Pentagon eyes surging carrier group to Middle East amid tensions with Iran
U.S. President Donald Trump tours the Ford River Rouge Complex on January 13, 2026, in Dearborn, Michigan. Trump is visiting Michigan where he will participate in a tour of the Ford River Rouge complex and later give remarks to the Detroit Economic Club. (Photo by Anna Moneymaker/Getty Images)
(WASHINGTON) — The Pentagon was expected to send additional military assets to the Middle East in coming days, according to several people familiar with the discussions, including possibly the USS Abraham Lincoln carrier strike group.
Such a move is considered a typical precaution at times of heightened tensions because of the 30,000 troops stationed throughout the region in countries like Qatar, Jordan, Syria and Iraq.
The added firepower would serve as a deterrent to attacks by adversaries against U.S. bases. But it also would give President Donald Trump additional options to strike Iran later if he chooses.
Examples of assets that could be surged include an aircraft carrier strike group accompanied by cruisers and missile destroyers, as well as Air Force fighter squadrons and land-based air missile defense systems.
Discussions of the additional military assets come as Trump threatened to attack Iran’s government because of violent clashes with protesters. Officials in Tehran responded by threatening to strike back at U.S. bases if he followed through.
According to one person familiar with the discussions this week, Trump was told that a military strike against Iran could be extraordinarily dangerous and potentially risk the lives of U.S. service members in the region, particularly if the government in Tehran felt it was on the brink of collapse. NBC News was first to report this detail.
On Wednesday, Trump told reporters he opted against strikes for now because the U.S. had been told “on good authority” that the killing of protestors in Iran had stopped. Trump also said Friday that 800 planned executions in Iran had been halted, a claim that could not be immediately verified.
In an interview with Fox News on Wednesday, Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi denied Tehran had any plans to execute protesters.
Several sources said there had been long-running concerns among U.S. officials that the military didn’t have the right mix of assets in place to protect against a potential massive retaliatory strike from Iran, given that Trump had surged much of the military’s force to the Caribbean to support the capture of Venezuelan dictator Nicolas Maduro.
There is currently no aircraft carrier in the Middle East, although officials say there are six Navy ships, including three missile destroyers. The Pentagon declined to comment.
If the Lincoln is deployed to the Middle East from the South China Sea, it’s expected to take longer than a week to arrive. The USS Lincoln was spotted earlier this week on satellite sailing away from the Philippines.
An excavator works to clear rubble after the East Wing of the White House was demolished, Oct. 23, 2025. (Eric Lee/Getty Images)
(WASHINGTON) — The federal judge presiding over a challenge to the White House ballroom project signaled deep skepticism of the Trump administration’s argument that the president has the legal authority to undertake the East Wing renovations and to fund them with private donations.
In a hearing on Thursday, U.S. District Court Judge Richard Leon pressed an administration lawyer on both of those issues — as he questioned whether the president has the power to tear down part of what he called “an icon that’s a national institution,” and described the intent to fund it with private gifts as a “Rube Goldberg contraption” that would evade congressional oversight.
The National Trust for Historic Preservation filed a lawsuit last month seeking to stop the ballroom construction until the project completes the federal review process standard for federal building projects and the administration seeks public comment on the proposed changes.
The National Trust, the privately funded nonprofit designated by Congress to protect historic sites, was seeking a preliminary injunction.
At the end of the hour-long hearing Thursday, Judge Leon said he will likely not issue a decision this month, but “hopefully” in February. He said he expects the losing side to appeal.
In a statement provided to ABC News, White House spokesman Davis Ingle said: “President Trump is working 24/7 to Make America Great Again, including his historic beautification of the White House, at no taxpayer expense. These long-needed upgrades will benefit generations of future presidents and American visitors to the People’s House.”
The size and cost of the project have increased since first being unveiled. In November, Trump said the project would cost $400 million, after an initial estimate of $200 million. The White House has said the project will be funded by private donations.
Judge Leon, a George W. Bush appointee, said the Trump administration appears to be making an “end run” around congressional oversight with the president’s plan to privately raise $400 million for the ballroom project, and he admonished the Justice Department’s lawyer to “be serious” in justifying a legal rationale for it.
While the case presents a series of complicated and overlapping legal issues, the judge spent much of the hearing focused on just two federal statutes — one, which says that no “building or structure” can be built on any federal public grounds in the District of Columbia “without express authority of Congress,” and another that calls for yearly appropriations for the “maintenance, repair, alteration, refurnishing [and] improvement” of the White House.
Leon noted that Republicans control both houses of Congress, and that the president could have gone to lawmakers to seek approval for the demolition and rebuild. He also suggested the $2.5 million Congress recently appropriated for White House maintenance was for “very small-size projects,” not a ballroom.
Justice Department lawyer Yaakov Roth responded that Trump didn’t want $400 million in taxpayer money to be used for the project, when he could solicit gifts to the National Park Service to fund it instead. Roth also noted that Congress was never asked in Gerald Ford’s era to approve the building of a swimming pool, or a tennis pavilion during Trump’s first term.
“[Your argument for using NPS’s gift authority] on an icon that’s a national treasure is, what? The ’77 Gerald Ford swimming pool?” Leon asked. “You compare that to ripping down the East Wing? C’mon! Be serious.”
Leon said he saw “no basis” in the legislative history of the park service’s gift authority that would allow Trump to use it to raise $400 million to build a new White House ballroom. “None,” Leon said. “Zero.”
Arguing for the National Trust, attorney Tad Heuer described the president as a “temporary tenant of the White House, not the landlord.” Leon suggested “steward” might be a more fitting term.
“He is not the owner,” Heuer said.
As Roth took the podium to begin his argument on behalf of the administration, he attempted to convince the judge that the National Trust has no standing to sue. Leon abruptly cut him off.
“I’m very comfortable with standing in this case,” Leon said. “Sorry to disappoint you. You’ll get your chance at the Court of Appeals.”
Roth warned the judge that an order halting construction at this stage could expose the existing White House structure to damage and potentially lead to security concerns, since it’s widely believed that a replacement for a previously-existing underground bunker is part of the project. The National Trust has said it would not object to continued construction on the security portion of the work.
“It can’t be divided out that way,” Roth said of the security-related construction, “unless we want the court to be the project manager on site.”
Leon declined to issue an order from the bench. He said the coming winter storm made it unlikely he would issue a ruling on the National Trust’s motion for a preliminary injunction before the end of this month.
ABC News’ Michelle Stoddard contributed to this report.
Editor’s Note: An earlier version of this story misidentified an attorney for the National Trust for Historic Preservation. The story has been corrected and updated.
U.S. first lady Melania Trump delivers a statement at the Grand Foyer of the White House on April 9, 2026 in Washington, DC. (Alex Wong/Getty Images)
(WASHINGTON) — A senior adviser to first lady Melania Trump, Marc Beckman, said she wanted to “set the record straight” when she delivered her surprise statement at the White House denying any ties to late convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein.
Beckman elaborated on the first lady’s decision to publicly address the Epstein controversy during an appearance Friday morning on “Fox & Friends.”
“If she can’t stick up for herself, if she can’t defend herself and make sure that her reputation is impeccable, who will do it? Nobody’s done it to date,” Beckman said.
“She’s ready to fight,” he added.
The press was not given advance notice on the topic of the first lady’s Thursday remarks, in which she said she never had any knowledge of Epstein’s crimes and that she had no relationship with Epstein or Ghislaine Maxwell, his co-conspirator who was convicted of sex trafficking.
The first lady also called for public hearings into the Epstein controversy and to allow survivors to testify before Congress if they wish to do so.
“The lies linking me with the disgraceful Jeffrey Epstein need to end today,” Melania Trump said.
A spokesperson for the first lady’s office said the West Wing was aware she would make a statement.
But sources told ABC News that White House officials were caught off guard by the topic of her address, with some questioning why she was commenting on the subject now.
President Donald Trump said he did not know the first lady was going to make a statement today about Epstein, according to an MS Now reporter who said she had a brief phone interview with the president.
Asked by ABC News for clarification, a spokesperson for the first lady directed any questions about Trump’s knowledge about her statement to the West Wing. But the White House has said any questions related to the statement should come from her office.
President Trump has tried to shift focus away from the Epstein controversy, repeatedly calling it a “Democratic hoax.” Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche, in a recent interview, said the Epstein files matter “should not be a part of anything going forward” at the Department of Justice.
Beckman was asked on “Fox & Friends” why Melania Trump decided to come forward at this moment.
“First, enough is enough. This has been ongoing and it’s time for the public to refocus their attention on what achievements our first lady has done,” Beckman said, pointing to her foster care and education initiatives.
Beckman echoed the first lady’s comments that fake images and stories about her and Epstein have circulated for years, prompting her to come out and address them — despite headlines in recent weeks moving on from the Epstein files.
“The first lady accomplished three things yesterday as it relates to the disgraceful Epstein,” he said. “First, she cleared her record. She set the record straight. She debunked all of the lies surrounding her and Epstein. Second, she became a champion for these women, for the victims. Finally, third, she is a real leader in Washington, D.C. She is calling on Congress to act now.”
ABC News asked the White House if the president agrees with the first lady that Epstein’s victims should testify before Congress but has not gotten a response.
A group of 13 Epstein survivors and the brother and sister-in-law of another accused the first lady of “shifting the burden onto survivors,” rather than pushing for accountability.
“Survivors have done their part. Now it’s time for those in power to do theirs,” they said.
ABC News’ Rachel Scott and Isabella Murray contributed to this report.
President Donald Trump pauses as he finishes speaking about the Iran war from the Cross Hall of the White House on Wednesday, April 1, 2026, in Washington. (Alex Brandon-Pool/Getty Images)
(WASHINGTON) — The White House, in their budget request for the 2027 fiscal year, is asking Congress to approve roughly $1.5 trillion for defense — a record-breaking military spending request as the U.S. remains in its fifth week of war with Iran.
That is a $445 billion, or a 42% increase from the 2026 total level, according to the White House. Non-defense spending is reduced by $73 billion, or 10%, according to the budget released by the White House on Friday.
This is a developing story. Please check back for updates.
