The U.S. is very confident it can protect American interests in the Indo-Pacific as the Chinese military surrounds Taiwan, the White House said Thursday.

National Security Council spokesperson John Kirby offered the assessment to reporters during a Monday briefing. China is conducting extensive and ongoing military drills around the self-governed island throughout the past week, going so far as to simulate strikes on the island this past weekend.

‘How does the U.S. see these latest Chinese military exercises and is the U.S. confident that Taiwan and help from the U.S. could continue to deter China from a military solution?’ a reporter asked. ‘Their saber-rattling as we call it was a lot more than sabers, and it’s more than rattling.’

‘We’re monitoring the exercises closely, as you might imagine,’ Kirby responded, adding that they were a needless reaction to Taiwanese President Tsai Ing-wen’s recent visit to the U.S. that sparked angry warnings from China.

‘We’re very comfortable and confident that we have in place, in the region, sufficient resources and capabilities to protect our national security interests in the Indo-Pacific,’ he continued. ‘I would add … there’s no reason for tensions across the Taiwan Strait to devolve into any kind of conflict.’

In total, the Chinese military deployed 71 aircraft and nine naval vessels around Taiwan as of Sunday.

The move comes in reaction to Tsai’s trip to the U.S. and her meeting with House Speaker Kevin McCarthy last week. The trip was Tsai’s seventh transit of the U.S., and the second time she had met with a U.S. House speaker. Nevertheless, China made threats and warnings ahead of the visit.

Kirby emphasized that China was overreacting to the incident and highlighted Tsai’s past trips to the U.S. and meetings with U.S. lawmakers.

The White House backed up McCarthy’s meeting with Tsai, saying it was not out of the ordinary.

Tennessee state Rep. Justin Jones, one of two Black Democratic lawmakers expelled last week from the GOP-led statehouse, is being sent back to the Legislature. 

The Nashville Metropolitan Council voted unanimously Monday to restore Jones to office, less than a week after GOP lawmakers stripped him of his seat. 

Republicans expelled Jones and fellow Democratic lawmaker Justin Pearson over their role in a gun-control protest on the House floor in the aftermath of a deadly school shooting at a private Christian school in Nashville. Pearson could be reappointed as early as Wednesday by the Shelby County Commission.

A third Democrat, Rep. Gloria Johnson of Knoxville, was targeted for expulsion as well, but was spared by a single vote. Johnson, who is White, has suggested that race was a factor in why Jones and Pearson were ousted but not her.

Republican lawmakers justified splitting their votes by saying Johnson had less of a role in the protest — she didn’t speak into a megaphone, for example.

Political tensions rose when the three joined with hundreds of demonstrators who packed the Capitol to call for the passage of gun-control measures just days after six people — including three children — were killed in a mass shooting at the Covenant School in Nashville. 

As protesters filled galleries, the lawmakers approached the front of the House chamber with a bullhorn and participated in a chant. 

GOP leaders have said the expulsions — a mechanism used only a handful of times since the Civil War — were necessary to avoid setting a precedent that lawmakers’ disruptions of House proceedings through protest would be tolerated.

Jones’ appointment is on an interim basis. Special elections for the seats will take place in the coming months. Jones and Pearson have said they plan to run in the special election.

Before the special council session began, a couple of hundred people gathered in front of the Nashville courthouse, and more were pouring in. Some held signs reading, ‘No Justin, No Peace.’ Inside the courthouse, a line of people waited outside the council chambers for the doors to open.

Republican House Speaker Cameron Sexton’s spokesperson, Doug Kufner, indicated that whoever is appointed to the vacancies by the Nashville and Shelby County governments ‘will be seated as representatives as the constitution requires.’

House Majority Leader William Lamberth and Republican Caucus Chairman Jeremy Faison said they would welcome back the expelled lawmakers if they are reinstated.

‘Tennessee’s constitution provides a pathway back for expulsion,’ Lamberth and Faison said in a joint statement. ‘Should any expelled member be reappointed, we will welcome them. Like everyone else, they are expected to follow the rules of the House as well as state law.’

The Associated Press contributed to this report. 

A battle over a $1 billion transmission line that won all regulatory approvals only to be rebuked by state residents in a referendum now comes down to nine regular folks.

In a rare move, a jury is being asked to decide a complicated constitutional matter — whether developers have a vested right to complete the 145-mile project, which would supply Canadian hydropower to the New England power grid.

The constitutionality of the statewide referendum on the project depends on the jury’s decision on the narrow vested-rights issue. And the case could turn on a simple majority of jurors.

‘We’re not aware of a similar instance in which the fate of a large energy asset rests in the hands of a jury. This is an unusual circumstance,’ Timothy Fox, vice president of Clear View Partners, an energy research firm in Washington, D.C., said before the trial began Monday.

The courtroom was packed Monday.

Attorneys for groups opposed to the project and the state attorney general’s office, which is charged with upholding the referendum, suggested to jurors on Monday that developers rushed construction with a goal of winning vested rights and nullifying the referendum.

But John Armando, lawyer for the developers, said the construction schedule was put in place years earlier, and that the case is ‘about fundamental fairness, about vested rights, about protection of property rights against retroactive laws.’

Last year, the Maine Supreme Judicial Court breathed new life into the stalled project when it ruled the retroactive nature of the statewide vote to stop the project would violate the developers’ constitutional rights if substantial construction already had begun in good faith before the referendum. Construction started in January 2021, about 10 months before the referendum in which 59% of voters rejected the project.

Justice Michael A. Duddy could have made the fact-finding determination himself. But he ruled in favor of project opponents, including the Natural Resources Council of Maine, who asked for a jury to make the determination. The judge seated nine jurors and two alternates.

Central Maine Power’s parent company and Hydro Quebec teamed up on New England Clean Energy Connect, which was unveiled in 2017 with a goal of supplying up to 1,200 megawatts of Canadian hydropower to the New England power grid. That is enough electricity for 1 million homes.

It’s one of two proposed large-scale transmission projects aimed at tapping hydropower from Quebec. The other would provide electricity to New York City.

Early on, developers envisioned smooth sailing because the transmission path would mostly follow existing corridors, with only a new 53-mile (85-kilometer) section crossing sparely populated woods to reach the Canadian border.

But the project encountered opposition each step of the way even as it received all necessary regulatory approvals. Developers already had begun cutting trees and setting poles for months when the governor asked for work to be suspended after voters rejected the project in November 2021.

Supporters say bold projects such as this one, funded by ratepayers in Massachusetts, are necessary to battle climate change and introduce additional electricity into a region that is heavily reliant on natural gas, which can cause spikes in energy costs.

Critics say the project’s environmental benefits are overstated — and that it would harm the woodlands in western Maine.

In Maine, two lawsuits over the project went before the Supreme Judicial Court, which ultimately upheld a lease for a 1-mile portion of the proposed power line that crossed state land.

The constitutional issue will likely end up back before the Supreme Judicial Court regardless of the outcome of the judge’s decision after the jury trial.

Chasten Buttigieg, Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg’s husband, snapped back at Americans boycotting Anheuser-Busch’s decision to make transgender activist Dylan Mulvaney the star of one of its latest Bud Light commercials.

On Monday, Chasten turned to Twitter  to speak to those boycotting the blue-canned, frothy alcoholic beverage.

‘If you’re upset about a beer company supporting civil rights, you might want to start bottling your tears,’ Buttigieg tweeted. ‘LGBTQ people drink water, too. Gonna boycott that next?’

Buttigieg was referring to criticism of the beer company’s decision to celebrate and partner with Mulvaney, a social media influencer famous for her ‘365 Days of Girlhood.’

The trans activist revealed earlier this month that Anheuser-Busch sent packs of Bud Light with the trans activist’s face on the can, as a way to celebrate Mulvaney’s first full year of ‘girlhood.’

The announcement received a significant amount of criticism, and some called the ad campaign another attempt to push gender propaganda.

In fact, conservative rocker Kid Rock was seen opening fire on several Bud Light cases in a viral video, and many have called to boycott Bud products.

Country star Travis Tritt announced that he is dropping all Anheuser-Busch products from his hospitality rider. Tritt added that many other stars are doing likewise, but not announcing it publicly.

Buttigieg’s tweet also received staunch criticism.

One Twitter user posted, ‘Goodness this is a stupid tweet…,’ while another replied to Buttigieg’s tweet by says, ‘So ‘civil rights’ for you consists of a man taking a woman’s position because he perpetuates the most regressive stereotypes of what a misogynist thinks it means to be a woman? [Dually] noted.’

Buttigieg recently spoke out against the GOP for banning sexually-explicit books from school libraries and passing laws against transgender drugs and medical procedures for minors. 

In March, he joined ‘The View,’ telling the hosts it is an ‘extremely dangerous time’ in American history.

He went on to say, ‘it’s been a very well-coordinated, well-funded effort to attack the LGBTQ+ community, specifically with the book bans.’

Senate Democrats are demanding Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts open an investigation into Justice Clarence Thomas over what they decry as his ‘misconduct’ detailed in a ProPublica report published last week.

The liberal outlet’s report accused Thomas of improperly receiving lavish vacations from Republican mega donor Harlan Crow, which reportedly included taking trips across the world on the latter’s yacht and private jet without disclosing them. 

In a Monday letter, Senate Judiciary Committee Chair Sen. Dick Durbin, D-Ill., along with every Democrat on the committee, cited the report as proof that Thomas has not upheld the ethical standards set for a Supreme Court justice.

‘The report describes conduct by a sitting Justice that he did not disclose to the public and that is plainly inconsistent with the ethical standards the American people expect of any person in a position of public trust,’ the letter read. ‘The Senate Judiciary Committee, which has legislative jurisdiction over Federal courts and judges, has a role to play in ensuring that the nation’s highest court does not have the federal judiciary’s lowest ethical standards.’ 

‘You have a role to play as well, both in investigating how such conduct could take place at the Court under your watch, and in ensuring that such conduct does not happen again. We urge you to immediately open such an investigation and take all needed action to prevent further misconduct,’ it added.

Experts, however, have dismissed the ProPublica report as political hit piece, and explained that justices are permitted to accept invites to properties of friends for dinner or vacations without paying for it or disclosing it.

‘This is just grasping at straws by the left that is desperate to tear down Justice Thomas because he now has a working originalist majority on the court,’ Roger Severino, vice president of domestic policy and The Joseph C. and Elizabeth A. Anderlik Fellow at The Heritage Foundation, told Fox News Digital following the report’s release.

‘This is politics. Plain and simple,’ he added.

Constitutional law professor and Fox News contributor Jonathan Turley told Fox News Digital that until recently, ‘even lower court judges were not required to report such trips under a personal hospitality exception.’

‘Justice Thomas would not have been required to report the trips under the prior rule,’ Turley said. ‘Once again, the Democrats and the media appear to be engaging in the same hair-triggered responses to any story related to Thomas. This includes the clearly absurd call for an impeachment by Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez.’

Fox News’ Andrew Mark Miller and Matteo Cina contributed to this report.

U.S. resettlement agencies involved in aiding approximately 72,000 Afghan evacuees brought to the U.S. in 2021 and 2022 experienced racism, sexism and verbal abuse from some of those evacuated, according to a State Department Inspector General report.

The review by the IG looked into the resettlement of tens of thousands of evacuees who were granted humanitarian parole to enter the U.S. after the withdrawal from Afghanistan in 2021. The inspector general’s office found that the nine groups faced a slew of issues and challenges with such an undertaking.

‘[Resettlement agency] officials told OIG that the [Afghan Placement and Assistance Program] involved some of the most significant challenges that they had ever faced,’ the report said. 

The agencies, non-profits that are also involved in supporting regular refugee resettlement, identified a host of issues — including the fast pace of arrivals compared to the 11,840 refugees they resettled in FY 2020. Additional issues included the COVID-19 pandemic and complications related to housing, staffing, and cultural orientation.

Among those cultural issues, agencies described ‘inappropriate behavior’ from some parolees which they attributed to a lack of cultural orientation.

‘For example, some RA staff reported experiencing racism and sexism from Afghan clients unaccustomed to the norms of U.S. society,’ the report said. 

Agencies reported that some parolees refused to work with female case managers or those from minority groups. One agency reported that ‘a few local offices had issues of verbal abuse from Afghans, mostly those who were upset or frustrated by the process.’ 

‘Many parolees had very high expectations and did not understand the role of local affiliates and would become frustrated with services and housing,’ the report said.

Nine groups were involved in the resettlement and received per capita grants of $2,275, with $1,225 of that marked for direct assistance. The resettlement was coordinated by the Bureau of Population, Refugees and Migration (PRM).

The report also highlighted ‘unrealistic expectations’ from some parolees regarding the resettlement process. For instance, a number of agencies said that some had been told they would receive ‘welcome money’ when they arrived. Others had unrealistic expectations regarding housing and would therefore reject housing offered to them as insufficient or of inferior quality. Some who had worked as professionals or held advanced degrees in Afghanistan ‘often believed that they would be set up in positions within their chosen field.’

The agencies recommended that PRM take measures including ‘standardized minimum requirements for cultural orientation that emphasize self-sufficiency, manage expectations, and convey U.S. societal expectations for behavior regarding gender, race, and sexual issues.’

The report also noted challenges related to mental and physical health issues, with some arriving with COVID-19, or who had experienced trauma or family separation. 

The report concluded that the resettlement was ‘an unprecedented and demanding effort that presented substantial challenges for the nine RAs that implemented the program.’

However, it found that many of the challenges were outside of the control of the PRM and also found that the agencies praised the funding provided via the program and what they said was an ‘unparalleled coordination between federal agencies’ in aiding the resettlement program.

The report is more positive than previous reports from different inspectors general, which faulted the vetting process for the evacuation and warned that national security threats may have entered the U.S.

On Thursday the White House released its review of the 2021 withdrawal, in which it defended President Biden’s decision to withdraw and called his decision ‘the right thing for the country.’ The review does acknowledge that the evacuation of Americans and allies from Afghanistan should have started sooner, but blames the delays on the Afghan government and military, and on U.S. military and intelligence community assessments.