INTERNACIONAL
Trick or Treat: Congress faces ‘chamber of horrors’ as government funding deadline looms
NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!
It was mid-July. And the House of Representatives was already done for the summer.
That’s right around the same time Halloween decorations like gigantic yard skeletons and Reese’s peanut butter and chocolate pumpkins began materializing in stores.
Those weren’t phantasms. Halloween is the next big consumer holiday on the calendar.
I mean, what would you buy to decorate for Labor Day?
But there’s a spooky alignment between July and Halloween when it comes to Congress. If you begin to see Halloween paraphernalia in July, that’s practically October in Capitol Hill terms. The reason? Congress didn’t finish its annual spending bills before the annual August recess and that means it will be a sprint to finish them by October 1, the deadline to avoid a government shutdown.
GRIDLOCK CRUMBLES AS SENATE ADVANCES SPENDING BILLS IN RACE AGAINST SHUTDOWN
Right around the same time that the rest of the nation starts thinking about ghosts and goblins for Halloween.
The funding deadline is enough to convert the U.S. Capitol into a chamber of horrors for the entire month of September. Congress is always dragging to complete spending measures in July. Then August comes and concerns about the spending bills vanish like a ghost. Then the appropriations bills rise like mummies out of their coffins when Congress comes back in September. The battle over averting a government shutdown is like a vampire. It sucks most other legislative activity out of Congress until there’s a deal. That’s because most Members want no part of a government shutdown. Lawmakers from both sides know that government funding is one of the most important inflection points on the political calendar.
Let’s examine where we stand with government funding.
Congress approved a stopgap spending bill to avert a government shutdown in March. That interim spending package funded the government through September 30, the end of the federal fiscal year. The House approved the bill. But lawmakers worried about a potential government shutdown because breaking a filibuster on the measure required 60 votes. That entailed support of some Democrats since Republicans only have 53 votes in the Senate.
U.S. Speaker of the House Mike Johnson (R-LA) delivers a statement on the Israeli museum shooting that left two Israeli Embassy staffers dead after holding a press conference on the House passage of the tax and spending bill, at the U.S. Capitol on May 22, 2025 in Washington, DC. (Kevin Dietsch/Getty Images)
At the last minute, Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., announced he would help Republicans crack the filibuster. Schumer didn’t vote yes on the bill itself. But the New York Democrat argued that avoiding a shutdown at that point was better than enduring one under President Trump – and Elon Musk who was then fully empowered at DOGE.
Some longtime Capitol Hill hands and Congressional observers feared the government might shutter for a lengthy period if it closed. Schumer and other Democrats asserted that the President and Musk would use that as justification for never re-opening some parts of the government since they lacked funding from Congress.
Progressives excoriated Schumer for not extracting a major concession from President Trump and Congressional Republicans which reflected Democratic values and priorities. Liberals used Schumer’s decision as justification to demand new Democratic leadership in the Senate. House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries, D-N.Y., appeared to seethe at Schumer’s maneuver, sidestepping questions from reporters about the break.
White House Budget Director Russ Vought says he wants a less bipartisan appropriations process. That’s fine. But this is about the math. House Republicans must stick together to pass any spending package there. House Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., can only lose three votes and still pass a bill without Democratic assistance. Likewise, Senate Republicans can only lose three votes there, too. But the real hurdle is the filibuster. That’s where 60 votes are necessary. And that means the GOP must lean on Democrats – assuming they’re willing to help out.
HILLARY RIPPED AS ‘MASSIVE LIAR’ AFTER SCATHING REACTION TO TRUMP’S PLAN TO FIX DC CRIME
It’s really unclear if Republicans can stick together to approve a spending package. Keep in mind that it’s almost a certainty that any spending measure must simply renew all current funding on a temporary basis. A lot of Republicans are fed up with this appropriations rut – especially since Johnson promised to do things differently once he claimed the Speaker’s gavel in October 2023. Remember that some conservatives helped bounce former House Speaker Kevin McCarthy, R-Calif., less than two years ago because he propounded an interim spending plan.
Some Republicans are beginning to lose patience with Johnson on spending plans. But remember that most Republicans will support whatever appropriations plan the GOP brass concocts – as long as it has the blessing of President Trump.
U.S. House Republican Leader Kevin McCarthy (R-CA) (L) talks to Rep.-elect Matt Gaetz (R-FL) in the House Chamber after Gaetz voted present during the fourth day of voting for Speaker of the House at the U.S. Capitol Building on January 06, 2023 in Washington, DC. ( Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images)
So Vought may advocate for a more partisan process. But that won’t result in policy achievements and GOP spending priorities unless Republicans convince Democrats to play ball.
Here’s another dynamic: some members of the conservative Freedom Caucus are hinting they simply want to re-up the current levels of funding again. Yes, lawmakers approved those spending plans under President Biden and a Democratic Senate. Therefore, much of the federal government is still operating under Democratic spending blueprints. But Democrats would demand more money for the next spending round. The same with some Republicans. So voting to renew the old money – regardless of who pushed for it – is less than Congress could have spent. That’s why some Freedom Caucus members suggest this would serve as a de facto spending cut.
They’re not wrong. Federal spending is almost always on an upward trajectory. This would level things off and bend the annual spending curve for the first time in decades.
TRUMP FIRES BACK AT ‘SQUAD’ MEMBER WHO CALLED HIM A ‘PIECE OF S—‘ AT RALLY
So, if your goal is to trim funding, this may be the most plausible option under the present political circumstances.
Remember, it’s about the math.
Moreover, Republicans have only approved a pittance of the funding cuts demanded by DOGE. Congress passed a bill to slash $9 billion from the Corporation for Public Broadcasting and foreign aid. That’s not a lot. And Republicans could barely approve that bill. How they rescind other funding remains to be seen. However, Republicans could greenlight all the old money – and then promise budget hawks they will attempt to claw back other tranches of spending through future recissions packages later in the fall or winter.
Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, a Democrat from New York, arrives to speak to members of the media at the US Capitol in Washington, DC, US, on Thursday, July 17, 2025. Republicans are set to succeed in their decades-long quest to end federal funding for public broadcasting after the Senate passed a $9 billion package of cuts derived from Elon Musk’s Department of Government Efficiency effort. Photographer: Al Drago/Bloomberg via Getty Images (Al Drago/Bloomberg via Getty Images)
But Democrats won’t go for that. They’d view that as Republicans dropping a Hershey’s bar in their trick or treat bag – and then exchanging it for a rock.
It’s unclear if Democrats have explored soaping the Republicans’ windows at the Capitol this fall if Republicans attempt that gambit. But this could be a chance to find out.
That brings us to the conundrum facing Schumer. One might question how the politics have changed since March – although President Trump and Musk are no longer in league with one another. But progressives will expect Schumer to demand a king’s ransom in exchange for Democratic votes breaking a filibuster.
In other words, both Johnson and Schumer face decisions of frightening proportions very soon.
It may seem as though October 1 is a long way down the calendar. It’s not. To ignore how complicated this may become is the legislative equivalent of whistling past the graveyard.
CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP
This is going to become a rather spooky fall when it comes to funding the government.
Makes you want to just sit in the corner, pull a blanket up over your head and devour a bag of Halloween candy.
republicans,budget,democrats,politics,congress,mike johnson,donald trump
INTERNACIONAL
El fundador de Telegram afirmó que 65 millones de rusos acceden a la app con VPN pese a la censura impuesta por Putin
La campaña de bloqueo y censura impulsada por el gobierno de Vladimir Putin contra Telegram -y otras plataformas- provocó una interrupción bancaria nacional y no logró frenar el uso de la aplicación, según su fundador Pavel Durov, quien afirmó que 65 millones de rusos siguen conectados a diario mediante VPN.
Las restricciones impuestas por las autoridades rusas a Telegram y a las redes privadas virtuales, conocidas como VPN, tuvieron efectos de alcance inesperado. De acuerdo con The Moscow Times y otros medios internacionales, el intento de bloqueo derivó en fallas masivas en el sistema bancario nacional, afectando pagos con tarjeta, cajeros automáticos y transferencias. Las entidades Sberbank, VTB y T-Bank notificaron fallos el 3 de abril, coincidiendo con la fase más intensa de la ofensiva digital.
En este contexto, Pavel Durov, fundador de Telegram, utilizó su propio canal en la plataforma para asegurar que más de 65 millones de personas en Rusia acceden cada día a la aplicación, pese al bloqueo, y que más de 50 millones envían mensajes diariamente. Durov calificó el fenómeno como una “Resistencia Digital”, en la que decenas de millones de usuarios emplean VPN y servidores proxy para sortear la censura.
Durov recordó que una estrategia similar en Irán solo generó un uso masivo de herramientas de evasión. “El gobierno esperaba migraciones hacia apps de vigilancia, pero solo consiguió que millones adoptaran VPN”, afirmó el empresario, quien prometió adaptar el tráfico de Telegram para dificultar su detección y bloqueo por parte de los sistemas de inspección rusos.
La ofensiva regulatoria fue liderada por Roskomnadzor, el regulador de internet de Rusia, que en febrero pasado comenzó a ralentizar el acceso y, a partir del 1 de abril, activó un bloqueo nacional. El objetivo oficial era redirigir a los usuarios hacia plataformas de mensajería alineadas con el Estado, como Max, una aplicación obligatoria en nuevos dispositivos desde 2025.
Especialistas en ciberseguridad, como Fyodor Muzalevsky de RTM Group, explicaron a The Moscow Times que el bloqueo de direcciones IP vinculadas a servicios financieros contribuyó a la caída bancaria. El incidente dejó fuera de servicio terminales de pago, cajeros y aplicaciones de banca móvil en todo el país. El metro de Moscú incluso permitió el acceso gratuito y comercios de la capital solo aceptaron efectivo durante horas.
La presión estatal crece sobre los servicios de mensajería y las VPN. El Ministerio de Desarrollo Digital ruso ordenó a las plataformas restringir el acceso a usuarios de VPN antes del 15 de abril, y analiza multas de hasta 30.000 rublos para quienes utilicen herramientas no autorizadas. Reuters destacó que Roskomnadzor ya bloqueó más de 400 servicios de VPN desde mayo de 2025, un aumento del 70% en comparación con el año anterior.
La respuesta social, según datos de Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, se refleja en cifras de uso: Telegram sumó cerca de 96 millones de usuarios en enero de 2026 antes de las restricciones. Aunque la cifra descendió tras el bloqueo, el mantenimiento de 65 millones de usuarios diarios ilustra la persistencia de la plataforma incluso bajo prohibición.
El conflicto digital abarca también otros servicios. Las autoridades intensificaron restricciones sobre aplicaciones extranjeras, como WhatsApp, luego de que su matriz, Meta, supuestamente incumpliera la legislación nacional. El portavoz del Kremlin, Dmitry Peskov, instó a la población a migrar a servicios estatales.
Los apagones de internet móvil se suman a la estrategia de control. Desde mayo de 2025, en 83 regiones rusas se han reportado cortes selectivos de conectividad, que solo permiten acceso a sitios aprobados por el gobierno. Este modelo incrementa la dependencia de herramientas de evasión para acceder a información y servicios básicos.
Telegram, además de mensajería, se consolidó como fuente principal de noticias y coordinación social, llegando incluso a ser utilizada por militares rusos en el conflicto de Ucrania, según The Moscow Times. El bloqueo de la plataforma tiene así consecuencias que trascienden lo tecnológico y afectan la operatividad social y política en el país.
De esta manera, el gobierno de Putin enfrenta la disyuntiva de endurecer el control sobre VPN y plataformas digitales, o ajustar su estrategia para evitar nuevos daños colaterales. Mientras tanto, la “Resistencia Digital” de millones de usuarios persiste, desafiando las restricciones y adaptando sus métodos para permanecer conectados.
Business,Corporate Events,Europe
INTERNACIONAL
A de facto pro forma: Why Washington fixated these sessions as the DHS shutdown dragged on through recess
NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!
Carpe diem. If you’ve wondered why all of Washington buzzed so much this week about «pro forma» sessions in the House and Senate, here’s your chance to find out why.
Come on now. Tempus fugit. There’s no time like the present. Hopefully, when you finish reading this, you can declare veni, vidi, vici when it comes to your understanding of pro forma sessions in the House and Senate.
Let’s start with what pro forma means and why it holds application in Congress.
SEN. MIKE LEE URGES TRUMP TO INVOKE RARE CONSTITUTIONAL POWER TO FORCE CONGRESS BACK FROM SPRING RECESS
In Latin, «pro forma» refers to «a matter of form.» In other words, something appears real, but it’s just perfunctory. For decades, the House and Senate have used the parliamentary artifice of a «pro forma» session to adhere to the Constitutional requirement of meeting every three days.
Article I, Section 5 of the Constitution states that «Neither House, during the Session of Congress, shall, without the Consent of the other, adjourn for more than three days, nor to any other Place than that in which the two Houses shall be sitting.» That means the House and Senate must convene at three-day intervals — unless both bodies approved the same «adjournment resolution» to allow one another to depart Washington for an extended period of time. In other words, the House and Senate must vote and agree to be out at the same time. And if there’s no consensus on an adjournment resolution, the House and Senate technically must «meet» every three days.
The House and Senate often fail to sync up on an adjournment resolution because the party opposite the President wants to block him from using his power to install cabinet officials or other figures via a «recess appointment» — thus circumnavigating the Senate confirmation process. That makes it challenging to approve an adjournment resolution. But that’s another matter.
Sunrise light hits the U.S. Capitol dome on Thursday, January 2, 2025. (Bill Clark/CQ-Roll Call, Inc via Getty Images)
Back to pro forma sessions.
Sans an adjournment resolution, the House and Senate simply gavel in and gavel out every three days. There is (usually) no legislative business. These are pro forma sessions. The House and Senate meet «in form.» But don’t accomplish anything. There’s often only one lawmaker on hand — the person who presides. House pro forma sessions usually run two or three minutes. Senate sessions are even more abbreviated — usually lasting 25 to 35 seconds.
What constitutes a Congressional meeting? Just those few seconds of session time suffices.
Some years ago, senators actually held an informal competition, racing through pro formas in an attempt to see who could conduct the meeting the fastest. The quickest pro forma session clocked in at a blistering 21 seconds.
Here’s the parliamentary posture of the House and Senate last week:
The Senate adjourned for the day in the wee hours on Friday, March 28. The House followed suit just before midnight the same night. Without an adjournment resolution, both would meet the next Tuesday. Therefore, if the House or Senate wouldn’t have to meet again until Tuesday.
GOP RAILS AGAINST ‘S— SANDWICH’ DEAL AS ALL EYES TURN TO HOUSE TO END DHS SHUTDOWN
There’s nothing written prohibiting the House or Senate from conducting legislative business during a pro forma session. In other words, either body just has to conduct some legislative business to convert a pro forma session into a de facto session. So that’s why it was though that the Senate’s pro forma session on Tuesday was ripe for activity as the DHS shutdown continued.
Some House Republicans demanded that the Senate align with what the House passed Friday night: a bill which funded all of the Department of Homeland Security for two months.
The Senate gaveled to order on Tuesday morning around 10:33 am et (a couple of moments late). Sen. John Hoeven, R-N.D., presided. But after 31 seconds, Hoeven adjourned the Senate without any business. Hoeven himself — or any senator — could have tried to pass the House bill with the skeleton crew on hand. Sen. Chris Coons, D-D.E., was the only other senator in the chamber. Coons or anyone else could have sought recognition to speak. But none of that happened.
Amid the ongoing Department of Homeland Security shutdown, Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., has not had his immigration reform demands met while Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D., and House Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., passed rival DHS funding proposals. (Photo by Alex Wong/Getty Images; Aaron Schwartz/Bloomberg via Getty Images; Photo by Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images)
And then the Senate adjourned, only to meet again Thursday morning (note the three-day interlude) at 7 a.m. for another pro forma session.
Pro forma sessions are customarily one of the most dull exercises in Congress. A skeleton crew of floor staff are there. Those asked to preside over the sessions are lawmakers who need to be in Washington for some reason over a recess or those who don’t go home often. Depending on which party has the majority, lawmakers from Maryland, Virginia or West Virginia frequently preside — simply because they are nearby. A limited number of reporters surface. They’re all thirsty for a quote or soundbite — simply because so few other lawmakers are available thanks to the recess. The whole enterprise starts and wraps up within minutes and everyone goes back home.
But that was not the case with last Tuesday’s Senate session. Everyone wanted to see if Republicans might try to approve the House-passed DHS bill. Or for that matter, if the House may attempt to align with the Senate and pass its bill. Neither happened. Even though a flood of reporters descended on the Capitol.
BEHIND THE SCENES OF CONGRESS’ ELEVENTH-HOUR RUSH TO FUND THE DHS
But the drama was higher this past Thursday morning. On Wednesday, House Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., dramatically reversed himself and consented to the Senate-passed bill to fund all the Department of Homeland Security through Oct. 1 — except the Border Patrol and ICE. Johnson and Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D., published a joint statement endorsing the Senate’s strategy. And so around dawn on Thursday, Thune himself showed up to pass the Senate package again.
The presence of the Majority or Minority Leader on the floor during a pro forma session is nearly unprecedented. It’s a magna momemti when it comes to a pro forma meeting.
A Transportation Security Administration agent watches as passengers queue for security screening at LaGuardia Airport in New York City on March 22. (Charly Triballeau/AFP via Getty Images)
This was not an ordinary pro forma. And even though nothing happened on Tuesday, neither of those sessions were far from the customary pro formas Congress usually sees during a recess.
It was presumed that the House would align in its pro forma session later Thursday morning. But consternation gripped the House Republican Conference. How was Johnson suddenly endorsing the Senate deal which he just characterized as a «joke» a few days earlier? That’s to say nothing of Johnson twisting himself in multiple knots and aggravating all wings of the GOP Conference.
So the House took no action. Which is why DHS remains shut down since the House and Senate have magnified the scope and potential for all four pro forma sessions held in recent days.
CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP
It turns out that all of these high-profile pro forma sessions were just bona fide pro forma sessions.
Nil actum est. Congress didn’t accomplish anything. Again.
house of representatives politics, senate, government shutdown, politics, john thune, chuck schumer
INTERNACIONAL
El piloto desaparecido en Irán reaviva el fantasma de la crisis de los rehenes de 1979 y deja a Estados Unidos en alerta máxima
El derribo de un avión de combate estadounidense sobre territorio iraní y la intensa búsqueda de uno de sus tripulantes han generado preocupación de que pueda ser capturado y proporcionar a Irán un valioso recurso que podría utilizar para presionar a Estados Unidos.
La operación de rescate se encontraba en su segundo día este sábado, con tropas estadounidenses realizando una búsqueda exhaustiva y el ejército iraní también intentando encontrar al tripulante.
Como muestra del afán del régimen por atrapar al aviador, un presentador de una filial local de la cadena estatal iraní leyó el viernes en televisión un comunicado en el que instaba a los residentes a capturar al «piloto o pilotos enemigos» y entregarlos vivos a las fuerzas de seguridad a cambio de una recompensa.
La posibilidad de que Irán capture al aviador evoca el temor a una repetición de la crisis de rehenes de Irán de 1979, un suceso traumático en la historia estadounidense que sentó las bases de casi cinco décadas de relaciones hostiles entre Estados Unidos e Irán.
La crisis, en la que estudiantes militantes tomaron la embajada estadounidense en Teherán y mantuvieron cautivos a 52 estadounidenses durante 444 días, sentó un precedente para Irán que perfeccionaría en las décadas siguientes como forma de acaparar titulares internacionales, infligir daño a sus adversarios y obtener concesiones.
Desde 1979, el gobierno iraní ha utilizado repetidamente la toma de rehenes como táctica contra sus adversarios. Ha detenido a estadounidenses, europeos y otros ciudadanos extranjeros, a veces manteniéndolos encarcelados durante años antes de liberarlos, a menudo a cambio de dinero o la liberación de sus propios ciudadanos encarcelados en el extranjero. Ha utilizado a los rehenes como herramientas de propaganda y para obtener influencia.
La crisis de 1979 marcó el último año de la presidencia de Jimmy Carter y, para muchos, se convirtió en un símbolo de sus fracasos.
Donald Trump ha criticado repetidamente la gestión de la crisis de rehenes por parte del Carter, calificándola de «patética». En 1980, declaró a un periodista: «Que este país se quede de brazos cruzados y permita que un país como Irán retenga a nuestros rehenes, a mi parecer, es un horror, y no creo que lo harían con otros países».
Hamidreza Azizi, experto en seguridad iraní del Instituto Alemán de Asuntos Internacionales y de Seguridad, una organización de investigación, afirmó que Irán podría adoptar dos estrategias si logra capturar al aviador.
Si la captura se mantiene en secreto, los iraníes podrían contactar a Estados Unidos en privado y llegar a un acuerdo secreto, exigiendo concesiones a cambio de la liberación del tripulante. O bien, Irán podría exhibir al aviador ante las cámaras como propaganda.
Según él, esa era la estrategia más probable. «Realmente quieren proyectar esta imagen de victoria y, además, humillar a Trump», afirmó Azizi.
Ali Alfoneh, investigador principal del Instituto de los Estados Árabes del Golfo, con sede en Washington, mencionó un incidente de 2007 en el que Irán capturó a marineros británicos, alegando que sus embarcaciones habían entrado ilegalmente en aguas iraníes. Los marineros fueron vendados, amenazados y sometidos a presión psicológica antes de prestar declaración en vídeo, en la que parecían disculparse. Sin embargo, no se reportó que sufrieran daños físicos, señaló Alfoneh.
“El entonces presidente Mahmoud Ahmadinejad aprovechó al máximo la cobertura mediática internacional al anunciar su liberación y les estrechó la mano personalmente”, declaró el Alfoneh en un correo electrónico. Añadió que el trato al aviador estadounidense probablemente sería diferente, dado que Estados Unidos e Irán están en guerra.
Incluso si el tripulante desaparecido es rescatado, el incidente subraya los riesgos de realizar misiones sobre territorio hostil contra un adversario con capacidad de represalia. Las operaciones de rescate son intrínsecamente peligrosas porque ponen en riesgo a otros miembros del servicio estadounidense.
Fuente: The New York Times
Bernardita Barreiro celebró su cumpleaños en Madrid junto a Agustina Macri: amigos, banquete y tres tortas
Del gol de Simeone y la expulsión de Nico González a la brutal patada a Thiago Almada: las perlitas de Atlético de Madrid-Barcelona
Con la mira en Adorni, la oposición planea convertir la próxima sesión informativa en una interpelación por su patrimonio
Un exdirector de Call of Duty dice que el gunplay de Fallout es "terrible", y le ha dado una idea a Todd Howard para mejorarlo de cara a Fallout 5
Los números de la pobreza: «Hay un problema de medición y de realismo de esas mediciones»
El fundador de Telegram afirmó que 65 millones de rusos acceden a la app con VPN pese a la censura impuesta por Putin
El Gobierno reevalúa la estrategia de comunicación por el caso Adorni y mide el impacto en la imagen de Milei
Milei se pone al frente de la defensa de Adorni y lo suma a un acto por Malvinas en una nueva muestra de respaldo
Oriana Sabatini sorprendió al elegir a una famosa como madrina de Gia, su hija con Paulo Dybala
Banco lanza un plazo fijo inédito: sigue a la inflación y permite retirar intereses todos los meses
POLITICA3 días agoMilei se pone al frente de la defensa de Adorni y lo suma a un acto por Malvinas en una nueva muestra de respaldo
- CHIMENTOS2 días ago
Oriana Sabatini sorprendió al elegir a una famosa como madrina de Gia, su hija con Paulo Dybala
- POLITICA2 días ago
La Armada sorteará 30 lugares en el buque que escoltará la salida de la Fragata Libertad: cómo anotarse
