Raw Story

France could send troops to Greenland to defend against Donald Trump's threat to take control of the Danish territory, according to a high-ranking official.

French foreign minister Jean-Noël Barrot told Sud Radio that France had discussed troop deployment with Denmark, which did not wish to proceed with the idea, reported Politico.

"If Denmark calls for help, France will be there," Barrot said. "The European borders are sovereign whether it's north, south, east and west ... nobody can allow themselves to mess around with our borders."

Danish prime minister Mette Frederiksen is currently on a quick tour of European capitals to discuss how to respond to Trump's threats to claim control of the massive Arctic island, and he will meet with NATO secretary-general Mark Rutte in Brussels after talking with German chancellor Olaf Scholz and French president Emmanuel Macron.

Denmark, France and Germany are all members of the NATO alliance, and so is the U.S., although Trump has attacked the organization over defense spending since his first term in the White House.

Barrot said that other foreign ministers from the European Union, when they gathered this week in Brussels, had expressed "very strong support" for Denmark in the dispute and "were ready to consider" sending troops if necessary, but he doubted that would be necessary.

"It won't happen," Barrot said. "People don't invade EU territories."

One of President Donald Trump's Day One executive orders that flew under the radar is provoking significant pushback from Congress — including from at least one House Republican.

The Atlantic reported Tuesday that Trump is now apparently violating Article I, Section 8 of the U.S. Constitution with an executive order pausing the disbursement of federal funds already appropriated by Congress. On January 20 — the same day Trump pardoned January 6 insurrectionists and attempted to repeal birthright citizenship — Trump issued an executive order entitled "Unleashing American Energy."

That order includes a section dubbed "Terminating the Green New Deal," which freezes hundreds of billions of dollars in funding for various infrastructure projects launched during former President Joe Biden's administration. However, that money was already approved via the passage of the Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) and the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law, which members of Congress were counting on for jobs in their districts.

READ MORE: Trump wants to 'impound' money appropriated by Congress — but this 50 year-old law could get in the way

Rep. Don Bacon (R-NB), who represents a purple district in the Omaha area, told the Atlantic that Trump's executive order was "alarming," particularly for his constituents, who were counting on $73 million from the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law to upgrade Omaha's airport.

"You just can’t determine what laws you want to execute and what you don’t," Bacon said, adding that executive orders from presidents representing both parties have "gotten out of hand."

"“You can’t change the law,” he added. “I think Republicans should stay true to that notion.”

According to the Atlantic, Bacon called the White House after that executive order was signed, which later prompted the White House Office of Management and Budget (OMB) to issue a memo clarifying the scope of the "Green New Deal" section of the executive order in question. The Nebraska Republican said he was told the order mainly applied to the IRA provision pertaining to electric vehicle mandates, and was not a blanket cancellation of federal appropriations.

READ MORE: MAGA Republicans would give Trump 'unprecedented power' to control the federal budget

But Rep. Rosa DeLauro (D-Conn.), who is the ranking member on the House Appropriations Committee, wasn't convinced, saying she believed "everything is at risk." She flatly called the executive order "illegal," and characterized the president's move to freeze federal funds as "stealing."

"It’s creating chaos,” she continued. “I honestly don’t think the people who are dealing with this know what they are doing.”

During his confirmation hearing last week, OMB Director-designate Russell Vought (who was a leading architect of the far-right authoritarian Project 2025 playbook) refused to say whether he would allow Trump to violate the Impoundment Control Act of 1974, which prevents presidents from denying the disbursement of federal funds already appropriated by Congress. He refused to say under oath whether Trump would abide by the law, telling the Senate Budget Committee: "For 200 years, presidents had the ability to spend less than an appropriation if they could do it for less."

Trump's executive order may not survive muster in the federal courts if the administration is sued over the impoundment issue. His executive order denying 14th Amendment protections to the children of undocumented immigrants was recently paused by U.S. District Judge John Cougheneur, who called it "blatantly unconstitutional."

READ MORE: 'We need to be radical': Trump's potential chief of staff wants 'post-Constitutional' gov't

CNN's Daniel Dale declared that White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt employed a "classic spinmeister tactic" when she failed to directly answer questions about Trump's sudden freeze on all federal grants and loans.

At issue was whether Americans who rely on federal assistance for things like food and medicine would lose their benefits.

The confusion began after "The Office of Management and Budget sent a vaguely worded two-page memo to all federal agencies Monday night directing them to 'temporarily pause all activities related to obligation or disbursement of all Federal financial assistance.'"

Anchor Brianna Keilar addressed Dale after Tuesday's White House press conference.

ALSO READ: Top GOPer's ‘most immediate’ priority for new committee includes probing a MAGA conspiracy

"I want to talk about a very big issue that is going to affect a lot of Americans, and that is the recent pause by the White House on these federal grants and loans," Keilar said.

"Karoline Leavitt tried to say repeatedly that she had answered this question — that direct assistance like Social Security, Medicare, food stamps — if you're getting that direct assistance or that direct check from the government, it's not going to be affected. But there's a lot of groups that you would expect — the nonprofits — [like] Meals On Wheels, Head Start. She wouldn't answer that question. And there's also so much other federal funding that goes to nonprofits that goes to local and state entities. So, not directly to individuals, but to entities that provide that essential aid, then to individuals that's held up. What did you think about what you heard?"

Dale responded, "Yeah, I think it's a classic spinmeister tactic saying, 'I answered that,' when you haven't answered it and apparently can't answer it right away. There's considerable uncertainty around the country among nonprofits of various kinds, organizations of various kinds, and the people who get help from those organizations."

Dale continued, "So, they may not get direct, individual payments straight from the federal government, but their lives, their situations, their living situations, in some cases their food and transportation situations, are very much dependent on the aid that comes through an intermediary organization. And we still do not have clarity on what is happening with the funding that usually goes to those entities."

Watch the clip below via CNN.

The congressional Republican retreat at Donald Trump's golf resort in south Florida is offering a financial windfall to the president as returns to office, according to a report Tuesday.

GOP leaders have huddled at the Miami-area Trump National Doral Golf Club to hash out details of a plan that House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-LA) hopes will get the president's agenda passed by Memorial Day. But the president stands to gain financially no matter what happens in those political discussions, reported the Washington Post.

"Holding the congressional retreat at a Trump property threatens to ignite the same kind of criticism that dogged Trump’s first term: that he has sought to personally profit off his public position in part by maneuvering elected officials, Secret Service agents and others in his orbit to stay at his properties, at times on the taxpayers’ dime," the Post reported.

"Trump’s critics have long said doing so is a violation of the emoluments clause of the Constitution, which aims to ensure that the public interest trumps personal gain."

Nearly all of the GOP conference's 218 members are attending the three-day event, along with some of their family members and staffers. This year is the first time House Republicans have spent money directly at a property owned by the president.

“Tell me that being here in Doral doesn’t beat the heck out of being in Washington, D.C., in January,” said Rep. Mario Diaz-Balart (R-FL), kicking off Monday's event with Trump before the president returned to the capital.

ALSO READ: Top GOPer's ‘most immediate’ priority for new committee includes probing a MAGA conspiracy

The White House declined to comment on the story, but an official told the paper on the condition of anonymity that organizers tried to limit staffers staying at Doral to essential personnel and said rates paid for the rooms were within the bounds of federal travel per diem rates.

But the retreat will likely revive concerns about self-dealing that hovered over Trump's first term, the Post reported.

“The exorbitant rates charged to the Secret Service and agents’ frequent stays at Trump-owned properties raise significant concerns about the former president’s self-dealing and may have resulted in a taxpayer-funded windfall for former president Trump’s struggling businesses,” said then-Rep. Carolyn B. Maloney (D-NY) wrote to the Secret Service director in 2022.

Republicans control the U.S. Senate by a 53-47 margin, but the newest member of the Senate Republican Conference may prove to be a thorn in President Donald Trump's side over the next four years.

On Tuesday, the Christian Science Monitor published an interview with Sen. John Curtis (R-UT), who was recently elected to replace the outgoing Sen. Mitt Romney (R-UT) after he retired from politics. Curtis already made waves despite being a senator for less than a month, after he made it clear that former Rep. Matt Gaetz (R-FL) would not have his support to lead the Department of Justice. He's since said that Trump is "far better served" with former Florida Attorney General Pam Bondi as his second attorney general nominee.

Because Republicans can only afford four defections, Curtis is expected to play a significant role in whether some of Trump's more controversial Cabinet appointments are ultimately confirmed by the full Senate.

While the Utah Republican ultimately voted in favor of confirming former Fox News host Pete Hegseth to be the next defense secretary, he's been cagey about whether he would back Director of National Intelligence-designate Tulsi Gabbard, whose confirmation hearing in the Senate Intelligence Committee is scheduled for later this week.

READ MORE: 'She lied to us': Ex-Gabbard staffers speak out about 'insane' meeting with Syrian dictator

Hegseth was only confirmed after Vice President JD Vance had to cast the tie-breaking vote, with Sens. Susan Collins (R-ME), Lisa Murkowski (R-AK) and former Senate GOP leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) voting no. If those three remain opposed to Trump's most contentious Cabinet appointments, Curtis' vote could prove impactful in deciding the makeup of the Trump administration.

"I view myself as somebody who has commitment to my constitutional responsibility – and I’m not a rubber stamp," Curtis told the Monitor.

The outlet noted that like his predecessor, Curtis is a Mormon, and that members of the Mormon church are typically warmer toward immigrants than other Republicans. In a January op-ed for the Hill, Curtis recalled one instance in which he watched a migrant get arrested by Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents, and argued that Trump's mass deportation agenda was not being "wielded with a proper portion of compassion."

“I saw in his eyes both his plight and my role in trying to fix this human crisis,” Curtis wrote. “No words were spoken, yet the look in his eyes seemed to be asking me the question, ‘How can you be letting this go on?’ He was the one in handcuffs, yet I felt as though I was the one who had failed.”

READ MORE: 'Terrified': Senator describes death threats lobbed at Republicans who opposed Hegseth

Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-NY) announced Tuesday that New York Attorney General Letitia James will "go to court right away" to challenge the federal aid freeze instituted by President Donald Trump's Office of Management and Budget.

A White House budget office memo called for a freeze on federal dollars being spent by 5 p.m. on Tuesday. It effectively puts a hold on multiple government operations until the agencies can ensure they comply with the removal of "DEI (diversity equity and inclusion) woke gender ideology and the Green New Deal."

ALSO READ: Get ready for 'The Great Revenge' as Trump’s Orwellian America takes shape

"This memorandum requires Federal agencies to identify and review all Federal financial assistance programs and supporting activities consistent with the President's policies and requirements," the memo says.

Schumer called the freeze "lawless, dangerous, destructive, cruel. It's illegal, it's unconstitutional."

The move will put James across the court from Trump, or his representatives, again. Last year, she successfully sued him and the Trump Organization for inflating asset values to obtain loans and deflating them for tax benefits.