EXCLUSIVE: Rep. Nancy Mace, R-S.C., is calling on the federal government to use artificial intelligence technology to better secure the southwestern border.

During an interview with Fox News Digital, Mace suggested the rapidly advancing technology could be used to enhance border patrol agents’ monitoring capabilities as border officials continue to see a record number of illegal aliens attempting to cross into the U.S. through Mexico.

On one front, she said, AI could help better collect ‘biometrics of everyone that comes across the border, especially when we’re talking about by land and illegally.

‘And if you’re using AI to find their biometrics in a database or multiple databases, I believe it can be done in a much swifter fashion,’ the congresswoman explained. ‘I think that that kind of technology could be used when you’re driving through the border.

‘For example, you don’t have to just stop and take a picture. … Using AI, using the advances in photography and video, AI could actually help identify who those individuals are as well.

‘There’s just a lot of opportunity there to do that, especially with people crossing illegally into our country, when you’re using biometrics and comparing it against a … terrorism watchlist. That’s really important. I think AI can make that those matches happen a lot faster, too,’ Mace added.

Mace said she recently spoke with border officials about how their existing biometrics technology is being used to keep illegal immigration under control and argued that AI’s rapidly advancing technology would be able to build on that.

‘I actually met with border patrol this week and looked at what they’re doing from a biometrics and cyber kind of standpoint as well,’ Mace said. ‘And any border patrol folks that will meet with us and talk to us about technology, we want to have that meeting. We want to talk to them, want to make sure that they have support.’

While conceding that conversation dealt with technology more broadly, Mace added, ‘When you’re talking about technology, AI inevitably is going to have to be involved. If you’re using multiple databases or multiple galleries to search for someone’s biometrics when they’re coming through the border … AI will make that process better, faster.’

However, she also issued a broad warning about the technology’s downsides.

‘We do use AI in different agencies here at the federal level,’ Mace said. ‘There’s some really great opportunity to find abuse and waste and fraud in the federal government. But, at the same time, you know, it can be abused, and that’s where we want to make sure that consumers are protected.’

WASHINGTON, D.C. – Congressional lawmakers agreed that AI needs federal oversight, but several were skeptical that President Biden or Vice President Kamala Harris were capable of leading the effort.

‘I wouldn’t trust Joe Biden and Kamala Harris to be able to successfully operate an iPhone, much less be a key focal point of AI policy,’ Florida Rep. Matt Gaetz told Fox News. ‘That said, there are some leading minds in the Democratic Party here on the Hill who I think are evaluating these issues with great thoughtfulness: Ted Lieu, Ro Khanna.’

Wisconsin Rep. Mike Gallagher told Fox News: ‘Neither the president nor the vice president should run AI. It’s a very complicated subject.’

WHO DO LAWMAKERS WANT TO RUN AI FOR THE WHITE HOUSE? WATCH HERE:

Biden and Harris met tech executives earlier this month to discuss potential risks and opportunities regarding AI. This week, the White House announced new initiatives to improve AI research and development, study its impact on the education system and invite public comment on AI-related priorities to ensure ‘equity.’

The Biden administration, Capitol Hill lawmakers and AI developers are beginning to come to a consensus that AI needs regulations to manage risks. But who should run point is still a point of contention.

Rep. Frederica Wilson, a Democrat, said Biden and Harris should lead the White House’s AI efforts as a team.

‘No one has a real handle on it and no one has the right prescription, so you’re going to need both of them involved in AI,’ she told Fox News.

But Rep. Tim Burchett disagreed.

‘We need to address it, but those two are not the ones,’ the Tennessee Republican said.

‘The government’s involvement in that will make it worse,’ Burchett continued. ‘The market needs to drive this thing.’

A handful of D.C. resident similarly told Fox News last week that Harris wouldn’t be able to effectively run the executive office’s AI efforts.

Some lawmakers said a commission of AI experts would best push the White House’s AI initiatives. 

‘I don’t have a whole lot of faith in either President Biden or Vice President Harris, but I think we need to have industry experts in the room, folks that understand the technology behind AI,’ Republican Rep. Nathaniel Moran said. ‘That can help both the legislative and the executive branch work through what are the practical problems with AI.’ 

Rep. Dan Crenshaw doubted Biden or Harris could ‘really do something with AI.’

‘Maybe it’s a commission that studies it,’ the Texas Republican said. 

To watch the full interviews with lawmakers, click here.

As Texas continues to grapple with an ongoing crisis at the southern border, now into its third year, Republican-led states are stepping up by sending troops, law enforcement and other resources to help secure the southern border.

This week both Tennessee and Nebraska announced they would be sending personnel to the border, joining Mississippi and Florida in doing so. Tennessee announced a deployment of 100 National Guard members, while Nebraska announced the deployment of 10 state troopers.

‘America continues to face an unprecedented border crisis that threatens our nation’s security and the safety of Tennesseans,’ Tenn. Gov. Bill Lee said in a statement on Wednesday. ‘The federal government owes Americans a plan to secure our country, and in the meantime, states continue to answer this important call to service. I am again authorizing the Tennessee National Guard to help secure the Southern border, and I commend these troops for providing critical support.’ 

‘Our nation has a serious and unchecked threat on its hands following President Biden’s decision to end Title 42,’ Nebraska Gov. Jim Phillen said. ‘Nebraska is committed to using every tool in its tool box to help stop the influx of illegal immigration at our southern border. Illegal immigration hurts our nation’s security, undermines the rule of law, and threatens the wellbeing of our state.’

Texas has been on the front lines of the crisis since it began in the early months of 2021. While the causes are widely debated — with Republicans blaming the Biden administration’s policies and the administration blaming Republicans for failing to provide funding and immigration reform — the numbers have been enormous.

There were more than 1.7 million migrant encounters in FY 2021, and more than 2.3 million in FY22. There have so far been over 1.4 million migrant encounters in FY 23 recorded until the end of April, with five months still left of the fiscal year.

Texas has surged resources to the border with Operation Lone Star, while the Biden administration has also touted its own resources it has sent to the border, including at the ports of entry and extra processing power. But now states with Republican governors are mobilizing, particularly as the Title 42 public health order has ended — which allowed for the rapid removal of migrants at the border due to the COVID-19 pandemic.

Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis had announced last week that his state was deploying resources to aid Texas.

The governor’s office said Florida has more than 1,100 assets and resources available to assist, including 101 Highway Patrol personnel, 200 Department of Law Enforcement officers, 800 National Guard soldiers, emergency management personnel, 17 unmanned drones and 10 vessels, including airboats.

‘The impacts of Biden’s Border Crisis are felt by communities across the nation, and the federal government’s abdication of duty undermines the sovereignty of our country and the rule of law,’ DeSantis said in a statement.

‘At my direction, state agencies including law enforcement and the Florida National Guard are being deployed to Texas, with assets including personnel, boats and planes. While Biden ignores the crisis he created, Florida stands ready to help Texas respond to this crisis,’ he said.

Texas Department of Public Safety spokesperson Chris Olivarez wrote in response, ‘We welcome the support from the state of Florida as they will provide additional law enforcement resources to help combat criminal activity & interdict deadly narcotics.’

A day later, Mississippi Gov. Tate Reeves said this state is mobilizing National Guard troops to help secure the border.

‘What happens at the border doesn’t stay there. Drugs and people are trafficked to every state in the nation – including Mississippi,’ Reeves said. ‘To keep Mississippians safe and limit the impact of our nation’s open borders, the Mississippi National Guard’s 112th Military Police Battalion has been mobilized and is supporting Customs and Border Protection officers and agents along the Southwest border.’

The Biden administration has been cautious about such efforts, with officials recently suggesting that the move by Florida was politically motivated.

‘Outstanding coordination is taking place at the local level each and every day. We have seen, however, at times that Gov. DeSantis and [Texas Gov. Greg Abbott] take actions that are being done really for purely political reasons and that do not involve the kind of coordination that we really need to see at the border,’ Department of Homeland Security official Blas Nunez-Neto told reporters last week.

‘We are confident in our men and women on the front lines, ability to conduct their border operations in a safe, humane and secure manner. And we again call on the governors to make sure that any steps they take are done in coordination with our federal personnel,’ he said.

Meanwhile, numbers have plummeted at the border compared to the highs seen in the days leading up to the end of Title 42, when agents encountered over 10,000 migrants a day. Numbers have since dropped to an average of around 3,000 a day, officials said last week.

Pennsylvania Republicans’ prospects in their bid to unseat Democratic Sen. Bob Casey hinge on the pending campaign announcements of two high-profile candidates.Hedge fund CEO David McCormick, who narrowly lost his party’s nomination to cardiothoracic surgeon and television personality Mehmet Oz in last year’s Senate race, has shored up the support of moderates, party leaders, and top officials.Meanwhile, state Sen. Doug Mastriano, a pro-Trump hardliner who suffered a landslide defeat at the hands of then-Attorney General Josh Shapiro in last year’s gubernatorial race, has long teased a Senate bid and is expected to announce his intent to run Thursday night.

The GOP primary field in Pennsylvania to challenge Democratic Sen. Bob Casey remains wide open, with the hopes of top party officials hanging on the potential entry of a high-profile candidate in a top-tier battleground state contest that could help define the Republican Party’s path forward in 2024.

Former hedge fund CEO David McCormick is the favorite of party leaders and has drawn pledges of financial support from top Republican officials — should he decide to run. Meanwhile, state Sen. Doug Mastriano, a hard-right lawmaker who was endorsed by former President Donald Trump in last year’s race for governor but lost in a landslide, has said he will announce Thursday night whether he will run for Senate.

McCormick is facing a complicated decision, with Trump seeking the party’s nomination for president. A Mastriano candidacy could further complicate McCormick’s path.

At the very least, it will ‘force McCormick to go spend millions to defend himself when that money would be better used in a general election or to help other candidates statewide,’ said Sam DeMarco, a McCormick ally and chair of the Allegheny County GOP.

For Republicans, Pennsylvania is a top target in their quest to recapture the Senate majority, while Democrats face a difficult Senate map in 2024.

Of 34 seats up for election, Democrats must defend incumbents in red states — Montana, Ohio and West Virginia — and multiple swing states, including Pennsylvania, if they are to hold their 51-seat majority.

The prospect of a Mastriano victory in a primary is prompting handwringing in some GOP circles.

Mastriano has spent the last few months saying that he could win a Senate primary ‘hands down’ and blaming the party establishment for his 15-point loss in November’s election for governor.

But many Republican officials say Mastriano’s subpar political skills, inability to raise money and extreme positions on abortion — among other issues — will guarantee a Casey victory in a state that has long embraced more moderate voices.

Republican hopes for victory may rest on McCormick, who narrowly lost the GOP nomination for Senate in 2022 to Dr. Mehmet Oz.

McCormick has promises of support from party brass, including a super PAC linked to Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell and the National Republican Senatorial Committee.

McCormick also has deep pockets and connections across spheres of politics, business and government from which to draw endorsements and campaign contributions — none of which were enough to prevail against Oz, the Trump-backed candidate who went on to lose the general election to Democrat John Fetterman.

If he runs, McCormick may have to share a ticket with Trump, who castigated McCormick in last year’s primary and continues to tell the lie that the 2020 presidential election was stolen.

In a book he published in March, McCormick told of an exchange with Trump in which the former president told him that, to win last year’s Senate primary, McCormick would need to say the 2020 election was stolen.

‘I made it clear to him that I couldn’t do that. Three days later, Trump endorsed Mehmet Oz,’ McCormick wrote.

Trump went on to campaign against McCormick, deriding him at one point as the ‘candidate of special interests and globalists and the Washington establishment.’

McCormick lost to Oz by fewer than 1,000 votes.

<!–>

–>

The White House on Thursday released a broad national strategy to fight antisemitism, describing the initiative as unprecedented in scope amid a surge in anti-Jewish crime.

However, the White House evaded an increasingly contentious debate over how to define antisemitism, avoiding a clear endorsement of a mainstream, widely accepted definition while simultaneously welcoming an alternative pushed by progressives who argue the former doesn’t allow sufficient space to criticize Israel, the world’s only Jewish state.

The 60-page document details four pillars that undergird the strategy: increasing awareness and understanding of antisemitism and appreciation of Jewish American heritage, improving safety and security for Jewish communities, reversing the normalization of antisemitism and countering antisemitic discrimination and building solidarity across communities to counter hate.

President Biden called the strategy ‘a historic step forward’ and the ‘most ambitious and comprehensive U.S. government-led effort to fight antisemitism in American history’ in a pre-recorded video message to kick off Thursday’s announcement.

‘It sends a clear and forceful message,’ Biden said of the strategy, arguing silence in the face of antisemitism is the same as complicity. ‘In America, evil will not win. Hate will not prevail. The venom of antisemitism will not be the story of our time.’

Biden’s message also included one explicitly political moment, when he called out former President Trump’s remarks from 2017 that some protesters opposing the removal of Confederate statues in Charlottesville, Va., were ‘very fine people,’ without naming his predecessor.

After Biden spoke, his outgoing domestic policy adviser, Susan Rice, and his homeland security adviser, Liz Sherwood-Randall, along with second gentleman Doug Emhoff, outlined key elements of the strategy, which includes more than 100 policy commitments across the executive branch.

The document also contains more than 100 calls to action for lawmakers and others across society to take in order to combat antisemitism. These include calls for tech companies to establish a zero-tolerance policy for hate speech on their platforms to ensure their algorithms don’t pass hate speech and extreme content to users, among many others.

The strategy also argues that antisemitism must be defined to combat it: ‘If we cannot name, identify, and admit a problem, we cannot begin to solve it.’

However, rather than endorse a definition, the White House refers to several competing definitions of antisemitism as educational tools for both elected officials and the public.

‘There are several definitions of antisemitism, which serve as valuable tools to raise awareness and increase understanding of antisemitism,’ the strategy states. ‘The most prominent is the non-legally binding ‘working definition’ of antisemitism adopted in 2016 by the 31-member states of the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA), which the United States has embraced. In addition, the administration welcomes and appreciates the Nexus Document and notes other such efforts.’

As of the end of last year, a total of 1,116 global entities — from countries to companies — have adopted and endorsed IHRA’s non-legally binding working definition of antisemitism, according to the Combat Antisemitism Movement. In the U.S., this includes at least 30 states and 56 cities and counties. The State and Education departments did the same under the Trump administration.

According to the definition, antisemitism ‘is a certain perception of Jews, which may be expressed as hatred toward Jews. Rhetorical and physical manifestations of antisemitism are directed toward Jewish or non-Jewish individuals and/or their property, toward Jewish community institutions and religious facilities.’

IHRA provides 11 specific, contemporary examples of antisemitism in public life, the media, schools, the workplace and in the religious sphere. Beyond classic antisemitic behavior associated with the likes of the medieval period and Nazi Germany, the examples include denial of the Holocaust and newer forms of antisemitism targeting Israel. such as demonizing the Jewish state, denying its right to exist and holding it to standards not expected of any other democratic state.

Experts have argued the definition is important for a range of practical uses such as adjudicating legal cases, monitoring bigotry on campuses and training law enforcement. Mainstream Jewish advocacy groups, such as the American Jewish Committee and Jewish Federations of North America, have pushed for the administration to adopt IHRA’s definition. 

However, critics have argued the newer examples of antisemitism cited in the definition don’t allow for what they describe as legitimate criticism of Israel and its policies. Progressive groups urged the Biden administration to leave out a definition of antisemitism entirely or consider alternative definitions. 

The Nexus Document, written by a group of academics, argues that applying double standards to Israel and opposing Israel’s continuation as the nation-state of the Jewish people may not necessarily be antisemitic, creating tighter standards around when anti-Israel speech and activity is antisemitic.

The White House’s strategy identifies some forms of anti-Israel rhetoric and activity that can cross the line into antisemitism.

‘Jewish students and educators are targeted for derision and exclusion on college campuses, often because of their real or perceived views about the State of Israel,’ the strategy says. ‘When Jews are targeted because of their beliefs or their identity, when Israel is singled out because of anti-Jewish hatred, that is antisemitism. And that is unacceptable.’ 

The strategy also pledges to ‘combat antisemitism abroad and in international fora — including efforts to delegitimize the State of Israel.’ It also notes the administration’s ‘unshakeable commitment to the state of Israel’s right to exist, its legitimacy, and its security’ and the ‘deep historical, religious, cultural, and other ties many American Jews and other Americans have to Israel.’

Proponents of the IHRA definition expressed satisfaction with the president’s strategy. Jewish Federations of North America Chair Julie Platt, for example, said the organization is ‘pleased that the White House reaffirms’ the IHRA definition. Dianne Lob and William Daroff, the chair and CEO of the Conference of Presidents of Major American Jewish Organizations, similarly said they ‘wholeheartedly applaud the Biden administration’s continuing embrace of the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance definition of antisemitism.’

Meanwhile, left-wing advocacy groups critical of IHRA’s definition praised the White House.

‘Importantly, the strategy avoids exclusively codifying any one specific, sweeping definition of antisemitism as the sole standard for use in enforcing domestic law and policy, recognizing that such an approach could do more harm than good,’ J Street said in a statement, adding that the administration ‘rightly cites [the IHRA] definition as just one of a range of illustrative and useful tools.’

The progressive group Bend the Arc said it was ‘pleased that the Biden administration has rejected the idea that government agencies should adopt the IHRA definition as authoritative policy or that it is the sole guide to antisemitism.’

Other Jewish groups were less supportive.

‘This decision seriously weakens the White House strategy. It is yet another instance of Biden caving to the anti-Israel radicals,’ said Republican Jewish Coalition CEO Matt Brook, who added that Biden ‘blew it’ by not exclusively using IHRA’s definition. He also noted the timing of the announcement — hours before the start of the Jewish holiday of Shavuot and near the end of Jewish American Heritage Month.

Dan Pollak, director of government relations for the Zionist Organization of America, also said he was ‘disappointed’ in the Biden administration, arguing the Nexus Document ‘gives a free pass to Jew-Haters who single out Israel.’

Critics of the strategy also noted the White House’s inclusion of the Council on American-Islamic Relations, or CAIR, as a partner in building ‘cross-community solidarity’ to combat antisemitism. According to experts and advocacy groups such as the Anti-Defamation League, CAIR has numerous ties to Hamas, a U.S.-designated terrorist organization that frequently fires rockets at Israel from its neighboring stronghold in Gaza.

In December, more than 100 lawmakers sent a letter to Biden urging him to form a national strategy to combat antisemitism and address threats and violence against Jewish communities. That some month, Biden established a government task force to coordinate efforts to fight antisemitism and other forms of religious bigotry. The group’s first task was to create a national strategy to counter antisemitism.

The new White House strategy comes as levels of antisemitism are at historic highs in the country. Jews are the victims of 63% of reported religiously motivated hate crimes but account for just 2.4% of the U.S. population, according to FBI data. Meanwhile, the Anti-Defamation League found that antisemitic incidents reported in the U.S. surged to historic levels last year, increasing 36% compared to 2021.

Earlier this week, a man with a Nazi flag crashed a U-Haul truck into a security barrier at the White House, according to police. Court documents reportedly say the suspect praised Adolf Hitler after his arrest and said that he aimed to ‘kill the president’ if necessary to overthrow the government and install himself in power. 

In such an environment, launching the White House’s strategy is a ‘historic moment in the modern fight against what’s known as the fight against the world’s oldest hatred,’ said Ambassador Deborah Lipstadt, the special envoy to monitor and combat antisemitism, who also spoke at Thursday’s announcement. ‘Where antisemitism persists, democracy suffers.’

Republicans in the House and Senate are questioning reported processing delays in the H-2A agricultural worker visa program — and asking if it is related to comments made by a Labor Department official they said may show ‘bias’ against the controversial program.

On Thursday, Committee on Education and the Workforce Chairman Virginia Foxx and Workforce Protection Subcommittee Chairman Kevin Kiley wrote to Acting Labor Secretary Julie Su raising concerns that employers applying for labor certifications for H-2A visas — which are for agricultural workers — are facing ‘substantial delays.’

‘For many farmers and ranchers, especially those with perishable crops, timely processing of applications at DOL and timely arrivals of guest workers are crucial. The planting and harvesting windows offer only a short amount of time to meet the season’s needs. Our understanding is that this worsening problem is caused by unnecessary and avoidable delays at DOL,’ they say.

The lawmakers note a letter sent to Su earlier this month from Sens. Bill Cassidy, R-La., Ranking member of the Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee, which noted comments by a regional agriculture enforcement coordinator at DOL’s Wage and Hour Division in a news article.

In the article for PRISM, Mike Rios is quoted as saying that the H-2A program ‘literally is the purchase of humans to perform difficult work under terrible conditions, sometimes including subhuman living conditions.’

Rios is also quoted as saying: ‘You can throw a rock and hit a violation in the agricultural industry.’

The comments are a repeat of long-standing concerns that critics of the program have expressed, arguing that temporary visa programs are often accompanied by exploitation and abuse. Supporters of the program say they are needed to tackle worker shortages.

Foxx and Kiley say the comments are ‘disturbing and puzzling’ as the laws and regulations DOL enforces are supposed to prevent such conditions — including those governing wages must pay those who are employed under the program.

‘The clear bias against farmers expressed in Mr. Rios’ quotes raises the question of whether DOL may be purposely delaying the processing of H-2A labor certification applications because of hostility to the H-2A program and to the agricultural employers who participate in the program,’ they write.

Their comments echo those of the letter sent by Sen. Cassidy.

‘If the officials tasked with enforcing the H-2A program believe the system amounts to ‘wage theft’ and ‘the purchase of humans to perform difficult work under terrible conditions,’ then either DOL is currently unable to competently enforce the law or these statements reflect a startling bias against American farmers who use the program,’ he wrote.

Foxx and Kiley ask the DOL for data on H-2A certifications, the reason for delays in processing, steps it has taken to address the delays and any additional steps it has planned.

In a statement to Fox News Digital, a spokesperson said that the views referenced in the letter ‘do not reflect those of the Department and we are committed to a fair and unbiased enforcement of the law.’

‘The H-2A visa program performs an important role in our economy by providing a vital workforce for the essential agricultural industry when U.S. workers are not available,’ the spokesperson said.

‘The Department of Labor’s role under the H-2A program is to effectively implement this program, which includes protecting worker’s rights and ensuring a level-playing field for law-abiding employers,’ the spokesperson said. ‘To be clear: workers should always be treated with dignity and respect. H-2A includes worker protection provisions that are enforced by the Department of Labor to combat against exploitative labor practices.’

The spokesperson went on to say that the agency is ‘laser-focused’ on ensuring that applications are processed in a timely manner ‘so that eligible U.S. employers are able to hire H-2A workers for agricultural needs when U.S. workers are not available.’

Seattle Firefighters looking to advance in their careers to become fire lieutenants are being required to learn curriculum from social justice activists and books that espouse woke ideology.

The Seattle Department of Human Resources (SDHR) fire lieutenant test features books from several prominent progressive authors, such as critical race theory (CRT) author Ibram X. Kendi.

The required reading tested on by the SDHR to become a fire lieutenant includes controversial woke books, including the entirety of Kendi’s ‘How to be an Antiracist’ as well as its introduction and acknowledgments, according to a Washington Free Beacon report.

Prospective fire lieutenants are also tested on the entirety of ‘Both Sides of the Fire Lane: Memoirs of a Transgender Firefighter: by Bobbie Scopa, according to the exam bibliography obtained by the Free Beacon, as well as the 800-page memoir ‘A Leader’s Guide to Unconscious Bias and Fighting Fire’ by a female firefighter.

It isn’t just the firehouse brass being tested on woke ideology — fireboat engineers in Seattle are being tested on Robin DiAngelo’s book ‘Is Everyone Really Equal?: An Introduction to Key Concepts in Social Justice Education’ as well as handouts covering ‘structural interplay between all oppressions.’

Retired Seattle firefighter Wayne Johnson told the Free Beacon this ‘stuff has nothing to do with firefighting.’

‘It has everything to do with social engineering,’ Johnson said.

The SDHR did not immediately respond to Fox News Digital’s request for comment.

The Seattle Fire Department’s push for incorporating this woke ideology in their curriculum comes as corporations are facing backlash for doing the same. 

Target CEO Brian Cornell said in a recent interview that ‘woke’ capitalism is ‘great’ for their brand and ‘the right thing for society.’

Cornell was asked to address the backlash to ‘woke’ corporate campaigns, which has caused an uproar among conservative consumers and recently embroiled brands like Bud Light, Nike and Disney.

‘I think those are just good business decisions, and it’s the right thing for society, and it’s the great thing for our brand,’ Cornell said.

Clay Travis called out retail store Target Wednesday for their ‘Pride’ products and said the company faces a ‘real, severe danger’ of suffering damage to their bottom line in the same way as Bud Light. 

The ‘Outkick’ founder joined ‘Fox & Friends’ to react to reports that Target convened an emergency meeting over their LGBTQ products, particularly clothing for transgender women.

‘Most people go to Target because it’s convenient and without any political agenda whatsoever. But so many brands have gone left-wing and decided they have to wave their politics in front of everyone out there. … I would be nervous if I was Target’s CEO,’ he told Ainsley Earhardt.

Target confirmed ‘adjustments’ to the Pride merchandising plans are underway after Fox News Digital learned it rolled back displays at some of its locations.

‘For more than a decade, Target has offered an assortment of products aimed at celebrating Pride Month. Since introducing this year’s collection, we’ve experienced threats impacting our team members’ sense of safety and wellbeing while at work. Given these volatile circumstances, we are making adjustments to our plans, including removing items that have been at the center of the most significant confrontational behavior. Our focus now is on moving forward with our continuing commitment to the LGBTQIA+ community and standing with them as we celebrate Pride Month and throughout the year,’ a Target spokesperson told Fox News Digital.

Fox News Digital’s Elizabeth Heckman contributed reporting.