama Presidential Center in Jackson Park, including the removal of Cornell Drive and construction along Stony Island Avenue. (Fox News)

Roads removed, routes rebuilt

Taxpayers often fund routine improvements near major civic projects — such as turn lanes, utility hookups or upgraded traffic signals — but the scale of the work surrounding the Obama Presidential Center is far more extensive.

By comparison, other modern presidential libraries required only limited public infrastructure upgrades and did not involve the removal of a major roadway or the wholesale redesign of a historic park’s traffic pattern.

Much of the publicly financed work reshaped the roads and utilities that once ran through Jackson Park.

Cornell Drive — a four-lane roadway that bordered the center’s east side by the park’s lagoon — was permanently removed under the center’s site plan and enveloped by the campus. Traffic that once ran alongside the lagoon has been rerouted farther west, reducing the number of public roads directly adjacent to the complex and creating a more unified campus footprint around the center.

Crews also tore down trees, relocated water mains, sewer lines, and electrical infrastructure and installed new drainage systems tied to the facility’s structural needs as part of the public infrastructure project.

City and state officials say the changes were necessary to manage traffic and visitor demand. Critics argued the redesign altered long-standing park infrastructure to accommodate the foundation’s preferred layout.

What’s clear is that without those road closures, reroutes and utility relocations, the project would not function as designed.

The Obama Foundation, which is funding the center’s construction, defended the project in a statement to Fox News Digital.

«The Obama Foundation is investing $850 million in private funding to build the Obama Presidential Center and give back to the community that made the Obamas’ story possible,» said Emily Bittner, a spokesperson for the foundation. 

«After decades of underinvestment on the South Side of Chicago, the OPC is catalyzing investment, from both public and private sources, to build economic opportunity for residents through jobs, housing, and public spaces and amenities.»

A map graphic shows the footprint of the Obama Presidential Center inside Jackson Park on Chicago’s South Side along Lake Michigan. (Fox News)

The number no one will state

IDOT, which controls the state’s funding for the corridor and signs off on major transportation contracts tied to the project, acknowledged approximately $229 million in state-managed infrastructure spending but did not produce a consolidated accounting reconciling that total across all project phases.

«With all the main parts of this aspect of the overall project awarded, to date the state via IDOT has contributed approximately $229 million,» an IDOT spokesperson told Fox News Digital in July in its latest release. «Approximate breakdown of these funds: $19 million in preliminary engineering; $24 million for construction engineering and $186 million for construction activities.» 

The spokesperson said that the initial $174 million figure was from a «2017 was a preliminary cost estimate.»

CDOT, which carried out the roadway closures, traffic rerouting and utility relocation work inside Jackson Park, acknowledged Fox News Digital’s Oct. 7, 2025, FOIA request and took a statutory extension but never issued a final determination or produced the requested records. The department also did not provide a unified city total or clarify how Chicago’s capital allocations overlap with the state’s spending.

OBM, which oversees the city’s capital allocations, did not say whether the city’s $175 million estimate remains current and directed Fox News Digital to the Capital Improvement Plan. Chicago’s most recent 2024–2028 Capital Improvement Plan — the city’s multi-year infrastructure budget — lists more than $206 million allocated to roadway and utility work surrounding the project. However, much of that funding is labeled «state,» and neither state nor city officials could clarify how those allocations overlap with IDOT’s reported total.

In a FOIA response, OBM said it «does not have responsive records» showing any cost overruns, reallocations or a breakdown of spending across major components of the Obama Center infrastructure work. 

The agency also could not explain how Chicago’s $206 million budget line relates to IDOT’s $229 million figure or how much of the city’s amount is actually paid by Chicago rather than the state.

CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP 

Chicago’s 2024–2028 Capital Improvement Program lists $206,078,058 for «Obama Presidential Center & Jackson Park – Infrastructure Improvements,» with most funding labeled as state sources. (City of Chicago Capital Improvement Program)

Pritzker’s office gave conflicting responses and ultimately produced no records showing the state’s total infrastructure spending.

Meanwhile, Mayor Brandon Johnson’s office did not respond to repeated requests for the city’s total infrastructure spending tied to the project or for how much more Chicago expects to commit. 

Without updated reconciliations from both levels of government, taxpayers still have no clear accounting of the financial obligations associated with the center.

What is clear is that Obama’s «gift» to Chicago comes with a hefty public price tag that has grown more complex — and without updated cost projections, the true total cost remains unknown.