The Gaza Humanitarian Foundation’s (GHF) new chairman is ignoring critics and keeping his focus on what he calls the group’s ‘singular mission’ of making sure the people of Gaza have food.

‘Our mission has nothing to do with Hamas. It has nothing to do with Israel. It has everything to do with making sure that hungry Gazans get food. That is our singular mission. No other mission,’ Rev. Johnnie Moore, GHF’s executive chairman, told Fox News Digital.

Moore took the helm June 3, just a few days after the Israeli- and U.S.-backed aid group began its distribution operations.

Even before GHF began distributing aid, it faced criticism in the weeks leading up to its launch. The United Nations came out strongly against the group. U.N. Under-Secretary-General for Humanitarian Affairs and Emergency Relief Coordinator Tom Fletcher was a vocal critic, claiming the U.N. already had the infrastructure and ability to distribute aid.

Moore, however, believes GHF is ‘trying to solve a problem that the U.N. hasn’t been able to solve,’ namely, the issue of Hamas stealing aid. Rather than admonish critics, Moore is urging them to join GHF’s efforts to get food to people on the ground in Gaza.

The GHF chief also noted that, despite what critics have said, Gazans have been ‘incredibly grateful’ to receive the support. Not only have the beneficiaries been thanking the U.S., they’ve been thanking President Donald Trump. Moore attributes this to a promise the commander in chief made in the Oval Office.

‘They’re thanking President Trump specifically because a few weeks ago, in the Oval Office, in one of the many, many press briefings that President Trump does, he made a passing comment,’ Moore said.

‘And the comment related to how Hamas was treating the Gazan people very badly when it came to humanitarian aid. And he made a promise that the United States would do something about it. And the people in Gaza are attributing our free distribution of food as a direct response to the promise of the president of the United States.’

Israel and the U.S. have repeatedly said that GHF is the best mechanism for distributing aid to Gazans and ensuring that Hamas does not get anything. Moore told Fox News Digital humanitarian aid officials have faced a ‘false choice’ for years between Hamas and the people of Gaza.

‘I think for many, many years, the aid community thought that the cost of giving aid to the people of Gaza is that you had to lose a certain amount of that aid to all of these other nefarious purposes. We’re just showing that that’s a false choice. That doesn’t have to be the case. We can actually give aid without facing these dilemmas,’ Moore said.

‘Since the Israeli authorities allowed the U.N. to resume bringing limited aid into Gaza after nearly 80 days of a total blockade of any supplies, there have been understandable instances of trucks carrying food being offloaded by hungry civilians,’ Eri Kaneko, spokesperson for the U.N. Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs, told Fox News Digital.

‘In some cases, we have also seen unacceptable looting by armed, criminal gangs, which posed tremendous risk to our drivers’ safety. To meet humanitarian needs in Gaza and help reduce looting, far more essential supplies should be allowed into Gaza through multiple crossings and routes.’

In late May, Israeli U.N. Ambassador Danny Danon revealed the international institution was using ‘mafia-like’ tactics against NGOs that were open to working with GHF. The U.N. removed several NGOs from a shared aid database, which acts as a ‘central system for tracking aid deliveries into Gaza,’ according to Danon.

The following week, after Danon exposed the U.N.’s actions, the U.S. vetoed a U.N. Security Council resolution calling for a ceasefire in Gaza. The resolution also addressed humanitarian aid, though Danon said it would have undermined, rather than advanced, such efforts.

Just minutes before vetoing the resolution, U.S. Chargé d’Affaires Dorothy Shea urged the U.N. to support GHF ‘to help it safely deliver aid without being diverted by Hamas. The GHF has emphasized it will deliver aid consistent with the humanitarian principles of humanity, neutrality, impartiality and independence.’

President Donald Trump said Wednesday he was willing to extend the deadline for countries to reach a trade deal with the United States, but he doesn’t think it will be necessary.

At the same time, he also indicated that in one to two weeks his administration would be sending out letters telling countries ‘what the deal is.’ 

Trump made the remarks ahead of a performance of ‘Les Misérables’ that he attended at the Kennedy Center in Washington with the first lady.

‘I would,’ Trump said when asked if he would be willing to extend the July 8 deadline for countries to negotiate a trade deal or else face steep tariffs. ‘But I don’t think we’re going to have that necessity,’ the president added, telling reporters ‘we’re rocking in terms of deals’ right now.

Shortly after announcing sweeping tariff policies on April 2 for virtually every U.S. trading partner, the Trump administration chose to institute a 90-day pause to give countries a chance to make a deal with the United States. 

Trump noted during the gaggle with reporters ahead of Wednesday’s Kennedy Center performance that the United States remains in talks with about 15 countries with whom it is still trying to cement a deal. But the president said that he intends to send letters to these partners setting unilateral tariff rates if a deal is not reached.   

‘We’re dealing with Japan. We’re dealing with South Korea. We’re dealing with a lot of them. We’re dealing with about 15 countries. But as you know, we have about 150-plus, and you can’t [make a deal with all of them]. So we’re going to be sending letters out in about a week and a half, two weeks, to countries and telling them what the deal is.’

‘At a certain point, we’re just going to send letters out … saying this is the deal, you can take it or leave it,’ Trump added.

Highly anticipated trade talks with China held in London this week led to a preliminary agreement between the world’s two biggest economic powers, but the ‘framework’ is still pending final approval from Chinese President Xi Jinping and Trump.

‘We made a great deal with China. We’re very happy with it,’ Trump told reporters at the Kennedy Center on Wednesday evening. ‘We have everything we need, and we’re going to do very well with it. And hopefully they are, too.’

A House Ways and Means Committee hearing took an unexpected turn Wednesday when Rep. Linda Sanchez (D-CA) accused Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent of interrupting her because of her gender—prompting audible groans from the room.

The exchange occurred during a tense five-minute questioning session, where Sanchez challenged Bessent on the impact of tariffs enacted under President Trump’s administration.

‘Prices are rising on many everyday goods,’ Sanchez said, citing increases in clothing, shoes, canned food, toys, and household tools. She added, ‘On average, Trump’s tariffs are estimated to cost households $3,000 more for the same goods than they would have last year,’ though she did not cite the source of the figure when pressed.

When Bessent attempted to interject, Sanchez quickly cut him off: ‘Please don’t interrupt me… I know I’m a woman, but please try to limit yourself to answering my questions.’

That remark prompted groans from the hearing room, with one attendee audibly reacting, ‘Oh, come on.’ Sanchez responded: ‘No, I’m sorry, but we get talked over all the time, and I don’t want that to happen at this hearing.’

Bessent, who is openly gay, did not address the accusation and instead focused on defending the administration’s trade policies. 

When Sanchez challenged him on pricing impacts and China’s trade behavior, Bessent responded, ‘That’s incorrect,’ and said, ‘They met their agreements under President Trump in 2020, and President Biden did not enforce them.’

Sanchez repeatedly claimed that American consumers are paying more due to tariffs and described recent negotiations with China as rushed and lacking transparency. ‘A poorly negotiated trade deal with China is probably not worth the paper that it is written on,’ she said. ‘I was alarmed to hear this morning that Trump said the U.S.–China deal was done after just two days of talks in London.’

Bessent defended the agreement as an initial step. ‘The deal struck was for a specific goal, and it will be a much longer process,’ he said, adding, ‘China has proven an unreliable partner.’

The clash between Sanchez and Bessent was repeatedly moderated by Chairman Adrian Smith (R-NE), who reminded members of time limits and decorum throughout the hearing.

President Donald Trump’s $9.4 billion spending cuts package survived a key hurdle on Wednesday afternoon, setting the measure up for a final House-wide vote later this week.

Trump’s proposal, which was introduced as legislation by House Majority Leader Steve Scalise, R-La., would cut $8.3 billion from the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID), and just over $1 billion from the Corporation for Public Broadcasting.

The Corporation for Public Broadcasting distributes federal funding to NPR and PBS.

The House of Representatives made a procedural motion known as a ‘rule vote,’ which passed mostly along party lines. 

The rule passing now allows for debate on the $9.4 billion spending cut measure, followed by a final House-wide vote.

But it’s not atypical for House leaders to include unrelated measures in rule votes, as is the case with the spending cuts package – House GOP leaders included a provision with minor changes to Trump’s ‘one big, beautiful bill’ to account for the Senate needing to amend the bill.

That latter piece of legislation, a vast tax and immigration bill, is moving through the budget reconciliation process.

By dropping the Senate’s threshold for advancement from 60 votes to 51, it allows the party in power to skirt the minority – in this case, Democrats – on vast pieces of legislation, provided they adhere to a specific set of budgetary rules.

House GOP leaders said they needed to make the recent changes to the bill to better adhere to the Senate’s ‘Byrd Bath,’ when the Senate parliamentarian reviews the bill and removes anything not adhering to reconciliation guidelines.

Whereas that deals with the government’s mandatory spending processes that are more difficult to amend, the $9.4 billion spending cuts package tackles discretionary spending that Congress controls every year.

It’s called a ‘rescissions package,’ which is a formal proposal by the White House to claw back federal funds already allocated for the current fiscal year.

Like reconciliation, the mechanism allows for a 51-vote majority in the Senate rather than 60. Congress has 45 days to consider it, or it is deemed rejected.

Republican leaders have held up this rescissions package as the first step to codifying the billions of dollars of government waste identified by Elon Musk’s Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE).

Trump allies have also made clear they view this first package as a test of what kind of cuts congressional Republicans can stomach.

And while the rule vote was expected to pass, the bill could have trouble ahead of its expected Thursday afternoon vote.

Rep. Mark Amodei, R-Nev., pointed out in a bipartisan statement that the media funding represents less than 0.01% of the federal budget and said taking that money away would ‘dismantle a trusted source of information for millions of Americans.’

Rep. Don Bacon, R-Neb., told reporters on Tuesday that he got assurances that USAID cuts would exclude critical medical funding.

‘I feel better than what I was hearing last week, that was gonna be a total cut,’ he said, without revealing whether he would support the bill.