Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand, D-N.Y., was heard screaming inside Democratic senators’ private lunch on Thursday amid ongoing debate over the looming government shutdown.

Democrats remained tight-lipped as they left the meeting, which lasted over an hour, but Sen. Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., told reporters: ‘You’ll hear from me soon.’ 

Senate Democrats are in disagreement over how to proceed on the House-passed stopgap spending bill to avert a government shutdown, with some inclined to help advance it and others apparently willing to risk a lapse in funding. 

‘They’ve been debating what to do, and there’s been people who feel strongly on both sides,’ a Democratic source familiar told Fox News Digital, in reference to several lengthy Senate Democratic caucus meetings in the past couple days. 

The senators have remained tight-lipped about the content of the meetings. 

As of Thursday afternoon, multiple lawmakers, including Sens. Mark Warner, D-Va., and Chris Van Hollen, D-Md., posted videos to inform social media that they were voting against the short-term spending bill, or continuing resolution (CR). 

‘I’ve seen the videos that they’re going to shut it down,’ Sen. John Fetterman, D-Pa., a staunch advocate of keeping the government open, told reporters. 

‘I’m like, that’s spicy. Spicy, I don’t know,’ he said sarcastically. ‘I don’t know if they’ll do it or not.’ 

According to Fetterman, ‘Any party should never shut the government down.’

He said it would be ‘a gift for the Republicans’ for Democrats to block the House-passed CR. ‘In fact, if anything, I think, they’re effectively daring us to do that.’

The Pennsylvania Democrat further criticized his colleagues, recalling, ‘It wasn’t that long ago before we were lecturing that you can never shut the government down. So that’s kind of inconsistent.’ 

‘We can all agree that it’s not a great CR, but that’s where we are and that’s the choice.’

Warner defended himself to reporters Thursday, explaining there are ‘no good choices.’ 

Asked if he thought a shutdown would be better for his constituents in Virginia, he said, ‘I’m saying both are awful.’

Sen. Mark Kelly, D-Ariz., who serves a state won by President Donald Trump, said he hasn’t ‘made a decision’ on the House’s short-term spending bill. 

He claimed the bill has ‘significant problems,’ also noting he is concerned ‘things could actually get worse’ due to the CR, in reference to the administration’s collaboration with Elon Musk. 

‘I also recognize that government shutdowns are not good,’ Kelly added. 

Shortly afterward, Kelly shared a post on X, revealing he won’t support the spending bill. ‘I cannot vote for the Republican plan to give unchecked power to Donald Trump and Elon Musk. I told Arizonans I’d stand up when it was right for our state and our country, and this is one of those moments,’ the post read. 

‘Our caucus is unified on a clean April 11 CR that will keep the government open and give Congress time to negotiate bipartisan legislation that can pass. We should vote on that,’ Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., said in floor remarks on Wednesday. 

The leader’s office did not immediately provide comment to Fox News Digital on whether the caucus is in fact unified.

Asked about the claim of unity, Kelly referred reporters to Schumer’s office. 

Fetterman, who openly disagrees with many of his colleagues on the House-passed stopgap bill, remarked that Schumer is ‘entitled to his own views,’ but said, ‘I’ve been consistent with mine.’

Rep. Andy Biggs, R-Ariz., has sent a letter to the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) calling for an investigation into ActBlue, the main fundraising platform for the Democratic Party, over concerns the platform had ‘been used to skirt the integrity of federal campaign finance laws.’

‘In 2024, President Biden’s Treasury Department found hundreds of suspicious transactions with ActBlue reported by banks,’ Biggs said in his letter to FBI Director Kash Patel on Thursday. 

‘The U.S. House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform and the Committee on House Administration have been investigating these allegations of misconduct. But the previous Administration has stalled access to the necessary documents. This week, Oversight Chairman Comer and Administration Chairman Stiles have renewed their request with Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent.’

The letter cited Republican concerns that ActBlue’s verification policies could potentially allow foreign actors in countries like China, Venezuela and Russia to influence elections with straw donations. 

Biggs also pointed out in his letter that nineteen state attorneys general across the country have made inquiries into ActBlue over a variety of allegations, including fraud, money laundering, fraudulent and counterfeit use of credit and debit cards, and patterns of contributions that are suspicious.

‘It must be emphasized that these allegations, were they to prove true, would indicate a serious threat to the integrity of our elections, besides the victimization of American citizens,’ Biggs wrote to Patel. ‘The gravity of the allegations and their implications demand a thorough and vigorous investigation by the Federal Bureau of Investigation. We strongly urge an inquiry into ActBlue.’

Fox News Digital reached out to ActBlue for comment but did not receive a response.

‘The allegations against ActBlue are alarming and, if true, threaten the integrity of our Republic,’ Biggs told Fox News Digital. ‘I’m thankful for the work Director Patel is doing to restore our justice system, and I look forward to working with him to uncover the truth about ActBlue.’

Republicans on the Committee on House Administration and other GOP officials have for months accused ActBlue of lax donor verification standards.

‘Following widespread allegations of fraudulent donations being reported to the FEC by ActBlue, one of the largest fundraising platforms in the country, this emergency rulemaking is necessary to reassure the American people that ActBlue is taking the necessary steps to protect its donors,’ Rep. Bryan Steil, R-Wis., said last year.

House Republicans subpoenaed ActBlue last October in what they said at the time was a bid to ‘safeguard our nation’s elections’ and ‘close loopholes in our campaign finance system,’ including contributions from donors whose identities were not as stringently vetted.

ActBlue told Newsweek in response to the Republican probes, ‘This investigation is nothing more than a partisan political attack and scare tactic to undermine the power of Democratic and progressive small-dollar donors. We welcome the opportunity to respond to these frivolous claims.’

In a press release earlier this week when a letter to the Treasury Department was sent, the House Oversight Committee said the Biden administration ‘intentionally stonewalled’ its work looking into ActBlue.

‘The Committees remain concerned with recent reports suggesting fraud and evasion of campaign finance law by individuals exploiting online contribution platforms, especially ActBlue,’ Steil and fellow GOP Reps. James Comer of Kentucky and Nick Langworthy of New York wrote. 

‘Until recently, ActBlue had not implemented standard procedures to guard against identity theft and fraud, such as by requiring a Card Verification Value (CVV) to process online transactions. The organization is also the subject of several state-level investigations stemming from allegedly fraudulent contributions made via the platform without the reported contributors’ awareness — serious allegations that, if proven true, would violate federal law.’

In a letter sent by GOP Rep. Darrell Issa of California to the Treasury Department this week, first reported by the Free Press, Issa asked the Trump administration to investigate ‘credible allegations’ that ActBlue has violated federal law by allowing terror-linked groups to use its platform.

‘Despite the detailed reporting and the reasonable suspicion that our nation’s laws had been violated, the Biden-Harris Treasury Department refused to substantively address these explosive revelations,’ Issa wrote.

‘The undeniable and continued collaboration between ActBlue Charities and terror-tied entities amounts to the enabling of terrorism and may also constitute money-laundering crimes,’ Issa added.

‘In addition, the flagrant inability of progressive groups to address the appearance of skirting a full range of our laws – or call out the evils of Hamas and the BDS movement – raises critical questions if the activities and coalition building of ActBlue and ActBlue Charities are in reality part of a wider commitment to financing and facilitating attacks on Israel and Jewish people in America and around the globe.’

ActBlue also drew the ire of Tesla and SpaceX CEO Elon Musk in a Sunday morning post on X, where he blamed ActBlue-funded groups for the recent protests at Tesla dealerships from activists opposed to his work with the Trump administration. 

‘An investigation has found 5 ActBlue-funded groups responsible for Tesla ‘protests’: Troublemakers, Disruption Project, Rise & Resist, Indivisible Project and Democratic Socialists of America,’ Musk wrote.

Musk then named five ActBlue funders he believed were responsible for funding the protests, including liberal mega-donor George Soros. 

Rep. John Larson, D-Conn., erupted over Elon Musk and the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) while delivering remarks to colleagues on the House Ways and Means Committee.

During a markup of bills related to providing the House with information on DOGE access to Treasury Department payment systems and the Social Security Administration, Larson turned red and shouted at Republican colleagues, ‘You will do whatever Elon Musk and Donald Trump tell you to do.

‘Where’s the independence of the committee? Where’s the legislature? We’re an equal branch of government,’ an enraged Larson yelled, ‘Look at the empty seats here. Where’s Elon Musk?

‘I’m sure he’s a genius and a very credible person because of the wealth he’s accumulated, but that does not put him above the law or the responsibility to come before this committee and this Congress,’ Larson said. ‘If he’s great, and all the plans and all the fraud and abuse that he found are so eminent, why isn’t he here explaining it? You know why!

‘Because he’s out to privatize Social Security. He’s been on television the last couple of days talking exactly about Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid and what he intends to do — privatize it. The American people, some of them may have been born at night, but not last night.’

The White House responded Thursday in a statement to Fox News Digital. 

‘The Democrats have no plan on how to recover from their embarrassing loss, and it shows,’ White House principal deputy press secretary Harrison Fields said. ‘Instead of working to become a party that focuses on the will of the people, they are hell-bent on keeping their heads in the sand and gaslighting on the widely supported mission of DOGE.

‘Slashing waste, fraud and abuse and becoming better stewards of the American taxpayer’s hard-earned dollars might be a crime to Democrats, but it’s not a crime in a court of law.’ 

The White House said earlier this week that President Donald Trump ‘will always protect Social Security, Medicare’ after Musk sat down for an interview with FOX Business Monday to give a behind-the-scenes look at DOGE’s work. 

Democrats took issue with Musk’s remarks on eliminating waste and fraud in entitlement programs, which he said account for most of federal spending. 

‘There’s a massive amount of fraud of, basically, people submitting Social Security numbers for Social Security benefits, unemployment, Small Business Administration loans and medical care,’ Musk said. ‘We’re trying to put a stop to all of that.’

Musk also told Fox Business federal entitlement programs serve as ‘a mechanism by which the Democrats attract and retain illegal immigrants by essentially paying them to come here and then turning them into voters.’ 

The White House said the U.S. Government Accountability Office estimates taxpayers lose as much as $521 billion annually to fraud, ‘and most of that is within entitlement programs, such as Medicare and Medicaid.’ 

Musk also said in a podcast interview with Joe Rogan last month that ‘Social Security is the biggest Ponzi scheme of all time,’ another remark that drew the ire of Larson. 

Larson claims the Trump administration wants to ‘slash and privatize’ Americans’ benefits. He said during the committee markup that Musk and the White House are perpetuating a ‘big lie’ that there is a Democratic plan ‘to bring illegal immigrants into the country by offering to pay them Social Security.’ Larson claimed, ‘There’s not a thread of truth to any of that.

‘And, yet, this unaccountable person — not a federal employee, not a volunteer — but a special person who’s not had to go through Senate approval and who this committee is now saying, ‘Yes, we agree with the president. He should not be accountable. He should be able to have free rein and do whatever he wants. We will willingly follow him and do whatever he says because he’s the wealthiest man in the world, and, surely, he must know how to save us from ourselves’,’ Larson said. 

Larson said Social Security ‘just happens to be the No. 1 anti-poverty program for the elderly and for the children of this country,’ adding that Musk and Trump ‘aren’t going to lose a moment’s sleep thinking about the privatization.’ 

The congressman and all committee Democrats introduced a resolution to compel the Trump administration to provide answers on DOGE’s intentions with Social Security, but Larson claimed Republicans are trying to stop it from coming to a vote. 

President Donald Trump on Thursday said he is holding out ‘hope’ that Russia will agree to a ceasefire with Ukraine as the first step to ending the brutal three-year-long war. 

‘We know where we are with Ukraine,’ he told reporters while speaking from the Oval Office alongside NATO Secretary-General Mark Rutte. 

‘Hopefully they’ll do the right thing,’ he added in reference to Russia.

Trump’s comments came just moments after Russian President Vladimir Putin gave an address in Moscow in which he thanked Trump for his ceasefire efforts, noting he agreed with them in ‘principle’ but signaled he was not agreeing to the 30-day proposal as it stands now. 

Trump said he was aware of Putin’s comments at the time of the Oval Office press conference and classified the Russian leader’s comments as ‘promising’ but ‘incomplete.’

‘He put out a very promising statement, but it wasn’t complete,’ Trump said. ‘I’d love to meet with him or talk to him, but we have to get it over with fast.’

The president noted that Russian officials have flagged grievances relating to debates over the Zaporizhzhia power plant and Ukrainians’ admittance into NATO, which Putin also touched on during his address in Moscow. 

‘A lot of the details of a final agreement have actually been discussed,’ Trump told reporters moments after Putin’s remarks. ‘Now we’re going to see whether or not Russia is there.

‘If they’re not, it’ll be a very disappointing moment for the world,’ he added. 

The White House has already started mapping out how to make good on its promise to slash federal spending in preparation for a six-month government funding bill to pass through Congress.

Two people familiar with the conversations told Fox News Digital that President Donald Trump and Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Director Russell Vought are working on a strategy for impounding federal funds that Congress is expected to allocate this week, before the partial government shutdown deadline on March 14.

Trump and his allies have made no secret of their belief that the Impoundment Control Act of 1974 is unconstitutionally constraining the powers of the president. But the new development is a significant step toward a likely legal showdown as Democrats warn they will respond if Trump tries to bypass Congress on federal spending.

The fight could go all the way up to the Supreme Court.

It comes as Senate Republicans and Democrats are at an impasse over a Trump-backed government funding bill known as a continuing resolution (CR). The Senate GOP needs as many as eight Democrats to cross the aisle and vote for the bill, which the left has widely panned as an avenue to let Trump and Elon Musk dismantle the federal bureaucracy.

The measure is a rough extension of fiscal year (FY) 2024 funding levels, meant to carry the government through the beginning of FY 2026 on Oct. 1. 

It’s the third such extension since the beginning of FY 2024, but the first to take place under a fully GOP-controlled Washington. 

Republicans have said it would give them more time to cobble together conservative spending bills for FY 2026, and have celebrated the CR essentially freezing government spending for a year.

Trump and House GOP leaders worked overtime convincing holdouts to vote for the CR this week, as some conservatives balked at the idea of extending Biden administration-era funding.

But the promise of Trump using Congress’ funding allocations as a ceiling and not a floor ultimately played a big part in convincing conservatives.

‘We appropriate, that’s an important principle. But then the chief executive can make decisions below that spending level. The chief executive can say, ‘Hey this isn’t the best use of money,” Rep. Chip Roy, R-Texas, told Fox News Digital in an interview this week.

Roy has been a key figure in government spending talks, acting as a liaison between conservative fiscal hawks and leaders in the House and White House.

He and Rep. Ralph Norman, R-S.C., both agreed with Vought and Trump that the Impoundment Control Act – which was passed in response to Congress at the time believing President Richard Nixon was holding back lawful funding because he disagreed with it personally – was unconstitutional.

‘The chief executive can say, ‘I don’t have to buy a $500 hammer, I can buy a $100 hammer. I don’t have to buy a $100 million carrier, I could buy $50 million carrier,’ or whatever. He’s the executive. So if that money is then spent properly to carry out the functions of government, why should you have to spend every dollar of it, right? It’s literally unconstitutional,’ Roy said.

Roy said he believed the same authority would apply to a Democratic president.

‘By the way, I realize this means that would be true for Joe Biden or that would be true for some future Democrat, and I’m OK with that. There’s always going to be some debate,’ Roy said. ‘There’s going to be some contours the courts would give us. Congress might step in and clarify the law, and that might be deemed constitutional… but to blanket to say the president can’t impound, I think is facially unconstitutional.’

Norman told Fox News Digital, ‘The 1974 impoundment act was against Richard Nixon. It’s a different day now.’

He also said Trump and Vought were ‘going to move forward’ on impoundment.

‘He’s got the constitutional right to do it, so he’s going to push on with it, and thinks the courts will ultimately side with him,’ Norman said. ‘I can’t get in Trump’s mind, but I know he’s hell-bent on interpreting the Constitution as his right to use impoundment.’

Rep. Dan Goldman, D-N.Y., who served as House Democrats’ lead counsel during Trump’s first impeachment, told Fox News Digital the move would be patently unconstitutional.

‘It is illegal for the president to act unilaterally and either rescind or change congressionally designated funds,’ Goldman said.

In the event of likely court challenges – which Goldman pointed out were already going on with Trump moving to cut various programs – House Democrats would likely move to help, he said.

‘We can file an amicus brief, and we likely would do that on such a critical issue of congressional power,’ he said.

At the same time, both Roy and Norman signaled Trump’s congressional allies were discussing rescission as another avenue to spend less than the CR allocates.

The Impoundment Control Act provided a mechanism for the legislative and executive branches to enact spending cuts via specific rescissions. Such a bill would only require 51 votes in the Senate rather than the standard 60-vote threshold for passage, meaning Democrats in theory would not be needed.

‘I think that they are concurrent plans, and we will use all of those tools at the appropriate time, but I say that as an observer from Congress,’ Roy said, noting he had no insight into White House discussions on impoundment.

Norman said Musk’s Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) will play a role in identifying where the funds could be found.

‘There’s going to be a lot of things in it. What DOGE has done is identify, but now if he’s just going to identify and we don’t move forward on rescission – it’s gotta have some effect,’ he said.

It’s not immediately clear if such conversations have reached House GOP leadership, however. Norman said they were ‘just beginning.’

But lawmakers have been toying with the idea of Trump pursuing spending cuts after the CR is passed for days.

Vice President JD Vance huddled with House Republicans behind closed doors earlier this week, making an 11th hour plea for unity on the looming CR vote.

Among his pitches, people told Fox News Digital at the time, was the need to keep the government open to allow DOGE to do its work.

‘We will have much more flexibility for DOGE cuts once we’ve had more time to identify and quantify them,’ one House Republican said of Vance’s message.

There’s also the matter of whether to repeal the Impoundment Control Act – Rep. Andrew Clyde, R-Ga., introduced a bill to do so earlier this year, and it’s gathered a significant number of Republican co-sponsors.

But a senior House Republican told Fox News Digital that while it was ‘on the table,’ it’s not likely that the Senate’s 53 Republicans will get enough help from Democrats to reach 60 votes.

Fox News Digital reached out to the White House and OMB for comment, but did not receive a response by press time.