The State Department told Fox News that it is aware of reports Wednesday that two American tourists were attacked in a popular European seaside destination that local media and police said left one person dead and another wounded.

The alleged attack happened early Wednesday in Cascais, Portugal, a coastal resort town about 20 miles west of Lisbon. 

Video taken by Reuters showed blood stains on a sidewalk, where a stabbing had taken place during an attempted robbery, according to media reports.

A State Department spokesperson told Fox News Digital that the agency takes seriously its commitment to protect U.S. citizens abroad and stands ready to provide consular assistance. 

‘One of the young men died at the scene and the other suffered injuries to his face and arms and was taken to [a] hospital,’ the Portugal Resident newspaper cited the Lisbon Metropolitan Command police force as saying.

The attack was carried out by three suspects who fled the scene in a vehicle, the newspaper added.

Further details about the incident and the identities of the victims were not immediately available. 

This is a developing story. Please check back for updates. 

Fox News’ Nick Kalman contributed to this report.

President Donald Trump on Wednesday signed a directive ordering the Department of War to keep paying U.S. troops despite the ongoing government shutdown, bypassing Congress after lawmakers failed to reach a funding deal for weeks.

The White House said the move is necessary to protect ‘military readiness’ as the budget standoff stretched into its third week. The order, issued as National Security Presidential Memorandum-8 (NSPM-8), directs the department to use available fiscal year 2026 funds to cover military pay and allowances.

‘The current appropriations lapse presents a serious and unacceptable threat to military readiness and the ability of our Armed Forces to protect and defend our Nation,’ the memo states.

Trump cited his Article II powers as commander-in-chief in issuing the order, which covers active-duty troops and reservists on service orders. The directive instructs officials to use only funds that are legally tied to military pay, in coordination with the Office of Management and Budget (OMB).

More than one million service members were expected to miss paychecks starting this week if Congress didn’t act. Trump’s move marks a break from past administrations, which often waited for bipartisan deals instead of intervening directly.

Rep. Nick LaLota, R-N.Y., told Fox News Digital that ‘Trump’s mid-month action was welcome news to the military community. But now that same community is anxious about what happens at the end of the month, where mortgages and rents and car payments all become due.’

‘Democrats were wrong to try to use troop pay as leverage to accomplish their political goals. And it would be wrong, it would be just as wrong, for a Republican to hope that that lack of pay would be a catalyst to get Democrats to acquiesce,’ LaLota said. ‘[Trump is] protecting the troops when Congress won’t.’

The Pentagon has not said which specific accounts will be used. Reports from Roll Call and Reuters indicate the administration has identified roughly $8 billion in unobligated defense funds as potential options.

Critics warn the move could face legal challenges under the Antideficiency Act, which bars spending money not appropriated by Congress. But White House officials argue the law permits spending that has a ‘reasonable, logical relationship’ to the purpose of the original funds: in this case, keeping troops paid.

The directive follows Trump’s Oct. 11 order to keep troop payments flowing during the shutdown. The White House’s latest move Wednesday with Congress still in gridlock could shape government shutdowns for generations to come.

Fox News Digital’s Elizabeth Elkind contributed to this report.

President Trump continues to be hailed as a global peacemaker for freeing the Hamas hostages and brokering a ceasefire between Israel and the terrorist group.

By assembling a coalition of countries to stop the two-year-old war, the president melded threats and diplomacy to end – at least for now – the bloody conflict that began with the heinous Hamas massacre of Oct. 7. 

Despite warning signs that Hamas may be unwilling to surrender its weapons, the guns have gone silent and the moving videos of freed hostages embracing their loved ones keep coming. 

Trump has drawn praise from leading Democrats (the Clintons), virtually all the media (which he thanked), and the likes of Jimmy Kimmel, James Carville and Bill Maher.

Then he came home.

Government employees aren’t being paid under the two-week-old shutdown that Trump engineered, in the sense that he refused to seriously negotiate with Democrats worried about the prospect of soaring Obamacare premiums.

The president, as he threatened to do, has cut or frozen almost $28 billion for projects largely based in Democratic-led cities and states, according to a New York Times analysis. That includes giant transportation projects in New York and Chicago.

Trump imposed a new round of layoffs on the Department of Education, targeting the Office of Civil Rights and the Special Education unit – which, following earlier firings, will be down to about six staffers, a 95% reduction since he took office.

He refused to take questions from ‘ABC fake news,’ but called on one of its female reporters, turned to a chuckling JD Vance and said, ‘I just like to watch her talk.’ He then said, ‘Good job. Thank you, darling,’ ignoring what she had asked.

What a stark contrast.

Why is the man capable of such steely leadership abroad insisting on being such a divisive figure at home?

He fervently believes that keeping an iron grip on his MAGA base is how he got elected and crucial to his political health. When Democrats attack his actions, it thrills most of his Republican supporters.

There were also those two horrifying assassination attempts last year.

Trump often complains that he is a victim – of relentlessly unfair media coverage, left-wingers calling him a Nazi and a dictator and lawfare investigations that produced four indictments against him.

As he sees it, he is counterpunching – simple as that. And he definitely has a major point.

Of course, no president has ever ordered the Justice Department to prosecute his political opponents, as with the indictments of James Comey and Letitia James. That shatters any remaining notion of DOJ independence.

Trump even took issue with a glowing Time cover story on the ceasefire – ‘His Triumph’ – because he didn’t like the picture, in which the lighting washed out part of his hair. 

And then there’s the handling of scandals.

One case of blatant partisanship, on both sides, is the Politico disclosure of group chats by Young Republican groups that drip with racist, anti-Semitic and violent content.

In 2,900 pages of leaked documents, the participants – all fervent Trump supporters – described Black people as monkeys and ‘the watermelon people.’ They talked about sending their opponents to the gas chambers that would reflect ‘the Hitler aesthetic,’ where they would be killed. A woman who is New York’s national committee member said: ‘I’m ready to watch people burn now.’

These are mainly not college kids, but party operatives, government staffers and one state senator, who under the rules, must be under the age of 40. Three participants have been ousted from their political jobs.

The national federation, which has 15,000 members, said: ‘we are appalled by the vile and inexcusable language … Such behavior is disgraceful, unbecoming of any Republican.’

I bring this up because of the reaction at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue.

A White House spokesperson told Politico that ‘Only an activist, left-wing reporter would desperately try to tie President Trump into a story about a random groupchat he has no affiliation with.’ To be sure, this cannot be blamed on the president in any way.

But, it does reflect how fringe views have infiltrated at least a small minority of younger party members.

What’s striking is the way in which the vice president dismissed the ugliness. 

Vance focused instead on Jay Jones, the Democratic candidate for Virginia attorney general, who was revealed to have texted a colleague in the legislature about his fantasies of killing the then-speaker, Todd Gilbert. ‘Two bullets to the head,’ Jones wrote. Chilling.

‘This is far worse than anything said in a college group chat,’ Vance said, ‘and the guy who said it could become the AG of Virginia.’

Trump also weighed in, saying that Jones wanted to see a ‘Republican legislator in Virginia shot in the head and to see his children murdered… pretty amazing.’

Now let me say it is beyond disgustingly pathetic that top Virginia Democrats haven’t pulled their support for Jones, and that he hasn’t been driven out of the race. It’s indefensible.

But it’s also a classic case of whataboutism, with each party’s leaders – there are some exceptions – focusing on the other side’s misconduct. 

Vance went a bit further yesterday, saying, ‘the reality is that kids do stupid things. Especially young boys, they tell edgy, offensive jokes.’ Again, they’re not just boys.

In the Middle East, Trump was trying to bring combatants together. In America, he is the chief combatant, doing whatever it takes to wield and expand his power.

Many politicians strive for unity, if only to win more converts to their side. That has never been Trump’s style, dating back to his days as a real estate developer and then as a candidate. His default setting is to fight.

Right now, Bibi Netanyahu loves Donald Trump. So do those who voted for him in a sweeping election victory. But the president has shown little interest in winning over his detractors.

It has been a turbulent yet inspiring year for Koreans. A declaration of martial law last winter plunged the nation into uncertainty, but what followed was not chaos – it was the reaffirmation of a people’s unshakable faith in democracy. 

The ‘Revolution of Light,’ culminating in the peaceful election of a new government, reminded the world that the Republic of Korea’s constitutional order rests not on the will of any ruler, but on the collective conscience of its citizens. 

Some observers abroad have mistaken the intensity of Korea’s political transition for fragility or deviation from democratic norms. In truth, such intensity is the very pulse of democracy itself. Our debates are often fierce, our elections passionately contested, yet our institutions endure. That resilience – born of experience, sacrifice, and civic discipline – is Korea’s greatest democratic asset.

Since taking office, President Lee Jae Myung has acted swiftly to reinforce the foundations of democracy at home and to renew the Republic of Korea’s partnership with the United States. In word and deed, President Lee has recognized the vital importance of the ROK-U.S. alliance and strengthened pragmatic cooperation with President Donald Trump, and put our interlocking security and economic objectives, and shared values at the heart of his agenda. 

This approach reflects Korea’s confidence as a mature democracy and responsible global partner. President Lee views the alliance not merely as a legacy of the past, but as a living partnership, adapting to new challenges – from regional security and economic cooperation to advanced future technology.

This vision was clear at their August summit, where the two leaders spoke with candor and mutual respect, underscoring their shared determination to build what they called a ‘Future-Oriented Comprehensive Strategic Alliance.’ President Trump’s remark, ‘We’ve gotten along very well,’ captured the new tone of trust shaping this alliance. 

President Lee and the whole of the Korean government have meticulously ensured that even as we focus on restoring our democratic system, we not flail for one second in our responsibilities as friend and ally.  This makes certain commentaries – portraying Korea’s new leadership as undemocratic, illegitimate or even hostile to religion – so bewildering and saddening. Such claims, often repeated in online forums and even on opinion pages, bear little resemblance to facts and hinder our joint efforts for real solutions. 

Let’s set the record straight: The government of the Republic of Korea was democratically elected. President Lee prevailed in a fair and transparent vote recognized around the world for meeting the highest election standards. Neither Korea’s independent judiciary nor its opposition parties objected to the result. 

Since then, the principles of the rule of law have been scrupulously observed. Ongoing legal proceedings concerning the previous administration’s declaration of martial law and other alleged abuses of power are being conducted by independent prosecutors appointed by the National Assembly – not by the Presidential Office. These legal proceedings demonstrate the rule of law, not the erosion of it.

Equally unfounded are recent claims that the new government is ‘anti-Christian.’ Such narratives appear to arise from ongoing investigations into bribery allegations involving church funds, but for people familiar with Korea, the notion of prejudice is demonstrably absurd.

Christianity, along with Buddhism and other faiths, has played an integral role in Korea’s social and cultural life. Christian missionaries helped establish many of the nation’s leading educational and medical institutions, countless Christians sacrificed their lives for Korea’s independence from Japanese colonial rule. 

Today, a large share of Korean population identifies as Christian, with millions of both Protestants and Catholics contributing to the fabric of Korean society. These individuals, like people of all faiths, continue to play a vital role in civic life, community service and the pursuit of national unity.

President Lee himself is a man of Christian faith. He and his administration have the deepest respect for freedom of religion and expression, which our Constitution enshrines. They, like all Koreans, are unambiguously proud of the legacy of Christianity and believe freedom of religion in the Republic of Korea rivals that of any place in the world.

To portray legitimate, lawful efforts to restore democratic order as a campaign against Christianity is not only misleading, but it undermines Christian legacy and respect for religious freedoms that are central to Korea’s democratic values.

As Koreans committed to democracy, vigorous debate and even disagreement are more than welcomed. It is what the new Korean government strove so vigorously to safeguard these past four months. But mischaracterizing all that has occurred does nothing to advance mutual understanding or produce real solutions for the Koreans and Americans alike.

The Republic of Korea and the United States have sustained our alliance through eight decades of bravery and sacrifice. Today’s challenges require nothing less. Under President Lee’s government, Americans can be assured that they have a friend and partner who shares core values and is committed to the success of both of our nations. 

Look no further than their summit on Aug. 25 where the two leaders ushered in the era of a ‘Future-oriented Comprehensive Strategic Alliance’ – one that looks confidently toward a more secure, democratic and prosperous future for both nations. Korea’s story is not one of uncertainty but of conviction: that a free people, tested by history, can renew both their democracy and their alliance with courage and grace. 

When U.S. forces launched strikes against Iranian military targets in June, critics warned it could ignite a regional inferno — even the start of World War III. Four months later, the Middle East is quieter than at any point in years. Iranian proxies have scaled back attacks, Gulf tensions have cooled, and Washington has shifted attention toward the Western Hemisphere.

The unexpected calm is raising a new question: Did decisive U.S. action restore deterrence — or has Washington simply been lucky?

Those who favor a more forceful U.S. foreign policy counted Iran’s lack of a response as a win for their frame of mind — and a loss for restrainers. They now credit the strikes with bringing about a period of relative peace that culminated in a fragile ceasefire between Israel and Hamas this week.

Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene, R-Ga., publicly broke from her longtime support of President Donald Trump after the strikes.

‘Six months in and here we are turning back on the campaign promises, and we bombed Iran on behalf of Israel,’ she said on Newsmax at the time.

‘We’re entering a nuclear war, World War Three, because the entire world is going to erupt. And you know what, the people that are cheering it on right now, their tune is going to drastically change the minute we start seeing flag-draped coffins on the nightly news.’

On Monday, she praised Trump for brokering the peace deal between Israel and Hamas. ‘Blessed are the peacemakers! May healing begin for all.’ 

‘You’ve put every U.S. troop and embassy in the region at risk and squandered America’s diplomatic leverage — though you’ll likely think you’ve strengthened it,’ said Adam Weinstein, deputy director of the Middle East Program at the Quincy Institute, at the time.

Sen. Chris Murphy, D-Conn., claimed the strike ‘put the United States on a path to a war in the Middle East that the country does not want, the law does not allow, and our security does not demand.’

Rep. Thomas Massie, R-Ky., was even more blunt. ‘It was a good week for the neocons in the military-industrial complex who want war all the time,’ he said on CBS’ Face the Nation.

Four months later, those who once warned of a spiral toward World War III are facing an uncomfortable reality: the region is largely quiet.

‘Those who warned of World War III before the U.S. and Israeli strikes on Iran fundamentally misunderstood both the nature of deterrence and the regime in Tehran,’ said Mark Dubowitz, CEO of the Foundation for Defense of Democracies.

‘Strength and resolve don’t invite escalation — they prevent it. What we’ve seen in recent months is a return to deterrence through escalation dominance: Iran, Hezbollah, Hamas, and other American enemies are recalibrating precisely because the United States finally imposed real costs on the Islamic Republic.’

Dubowitz said years of Western restraint emboldened Iran. ‘For years, Western policymakers indulged in a fantasy that restraint would produce stability,’ he said. ‘It did the opposite. Tehran read our de-escalation as weakness and kept pushing.’

‘Everybody who said that a strike on Iran would be a disaster was wrong,’ said Matthew Kroenig, vice president of the Atlantic Council’s Scowcroft Center and a former Pentagon strategist. ‘These fears about Iranian retaliation and region-wide war were exaggerated. Iran doesn’t want a major war with the United States, the greatest superpower on earth that could end its regime. Instead, Iran engaged in some kind of token retaliation, and the whole thing died down.’

Trump’s authorization of the strikes was not a departure from his ‘America First’ principles, as Greene suggested, but a continuation of them.

‘When it comes to hitting an adversary hard, Trump has always been open to that kind of short, sharp, decisive use of force to achieve a clear objective,’ Kroenig said.

Those in the restraint camp say they don’t count Trump’s decision as a total loss for their viewpoint. They argue that predictions of a wider war were based on a different scenario — one that Trump ultimately avoided.

‘The prediction that this could lead to a wider war was for the scenario in which the U.S. would join Israel in a larger military campaign against Iran with the intent of regime change,’ said Trita Parsi, co-founder of the Quincy Institute. ‘This is not what Trump opted for. He clearly signaled to Tehran before the strikes where he would strike to ensure that the locations would be vacated and that there would be no casualties. He also signaled his intent to only strike these sites and be done with it. This significantly reduced the risk of a larger escalation.’

Rosemary Kelanic of Defense Priorities acknowledged that the strikes were ‘not a win for restraint’ in principle, and though the U.S. felt few repercussions, it was still a gamble.

‘I think it’s really easy to learn the wrong lesson from this, which is, all we have to do is go in and bomb for 45 minutes and then everyone will back down,’ she said. ‘Most of the time, U.S. military force doesn’t actually produce the outcomes that we want.’

Adam Weinstein said the operation came at the cost of diplomacy, noting that the strikes took place in the midst of ongoing negotiations with Tehran over its nuclear program.

‘The strikes were a setback on diplomacy with Iran,’ he said. ‘They negatively affected the world’s ability to ensure that Iran doesn’t develop a nuclear capability. It essentially destroyed trust between Iran and the international community.’

Former President Barack Obama endorsed former Democratic Rep. Abigail Spanberger in Virginia’s governor race, releasing a pair of ads attacking Republicans. 

The contest between Spanberger, a former CIA officer, and Virginia Lt. Gov. Winsome Earle-Sears is one of only two governor races in the U.S. this November. The contests are viewed as political bellwethers ahead of the 2026 midterm elections. 

‘Virginia’s elections are some of the most important in the country this year. We know Republicans will keep attacking abortion rights and the rights of women. That’s why having the right governor matters, and I’m proud to endorse Abigail Spanberger,’ Obama said in one of the ads, titled ‘Protect Our Rights.’ 

‘In Congress, Abigail held Republicans accountable and fought to protect voting rights and abortion rights,’ Obama said. ‘But it won’t happen without you. Every vote counts, so turn out. Virginia, Abigail Spanberger is the best choice for governor.’

Earle-Sears’ press secretary Peyton Vogel told Fox News Digital in reaction to the ads that, ‘Abigail Spanberger is scared, and it shows.’

‘After losing support across Virginia, she’s leaning on liberal elites to try and save her collapsing campaign. This is a desperate play from a candidate who’s run out of support, out of ideas, and out of time. Voters see through it, and that’s why Winsome Earle-Sears is surging,’ Vogel added.

In the other ad, Obama said, ‘Republican policies are raising costs on working families so [that] billionaires can get massive tax cuts.’

‘As governor, Abigail will stand up for Virginia families,’ Obama said. ‘She’ll work to build an economy that works for everyone, not just big corporations and the wealthy.’ 

Earle-Sears most recently criticized Spanberger on her X account Wednesday night for her reaction to the texting scandal surrounding Democratic Virginia attorney general candidate Jay Jones. 

The scandal involving Jones came to light earlier this month when the National Review published text message exchanges between Jones and his former state legislative colleague, Republican House Delegate Carrie Coyner. In the exchanges, Jones appears to call for violence against then-Virginia House of Delegates Speaker Todd Gilbert, his wife, Jennifer, and their children. 

‘Jay Jones expressed his desire to murder a dad and his two young boys — and to see police officers get shot,’ Earle-Sears said. ‘Abigail Spanberger still supports him.’ 

Fox News Digital reported this week that Spanberger’s campaign store continues to sell merchandise co-branded with the rest of the statewide Democratic ticket — which includes Jones. 

Fox News’ Paul Steinhauser, Rachel Wolf and Charles Creitz contributed to this report. 

Senate Democrats wanted an equal say in crafting spending bills before the shutdown and are about to get a chance to do so, but they’re unlikely to support Republicans’ latest effort to jump-start the government funding process.

The Senate on Thursday is set to move through a procedural hurdle on the annual defense spending bill, which, among other things, would ensure that military service members would get their paychecks.

Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D., teed up the bill earlier this week as the shutdown raged on to pressure Senate Democrats to make good on their desire to fund the government in a bipartisan manner, and in the hopes of getting the appropriations process moving again. 

‘We can actually get the appropriations process going forward,’ Thune said. ‘So that’s in the works.’

And in the Senate, given the 60-vote filibuster threshold, spending bills are prime examples of the many pieces of legislation that have to be bipartisan to pass. But Senate Democrats seemed unwilling to go all in on supporting the defense bill, and like the Republicans’ plan to reopen the government, appear ready to block Thune’s effort.

They want to know exactly what Republicans plan to put on the floor later on, despite the vote on Thursday afternoon being designed to give lawmakers the chance to move forward with at least one of several spending bills that must be passed to fund the government.

‘We have to see what they’re going to put on the floor,’ Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., said. ‘They haven’t told us yet.’

Republicans are also eyeing at least three other spending bills to attach to the defense appropriations bill, including legislation that would fund the departments of Labor, Commerce, Transportation, Health and Human Services, and Housing and Urban Development.

Sen. Mike Rounds, R-S.D., is a member of the Senate Appropriations Committee and appears ready for the reality that Democrats would block the defense bill and broader spending package.

‘You have to start with the defense, and then you can add the other ones to it, but once again, it takes agreement by our Dem colleagues that want to move that forward,’ he said. ‘I’m not sure that we’ve got the votes to do that yet.’

There is a trust deficit between Senate Democrats and Republicans from earlier this year when the GOP passed President Donald Trump’s request to claw back billions in funding for foreign aid and NPR and PBS, in addition to continued actions by Office of Management and Budget Director Russ Vought to withhold or cancel funding for Democratic priorities.

Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse, D-R.I., told Fox News Digital after Senate Democrats met behind closed doors on Wednesday that there had been no indication from Republicans there would be ‘bipartisan cooperation or any willingness to put any guardrails around what they plan to do.’

‘I think the stage we’re at is that we’ve been shown nothing,’ he said. ‘So there’s no reason to vote for it yet.’

‘I think what was needed is a larger agreement about how the appropriations process is moving forward, so it’s clear that our priorities are respected,’ he continued.

However, pairing the defense bill could grease the wheels for some in the Democratic caucus.

‘No, not unless it’s paired with [the Labor and HHS bill],’ Sen. Angus King, I-Maine, said.

Thune’s move to reignite the appropriations process, an exercise that played out in the Senate in early August when lawmakers advanced a trio of funding bills ahead of the shutdown deadline, is part of Republicans’ broader desire to fund the government the old-fashioned way, rather than through a colossal omnibus spending package.

It’s an exercise, however, that hasn’t been fully completed since the 1990s.

Sen. Eric Schmitt, R-Mo., noted to Fox News Digital that a major part of selecting a new leader for the Senate GOP was returning to what’s known as regular order, or passing spending to fund the government.

He argued that when Schumer ran the Senate as majority leader, the upper chamber was often resigned to passing ‘these omnibus bills that were developed in the, you know, middle of the night with four people.’

‘We’re not interested in that. So we want to get bills on the floor, and they’ve got to move in a bipartisan way, right? So I think this is something that I would hope Democrats would support, too,’ he said. ‘But if their mentality is at this point, you know, just oppose everything Republicans want to do, it’s pathological, and I don’t have any advice for them except seek help.’

Republicans are still trying to reopen the government and plan to put the House-passed continuing resolution (CR) on the floor again Thursday for a 10th time. And just like many times before, it is expected to fail.

When asked if he believed that the shutdown could transform into lawmakers passing spending bills one-by-one to reopen the government, Thune said, ‘I certainly hope not.’