Connect with us

INTERNACIONAL

Trump’s fiercest GOP critic became his most influential voice on war and peace

Published

on


NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!

In 2015, Sen. Lindsey Graham called Donald Trump a «jackass» and warned Republicans that nominating him would be a disaster. Trump responded by reading Graham’s personal cellphone number aloud during a campaign rally, encouraging supporters to call the South Carolina senator.

Advertisement

Few political rivalries seemed less likely to evolve into one of Washington’s most consequential foreign policy partnerships.

Trump rose to power promising to end America’s «endless wars» and challenging decades of Republican foreign policy orthodoxy. Graham, by contrast, remained throughout his three decades in public service an unabashed advocate of projecting American power abroad.

FROM ‘DISGRACE’ TO ‘FAMILY’: TRUMP’S REMARKABLE JOURNEY WITH LINDSEY GRAHAM

Advertisement

Yet over the next decade, Graham became one of the few lawmakers with regular access to President Trump on questions of national security, emerging as one of the Republican Party’s most influential voices on Iran, Ukraine, Israel and NATO.

Sen. Lindsey Graham, Republican of South Carolina, speaks with reporters aboard Air Force One with President Donald Trump and Secretary of Commerce Howard Lutnick on the way back to Washington, D.C., on Jan. 4, 2026. (Jim Watson/AFP via Getty Images)

He had built his Senate career around foreign policy. While many lawmakers spent weekends back home, Graham was often overseas meeting presidents, visiting war zones and trying to broker agreements between allies and the White House. 

Advertisement

By the end of his career, his office had become an unofficial waypoint for foreign leaders trying to understand — or influence — the Trump administration.

In interviews following the senator’s sudden death Saturday, Trump described Graham as «like a member of the family» and said he was among the final people to speak with the South Carolina Republican after he returned from Ukraine just hours before his death.

As Trump reshaped Republican foreign policy around an «America First» agenda, Graham became one of the few congressional voices with regular access to the president on questions of war and peace. He frequently pressed Trump to maintain a muscular U.S. role abroad — even as the president questioned long-standing alliances and warned against prolonged military interventions.

Advertisement
Donald Trump and Lindsey Graham

Donald Trump and Lindsey Graham pose for a picture on a golf course June 28, 2025. (Sen. Lindsey Graham via X)

Rather than becoming another Republican hawk sidelined by Trump’s ascent, Graham cultivated one of the closest working relationships with the president, giving him unusual influence as the administration navigated conflicts from Ukraine and Iran to Israel and NATO.

Whether Graham simply reinforced Trump’s instincts — or helped shape them — may become one of the defining questions of his foreign policy legacy.

GRAHAM REPORTEDLY REFUSED MEDICAL HELP BEFORE SCHEDULED TV APPEARANCE

Advertisement

«He would call me all the time,» Trump told Fox News Monday. «I’d say, ‘Stop calling me, Lindsey.’ It was amazing. He just never stopped. He was a worker — a total workaholic politician.»

Colleagues said Graham lived and breathed the work of the Senate, particularly serving as an informal envoy between the U.S. and allies around the world.

In the hours before his death, Graham told a confidant he wasn’t feeling well but joked he couldn’t die now because he still had work to do. He was preparing to push a long-stalled bipartisan Russia sanctions bill through the Senate, remained focused on advancing Saudi-Israel normalization and believed the Trump administration had not yet finished confronting Iran.

Advertisement

He had just completed his 10th trip to Ukraine, and maintained tight relationships not only with President Volodymyr Zelenskyy but also with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, NATO Secretary-General Mark Rutte, Gulf leaders and others around the world.

Graham believed that influence came from showing up, according to Jack Keane, a retired Army four-star general, the chairman of the Institute for the Study of War and Fox News Senior Strategic Analyst.

«He wasn’t interested in writing op-ed pieces or making speeches, he wanted firsthand contact with leaders of the world.» Keane, who counted Graham as a friend, told Fox News Digital. «He was interested in getting the results.»

Advertisement

Graham, upon being beaten by Trump in the 2016 primary, conceded that the then-real estate mogul understood the American public better than he did .

«He understood the American people better than we did, and shame on us for not doing it as effectively as him,» Graham said at the time, according to Keane. 

So Graham went to work making himself useful for the president.

Advertisement

«Graham knew the world better than almost anyone in Washington, and he likely knew many foreign leaders better than President Trump’s own appointees,» Keane said. «He made a conscious decision to help the president by offering advice and counsel, which grew into both a personal and professional relationship.»

Graham’s worldview was shaped alongside late Sens. John McCain, R-Ariz., and Joe Lieberman, D-Conn., with whom he traveled extensively overseas. The trio —known as the «Three Amigos» — championed an interventionist Republican foreign policy rooted in American military leadership, support for democratic allies and confronting authoritarian adversaries.

Graham publicly disagreed with Trump over Iran negotiations — preferring strikes and regime change — and repeatedly pushed for a tougher line against Russia in the war on Ukraine.

Advertisement

Those convictions at times put him closer to traditional Republican foreign policy than to Trump’s «America First» instincts, even as he worked to remain one of the president’s closest advisors.

Trump’s approach to foreign policy often shifted between military confrontation and diplomatic restraint. Graham’s rarely did.

A picture taken on July 10, 2026 shows U.S. Senator Lindsey Graham (R-SC) speaking to the media after his meeting with Ukraine's President Volodymyr Zelenskiy, amid Russia's attack on Ukraine, in Kyiv, Ukraine

Sen. Lindsey Graham is pictured in Kyiv on June 10, one day before his passing. (Valentyn Ogirenko/Reuters)

Whenever Trump appeared to move toward a negotiated settlement with Iran, Graham followed a familiar playbook: remind the White House that Congress ultimately would have to review any lasting agreement.

Advertisement

After Trump announced a memorandum of understanding with Iran in June, Graham quickly argued that any lasting deal would require congressional scrutiny and even suggested Vice President JD Vance would ultimately have to defend it on Capitol Hill.

By the time of his death, Graham had fashioned exactly the role he wanted in Washington: trusted interlocutor between the White House, Congress and foreign leaders.

Sen. Amy Klobuchar, D-Minn., described Graham as having a «kid-like exuberance about his job and the responsibilities he was given.»

Advertisement

«Even in his sixties he would get off a plane in a foreign land with a twinkle in his eye and look at me as if to say, can you believe we are actually here and doing this?» she wrote on X.

Very rarely in life do you get to be exactly where you want to be, when you want to be there, with who you want to be with, doing precisely what you want to do — that was every moment for Lindsey,» White House deputy chief of staff Stephen Miller wrote on X.

«Lindsey was a senator’s senator. The job was everything to him. Truly did he believe in the splendor of the office and the noble lineage behind it, of which he was the worthy heir.»

Advertisement

Graham rarely seemed interested in winning an argument if it meant losing the president. He spent more than a year revising his long-stalled Russia sanctions legislation and negotiating with the White House as Trump pursued his own diplomatic outreach to Russian President Vladimir Putin. Only days before his death did Graham announce that he had reached an agreement with the administration to move the bill forward.

While Trump frequently questioned the value of NATO and demanded allies shoulder more of the burden, Graham viewed America’s alliances as one of its greatest strategic advantages. He generally agreed that European nations needed to spend more on defense, but argued the alliance itself remained indispensable to deterring Russia and projecting American power.

Graham’s support for Israel was equally central to his worldview. He regarded Israel as America’s closest partner in the Middle East and spent years working to strengthen ties between Israel and Arab states, viewing Saudi-Israeli normalization as a historic opportunity to reshape the region while further isolating Iran.

Advertisement

Graham spent a decade proving that in Washington, proximity to power could matter as much as formal authority. Without Graham in Washington, Ukraine now fears it may have lost an indispensable advocate in Washington.

«Huge and absolutely unexpected loss,» said Oleksandr Merezhko, a lawmaker with Zelenskyy’s party, told the AP. «He was truly indispensable. I even don’t know who might be as important for us now in Trump’s entourage.»

«He was the closest link between Ukraine, our president and Trump,» he added. «Our position in Trump’s entourage might be weaker.»

Advertisement

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

It’s unclear who will be able to usher Graham’s signature Russia sanctions bill through the Senate and onto the president’s desk with the same access to both ends of Pennsylvania Avenue.

For now, the president will navigate wars in Ukraine and the Middle East without the friend who was never shy about telling him to hit harder.

Advertisement

lindsey graham, politics, foreign policy senate, donald trump, foreign policy

INTERNACIONAL

EXCLUSIVE: Oversight Project sues to block Maryland Democrats’ redistricting measure backed by Gov Moore

Published

on


NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!

EXCLUSIVE: A new lawsuit set to be filed in Maryland seeks to block a redistricting amendment backed by Democrat Gov. Wes Moore from appearing on the November ballot, arguing state officials advanced the measure after the state’s own legislative analysts concluded the statutory deadline for certifying ballot questions had already passed.

Advertisement

The complaint, filed Thursday night in Anne Arundel County Circuit Court by the conservative watchdog group Oversight Project and reviewed by Fox News Digital, argues HB 2100 could not lawfully reach voters because Maryland’s July 1 deadline for certifying statewide ballot questions expired more than a month before lawmakers convened a special session to approve the proposal.

The Oversight Project, which filed the lawsuit with Republican lawmakers, argues approval of the amendment could pave the way for an 8-0 Democratic congressional delegation. 

SUPREME COURT DEALS BLOW TO VIRGINIA DEMOCRATS IN FIGHT OVER STATE COURT ELECTION MAP RULING

Advertisement

HB 2100 would ask voters to amend the Maryland Constitution so state constitutional standards governing compactness and boundaries would no longer apply to congressional districts.

The Oversight Project describes itself as working «to expose and root out corruption in government, among elected officials, and in our most influential organizations to ensure power resides with the American People.»

The complaint alleges Democratic sponsors characterized the amendment as merely «technical» in the Maryland House. (Getty, File)

Advertisement

Its filing points to a Department of Legislative Services fiscal note stating that «the new statutory deadline of July 1 for certification of ballot questions» had already passed. The fiscal note also states that election officials were required to publicly post the full text of a proposed constitutional amendment at least 90 days before Election Day.

According to the complaint, lawmakers then added the phrase «notwithstanding any other provision of law» to HB 2100 less than an hour before the joint committee hearing began. The plaintiffs argue the language was intended to override Maryland’s certification, notice and public comment requirements after those deadlines had already elapsed.

The complaint further alleges Democratic sponsors characterized the amendment as merely «technical» in the House, while Senate debate reflected that lawmakers understood the statutory timeline could no longer be met.

Advertisement

The filing cites remarks by Democratic state Sen. Cheryl Kagan during floor debate.

VIRGINIA DEMS ACCUSED OF ILLEGALLY ‘STEAMROLLING’ STATE LAW THAT COULD UPEND REDISTRICTING CRUSADE

Wes Moore

A new lawsuit in Maryland seeks to block a redistricting amendment backed by Democrat Gov. Wes Moore. (Brian Witte/AP Photo, File)

«There is no time to comply with the plain language of the law with our new law because July 1st is in the rearview mirror,» Kagan said, according to the complaint. «There’s no time to have the Secretary of State draft language, to have it published, to have a comment period, to have it modified. It’s just not an option.»

Advertisement

Maryland GOP Delegate Matt Morgan, one of the plaintiffs, told Fox News Digital the disputed language was introduced at 11:08 a.m. for a noon committee hearing.

«They have the law. They’re supposed to follow it. They didn’t,» Morgan said. «And now we’re going to take it to court and see what the judges have to say about it.»

DEMS CIRCLE THE WAGONS BY BLAMING GOP FOR THEIR GERRYMANDERING RESPONSE AHEAD OF MIDTERMS: ‘VERY DESPERATE’

Advertisement
California Election DHS Voting Rolls

The complaint argues that HB 2100 could not lawfully reach voters because Maryland’s July 1 deadline for certifying statewide ballot questions expired more than a month before lawmakers convened a special session to approve the proposal. (Kyle Grillot/Bloomberg via Getty Images, File)

Morgan said Democratic leadership later described the amendment as «technical» on the House floor.

«The truth is that that was their way of trying to get around them missing all these statutory deadlines,» he said.

Republican Delegate Kathy Szeliga, another plaintiff, said legislators had only hours to review the revised language while the public had no opportunity to comment.

Advertisement

«The public got absolutely no time to look and weigh in on the amended language,» Szeliga told Fox News Digital. «So, it just reeks of a naked political, partisan power grab on the Democrats’ behalf.»

According to the complaint, the proposal is intended to overturn the practical effect of a 2022 state court ruling holding that those constitutional standards applied to congressional redistricting. Democrats hold seven of Maryland’s eight U.S. House seats.

REDISTRICTING WAR INTENSIFIES AS GOP SUFFERS SETBACKS IN TWO STATES

Advertisement
Maryland state house

Democratic leadership described the amendment as «technical» on the state House floor. (Jonathan Newton/For The Washington Post via Getty Images, File)

Moore has publicly defended the amendment as a response to Republican-led redistricting efforts in other states, saying it would ensure «Marylanders — and no one else — have the final say over their representation.»

The lawsuit asks the court to bar state officials from certifying, printing, distributing, tabulating or canvassing votes on the amendment and requests expedited review because of the approaching election calendar.

Moore’s office, the Maryland Attorney General’s Office and the Maryland State Board of Elections did not immediately respond to Fox News Digital’s request for comment.

Advertisement

maryland, legislation, elections state and local, democratic party, midterm elections, congress, republicans elections

Advertisement
Continue Reading

INTERNACIONAL

Con la presencia de Milei y bajo una alerta terrorista, asume el nuevo presidente de Colombia

Published

on


Con la presencia de Javier Milei entre los invitados especiales y bajo una alerta terrorista, el ultraderechista Abelardo de la Espriella asumirá este viernes la presidencia de Colombia, en un drástico viraje ideológico que pondrá punto final a cuatro años del primer gobierno de izquierda en la historia del país.

Unos 11.000 uniformados de la Policía, el Ejército y la Fuerza Aeroespacial Colombiana custodiarán la ceremonia que se llevará a cabo en Cali, la principal ciudad del sudoeste colombiano. Es la primera vez que la jura no se realiza en Bogotá, en una decisión que busca mostrar el inicio de un nuevo proceso de “descentralización” política.

Advertisement

El acto se desarrollará en la Arena USC, de la Universidad Santiago de Cali, que puede albergar a más de 2300 personas

De la Espriella, un polémico abogado mediático, de 48 años, ganó el balotaje del 21 de junio con un apretado margen de menos de un punto de ventaja sobre el candidato oficialista Iván Cepeda, heredero del presidente saliente, Gustavo Petro, quien no asistirá a la ceremonia porque considera fraudulento el proceso eleccionario. Solo 200.000 votos separaron a ambos candidatos entre los más de 25 millones contabilizados.

El nuevo mandatario asumirá un país aquejado por una nueva ola de violencia guerrillera y del crimen organizado y con el desafío latente de gobernar sin una mayoría en el Congreso. Además, afrontará un grave déficit fiscal, una profunda crisis del sistema de salud y una preocupante realidad climática y energética.

Advertisement

Los grandes desafíos del nuevo gobierno colombiano

El nuevo presidente afrontará un camino difícil. En el corto plazo tendrá ante sí cinco grandes frentes abiertos:

  • Gobernabilidad. Este será un asunto clave para el nuevo gobierno. El izquierdista Pacto Histórico de Petro tiene la primera minoría en el Congreso, con 26 senadores y 43 diputados. El Centro Democrático (CD), una fuerza tradicional de la derecha colombiana, se sumará al nuevo gobierno y aportará 17 senadores y 30 diputados.

Por lo pronto, De la Espriella construyó un bloque de unidad en el Senado con el CD, Salvación Nacional, el Partido Conservador, la U y Cambio Radical. En total alcanzaría 49 votos, sobre un total de 103, pero apunta a crecer con disidentes del Partido Liberal.

En Diputados, el Centro Democrático ostenta la primera minoría, seguida por el Partido Liberal y el Pacto Histórico de Petro, con una dispersión de bancas entre partidos minoritarios que obligará al oficialismo a pactar grandes alianzas.

El presidente electo de Colombia, Abelardo de la Espriella, habla durante una conferencia de prensa en Bogotá, Colombia, el jueves 30 de julio de 2026. (Foto AP/John Vizcaino)

Advertisement
  • Inseguridad. La violencia guerrillera y del crimen organizado sufrió un importante aumento en los últimos años a pesar del esfuerzo de Petro para pacificar el país a través del diálogo con grupos ilegales. “Este es el principal desafío porque fue un fracaso el plan de ‘Paz Total’ que intentó llevar adelante el gobierno saliente”, dijo a TN la politóloga Bibiana Ortega, de la Universidad Javieriana de Bogotá.

La Fundación Ideas para la Paz, citada por EFE, reveló que el número de guerrilleros creció 23,5% solo en 2025. Se calcula que son 27.121 personas en armas y en redes de apoyo del Ejército de Liberación Nacional (ELN) y las disidencias de las Fuerzas Armadas Revolucionarias de Colombia (FARC).

Pero estos grupos no están solos. Las organizaciones criminales mantienen también un enorme peso en el país. El Clan del Golfo, el mayor grupo criminal, tiene al menos 9840 miembros.

De la Espriella prometió “mano dura” en la campaña. Quiere replicar las políticas radicales de Nayib Bukele, a quien imita en su estilo y en su discurso, a pesar de las innumerables denuncias de organismos de derechos humanos contra el presidente salvadoreño.

“A esas personas que están al margen de la ley, un mensaje categórico: disponen de un mes para entrar en razón (…) y organizar su sometimiento al Estado de derecho. En mi Gobierno no habrá ofertas generosas ni concesiones inaceptables como las que recibieron del régimen que está llegando a su fin”, afirmó el nuevo presidente. En campaña, prometió “bombardear” a los grupos armados.

Advertisement



Colombia, Abelardo de la Espriella, Sumario

Continue Reading

INTERNACIONAL

Los precios del petróleo suben ante la preocupación por los planes de reapertura del estrecho de Ormuz

Published

on


Vista de una antorcha en la instalación de estabilización de petróleo (REUTERS/Alexander Manzyuk/Archivo)

El precio del petróleo subió este viernes en medio de nuevas preocupaciones por la apertura del estrecho de Ormuz, luego de que Irán, en coordinación con Omán, propusiera prohibir el paso de buques considerados hostiles y aplicar fuertes multas a quienes violen las reglas propuestas. El régimen persa mantiene un cierre de facto de la vía marítima estratégica desde el 28 de febrero de 2026.

Advertisement

Los futuros del crudo Brent, de referencia europea, ascendieron 80 centavos, o 0,97%, hasta 83,29 dólares el barril, mientras que el West Texas Intermediate (WTI) de Estados Unidos subió 64 centavos, o 0,83%, hasta 77,93 dólares.

El jueves, los futuros del petróleo cerraron con un alza superior a los 3 dólares por barril después de que Irán analizara un proyecto de ley para prohibir el paso de buques estadounidenses e israelíes por el estrecho de Ormuz, canal donde transitaba cerca de una quinta parte del petróleo y gas natural licuado mundial antes del inicio de la guerra en Medio Oriente a fines de febrero.

Los precios habían caído a principios de semana ante la posibilidad de una solución al conflicto, pero el Brent superó los 80 dólares el jueves tras haber caído por debajo de ese umbral por primera vez desde el 13 de julio. Ambos referenciales se encaminan a cerrar la semana con una caída cercana al 8%.

Advertisement
Embarcaciones en el estrecho de Ormuz, cerca de la playa de Bandar Abbas (Irán), el 27 de julio de 2026 (Razieh Poudat/ISNA/vía WANA/vía REUTERS)
Embarcaciones en el estrecho de Ormuz, cerca de la playa de Bandar Abbas (Irán), el 27 de julio de 2026 (Razieh Poudat/ISNA/vía WANA/vía REUTERS)

Las tensiones entre Irán y Estados Unidos mantienen la atención del mercado energético tras la presentación de un borrador de plan iraní que propone restringir el tránsito por el estrecho de Ormuz.

Analistas coinciden en que las hostilidades entre ambos países persisten. Lin Ye, vicepresidente de mercados de materias primas y petróleo en Rystad Energy, explicó que la reciente reacción de los precios del petróleo está vinculada a la difusión del plan iraní. “El detonante inmediato es más específico, está reaccionando al plan publicado por Irán para las condiciones de tránsito en Ormuz, que prohibiría buques estadounidenses e israelíes y exigiría a otros países ‘hostiles’ pagar compensaciones antes del paso”, declaró Ye en diálogo con Reuters. El ejecutivo remarcó: “Eso no es el mercado descontando un mal acuerdo, es la confirmación de que lo que surja será un corredor gestionado o condicional, no una restauración del flujo normal”.

Un legislador iraní informó que una comisión parlamentaria evalúa un proyecto preliminar que prohíbe el tránsito de barcos estadounidenses, israelíes y de otras naciones consideradas hostiles por el Parlamento de Irán. Este proyecto prevé multas de hasta el 20% del valor de la carga para quienes violen estas restricciones, informó la agencia Fars.

Según un alto funcionario iraní, Irán aspira a cobrar tarifas de entre el 5% y el 7% del precio de las cargas a los buques que utilicen el estrecho. Por su parte, Omán discute fijar tarifas cercanas al 3%, mientras que Washington rechaza cualquier tipo de cobro. Cuatro fuentes del sector consultadas por Reuters advirtieron que el acuerdo propuesto enfrenta dificultades de implementación debido a las sanciones de Estados Unidos y a las cláusulas restrictivas de seguros sobre cualquier pago.

Advertisement
Una imagen muestra un manómetro cerca de las bombas de extracción de petróleo (REUTERS)
Una imagen muestra un manómetro cerca de las bombas de extracción de petróleo (REUTERS)

Vandana Hari, fundadora de la consultora Vanda Insights, afirmó que “las señales de esta semana sobre un posible acuerdo de tránsito Irán-Omán han causado oscilaciones en la percepción del mercado, pero hasta ahora dejan sin claridad qué condiciones se necesitan para concretar el entendimiento”.

En paralelo, los hutíes de Yemen informaron sobre ataques con misiles y drones contra “despliegues sauditas” en las regiones de Marib y Hadramout, según reportó Reuters. El presidente de Estados Unidos, Donald Trump, declaró el jueves ante periodistas que considera que “la guerra terminará pronto”.

(Con información Reuters)



Europe

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Tendencias

Copyright © 2026 NDM - Noticias del Momento | #Noticias #Chimentos #Política #Fútbol #Economía #Sociedad