Former Vice President Kamala Harris on Saturday evening condemned the Trump administration’s capture of Venezuelan dictator Nicolás Maduro and his wife, calling the operation both ‘unlawful’ and ‘unwise.’

In a lengthy post on X, Harris acknowledged that Maduro is a ‘brutal’ and ‘illegitimate’ dictator but said that President Donald Trump’s actions in Venezuela ‘do not make America safer, stronger, or more affordable.’

‘Donald Trump’s actions in Venezuela do not make America safer, stronger, or more affordable,’ Harris wrote. ‘That Maduro is a brutal, illegitimate dictator does not change the fact that this action was both unlawful and unwise. We’ve seen this movie before.

‘Wars for regime change or oil that are sold as strength but turn into chaos, and American families pay the price.’

Harris made the remarks hours after the Trump administration confirmed that Maduro and his wife were captured and transported out of Venezuela as part of ‘Operation Absolute Resolve.’

The former vice president also accused the administration of being motivated by oil interests rather than efforts to combat drug trafficking or promote democracy.

‘The American people do not want this, and they are tired of being lied to. This is not about drugs or democracy. It is about oil and Donald Trump’s desire to play the regional strongman,’ Harris said. ‘If he cared about either, he wouldn’t pardon a convicted drug trafficker or sideline Venezuela’s legitimate opposition while pursuing deals with Maduro’s cronies.’

Harris, who has been rumored as a potential Democratic contender in the 2028 presidential race, additionally accused the president of endangering U.S. troops and destabilizing the region.

‘The President is putting troops at risk, spending billions, destabilizing a region, and offering no legal authority, no exit plan, and no benefit at home,’ she said. ‘America needs leadership whose priorities are lowering costs for working families, enforcing the rule of law, strengthening alliances, and — most importantly — putting the American people first.’

Maduro and his wife arrived at the Metropolitan Detention Center in Brooklyn late Saturday after being transported by helicopter from the DEA in Manhattan after being processed.

Earlier in the day, Trump said that the U.S. government will ‘run’ Venezuela ‘until such time as we can do a safe, proper and judicious transition.’

Harris’ office did not immediately respond to Fox News Digital’s request for comment.

Fox News Digital’s Jasmine Baehr contributed to this report.

Cuban leaders should be concerned following the U.S. military operation in Venezuela and the arrest of Nicolás Maduro, Secretary of State Marco Rubio said Saturday, as President Donald Trump signaled that his administration could shift its focus to the Caribbean island.

Cuba has long maintained a presence in Venezuela, with intelligence agents and security personnel embedded amid close relations between Havana and Caracas.

Rubio, the son of Cuban immigrants, said Venezuela’s spy agency was ‘basically full of Cubans,’ as was Maduro’s security detail.

‘One of the biggest problems Venezuelans have is they have to declare independence from Cuba,’ he said during a news conference in which officials revealed details of the military operation. ‘They tried to basically colonize it from a security standpoint.’

He added that the communist island was ‘a disaster. It’s run by incompetent, senile men — and in some cases, not senile, but incompetent nonetheless.’

The secretary has repeatedly denounced Cuba and its leadership as a dictatorship and a failed state.

‘If I lived in Havana, and I was in the government, I’d be concerned — at least a little bit,’ Rubio said.

Trump said Cuba was something his administration would ‘end up talking about because Cuba is a failing nation right now — a very badly failing nation.’

‘And we want to help the people,’ he added. ‘It’s very similar in the sense that we want to help the people in Cuba, but we also want to help the people who were forced out of Cuba and are living in this country.’

Maduro and his wife, Cilia Flores, were taken by U.S. forces and brought aboard the USS Iwo Jima. They were expected to be transported to the U.S. to face federal charges.

The couple, along with other Venezuelan officials, face ‘drug trafficking and narco-terrorism conspiracies,’ according to an unsealed indictment posted on social media Saturday by U.S. Attorney General Pam Bondi.

They are accused of partnering with drug cartels to traffic drugs into the U.S.

Maduro and his wife ‘will soon face the full wrath of American justice on American soil in American courts,’ Bondi wrote.

They are charged with narco-terrorism conspiracy, cocaine importation conspiracy, possession of machine guns and destructive devices, and conspiracy to possess machine guns and destructive devices against the U.S.

It can fairly be said that the most precarious jobs in the world are those of a golf ball collector at a driving range, a mascot at a Chuck E. Cheese and a Trump administration lawyer.

That was evident at the press conference yesterday as President Donald Trump blew apart the carefully constructed narrative presented earlier for the seizure of Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro and his wife, Cilia Flores. Some of us had written that Trump had a winning legal argument by focusing on the operation as the seizure of two indicted individuals in reliance on past judicial rulings, including the decisions in the case of former Panamanian dictator Manuel Noriega.

Secretary of State Marco Rubio and Air Force Gen. Dan Caine, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, stayed on script and reinforced this narrative. Both repeatedly noted that this was an operation intended to bring two individuals to justice and that law enforcement personnel were part of the extraction team to place them in legal custody. Rubio was, again, particularly effective in emphasizing that Maduro was not the head of state but a criminal dictator who took control after losing democratic elections.

However, while noting the purpose of the capture, Trump proceeded to declare that the United States would engage in nation-building to achieve lasting regime change. He stated that they would be running Venezuela to ensure a friendly government and the repayment of seized U.S. property dating back to the government of Maduro’s mentor and predecessor, Hugo Chávez.

This city is full of self-proclaimed Trump whisperers who rarely score above random selection in their predictions. However, there are certain pronounced elements in Trump’s approach to such matters. First, he is the most transparent president in my lifetime, with prolonged (at times excruciatingly long) press conferences and a brutal frankness about his motivations. Second, he is unabashedly and undeniably transactional in most of his dealings. He is not ashamed to state what he wants the country to get out of the deal.

In Venezuela, he wants a stable partner, and he wants oil.

Chávez and Maduro had implemented moronic socialist policies that reduced one of the most prosperous nations to an economic basket case. They brought in Cuban security thugs to help keep the population under repressive conditions, as a third fled to the United States and other countries.

After an extraordinary operation to capture Maduro, Trump was faced with socialist Maduro allies on every level of the government. He is not willing to allow those same regressive elements to reassert themselves.

The problem is that, if the purpose was regime change, this attack was an act of war, which is why Rubio struggled to bring the presser back to the law enforcement purpose. I have long criticized the erosion of the war declaration powers of Congress, including my representation of members of Congress in opposition to Obama’s Libyan war effort.

The fact, however, is that we lost that case. Trump knows that. Courts have routinely dismissed challenges to undeclared military offensives against other nations. In fairness to Trump, most Democrats were as quiet as church mice when Obama and Hillary Clinton attacked Libya’s capital and military sites to achieve regime change without any authorization from Congress. They were also silent when Obama vaporized an American under this ‘kill list’ policy without even a criminal charge. So please spare me the outrage now.

My strong preferences for congressional authorization and consultation are immaterial. The question I am asked as a legal analyst is whether this operation would be viewed as lawful. The answer remains yes.

The courts have previously upheld the authority of presidents to seize individuals abroad, including the purported heads of state. This case is actually stronger in many respects than the one involving Noriega. Maduro will now make the same failed arguments that Noriega raised. He should lose those challenges under existing precedent. If courts apply the same standards to Trump (which is often an uncertain proposition), Trump will win on the right to seize Maduro and bring him to justice.

But then, how about the other rationales rattled off at Mar-a-Lago? In my view, it will not matter. Here is why:

The immediate purpose and result of the operation was to capture Maduro and to bring him to face his indictment in New York. That is Noriega 2.0. The administration put him into custody at the time of extraction with law enforcement personnel and handed him over to the Justice Department for prosecution.

The Trump administration can then argue that it had to deal with the aftermath of that operation and would not simply leave the country without a leader or stable government. Trump emphasized, ‘We’re going to run the country until such time as we can do a safe, proper and judicious transition.’

I still do not like the import of those statements. Venezuelans must be in charge of their own country and our role, if any, must be to help them establish a democratic and stable government. Trump added, ‘We can’t take a chance that somebody else takes over Venezuela that doesn’t have the good of the Venezuelan people in mind.’

The devil is in the details. Venezuelans must decide who has their best interests in mind, not the United States.

However, returning to the legal elements, I do not see how a court could free Maduro simply because it disapproves of nation-building. Presidents have engaged in such policies for years. The aftermath of the operation is distinct from its immediate purpose. Trump can argue that, absent countervailing action from Congress, he has the authority under Article II of the Constitution to lay the foundation for a constitutional and economic revival in Venezuela.

He will leave it to his lawyers to make that case. It is not the case that some of us preferred, but it is the case that he wants to be made. He is not someone who can be scripted. It is his script and he is still likely to prevail in holding Maduro and his wife for trial.

With Venezuelan dictator Nicolás Maduro extracted from Caracas on Jan. 3, Venezuelans and the world are anxious to learn about the future that awaits.

In a press conference following the Maduro operation on Saturday, President Donald Trump announced that the U.S. is ‘going to run the country’ until a transition can be safely made.

Isaias Medina, an international lawyer and former senior Venezuelan diplomat, said a peaceful transition is vital for the 9 million to 10 million Venezuelans who are forcibly displaced and living in exile. Medina, who resigned his diplomatic post in protest against Maduro’s rule in 2017, told Fox News Digital that exiled Venezuelans ‘have been preparing ourselves to go back to rebuild our nation.’

With support from international organizations like the Organization of American States, Medina said the most important next step for Venezuela is to establish a transitional government that can restore the rule of law and rebuild institutions that have been decimated under the Maduro regime. Setting in place free and fair elections is particularly important, Medina said, noting that it’s ‘a legal obligation owed to [Venezuela’s] people, because on their occupied territory, it was never equitable or really free.’

Under Maduro, Medina said that ‘there was no separation of powers, there was no rule of law, there was not even sovereignty.’ Instead, Medina said Venezuela had an occupied territory extensively influenced by terrorist and trafficking organizations Hamas, Hezbollah, the Ejército de Liberación Nacional (ELN) and the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (FARC). He said these groups were exploiting Venezuelan resources.

David Daoud, a senior fellow at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, told Fox News Digital that so long as Venezuela poses no threat to U.S. national security, the ‘ideal situation’ for Venezuela ‘would be American guidance for determined local action.’ 

‘The best we can shepherd Venezuela to be is a productive member of the family of nations, and that’s something that we can help with a softer touch, without boots on the ground,’ Daoud said. ‘I don’t think we need to be in the business of trying to create Jeffersonian democracies anywhere.’

Following Maduro’s ouster, Daoud said the level of chaos allowed to exist inside Venezuela will determine whether terror groups like Hezbollah and Hamas will be able to continue operating there. ‘It would really depend — does the day after in Venezuela create a stable state that is able to properly exercise control over all its territory, is interested in implementing the rule of law, is not corrupt. That would make things very, very complicated, if not impossible, for Hezbollah to operate, at least in the way it has been operating for a decade-plus, ever since the linkage between it and the original Chávez regime came about.’

Going forward, Medina suggested that the country will also have to manage guerrilla forces like the colectivos, violent groups of Venezuelans who were armed and trained with old U.S. and Russian military weapons. Medina said having these guerrillas ‘return the weapons for freedom’ could help to ‘unite the nation under one banner of development and evolution… so that we can have a country that really meets the expectations, not only of the riches that it has, but of the people and the development of their education and training and jobs, because it has been completely destroyed by design.’

Though the road ahead is uncertain, Medina is filled with hope. ‘What we have ahead of us is a great journey to be able to build upon the ruins of what this regime left us. But I think we’re going to become stronger, and this is the moment. The time has come,’ Medina said.

Months after the 12-day war between Israel and Iran, tensions are rising again as Iran kills protesters, Israel weighs new military action and President Donald Trump signals the U.S. could intervene.

Trump sharpened pressure on Tehran this week, threatening U.S. action if Iranian security forces violently suppress the ongoing protests that erupted after the country’s national currency collapsed.

‘If Iran shoots and violently kills peaceful protesters … the United States of America will come to their rescue,’ Trump said on social media, adding that the U.S. was ‘locked and loaded.’

But while Trump’s language suggested a readiness to use force, analysts say Washington still has options short of direct military action.

Daniel Shapiro, a former U.S. ambassador to Israel, said Washington should move quickly to expand internet access for demonstrators and prepare for potential political change.

‘Support protesters with internet access and prepare now to advise and assist in a transition,’ Shapiro wrote on X.

Richard Goldberg, a senior advisor at the think tank Foundation for Defense of Democracies, argued that Washington has options short of direct military action.

‘The two most powerful things the U.S. and close partners can do without military involvement is facilitate secure information flow to the protesters and blind the security forces,’ Goldberg wrote on X, adding that while Trump has suggested a kinetic approach, non-kinetic options remain available.

Human rights groups have reported between five and eight killings linked to the recent unrest, along with more than 30 people injured and over 100 arrested as demonstrations spread to dozens of cities across the country.

The White House did not specify what form any intervention might take. Past U.S. responses to unrest in Iran have typically been limited to sanctions and other non-kinetic measures, but Trump has recently shown a willingness to authorize direct military action, including strikes on Iran’s nuclear sites, operations against ISIS in Nigeria following reports of mass killings of Christians and actions targeting alleged narco-traffickers near Venezuela.

Iranian officials responded sharply to Trump’s remarks, warning that U.S. involvement would risk wider regional conflict and place American forces in danger.

Ali Larijani, a senior Iranian national security official, said U.S. interference would destabilize the region and threaten American interests.

‘Trump must realize that U.S. intervention in this internal matter will lead to destabilizing the entire region and destroying American interests,’ Larijani wrote on X. ‘The American people must know that Trump is the one who started this adventure, and they should pay attention to the safety of their soldiers.’

Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf, the speaker of Iran’s parliament, warned that ‘all American bases and forces across the entire region will be legitimate targets’ if the U.S. intervenes.

Iranian authorities have acknowledged legitimate economic grievances but have moved quickly to frame the unrest as foreign-instigated, a narrative hard-liners intensified after Trump’s warning.

Human rights groups say the crackdown has been accompanied by a sharp escalation in state repression. Since the June war, between 1,500 and 2,000 people have been executed by the Iranian regime, most of them in secret, according to rights organizations monitoring the country.

The protests erupted amid soaring prices and a collapsing currency. The Iranian rial has fallen to record lows against the U.S. dollar, while inflation climbed to 42.2% in December, compounding economic pressure driven by international sanctions and years of mismanagement.

Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian has framed the moment as existential, recently saying he considers the country to be in ‘total war’ with the United States, Israel and Europe. He claimed Iran’s military emerged stronger after the June conflict, according to The Times of Israel.

‘Our beloved military forces are doing their jobs with strength,’ Pezeshkian said. ‘So, if they want to attack, they will naturally face a more decisive response.’

While Israel has not announced new strikes, Israeli officials have made clear they view any effort by Iran to rebuild its nuclear or ballistic missile programs as a red line following the June conflict that severely degraded Iran’s air defenses. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu reportedly broached the topic of round two strikes to take out Iranian missiles in a meeting with Trump last week. 

Trump made that position explicit when asked whether he would support another Israeli attack on Iran.

‘If they continue with the missiles? Yes. The nuclear? Fast. One will be, ‘Yes, absolutely’; the other will be, ‘We’ll do it immediately,’’ Trump said.

Since the end of the fighting, Iranian officials and state-linked media have signaled a push to restore and expand the country’s ballistic missile capacity, even as damage from the war disrupted production sites, launch infrastructure and supply chains. Western and Israeli officials have warned that Tehran is attempting to reconstitute missile forces as quickly as possible to reestablish deterrence and signal resilience after the strikes.

Trump reiterated Washington’s position earlier this week during a meeting with Netanyahu, warning that Iran would face renewed strikes if it attempted to restore prohibited capabilities.

Analysts say the convergence of internal unrest and external pressure places Tehran in a volatile position, increasing the risk of miscalculation even if none of the major players is actively seeking a new war.

Despite damage to its defenses, Iran retains the ability to retaliate indirectly through missile launches or proxy attacks, tactics it has used in past confrontations to raise costs for the U.S. and Israel without triggering full-scale conflict.

U.S. defense officials have not announced changes to American force posture in the region, though U.S. troops and assets remain on heightened alert following the June war.

The conflict severely damaged Iran’s nuclear and missile infrastructure and killed senior military commanders and nuclear scientists, while Iranian missile attacks killed 28 people in Israel. Iran’s response to subsequent U.S. strikes was limited, with missiles fired at a U.S. airbase in Qatar after advance warning was given.

That relative calm is now under strain as Iran confronts its most serious internal unrest since the war and Trump signals a lower threshold for U.S. intervention, a combination that risks turning a fragile pause into another flashpoint.

Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., remained silent Friday when his office was asked about New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani’s day one orders that drew backlash from the international Jewish community.

Among his first actions as mayor, Mamdani revoked orders by his predecessor, Eric Adams, including Executive Order 61, which provided additional NYPD security to synagogues in the city and axed the definition of antisemitism adopted by the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA).

He also overturned a restriction on boycotting Israel put in place by Adams. 

‘On his very first day as New York City mayor, Mamdani shows his true face: He scraps the IHRA definition of antisemitism and lifts restrictions on boycotting Israel,’ the Israeli Foreign Ministry wrote in a post on X. 

Schumer’s office did not respond to Fox News Digital’s multiple requests for comment on whether he supported Mamdani’s decisions or what message the Jewish communities in New York City should take away from them.

Schumer previously shied away from taking any stance on Mamdani after it became apparent the socialist candidate would capture the Democratic nomination for mayor.

‘We are continuing to talk,’ Schumer said whenever asked if he would extend an endorsement. 

His silence on his support continued even as Mamdani refused to outright denounce the use of the phrase ‘Globalize the intifada,’ a saying used by critics of Israel to advocate for the removal of the Jewish state. At the time, Mamdani’s posture toward the phrase drew condemnations and alarm from pro-Israel advocates.

Now with Mamdani in office, allies of Israel believe the new mayor’s posture could already prove a dangerous one.

The Consul General of Israel in New York, Ambassador Ofir Akunis, said the revocations ‘pose an immediate threat to the safety of Jewish communities in New York City and could lead to an increase in violent antisemitic attacks throughout the city.’

In the wake of several antisemitic attacks in recent weeks, Schumer, the highest-ranking Jewish elected official in the United States, has said the country must soundly condemn antisemitism ‘at every turn.’

After the deadly Bondi Beach shooting in mid-December that left 15 victims dead at a Jewish community event, Schumer maintained that the Jewish people had been uniquely targeted. 

‘The Jewish people have been collectively demonized. Our collective humanity demands we come together no matter our race, religion, our nationality and forcefully rebuke those forces,’ Schumer said. ‘As I have warned repeatedly, antisemitism is a scourge around the world.’

Fox News Digital’s Morgan Philips contributed to this report.

As nationwide protests continued to spread across Iran on Friday, the regime’s hardline Parliament speaker warned the U.S. that American forces and bases in the region would be considered ‘legitimate targets’ if Washington intervenes in the country’s ongoing political unrest.

Parliament Speaker Mohammad Bagher Qalibaf made the comments after President Donald Trump said earlier Friday that the U.S. would take action if Iran uses force against demonstrators. It comes as protests entered a sixth day and appear to be spreading, with Iranian opposition groups claiming at least eight deaths.

‘The disrespectful President of America should also know that with this official admission, all American centers and forces across the entire region will be legitimate targets for us in response to any potential adventurism,’ Qalibaf wrote in Persian on X.

‘Iranians have always been united and determined to act in the face of an aggressor enemy,’ he added.

Qalibaf’s threat emerges as the United States maintains a substantial military presence in the region.

Roughly 40,000 active-duty U.S. troops and War Department civilians are deployed across the Middle East, according to Military Times, citing Pentagon officials. Forces are stationed in countries including Qatar, Bahrain, Kuwait, Iraq and Syria, according to Reuters.

Trump said earlier Friday that the United States is ‘locked and loaded and ready to go’ if Iranian authorities violently suppress demonstrators.

‘If Iran shoots and ‘violently kills peaceful protesters, which is their custom, the United States of America will come to their rescue,’’ Trump wrote on Truth Social.

The Iranian opposition group National Council of Resistance of Iran (NCRI) claimed Friday that protests have spread to at least 44 cities across 19 provinces, with at least eight people killed in clashes with security forces over the past two days. The group said the youngest victim was 15 years old. The claims could not be independently verified.

According to the NCRI, demonstrations and street fighting intensified overnight, with protesters blocking roads, throwing stones and setting fire to police vehicles in multiple cities, including Marvdasht, Semirom, Darreh-Shahr, Ramhormoz and Azna. 

The group also claimed demonstrators burned a statue of slain Iranian Gen. Qassem Soleimani in Lali, in Iran’s Khuzestan province.

Funerals of those killed in the uprising turned into angry demonstrations against the clerical dictatorship, NCRI reported.

In Zahedan, in Iran’s southeast near the borders with Pakistan and Afghanistan, demonstrators rallied after Friday prayers, chanting slogans including ‘Death to the dictator’ and ‘Death to Khamenei.’

The unrest marks Iran’s most significant protests since 2022, when the death of 22-year-old Mahsa Amini in police custody sparked nationwide demonstrations. Iranian officials say the current unrest has not reached the same scale or intensity.

In recent demonstrations, some of the most severe violence has been reported in western Iran, where videos circulating online appear to show fires burning in streets and the sound of gunfire during nighttime protests.

In a message to the protesters, the President-elect of the NCRI, Maryam Rajavi, said that the protesters have ‘struck fear into a weakened enemy.’

‘Scenes of your courage, valor, and steadfast resistance captivate the conscience of the world,’ Rajavi said. ‘Therefore, from here, I say to the clerics, the Revolutionary Guards, the Basij forces, and their intelligence agents: whatever measures you take, you will not be able to silence a people who have resolved to overthrow the clerical regime.’

‘You may kill, you may wound, you may arrest and imprison, but you will not escape the relentless wrath of this nation. And let this stand as an explicit warning to all those who order and carry out these crimes and killings: the courts of a free Iran are awaiting you.’

Meanwhile, exiled Crown Prince Reza Pahlavi, the eldest son of Iran’s former shah, praised Trump’s ‘decisive leadership’ and tough stance against Iran’s ruling clerics.

Pahlavi said Iranians are risking their lives to end 46 years of rule by the Islamic Republic.

‘[The people] have entrusted me with a message along with a great responsibility: to strive for the revival of the relationship that Iran once had with America; a relationship that brought peace and prosperity to the Middle East,’ Pahlavi wrote on X.

‘I have a clear plan for a stable transition in Iran and enjoy the support of my people to achieve it. With your leadership in the free world, we can leave behind a lasting legacy of enduring peace.’

Fox News’ Bradford Betz, Greg Norman, Morgan Phillips and The Associated Press contributed to this report.

If you’re still unpacking results from the 2024 election, it’s time to give up.

2026 is an election year.

Welcome to the midterms. 

Health care. The economy. The ‘One Big, Beautiful Bill.’ All are factors as voters go to the polls this fall.

Democrats are trained on kitchen table issues this year. They hope that voters will forget about culture wars and have buyer’s remorse, perhaps flipping the House — and even the Senate.

‘They just don’t have enough money in their pockets to pay the bills to buy the medicine they need,’ said Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y. ‘Costs are skyrocketing. And in 2026, you’ll be hearing from us about costs over and over and over again.’

However, Republicans are bullish on maintaining Senate control.

‘I think you’re going to see a remarkable 2026. I mean we’re excited about the prospects for the economy,’ Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D., told Bret Baier.

But Thune is cautious.

‘Typically there are headwinds in a midterm election,’ said Thune. ‘You can’t convince people of something they don’t feel.’

Retirements by Sens. Gary Peters, D-Mich., and Tina Smith, D-Minn., could create challenges for Democrats to hold those seats. Take, for example, why Republicans are spending so much time railing against Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz and Rep. Ilhan Omar, D-Minn., and the state’s welfare scandal and childcare questions. This fuels optimism that Republicans can prevail in the Gopher State.

‘President Trump was very close in Minnesota. It’s a four-point race. We know with the right candidate, we will be successful,’ said Sen. Tim Scott, R-S.C., head of the National Republican Senatorial Campaign (NRSC) to Fox News Digital’s Paul Steinhauser.

Republicans hope that Democrats nominate controversial candidates.

‘If I didn’t know better, I would say that some of these folks are Republican plants. They’re clearly from the loon wing of the Democratic Party,’ said Sen. John Kennedy, R-La., about some Democratic Senate hopefuls. 

Republicans are rooting for a radioactive Rep. Jasmine Crockett, D-Texas, to secure the Democratic nod over a more moderate Democrat James Talarico — to potentially face Sen. John Cornyn, R-Texas, Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton or Rep. Wesley Hunt, R-Texas, for the Texas Senate race.

‘They tell us that Texas is red. They are lying. We’re not,’ said Crockett. ‘Y’all ain’t never tried it the J.C. way.’

Graham Platner is a Democratic populist in Maine. He hopes to face Sen. Susan Collins, R-Me. — if he’s able to defeat Gov. Janet Mills in the primary. Platner has a history of inflammatory posts online.

‘The candidate for Senate in Maine for the Democrats calls me a Nazi, which is rich, coming from a guy who literally has a Nazi tattoo on his chest,’ said Vice President JD Vance.

Platner claims he didn’t know the symbolism of the tattoo at the time. He’s since covered it up.

Sen. Jon Ossoff, D-Ga., is perhaps the most vulnerable Democrat facing re-election this cycle. Ossoff won a runoff as President Trump challenged the 2020 Georgia election results. Republicans intend to target Ossoff with his votes against re-opening the government during the shutdown.

But Democrats think they can swipe some seats from the GOP.

Sen. Thom Tillis, R-N.C., is retiring. The Tar Heel State may represent the best overall pickup opportunity for Democrats.

Former North Carolina Gov. Roy Cooper is expected to face former Republican National Committee Chairman Michael Whatley in a barnburner.

And Democrats think former Sen. Sherrod Brown, D-Ohio, might be able to return to Washington by winning the state’s other Senate seat this fall. 

Brown likely faces Sen. Jon Husted, R-Ohio. Gov. Mike DeWine appointed Husted to the Senate to succeed Vance when he left the Senate and became vice president. A former Ohio lieutenant governor, Husted has never campaigned statewide for Senate.

This is why Democrats are focused on your pocketbook and health care in 2026.

‘We’re going to get it done by getting it on some piece of legislation, or we’re going to get it done by marching through into the midterms and winning,’ predicted Sen. Amy Klobuchar, D-Minn.

And the biggest factor may be who’s not on the ballot this year: President Donald Trump. Republicans saw examples of that in 2018 and 2022. Voters often see midterms as a presidential report card. 

That’s possibly working against Republicans as they attempt to cling to power in the House. History is against the GOP in 2026. The President’s party customarily loses about 26 seats in the first midterm. But House Republicans aim to run on their accomplishments.

‘So far, House Republicans have passed 413 bills. This year, we’ve codified 68 of President Trump’s America First executive orders,’ said House Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La. ‘We look forward to continuing all that work when we return in 2026, and we go into an epic midterm election cycle.

Epic is right.

Republicans tried to erect a political heat shield to deflect midterm norms. Republicans drew new, GOP-friendly districts in Texas and Missouri. But those districts are a lighter shade of red. That could dilute the GOP base vote as these districts as battlegrounds.

‘We have to make sure that we’ve got an edge. This is a big deal, and we’ve gotta be politically smart. And I hate to say this, for a change,’ Rep. Jeff Van Drew, R-N.J. said on Fox News Channel. 

Democrats countered the Republican maneuvering with redistricting of their own. Particularly in California.

‘Our focus is on the swing districts, the purple districts across the country,’ said Rep. Suzan DelBene, D-Wash., head of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee (DCCC). ‘It’s why we expanded our map of offensive opportunities.’

But it’s risky if Democrats run candidates who are too progressive for certain seats.

Democrats plan investigations and subpoenas of the Trump administration if they win the House. One Democrat is eyeing the Pentagon.

‘When we take back the House in 2026, every single one of their actions is going to be under an MRI. We’re going to evaluate them up against the laws of war. And they will be held accountable for violating those laws of war,’ Rep. Jake Auchincloss, D-Mass., told ABC News.

But House control could hinge on the Supreme Court. Around 20 House seats could shift toward the GOP if the high court unwinds part of the Voting Rights Act. That law gave Democrats an edge in multiple districts populated by minorities. 

A ruling requiring new districts could drastically upset the balance of power for this year’s House contests.