Politics

(NEW YORK) — Major changes are coming on Oct. 1 for the tens of millions of Americans who rely on the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) for food assistance from the federal government.

In the short term, most families will see a slight bump in their monthly payments to help afford groceries. But in the coming months, households will face stricter eligibility requirements and changes to how the benefits are administered that could ultimately result in far fewer benefits.

An estimated five million Americans — including more than 1 million children — have already lost SNAP assistance over the past year as part of President Donald Trump’s signature tax and spending law, according to the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities.

Short-term boost in benefits

Every year on Oct. 1, the federal government adjusts its monthly SNAP benefits to account for inflation. These cost-of-living adjustments apply across all states.

For a typical single-person household in one of 48 states (not including Alaska or Hawaii), checks will go from a maximum of $298 to $306 per month. That’s an extra $8 monthly.

For a family of four, checks will go from $994 to $1,023 per month. That’s an extra $29 per month, or $348 per year.

These inflation adjustments are intended to help families keep up with the rising cost of food. Grocery prices are up 2.2% in the past year.

Big funding changes

While these adjustments will help alleviate some cost pressures for current SNAP recipients, a major overhaul to the program is resulting in fewer people receiving benefits.

As part of the “One Big Beautiful Bill Act,” states are required to pay for a larger share of SNAP administrative costs while the federal government pays less. Now, states will be required to cover 75% of those administrative costs — a 25% increase. This change takes effect Oct. 1 and will leave states with millions of dollars of additional costs to cover. 

Additional cost shifts are also looming for states. Starting in 2027, states with a SNAP recipient error rate above 6% would also be on the hook for funding a portion of SNAP benefits themselves — expected to cost states hundreds of millions of dollars extra per year.

In anticipation of these sweeping changes, some states are already seeing a big drop in SNAP enrollment.

According to an analysis from the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, Arizona, Florida and Louisiana were some of the states that saw the biggest change in participation, with Arizona seeing its numbers cut nearly in half. 

Changing eligibility requirements

The Republican-backed law has already imposed stricter requirements on SNAP recipients. 

Under the law, work requirements apply to able-bodied adults without dependents aged 18 to 64, up from the previous age limit of 54. 

The law also changed work requirements for families responsible for a dependent. Now, families with children age 14 and older are no longer eligible for an exemption from those work requirements. 

Copyright © 2026, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(WASHINGTON) — Texas GOP Senate nominee Ken Paxton told donors at a private fundraiser last week that President Donald Trump’s midterm convention in Dallas earlier this month had hurt him politically, according to audio obtained by The New York Times.

In a recording, a person believed to be Paxton is asked, “Do you feel like he’s a little bit of a drag?” It’s not clear in the audio about whom the questioner is referring.

“So to be honest with you, the numbers — when we did that convention — it dropped our numbers. Everybody’s numbers dropped. Right now, yeah, not good,” someone reported to be Paxton said in response to the question.

Three other people with knowledge of the event confirmed to the New York Times that Paxton was at the private fundraiser — with two of those people recalling Paxton’s response about the GOP midterm convention.

The Paxton campaign pushed back against the report, calling it “manipulated nonsense.” When ABC News asked specifically whether the campaign was claiming the audio was manipulated, the Paxton campaign did not respond.

ABC News reached out to the White House for comment, but did not receive a response.

Paxton’s comments are noteworthy, given how he has aligned himself with Trump, earning his endorsement ahead of the Texas Senate runoff earlier this year. Trump backed Paxton over incumbent Sen. John Cornyn in the GOP primary.

A recent ReconMR Texas Poll found that the Senate race in Texas remains tight, as 49% of likely voters said they would vote for Democrat Senate candidate James Talarico if the election were held today and 43% said they would vote for Paxton.

During the GOP midterm convention, Trump both praised Paxton and mocked him for his appearance.

“He may not dress right, he may not talk exactly perfectly, and he may not be the best-looking guy I’ve ever seen. But you know what he is? He’s the greatest attorney general in America, and he deserves to be your next senator,” Trump said in early September.

Paxton’s comments about the midterm convention also paint a larger picture of how some GOP candidates feel Trump’s low approval rating, along with the political environment where voters are concerned about prices, could hurt them politically.

Several Republicans running in competitive statewide and federal races are joining growing calls in their party to end the war in Iran, including battleground Senate candidates Rep. Ashley Hinson of Iowa and Sen. Jon Husted of Ohio.

Trump is scheduled to travel to Texas later this week to deliver economic remarks at a truck manufacturing company — a visit that comes five weeks before Election Day and as Texas is home to many key races.

Copyright © 2026, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth is set to announce on Wednesday that the Pentagon will cut 20% of positions reserved for generals and admirals, doubling a reduction he ordered last year as part of a broader effort to shrink the military’s senior ranks, according to two U.S. officials.

Hegseth is expected to announce the move during a “State of the Force” address on Wednesday at Marine Corps Base Quantico in Virginia, where he will outline his agenda for the force over the coming year. The new target doubles the 10% overall reduction in general and admiral positions he ordered in 2025.

The speech follows Hegseth’s appearance at Quantico last year, when he abruptly summoned the military’s top brass from around the world and used the address to rail against what he framed as declining standards, demanding there would be “no more beardos” and “no more fat generals.”

Much of the speech was also devoted to culture-war grievances.

“No more identity months, DEI offices, dudes in dresses,” Hegseth declared last September to a room full of the military’s top leaders.

At the time, the Pentagon also directed all of its troops to watch video of the speech.

This year, commanders across the services were asked to nominate mostly junior and mid-ranking troops to attend, according to officials familiar with the matter.

The nominees are expected to include high-performing service members, such as troops recognized for major achievements or winners of military competitions, according to officials. Those selected must also be in compliance with military fitness and body fat standards, a routine requirement for official travel and attendance at major events.

It is unclear exactly how the new cuts will be carried out, or whether such a dramatic reduction amid the Iran war would disrupt day-to-day military operations. The services have already been reducing the number of senior officers in part by consolidating commands and organizations, allowing some positions previously held by two generals or admirals to be overseen by one.

The cuts can also mean some commands could be downgraded to a lower level rather than eliminated outright or different parts of the military being shut down completely.

The services have been directed to complete those cuts to the most senior ranks, which can end up being dozens of roles by January, one official explained. 

There are currently 841 active-duty flag officers.

The move also follows a broader purge of the military’s senior ranks under Hegseth, who has fired or sidelined a string of top officers without publicly explaining the rationale. Among them was Gen. Randy George, who was removed as the Army’s top officer; Gen. CQ Brown, who was fired as chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff; and Adm. Lisa Franchetti, who was removed as chief of naval operations.

Before leaving the administration in September, then-Army Secretary Dan Driscoll repeatedly warned the White House that Hegseth’s removal of senior officers and efforts to block others from advancing were thinning the Army’s leadership ranks, according to people familiar with the situation. Driscoll told Trump the moves were leaving the service with a smaller pool of experienced officers to fill future senior commands.

Copyright © 2026, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(WASHINGTON) — With just weeks until the high-stakes midterm elections, President Donald Trump is set to headline rallies in Republican-favoring states this week — with critics asking why the president is not instead focusing on key battleground states instead.

Some Republicans and experts say the goal is to boost midterm election turnout among Republican voters more generally who might have been less motivated to vote this year, and that this sort of travel to “safe” states during midterm years is not unprecedented. One expert said Trump’s low national approval ratings could be seen as a risk — and a reason he’s not stumping in more competitive areas.

Trump will join a “Midterm Rally” on Thursday, Oct. 1 in Durant, Oklahoma, and another in Mobile, Alabama on Friday, Oct. 2, according to announcements by the Republican National Committee last week.

Both rallies will be in congressional districts and states that appear to favor the Republican Party in the 2026 midterm elections.

Durant, for instance, is located in Oklahoma’s 2nd Congressional District, which Trump won by more than 50 percentage points in 2024, according to data compiled by the Associated Press. This district, held by GOP Rep. Josh Brecheen, is also expected to be solidly Republican in the midterms, as are the statewide governor and Senate races, according to ABC News race ratings.

Mobile, meanwhile, was redrawn after mid-decade redistricting to be in Alabama’s 1st Congressional District. The redrawn district, favoriting Republicans, would have voted for Trump in 2024 by around 40 points.

The 2nd Congressional District, which formerly included part of Mobile, is currently represented by Democratic Rep. Shomari Figures, but now leans Republican post-redistricting, according to ABC News race ratings — although Figures and his supporters plan to put up a fight to hold the seat. And the statewide Senate and governor races in Alabama are considered solid Republican, according to ABC News race ratings.

Trump will also be heading to states with more competitive races. Later in October, he is set to attend rallies in Ohio, Iowa and Nebraska — states that voted for him in 2024 but are hosting competitive Senate races in 2026.

Trump, asked about the upcoming red-state campaign trips in the Oval Office on Monday, said “we have great people” in those races, and slammed the Democratic candidates.

But Democrats are arguing that Trump is going to red states like Alabama because Republicans are nervous.

“We’re scaring the hell out of them,” Democratic gubernatorial candidate and former Sen. Doug Jones argued on MS NOW on Sunday. “They think … Alabama’s a firewall. Now they’ve got to protect a firewall. Well, it’s not a firewall anymore.”

But Republicans say that Trump’s red state rallies will benefit the GOP more broadly.

An official with the RNC made the case to ABC News on Thursday that the rallies will help turnout in neighboring media markets in Texas and Florida. Republicans are trying to hold on to a Senate seat and governorships in both states.

Kyle Kondik, an elections analyst and the managing editor of Sabato’s Crystal Ball, told ABC News that he found the Oklahoma and Alabama events to be “head-scratchers,” and didn’t buy the media market argument: “Why not just go to Texas and Florida?”

Separately, RNC National Press Secretary Natalie Baldassarre said in an appearance on Newsmax on Monday that the GOP has the “resources” and “record cash on hand, so the goal here is to drive people to the polls.”

Georgia-based Republican strategist Ryan Mahoney told ABC News he also felt Trump’s travel to red states was about turning out voters who otherwise might not show up. He added that some Republican-base voters may be disenchanted by Trump because of the higher cost of living — an issue that has plagued the president, according to recent polling.

“There’s no shortage of states, solid-red districts, solid-red states [that] are starting to suffer with Republican base voters who lack enthusiasm and motivation to get out and vote,” Mahoney said.

Still, Mahoney said the GOP should be more focused on competitive races: “it’s not a good look for Republicans.”

Matthew Dallek, a political historian at George Washington University, told ABC News there’s merit to the argument that Trump will turn out unmotivated GOP voters with these rallies.

“Trump has this ability, at least when he’s on the ballot, to turn out some people who don’t typically vote, to kind of remake the electorate to some extent,” he said.

But Dallek also pointed to low national approval ratings for Trump — just 33% of Americans approve of Trump and 67% disapprove, according to a recent CNN poll — that he said have created a “toxic” brand for the president, which he said could be why he is not stumping in more competitive areas.

Kondik was also skeptical that Trump appearing “front and center” at rallies may be helpful for unmotivated GOP voters who have fallen out of the president’s coalition.

From a historical perspective, however, Dallek pointed out that it’s not unprecedented for a sitting president to head to “safe” territory during a midterms election cycle. He pointed to Barack Obama, who, for instance, attended rallies in 2010 in Los Angeles and Maryland, as well as George W. Bush in 2006 (who attended rallies in states such as Indiana and Georgia.

“[Trump] is following a pattern that many of his predecessors have followed, which is when they are unpopular in midterm elections, to the extent they travel, they go to their base,” he said.

ABC News’ Hannah Demissie, Benjamin Siegel and Gaby Vinick contributed to this report.

Copyright © 2026, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(WASHINGTON) — The Trump administration used funds from the Department of Homeland Security to air TV ads featuring President Donald Trump in recent days, according to sources familiar with the matter. 

The money was moved into a U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) account for “commemorative events” on Sept. 19, and federal contract data shows that a contract of $20 million was awarded the next day to the LMD Agency, a Maryland-based advertising agency for a “National Media Campaign.” Days later, the ads began airing.

CBP is the the agency within DHS that is responsible for securing the nation’s border and ports of entry. The funds appear to have been drawn from Trump’s signature tax and spending bill passed in 2025. The bill provided $6.2 billion for a variety of border security improvements, but also for “commemorating efforts and events related to border security.”

LMD Agency did not immediately respond to ABC’s request for comment. The Wall Street Journal first reported the source of the federal funds. 

DHS has been known to use funds for advertising campaigns, including spending millions of advertisements encouraging people who are in the country illegally to self-deport. 

The federal government has spent at least $1.7 million to air three different TV ads featuring Trump in recent days, according to an estimate from AdImpact, which tracks and analyzes political ad spending across TV, digital and connected TV channels.

DHS directed inquires to the White House. In a statement to ABC News, a White House spokesperson said: “These public service announcements are about reminding Americans to love their country and understand what makes it worth defending, at home, at our borders, and abroad. The ad is educational and unapologetically patriotic. We should be proud of our country.” 

Democrats on the Senate Appropriations Committee responded by sending a letter to Homeland Security Secretary Markwayne Mullin demanding he answer questions about the breakdown of the funds, whether the ads are expected to continue, and DHS’s role in facilitating their airing.

“The American people deserve answers about how this president is literally stealing their tax dollars to air campaign ads celebrating himself — while doing nothing to help them afford health care or housing,” the letter says. 

Copyright © 2026, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(WASHINGTON) — President Donald Trump celebrated the Senate’s passage of the Protect College Sports Act, saying that the legislation will “save college sports” and is a “really big deal.”

“This is a really big deal. It will not only save college sports, it will save the colleges themselves,” Trump wrote in a Monday night social media post.

Trump has long been an advocate for this legislation and said in August that he would sign the bill “immediately” if it came across his desk — urging both the House and Senate to advance it.

On Monday night, the Senate passed the act with a vote of 77-22, bringing a massive restructuring of college athletics one step closer.

The legislation establishes a federal framework for college athletics to create one set system over the current patchwork of differing state rules. It creates one rulebook on how athletes can earn money from their name, image and likeness (NIL) and puts a cap on the amount of money schools can directly share with their athletes. 

But it’s not just about money. The bill also deals with transfers, eligibility and media rights. Athletes can transfer to another school one time without losing a year of eligibility and student-athletes are given five years of eligibility with exceptions for certain circumstances such as a serious injury. The legislation also gives colleges the ability to negotiate broadcasting agreements collectively to give them more control over how their games are marketed and distributed. 

Supporters of the bill say that it will add much-needed stability to the world of college athletics that has rapidly changed in recent years due to increasing NIL deals and frequent transfers. Senators — including Sen. Ted Cruz — argue that creating one national set of rules will reduce uncertainty and establish clear guidelines for compensation, eligibility and media rights.

“This bill puts an end to the chaos plaguing college athletics. It protects NIL opportunities because student athletes deserve the opportunity to benefit from their talent, without being taken advantage of by unscrupulous agents and backdoor deals, it creates clear, enforceable rules for eligibility and transfers. It protects our traditions and rivalries,” Cruz said on the Senate floor ahead of Monday’s vote.

While the bill received bipartisan support in the Senate on Monday, there were still concerns from many senators, largely around the amount of leverage the bill gives to the NCAA. The NCAA will now be in charge of overseeing school compliance on certain portions of the bill while also being granted immunity from federal antitrust lawsuits when enforcing its rules.

Democratic Sen. Chris Murphy, one of the bill’s opponents, argued that the legislation could give the NCAA greater legal protection and authority without giving athletes an equivalent role in negotiating the rules that govern them. 

“You don’t need a bill of this sweeping scope to address what are a set of minor but important practices in college athletics that have gotten out of control. We could have either passed a very narrow bill here to address the agent issue and the transfer issue, or we could have done what happens in most industries, which is just say to the NCAA and to the colleges, tough luck. Congress isn’t going to come in here and micromanage your relationship with the athletes. If you want to work something out, sit down and talk to the athletes about it,” Murphy said.

On Monday night, the NCAA thanked the senators who supported the legislation and looked ahead to the next hurdle: House passage.

“The NCAA thanks the many senators who sponsored this bill — including Senators Cruz, Cantwell, Schmitt and Coons — as well as the many other senators who voted for the bill, for their bipartisan effort to protect this uniquely American tradition of college sports in the decades to come,” the NCAA wrote in a social media post. “Now the bill moves to the U.S. House of Representatives and there is much work left to do to ensure student-athlete benefits are codified into federal law and future generations of young people can access those benefits and use college sports as the launching point for their careers.”

The bipartisan piece of legislation still faces obstacles in the House.

The Congressional Black Caucus has come out against the bill because they believe it doesn’t include strong enough protections and economic opportunities for Black athletes. Additionally, some conservative House members have expressed criticism for similar legislation, arguing the government is trying to have too much oversight over college sports.

The House remains out of session for their midterm recess and it is unlikely that they will be called back to Washington early to consider the legislation. 

So while the legislation is now in the red zone, it’s going to take more than a “tush push” to get it into the end zone and onto the president’s desk.

Copyright © 2026, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

Former special counsel Jack Smith is set to appear before the Senate Judiciary Committee on Tuesday to defend his two criminal investigations of President Donald Trump amid growing calls from Republicans that Smith himself face prosecution by Trump’s Justice Department. 

Smith, who secured indictments against Trump over his efforts to overturn his 2020 election loss and his alleged unlawful retention of classified documents after leaving the White House, has repeatedly said he believes he could prove Trump’s guilt beyond a reasonable doubt and defended the actions of his investigative team. 

Trump has long denied wrongdoing and neither case ultimately made it before a jury following his 2024 election victory, after which Smith moved to dismiss both indictments based on DOJ policy barring prosecution of a sitting president. 

In an opening statement to the committee obtained by ABC News, Smith is expected to say, “I stand by my decisions as Special Counsel, including my decision to bring charges against President Trump. I made these decisions without regard to President Trump’s political association, activities, beliefs, or candidacy in the 2024 presidential election.” 

“If asked whether to prosecute a former President based on the same facts today, I would do so regardless of whether that President was a Republican or a Democrat,” his statement says. 

Trump has repeatedly said Smith should face prosecution and he has become a central target of House and Senate Republicans, who have argued his investigations were fueled by political animus and represented a “weaponization” of the Justice Department.

Senate Democrats have cast Republicans’ attacks on Smith as misleading and hypocritical in light of what they argue is Trump’s blatant weaponization of the department to pursue his political enemies. 

Attorney General Todd Blanche said in July testimony that the department was investigating a criminal referral from Republicans who accused Smith of lying in prior public testimony before the House Judiciary Committee.

In a lengthy rebuttal to Blanche, Smith’s attorneys argued the referral was based on “spurious” claims that took his testimony out of context in order to create a pretext for the Justice Department to investigate him. 

“During his testimony, Mr. Smith provided truthful, responsive answers and candidly discussed his work,” Smith’s attorneys said. “This referral reflects a chilling eagerness to weaponize the justice system by attacking a career, nonpartisan public servant who faithfully and fearlessly performed his duties by following the facts and the law.”

In the nearly two years since Smith’s office was shuttered following Trump’s 2024 election win, nearly every prosecutor and line agent associated with Smith’s investigation have either resigned or been fired. 

The Justice Department and FBI have also handed over scores of records from Smith’s probes to Republican lawmakers who have released them in piecemeal disclosures alleging, without evidence, that they expose corruption or otherwise unethical behavior by Smith’s investigative team. 

In Tuesday’s hearing, specifically, Republicans are expected to accuse Smith of unlawfully targeting their phone records during the course of his investigation into Trump’s efforts to overturn his 2020 election loss. 

Smith has repeatedly defended his office’s actions with respect to the subpoenaed records, and has said the records were only targeted because they were made in the period where Trump and other White House officials were seeking to disrupt certification of Joe Biden’s 2020 election win — which ultimately led to the violent Jan. 6, 2021, assault on the U.S. Capitol. 

“I didn’t choose those members, President Trump did,” Smith said in prior testimony regarding lawmakers whose records his office obtained.

Another factor looming over Smith’s Tuesday testimony is that he is technically barred from discussing details from his other criminal investigation of Trump’s alleged unlawful retention of classified documents at his Mar-a-Lago resort. 

The Trump-appointed federal judge who previously dismissed the classified documents case, Aileen Cannon, has a standing order that prohibits Smith or any other government official from revealing information that could be part of his final report detailing the probe. An appeals court is currently weighing a lawsuit filed by First Amendment advocacy groups seeking to lift Cannon’s order and make the report public. 

Copyright © 2026, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

Leaders of top artificial intelligence companies are set to attend a lunch meeting with President Donald Trump and House Speaker Mike Johnson at the White House on Tuesday amid growing fears about the threat of the rapidly innovating technology.

The meeting comes as AI leaders are issuing dire warnings about the threat of AI and calling for steps to slow it down before it outsmarts humans. Following those warnings, lawmakers are weighing what — if any — action should be taken.

Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg will attend the meeting, a source familiar confirmed to ABC News. Another source familiar said that Dario Amodei, CEO of Anthropic will also attend. And Google CEO Sundar Pichai will also attend, a Google spokesperson confirmed to ABC News. Jensen Huang from Nvidia and Alex Karl from Palantir are also expected to attend, ABC News has confirmed.

Zuckerberg has pushed back on calls from other tech leaders to collectively slow down AI, saying “every lab has the responsibility and incentive to move at the pace required to train its models safely.”

The meeting will also include other tech leaders.

This won’t be the first time that top tech leaders have met with Trump on the issue. The Meta CEO also attended the state dinner at the White House for Chinese President Xi Jinping last week, along with the CEOs of OpenAI, Nvidia, Microsoft, Google, AMD, SpaceX and executives from Amazon and Apple. Amodei also had dinner with Trump late on Sunday night.’

The president has said that the warnings about the technology and calls to slow down AI development are a “hoax.”

“AI taking over the World, destroying Humanity, and all other things bad, is a HOAX[…],” Trump said in a social media post in mid-September, before comparing the warnings to his impeachments.

The president has made clear that he does not believe in regulating the technology. Just last week while addressing the United Nations General Assembly, Trump said the U.S. “rejects” a global attempt to regulate AI.

Johnson told reporters two weeks ago about the meeting, saying there would be “a deliberate discussion about the responsibility of the companies to maintain safety, and what role, if any, the government has to play in that.”

While Johnson called on the companies to “self-regulate,” he also also stressed that the U.S. should not lose its competitive edge in the space.

“We cannot have a moratorium on the development of AI, because then we will lose our edge to China, and that has serious national security implications for,” Johnson said.

On Monday, Johnson said the the fears of the threat of AI is a Chinese psychological operation and are politically motivated.

“This is what Democrats do. They glom on to something and say, ‘This is doom and gloom and everyone will die if we don’t win,'” he told Fox Business. “Don’t buy it. It is a Chinese psyop.”

The White House has not responded to ABC News when asked about the meeting.

Copyright © 2026, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(WASHINGTON) — Trump administration officials said on Monday that the United States has no plans to sell weapons to China after U.S. Ambassador to China David Perdue indicated during a televised interview that President Donald Trump offered a weapons deal to China’s Xi Jinping during a high-profile summit last week.

“President Trump continues to say, ‘Hey, we sell arms to other people around the world,'” Perdue said Sunday during an appearance on Fox News. “He actually asked President Xi would he like to buy some at one point.”

Perdue did not provide further details about the offer, and he did not reveal Xi’s response.

A U.S. official denied there were plans to sell weapons to China.

“The U.S. government has no plans to sell weapons to China,” the official said to ABC News on Monday. 

The State Department also denied a potential sale, saying in a statement to ABC News that “U.S. law prohibits arms sales to China and there is no offer or plan to sell arms to China.”

Asked about Perdue’s comments in the Oval Office on Monday, Trump said he “didn’t discuss it” with Xi, suggesting he meant Taiwan instead of China.

“I never heard of that one. I’m going to have to ask him. You mean we’re going to sell? Now they’d probably like to buy it because we do make better equipment than them. So maybe it’s a good idea. Yeah, but, we didn’t discuss it,” Trump said, later adding “I think he probably was talking about Taiwan.”

A U.S. weapons sale offer to China would be extraordinary, as China is viewed as the primary strategic and economic competitor of the U.S. and is designated as a foreign adversary. The U.S. has placed extensive economic sanctions on China, including economic restrictions, investment bans and contract limits on companies, groups and schools tied to the Chinese military.

The two geopolitical rivals are also competing in the race to develop advanced artificial intelligence and have opposing views over Taiwanese sovereignty.

And in recent weeks, Beijing has come under scrutiny for allegedly providing another U.S. adversary — Iran — with satellite imagery in their ongoing conflict with the U.S. and other regional allies.

Perdue told Fox News that Xi had “assured” Trump during their bilateral meeting last week that they were “looking into” the allegations about supporting Iran with satellite imagery.

The Trump administration notably downplayed taking action against China for allegedly helping Iran despite the United States’ stated goal of targeting all countries with financial ties to Iran as part of the U.S. Treasury’s offensive “Operation Economic Outcast.”

“When they say that China spies on us, I say, ‘You’re right, and we spy on them too,’ you know? We spy on them too,” Trump said earlier this month. 

When asked by reporters on Friday if the two leaders had discussed the war in Iran, Trump replied, “We did,” adding without providing details: “I think we’re going to do great.”

The potential offer to China comes as the Trump administration continues to press pause on a proposed $14 billion arms sale to the island of Taiwan, a de facto independent nation.

China has long claimed the sovereign territory as its own and regularly conducts large-scale military drills, live-fire exercises and daily air and naval patrols to apply pressure on the island. Taiwan relies heavily on U.S. military support to push back on China’s encroachments.

Perdue said that the administration was not denying Taiwan access to weapons needed for its defense, asserting: “President Trump is as strong on Taiwan as I’ve ever seen anybody. He’s made it very clear that we have not changed the One China policy.”

“President Xi has heard that repeatedly from President Donald Trump. President Trump has already sold 50% more arms to Taiwan than any other president since 1979,” Perdue added.

ABC News’ Nicholas Kerr contributed to this report.

Copyright © 2026, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.

(WASHINGTON) — President Donald Trump will announce the construction of a massive new steel plant during an Oval Office event on Monday, a White House official said.

The project, which will be built by Mesabi Metallics in Iowa, will command a $15 billion investment from the company and is the first mega-steel plant built in the United States since the 1960s, the official said. The first steel production is expected to be in 2030 and, once fully built out, will produce 10 million tons of steel annually, making it among the largest in the U.S. 

The company also recently invested $2.5 billion in a new iron ore mine in Minnesota, which the official said will allow the project to be fully integrated in the U.S. from mining to production. The mine is expected to produce 7.5 million tons of iron ore annually and will create 350 new jobs in Minnesota. Another 1,750 jobs are expected in Iowa, the official added.

“Today’s announcement underscores the President’s historic efforts to revitalize the U.S. steel industry — supporting local communities, strengthening supply chains, and protecting our national security,” White House spokesperson Taylor Rogers said in a statement confirming the announcement.

Executives from Mesabi Metallics are expected to attend the event on Monday, as well as Secretary of Commerce Howard Lutnick, Executive Director of the White House’s National Energy Dominance Council Jarrod Agen and John Jovanovic, chairman of the U.S. Export-Import Bank.

The Wall Street Journal first reported the details of the project. 

The Wall Street Journal noted that Mesabi Metallics is backed by the Essar Group, an Indian multinational conglomerate, which first proposed the mine and mill project 20 years ago, and ultimately failed. The mine project filed for bankruptcy a decade ago, the Wall Street Journal reported.

Copyright © 2026, ABC Audio. All rights reserved.