Washington’s ambassador to Israel said he did not think an independent Palestinian state remains a U.S. foreign policy goal, prompting the State Department to say he spoke for himself while the White House referred to past comments from President Donald Trump expressing doubts about a two-state solution.
“I don’t think so,” U.S. Ambassador Mike Huckabee said in an interview with Bloomberg News published on Tuesday, when asked if a Palestinian state remains a goal of U.S. policy.
Asked about Huckabee’s comments, the White House referred to remarks earlier this year by Trump when he proposed a U.S. takeover of Gaza, which was condemned globally by rights groups, Arab states, Palestinians and the U.N. as a proposal of “ethnic cleansing.”
The White House also referred to remarks by Trump from last year before he won the 2024 election when he said: “I’m not sure a two-state solution anymore is going to work.”
Asked whether Huckabee’s remarks represented a change in U.S. policy, State Department spokesperson Tammy Bruce declined to comment on Tuesday, saying policy-making was a matter for Trump and the White House.
“I’m not going to explain them or really comment on them at all. I think he certainly speaks for himself,” Bruce told reporters.
Huckabee, an evangelical Christian, is a staunch pro-Israel conservative.
“Unless there are some significant things that happen that change the culture, there’s no room for it,” Huckabee was quoted as saying by Bloomberg. Those probably won’t happen “in our lifetime,” he said.
Trump, in his first term, was relatively tepid in his approach to a two-state solution, a longtime pillar of U.S. Middle East policy. Trump has given little sign of where he stands on the issue in his second term.
Huckabee suggested a piece of land could be carved out of a Muslim country rather than asking Israel to make room. “Does it have to be in Judea and Samaria?” Huckabee said, using the biblical name the Israeli government favors for the Israeli-occupied West Bank, where some 3 million Palestinians live.
Huckabee, a former Arkansas governor, has been a vocal supporter of Israel throughout his political career and a longtime defender of Jewish settlements in the West Bank.
Trump has pursued strongly pro-Israel policies as president and his choice of Huckabee as ambassador signaled that they would continue.
The United States has for decades backed a two-state solution between the Israelis and the Palestinians that would create a state for Palestinians in the West Bank and Gaza alongside Israel.
The latest bloodshed in the decades-old Israeli-Palestinian conflict was triggered in October 2023, when Palestinian Hamas militants attacked Israel, killing 1,200 and taking about 250 hostages, according to Israeli allies.
U.S. ally Israel’s subsequent military assault on Gaza has killed nearly 55,000 Palestinians, according to Gaza’s health ministry, while internally displacing nearly Gaza’s entire population and causing a hunger crisis. The assault has also triggered accusations of genocide at the International Court of Justice and of war crimes at the International Criminal Court. Israel denies the accusations.
Source: United States House of Representatives – Congresswoman Lauren Underwood (IL-14)
WASHINGTON—During today’s House Appropriations full committee markup of the 2026 Military Construction, Veterans Affairs, and Related Agencies funding bill, Rep. Lauren Underwood (IL-14) delivered the following remarks:
“Mr. Chairman, I strongly oppose the Fiscal Year 2026 Military Construction, Veterans Affairs, and Related Agencies Appropriations bill we are considering today.
Our veterans are heroes who have given so much to our country. Their sacrifices can never be fully repaid, but the least we can do is to provide them with high-quality healthcare and other benefits they are entitled to.
When they come home, they deserve to know that the country they fought for is going to deliver on its promises.
And today, we have the opportunity to keep those promises—but unfortunately, my colleagues across the aisle have chosen to join the Trump Administration in turning their backs on veterans.
To start, this bill takes a page right out of the Project 2025 playbook by wasting billions of taxpayer dollars to privatize veterans’ medical care—even though this approach will only lead to higher costs, longer wait times, and more barriers to care.
So while this Committee could be investing in vital, VA-based care that is consistently preferred by veterans and outperforms private community care, House Republicans have written a bill that will raise costs AND lower the quality of veterans’ care. This is unacceptable.
If that wasn’t bad enough, let’s talk about the PACT Act.
I was proud to support this historic, bipartisan expansion of health care and benefits for veterans exposed to toxic substances like burn pits and Agent Orange.
Since its passage, the VA has delivered new PACT Act-related disability benefits to more than 1.4 million veterans and over 14,000 survivors of veterans who died of a toxic exposure-related illness.
The PACT Act was a promise: if you put your life on the line for this country, we will take care of you.
But this bill breaks that promise by failing to provide guaranteed advance funding for the PACT Act’s Toxic Exposure Fund. Advance funding provides the certainty the VA needs to plan for and deliver consistent high-quality care for our veterans who were subjected to toxic exposures.
And it doesn’t stop there. This bill is packed with the same cruel, performative policy riders we see year after year. As a nurse, I believe health care is a human right—including the full range of reproductive health care services. But this bill blocks the VA from providing abortions or even abortion counseling.
It would force many of our veterans—like countless women across this country since the disastrous Dobbs decision—to wait till they are on their deathbeds to receive essential health care. It’s extreme, it’s deadly, and it’s anti-veteran.
The bill also underfunds military construction by $904 million, delaying critical infrastructure needs that are vital to our military readiness. That hurts recruitment, worsens the quality of life for servicemembers and their families, and undermines our national security.
But perhaps most alarming – this bill FAILS to stop the Trump Administration’s dangerous, unconstitutional effort to dismantle the Department of Veterans Affairs.
So far, the Trump Administration has illegally fired thousands of VA staff that support critical services like processing claims benefits and keeping the Veterans Crisis Line running, and they have cancelled more than 500 contracts. These cuts have interrupted veteran services and threatened the future of critical research from cancer treatments to suicide prevention.
And this is just the beginning.
Donald Trump’s VA Secretary has said publicly that the Administration’s goal is to reduce the agency’s staff by 15 percent –that’s 80,000 fewer professionals working to keep our promises to those who have served this country and many future generations of veterans left behind.
Already I have heard from veterans in my District about the distress caused by these impending cuts. At my most recent town hall, one veteran who has sought mental health care at the VA since the 1970 shared his concerns about the future of his care in midst of these impending cuts.
Another constituent of mine reached out via email and shared that “veterans that use the center for mental health issues are having anxiety attacks over the issues at the VA.” This is the real cost of the Administration’s decisions.
And instead of standing up for our veterans, my Republican colleagues have written a bill that rubber stamps the Administration’s illegal and cruel acts.
For all these reasons and more, I cannot support this bill.
Our veterans deserve better. They deserve a Congress that honors their service—not just with words, but with action.
They deserve a fully funded VA, access to comprehensive health care—including reproductive care—and a government that keeps its promises.
I ask my colleagues across the aisle to do the right thing, stand up for veterans, and reject this misguided bill.”
Source: United States House of Representatives – Congressman Jason Crow (CO-06)
WASHINGTON — Congressman Jason Crow (D-CO-06) issued the following statement on President Trump’s deployment of the National Guard and active duty Marines in California:
In a statement, Congressman Crow said:
“Federalizing and deploying National Guard troops in any state should always be a last resort to address situations local authorities can’t handle alone. The reason for this is simple: introducing military personnel into domestic law enforcement situations is an escalation and can put both the military personnel and civilians on the ground at additional risk.
“Deploying troops inappropriately can also threaten the integrity and public trust of our military. There are many examples in US history of this ending poorly.
“Here, both the mayor and the governor have been very clear that military personnel (the National Guard or active duty) are not necessary.
“I urge President Trump to reverse course and allow state and local law enforcement officials to respond.”
Source: United States House of Representatives – Congresswoman Ann Wagner (R-MO-02)
Ballwin, MO – Congresswoman Ann Wagner (R-MO) released the following statement after President Donald J. Trump approved Governor Mike Kehoe’s request for federal support to aid disaster recovery from the May 16th tornado.
“Thank you President Trump for your swift action to provide federal support to the victims of the deadly tornado last month. The St. Louis region was hit incredibly hard and this disaster assistance is going directly to ensure our community can rebuild stronger and better than before. I appreciate President Trump and his team for working with us so our officials on the state and local level have the resources they need. I spoke with people on the ground when I saw the damage firsthand and I know how helpful this aid will be to our friends and neighbors.”
Source: United States Senator for Connecticut – Chris Murphy
June 10, 2025
WASHINGTON—U.S. Senators Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), a member of the U.S. Senate Appropriations Committee, and Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.) joined 27 of their U.S. Senate colleagues in slamming a Republican attempt to rescind $1.07 billion in already-allocated funding for the Corporation for Public Broadcasting (CPB), which funds local public broadcasting stations across the country. The $1.07 billion represents 100% of CPB’s funding through September 2027. This move follows President Trump’s executive order directing cuts to federal funding for PBS and NPR.
“Following the White House’s request to rescind $1.07 billion in federal funding for CPB, we write to express our strong opposition to any rescission of funding for public broadcasting and prohibitions of direct and indirect funding to the Public Broadcasting Service and National Public Radio,” the senators wrote. “This funding is essential to the functioning of the public media system and the communities they serve, and any cuts in funding would have detrimental effects on local stations, which rely on this funding to provide critical services to millions of Americans across the country. Public broadcasting is an essential service that should be protected, not decimated. For this reason, we request that you prioritize maintaining and continuing funding for CPB.”
The Corporation for Public Broadcasting supports over 1,500 local public television and radio stations that provide free, high-quality programming to millions of households across America. It provides young children who don’t get the chance to attend preschool with educational content that helps them learn to read; airs highly trusted nightly news programming; and shares critical public safety information during emergencies. Local public television stations also provide extensive coverage of local government and elections and host candidate debates, helping Americans stay connected with their elected leaders. Because public television and radio relies heavily on federal funding to operate, particularly in rural communities, losing this funding would force many of these stations to reduce much of their programming or, in some cases, close their doors.
U.S. Senators Kirsten Gillibrand (D-N.Y.), Ed Markey (D-Mass.), Michael Bennet (D-Colo.), Lisa Blunt Rochester (D-Del.), Cory Booker (D-N.J.), Catherine Cortez Masto (D-Nev.), Tammy Duckworth (D-Ill.), Martin Heinrich (D-N.M.), John Hickenlooper (D-Colo.), Mazie Hirono (D-Hawaii), Tim Kaine (D-Va.), Andy Kim (D-N.J.), Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.), Ben Ray Luján (D-N.M.), Alex Padilla (D-Calif.), Gary Peters (D-Mich.), Jacky Rosen (D-Nev.), Bernard Sanders (I-Vt.), Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.), Jeanne Shaheen (D-N.H.), Elissa Slotkin (D-Mich.), Tina Smith (D-Minn.), Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.), Mark Warner (D-Va.), Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), Peter Welch (D-Vt.) and Ron Wyden (D-Ore.) also signed the letter.
Full text of the letter is available HERE and below:
Dear Majority Leader Thune,
Federal investment in the Corporation for Public Broadcasting (CPB) supports over 1,500 local and regional public television and radio stations that provide free, high-quality programming to millions of households across the country. Following the White House’s request to rescind $1.07 billion in federal funding for CPB, we write to express our strong opposition to any rescission of funding for public broadcasting and prohibitions of direct and indirect funding to the Public Broadcasting Service and National Public Radio, as outlined in the Executive Order titled, “Ending Taxpayer Subsidization of Biased Media” released on May 1, 2025. This funding is essential to the functioning of the public media system and the communities they serve, and any cuts in funding would have detrimental effects on local stations, which rely on this funding to provide critical services to millions of Americans across the country.
Our public broadcasting system is a unique American institution that is deeply embedded in our communities and a critical source of lifesaving public safety services, accurate information, and educational programming. The vast majority of the federal funding CPB receives is allocated to local radio and television stations across the country. These cuts will have an immediate and significant impact for stations in rural communities that heavily rely on CPB funding to provide critical services and could likely result in the elimination of programming or outright closure of stations in areas already faced with limited connectivity.
According to Northwestern University, 55 million people in the United States have no or only one source of local news, and rural counties are far more likely to lose their local news outlets. This number could increase if the two-year advance appropriation for public media is not upheld, resulting in the drastic reduction or complete elimination of free, high-quality local programming. This is especially concerning given the importance of public broadcasting during public emergencies, such as natural disasters, transportation accidents, national security threats, or public safety matters. CPB funds are essential to ensuring that the broadcast infrastructure remains robust and operational in disaster situations, especially scenarios in which local public broadcasters serve as the only source of information for those who need a lifeline. Any cuts in funding will have drastic consequences for communities in need.
And there is much more to their public safety services in addition to the critical local information they broadcast. Public television’s interconnection technology, which connects local public television stations to PBS, is also one of the backbone pathways for the delivery of our nation’s Wireless Emergency Alert (WEA) services – enabling cell phone subscribers to receive geotargeted emergency text alerts no matter where they are in the country. A cut to public broadcasting funding would put this lifesaving service and its nationwide footprint at risk.
Public television has also pioneered cutting edge technology that helps first responders communicate with each other over the broadcast spectrum without the need for mobile service or broadband. This datacasting technology and public television’s public safety partnerships is already helping with early earthquake warning and has been proven effective in a wide range of scenarios where broadband or cellular service are limited, including rural search and rescue, overwater communications, large event crowd control and more. But this is only possible if stations serving rural and remote areas with limited broadband are healthy and continue operating as they are today.
On the education front, public television’s early childhood education services ensure that every family has access to high-quality, non-commercial educational content regardless of their ability to pay for such services. This is essential for over 50 percent of three and four-year old children who do not attend formal preschool.
If funding for the Corporation for Public Broadcasting (CPB) is eliminated or rescinded, the impact would be devastating. Millions of people across the country whose stations rely on CPB funding for a significant percentage of their budget would be at risk of losing access to public television’s services. These are services that nobody else in the media world is providing, but it’s exactly the work for which public broadcasting was created, and they are delivering to our communities every day.
Public broadcasting is an essential service that should be protected, not decimated. For this reason, we request that you prioritize maintaining and continuing funding for CPB. We appreciate your consideration of this request and thank you for your prompt attention to this matter.
Source: United States House of Representatives – Congressman Ken Calvert (CA-42)
Today, Congressman Ken Calvert (CA-41) issued the following statement after voting to pass the One Big Beautiful Bill Act:
“I promised voters that if they sent me back to Congress, I would fight to keep their taxes low – and that’s exactly what this One Big Beautiful Bill does. The passage of the bill will prevent the looming tax increase that would be the largest in our nation’s history. Job growth, take-home pay, and economic opportunities hit historic highs following the passage of the 2017 tax cuts. This bill extends and expands those pro-worker and pro-family policies.
To support American workers, the bill eliminates federal income taxes on tips and overtime. To support retirees, the bill includes new tax relief for seniors. To support families, the bill increases the state and local taxes (SALT) deduction cap to $40,000 as well as extends and expands the child tax credit that Republicans doubled in 2017. To support job creators, the bill expands and makes permanent the small business deduction and allows 100% immediate expensing.
The One Big Beautiful Bill includes resources that will allow the Trump Administration to solidify the tremendous progress made in securing our border by completing the southern Border Wall and investing in our Border Patrol. To secure America and support our military, the bill will allow the Defense Department to acquire ships, aircraft, and other essential weapons systems as well as invest in the innovation entities within the Department focused on deploying vital capabilities in a time frame of relevance.
I have made it clear throughout this process that I would not support cuts to Medicaid for seniors, children, mothers, and the disabled. The One Big Beautiful Bill protects these populations and does NOT cut Medicaid for seniors, children, mothers, and the disabled. The bill makes NO changes to Social Security, Medicare, or veterans’ benefits.
The changes to Medicaid strengthen the program by eliminating waste, fraud, and abuse. The bill ensures federal tax dollars are not used to provide Medicaid benefits for illegal immigrants through new immigration status check rules. The bill also implements sensible 20-hour per week work requirements – which can be satisfied through either employment, volunteering, or education – for able adults without children under 65 years of age. According to the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office, the only individuals estimated to lose Medicaid benefits because of the bill are illegal immigrants, ineligible recipients who will lose coverage due to better enforcement of eligibility rules, and able adults without children who refuse to satisfy the new work requirements. These are reasonable, responsible Medicaid reforms that protect the most vulnerable as well as taxpayers.”
Source: United States House of Representatives – Representative Zoe Lofgren (D-San Jose)
SAN JOSE, CA – Today, Congresswoman Zoe Lofgren (CA-18) released the following statement after the Trump Administration deployed California’s National Guard in response to ongoing protests in Los Angeles, California:
“Trump’s unwarranted and unwise deployment of California’s National Guard over the objections of California officials is likely intended to inflame the situation. It’s not a surprise that when masked and armed ICE agents deployed across communities arresting working people, parents, and neighbors there would be objections. This was aggravated when, as he was peacefully protesting, union leader David Huerta was pushed by ICE, injured, and then arrested. Many of us, observing Trump’s authoritarian bent, have been concerned that he would look for some excuse to seize control from civilian authorities. Our citizen soldiers, members of California’s National Guard, should not be abused in this way. But given Trump’s view of soldiers as “ losers,” he obviously doesn’t care that these volunteers have been called away from their jobs and families for no good reason other than creating a scene and potentially creating an environment where violence and disorder may be stimulated.”
Source: United States Senator for New Mexico Martin Heinrich
WASHINGTON — Today, U.S. Senators Martin Heinrich (D-N.M.), Ranking Member of the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee, joined Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.), Brian Schatz (D-Hawaii), and Tina Smith (D-Minn.) in a press conference on how Trump and Republicans’ reconciliation bill will raise energy costs for working families, all to pay for tax handouts for their billionaire donors.
VIDEO: U.S. Senator Martin Heinrich (D-N.M.) hosts a press conference blasting Trump and Republicans’ reconciliation bill for raising energy costs, June 10, 2025.
Heinrich’s remarks as delivered are below:
As Senator Schatz said, the conundrum we’re in with electricity right now is that we haven’t been in this supply demand space since air conditioners became a widely available technology.
That was the last time we saw the kind of growth in demand that we’re experiencing right now. On the supply side, the place we find ourselves in right now is one where, if you want to order a combined cycle of natural gas turbine, if you ordered it yesterday, you’re going to get it in 2030 or 2031.
If you want to build a new API, 1000 Nuclear Generating Station, as the President has said he does, it’s going to take you 5 to 10 years to actually build that.
If you want to do the geothermal stuff that’s taking off in Utah, to some extent in New Mexico, that’s scaling slow: It’s going to be 5 to 10 years before that stuff is at scale.
So if you look at this incredibly increased demand from artificial intelligence, from electrification, from the surge we’ve seen in manufacturing, and you look at the supply that’s coming onto the grid in 2024 and what’s coming on in 2025 well over 90% of that is actually renewables plus storage.
And that’s the case because it’s the cheapest, fastest to permit and fastest to build.
So if you start throttling back 90% of your supply at a time when demand is going through the roof, what’s the impact of that?
And I’m here to tell you, the impact is electricity bills are going up.
They are going up all across the country.
And Republicans are going to own that because there is no world in which we throttle supply like they are doing right now, especially with this reconciliation bill, but in 5 or 10 other different ways as well, and you don’t see those electric bills go through the roof.
IRA tax credits are the biggest piece of that but it’s not the only one.
They basically eviscerated the agencies that finance or permit many of these things.
They said they wanted to build nuclear.
The only nuclear that’s been built in the last 30 years is what we just saw happen in Georgia, and that happened because the loan program office — where they’ve lost half the staff and defunded it in the president’s budget.
If you want to produce oil and gas, you need somebody at the Bureau of Land Management who can actually pick up the phone about a permit.
They have chased people out of the Bureau of Land Management.
You add that to the kind of permitting abuse that we’ve seen with Empire Wind, a fully permitted multi-gigawatt project, and then you throw in some steel and aluminum tariffs just to make the natural gas projects that are in the books even more expensive.
This is a perfect storm of higher electricity rates, and if they pass this reconciliation bill without changes, they’re going to own every bit of it.
Hundreds of U.S. Marines arrived in the Los Angeles area on Tuesday under orders from President Donald Trump, ratcheting up tensions in America’s second largest city, as California’s governor warned “democracy is under assault.”
Trump’s extraordinary measures of sending National Guard and Marines to quell protests, which broke out in response to his immigration raids, fueled demonstrations for a fifth day in Los Angeles, and sparked protests in several other cities.
As Trump and Newsom traded fulminations, the city’s mayor said the protests were limited to about five downtown streets, but declared a curfew for parts of the downtown area due to violence and looting.
Police arrested another 197 people on Tuesday – more than double the total number of arrests to date.
Democratic leaders have raised concerns over a national crisis in what has become the most intense flashpoint yet in the Trump administration’s efforts to deport migrants living in the country illegally, and then crack down on opponents who take to the streets in protest.
“This brazen abuse of power by a sitting president inflamed a combustible situation, putting our people, our officers and even our National Guard at risk. That’s when the downward spiral began,” Newsom said in an a video address.
“He again chose escalation. He chose more force. He chose theatrics over public safety. … Democracy is under assault.”
Newsom, widely seen as preparing for a presidential run in 2028, has called the deployments an illegal waste of resources. He and the state sued Trump and the Defense Department on Monday, seeking to block the deployment of federal troops. Trump in turn has suggested Newsom should be arrested.
Trump, voted back into office last year largely for his promise to deport undocumented immigrants, used a speech honoring soldiers on Tuesday to defend his decision.
He told troops at the Army base in Fort Bragg, North Carolina: “Generations of Army heroes did not shed their blood on distant shores only to watch our country be destroyed by invasion and third-world lawlessness.”
“What you’re witnessing in California is a full-blown assault on peace, on public order and on national sovereignty, carried out by rioters bearing foreign flags,” Trump said, adding his administration would “liberate Los Angeles.”
Demonstrators have waved the flags of Mexico and other countries in solidarity for the migrants rounded in a series of intensifying raids.
Homeland Security said Monday its Immigration and Customs Enforcement division had arrested 2,000 immigration offenders per day recently, far above the 311 daily average in fiscal year 2024 under former President Joe Biden.
UNREST IN THE STREETS
Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass on Tuesday announced a curfew for one square mile (2.5 square km) of downtown Los Angeles that will run from 8 p.m. to 6 a.m. locally (0300 to 1300 GMT) for several days.
With five minutes until the curfew took effect, hundreds of protesters faced police with their hands raised, chanting “”peaceful protest.”
Even so, state and local officials have called Trump’s response an extreme overreaction to mostly peaceful demonstrations.
Bass emphasized at a press conference the distinction between the majority of demonstrators protesting peacefully and a smaller number of agitators she blamed for violence and looting.
A curfew had been considered for several days but Bass said she decided to impose one after 23 business were looted on Monday night.
“When these peaceful rallies end, and the protesters head home, another element moves in: opportunists, who come in under the cover of a peaceful protest to ravage and destroy,” Council member Ysabel Jurado, who represents the area, told reporters.
As the mayor and the council member spoke, police and protesters were engaged in skirmishes outside.
In what has become a daily ritual, police forced demonstrators away from the streets outside the Metropolitan Detention Center, where many detained migrants are held. Multiple groups of protesters snaked through downtown Los Angeles, monitored or followed by police armed with less lethal munitions.
Protests also took place in other cities including New York, Atlanta and Chicago, where demonstrators shouted at and scuffled with officers. Some protesters climbed onto the Picasso sculpture in Daley Plaza, while others chanted that ICE should be abolished.
Christina Berger, 39, said it was heartbreaking to hear about children who are afraid of being separated from their families due to immigration raids, adding, “I just want to give some hope to my friends and neighbors.”
MARINES AT THE READY
About 700 Marines were in a staging area in the Seal Beach area about 30 miles (50 km) south of Los Angeles, awaiting deployment to specific locations, a U.S. official said.
A U.S. official said there were 2,100 National Guard troops in the Los Angeles area on Tuesday, more than half the 4,000 to be activated. The Marines and National Guard troops lack the authority to makes arrests and will be charged only with protecting federal property and personnel.
Even so, California Attorney General Rob Bonta told Reuters the state was concerned about allowing federal troops to protect personnel, saying there was a risk that could violate an 1878 law that generally forbids the U.S. military, including the National Guard, from taking part in civilian law enforcement.
“Protecting personnel likely means accompanying ICE agents into communities and neighborhoods, and protecting functions could mean protecting the ICE function of enforcing the immigration law,” Bonta said.
U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement on Tuesday posted photos on X of National Guard troops accompanying ICE officers on an immigration raid. Trump administration officials have vowed to redouble the immigration raids in response to the street protests.
Joumanna Bercetche (Bloomberg TV): President Trump was in the region last week. It was the first Lme a US President has paid a visit to Qatar since 2003. Howsignificant was this visit for the Gulf do you think? And also how do you think this
President’s approach to the region differs from his predecessors?
His Excellency: Well I believe that the President’s first trip to the GCC region, visiLng Saudi, Qatar, and UAE has been a great demonstraLon for the potenLal of that region. This sent a very strong message to the enLre world that there is a very high potenLal in that region. This region is flourishing, this region has a lot to do when it comes to contribuLng to the future technology and the revoluLon of arLficial intelligence and the need of course for power. Basically, we have had a great visit and I believe this is equivalent to the rest of the countries in the GCC. During that visit we had wide range of topics that’s being discussed whether it’s on regional security, on the future economic cooperaLon between the two countries and how to untap the potenLal between the two countries. These topics actually have varied whether it’s how to partner in arLficial intelligence, how to partner in energy and how to expand also in being a criLcal and vital part of the supply chain for the United States economy which is the leading economy in the world. I believe this was very much perceived in a posiLve way by the region and of course we know that the policy varies from one administraLon to another. We are glad to see that the Middle East, and GCC in parLcular, is a priority for this administraLon, and we believe that there is a lot of potenLal for both of us in the region and the United States that we can untap in the next few years. And also I think that one of the key elements of the President’s visit is making sure that the situaLon in this region remain stabilized and we have seen what a delicate period that we are going through in that region whether it’s on their talks, on the US talks with Iran, or with the situaLon in Gaza and the changes that happened in Syria. And we are hoping that these kind of engagements will lead us to a point where we can have all these conflicts seXled and hopefully being more focused on the prosperity of the region.
Joumanna Bercetche (Bloomberg TV): President Trump has been labeled a transacLonal President. He certainly likes to do deals. He has wriXen a book about the art of the deal and he likes things of value, especially if they come free. I want to ask you about the giY of this Boeing jet that Qatar wants to give to use as interim Air Force 1. It’s being met with a lot of controversy back home. What wasthe purpose of this giY? And is it as some criLcs say, an opportunity for Qatar togain influence with this administraLon?
His Excellency: Well look actually we have seen that there was a lot of controversy that’s being created out of this, what I call it, an exchange between two countries and basically the relaLonship that we have between Qatar and the United States is a very insLtuLonal relaLonship that witnessed different administraLons, and the insLtuLonal relaLonship remained very strong and at the backbone of this partnership. The plane story is a Ministry of Defense to Department of Defense transacLon which is basically done in full transparency and very legally and it is part of the cooperaLon that we have been always doing together for decades. For example, the airliYing in Afghanistan is something that we have almost 80% of that done by our air forces. The security deployment of the United States during the World Cup to support our efforts was done by the United States and I see it as a normal thing that happens between allies and basically I don’t know why people are thinking about it, that this is considered as a bribery or considered as something that Qatar wants to buy an influence with this administraLon. I don’t see any honestly valid reason for that and I believe that there is a huge issue in misconcepLon or unfortunately some spoilers who are trying to portray Qatar as a country that tries to buy its way. I believe if you look at the track record at least for the last 10 years whenever there is some scoop coming out in the media and trying to put Qatar under a spotlight that Qatar is bribing to get the World Cup or Qatar is bribing the EU Parliament or whatever, unLl like the end Qatar is trying to bribe the Prime Minister of Israel. I’m sure that, you know, it does tell you something that for the last 10 years, none of these cases has stand or had any proof that Qatar has done anything wrong. We are a country that would like to have strong partnership and strong friendship and anything that we provide to any country, it’s provided out of respect for this partnership and it’s a two ways relaLonship. It’s mutually beneficial for Qatar and for the United States and I believe everybody acknowledges this. I think that we need to overcome this stereotype of seeing Qatar as a small Arab naLon because it’s gas rich, it cannot find its way without buying it with money. It’s really a misconcepLon that hurts a lot not our reputaLon but the reputaLon also of other countries and insLtuLons.
Joumanna Bercetche (Bloomberg TV):Is the controversy worth it though if itmeans that there’s going to be further congressional scruLny of all of Qatar’sdealings now with the US?
His Excellency: Well, there is actually nothing that has been done by us under the table or like we are trying to do like a covert operaLon. It’s a Ministry of Defense to Department of Defense. There is a proper legal review now conducted between the two departments and nothing has happened yet actually. Now, our intenLon is to have a very clear exchange that the US is in need for to accelerate, you know, a temporary Air Force One. Qatar has the ability to provide this. We stepped up and basically a lot of naLons have giYed the US many things. I am not comparing that to the Statue of Liberty but I don’t know if this sounded a liXle bit maybe strange for the US because it’s coming from a small Arab naLon. I think that, you know, this has played some way a factor in this but I am hoping that people in the United States and even the poliLcians over there, they look at us as a friend, as a partner, as a reliable partner that we’ve been always there for the US whenever we were needed whether it’s in the war against terror, whether it’s in freeing American hostages from all around the world. It’s not something that we’ve been doing to buy an influence but this is a duty on us as a partner, as an ally of the United
States and as there is a duty for the United States towards Qatar.
Joumanna Bercetche (Bloomberg TV): I want to turn to regional geopoliLcs. Yesterday, the Israeli Prime Minister says that Israel is now carrying out operaLons with the purpose of taking over the Gaza Strip. They will carry out an unprecedented aXack on Hamas. That is a quote. The war is clearly entering into a new phase aYer a ceasefire that was negoLated earlier this year. Qatar played a pivotal role in that. It lapsed in March. The death toll conLnues to go up. There’s sLll what’s thought to be 20 hostages sLll alive in the Gaza Strip. There’s a humanitarian crisis going on there. What hope is there now for a lasLng ceasefire,
Your Excellency?
His Excellency: Well, it’s unfortunate that we’ve been seeing the situaLon unfolding in this way and it’s becoming very frustraLng for everyone and especially for us here in Qatar, we’ve been there from the beginning trying to mediate and trying to get to a deal where it alleviates the suffering of the PalesLnian people in Gaza and freeing the hostages and bringing them back to their family and trying to bring a path that will create a peaceful environment and security for both people. And that’s basically what we were aiming. And what I think that the last year and a half now has shown you that the only way forward is through negoLaLons. And unfortunately, that someLmes, you know, or many of the Lmes, these negoLaLons being sabotaged by poliLcal games with a very narrow vision and, you know, it’s just being postponed. One of the examples we had, the first deal that freed more than 100 Israeli hostages in November 23, it collapsed in one week. Then we had the second deal that’s been based on a framework that’s agreed on December 23 and we couldn’t announce it or we couldn’t finalize it unLl January 25. That states very clearly that this deal should include mulLple phases, that we have to do everything we can to avoid to return to the war and ensuring that all the hostages will be freed and there is a withdrawal from Gaza Strip and there is a clear way forward for the Gaza’s people to alleviate their situaLon. This deal has collapsed in 2nd of March and we have seen how the situaLon has been unfolding since then and the blockade on Gaza for now more than 60 days. And we are hearing also some responsible statements about the humanitarian situaLon over there, about, you know, the way of distribuLng these aids and distribuLng food in the form of meals and calculated calories for pre-qualified and pre-screened people. I think all these things that are happening has been unprecedented in our world today and it shouldn’t be acceptable for the internaLonal community. Yes, yet we have seen that, you know, unfortunately the Israeli government is carrying it out with impunity. Now, we conLnue our efforts despite everything and every aXempt to sabotage our efforts and try to also blackmail us and, you know, conLnuing aXacking us while we were the only country that’s helping together with Egypt and United States and we have just that this is just making us more determined to bring stability to the region, to end the war on Gaza, to free all the hostages and to bring them back to their family and to provide security for both people. The rounds of negoLaLons that took place in Doha in the past couple of weeks unfortunately didn’t lead us anywhere yet because there is a fundamental gap between the two parLes which is one party is looking for a parLal deal that might have the possibility to lead to a comprehensive deal and the other party is looking just for one-off deal and to end the war and to get all the hostages out and we couldn’t bridge this fundamental gap with whatever proposals we have provided given the past experience of the first deal that it collapsed and basically we are stuck in a situaLon that if this operaLon is starLng is just going to postpone the diplomaLc conclusion of the war which will end only diplomaLcally from our point of view and will just cost us a death toll on the PalesLnian side and also on the hostages side. Just I wanted to add one very important point to this. The delicacy of that situaLon in the region right now is criLcal and basically we have seen that the conLnuaLon of this campaign and this way and this behavior and it’s not only in Gaza but Gaza, West Bank, Lebanon, Syria is something becoming unbearable yet you have seen that all of us as governments, as countries we are calling for peace, we are calling for peaceful resoluLons and there is nothing stopping this kind of behavior. That will only add anger to the people in that region. This will add legiLmacy for non-state actors and is just going to fuel the narraLve of extremism and terrorism.
Joumanna Bercetche (Bloomberg TV): In President Trump’s speech last week in Riyadh, he talks about the birth of a new Middle East, the economic transformaLon and also the Gulf states playing an increasingly influenLal diplomaLc and mediaLon role and the prospect of regional stability. Can thereactually be regional stability in the absence of a soluLon to the PalesLnian and
Israeli conflict that has been going on for decades?
His Excellency: Well, we believe that this conflict is a core for the regional stability, and we hope that there will be a chance someLme soon. It requires a strong leadership, strong leadership from the PalesLnian side, from the Arab side and from the Israeli side because there will never be a deal without a compromise between all the parLes that ensuring that there are condiLons that can be created for the people to coexist together. This region has been for centuries with a beauLful social fabric that has different backgrounds and different ethnicity and different religions. Unfortunately, it’s been drained with these ancient wars and proxies that evolved over the last few decades. I cannot recall since I was born that there was a moment of stability in the region when we talk about the overall. We are blessed that the GCC was protected except during the Iraq war. But since we grew up, we grew up on just conflicts aYer another, aYer another.
Joumanna Bercetche (Bloomberg TV): We’ve got a couple of minutes, but I do want to ask you because you were in Tehran over the weekend. How likely is itthat you think we will get to an Iran-U.S. nuclear deal by the end of this year?
His Excellency: I believe there is a posiLve momentum. We had a very good conversaLon with President Trump when he was here. We see him as a President who tried to talk to everyone, which is something that we very much encouraged. Also, he is trying to avoid any conflict or any escalaLon. This determinaLon in itself is showing leadership and poliLcal will. On the other side, on Iran, we have seen and sensed the same posiLvity. Of course, Oman is leading the mediaLon, and we are trying to support their efforts. I have suggested that aYer the visit of President Trump to have a trilateral engagement with the Iranians and our Omani colleagues. We were discussing ideas that can bridge the gaps between the two parLes. We hope that those ideas will work. The last thing that we want in that region is a nuclear race or another round of escalaLon that is next to our countries.
Joumanna Bercetche (Bloomberg TV): Final quesLon on the Qatar economy. We have had the World Cup bump, you could call it. Of course, you have big visions of what you want to achieve in the next few years. What is the plan for the next fiveyears by 2030?
His Excellency: It is a very ambiLous plan. I have a friend who once told me that the World Cup was like an IPO for Qatar. I believe this was, thanks to God, this was a very successful IPO. It has been oversubscribed. We have seen the growth in many sectors aYer that. Basically, Qatar is trying to work on a transformaLon plan where we transform our economy into more being diversified, with a diversified base internally. We have been talking about this for the last 25 years and we have been working toward that objecLve. We are focusing on developing different sectors, whether it is on the manufacturing, on the logisLcs, on the educaLon, on the healthcare, on the tourism and technology. We have seen the technology revoluLon right now that is happening. We have seen that this technology revoluLon is not only happening away in the world, but countries like UAE is leading in arLficial intelligence or Saudi leading in data centers and we are trying to be part of this ecosystem and being a complementary for this region. Basically, we see that the potenLal is huge. The capability is there. Qatar has successfully built global brands in the last few decades. Qatar Airways is one of the main examples when you see that you have a leading airline being nominated number one for the last few years. This is something making us proud and we would like to see more and more brands coming out of Qatar like this.
Joumanna Bercetche (Bloomberg TV): Your Excellency, thank you so much. Thank you.
U.S. President Donald Trump warned people on Tuesday against protesting at the weekend military parade in Washington marking the U.S. Army’s 250th anniversary.
“For those people that want to protest, they’re going to be met with very big force,” Trump told reporters in the White House’s Oval Office.
Law enforcement agencies are preparing for hundreds of thousands of people to attend Saturday’s parade, U.S. Secret Service Special Agent in Charge Matt McCool said on Monday.
McCool said thousands of agents, officers and specialists will be deployed from law enforcement agencies from across the country. The FBI and the Metropolitan Police Department have said there are no credible threats to the event.
At least nine permits have been issued for protests on that day, a U.S. Secret Service spokesperson said on Tuesday.
In unscheduled Oval Office remarks, Trump discussed his decision to deploy 4,000 National Guard troops and 700 Marines to Los Angeles after protests erupted in response to federal immigration raids at workplaces there.
Trump defended his decision to take that rare step and said troops were necessary to contain the unrest, despite objections from local and state officials that they were needed.
Saturday’s event, which will coincide with Trump’s 79th birthday, includes an Army birthday festival on the National Mall and will culminate with a parade through the capital and an enlistment and re-enlistment ceremony presided over by the president.
Nationwide protests on that day were being organized by a group called No Kings.
“They’ve defied our courts, deported Americans, disappeared people off the streets, attacked our civil rights and slashed our services,” the group says on its website. “The corruption has gone too far. No thrones. No crowns. No kings.”
U.S. and Chinese officials said on Tuesday they had agreed on a framework to put their trade truce back on track and remove China’s export restrictions on rare earths while offering little sign of a durable resolution to longstanding trade differences.
At the end of two days of intense negotiations in London, U.S. Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick told reporters the framework deal puts “meat on the bones” of an agreement reached last month in Geneva to ease bilateral retaliatory tariffs that had reached crushing triple-digit levels.
But the Geneva deal had faltered over China’s continued curbs on critical minerals exports, prompting the Trump administration to respond with export controls of its own preventing shipments of semiconductor design software, aircraft and other goods to China.
Lutnick said the agreement reached in London would remove some of the recent U.S. export restrictions, but did not provide details after the talks concluded around midnight London time (2300 GMT).
“We have reached a framework to implement the Geneva consensus and the call between the two presidents,” Lutnick said. “The idea is we’re going to go back and speak to President Trump and make sure he approves it. They’re going to go back and speak to President Xi and make sure he approves it, and if that is approved, we will then implement the framework.”
In a separate briefing, China’s Vice Commerce Minister Li Chenggang also said a trade framework had been reached in principle that would be taken back to U.S. and Chinese leaders.
The dispute may keep the Geneva agreement from unravelling over duelling export controls, but does little to resolve deep differences over Trump’s unilateral tariffs and longstanding U.S. complaints about China’s state-led, export-driven economic model.
The two sides left Geneva with fundamentally different views of the terms of that agreement and needed to be more specific on required actions, said Josh Lipsky, senior director of the Atlantic Council’s GeoEconomics Center in Washington.
“They are back to square one but that’s much better than square zero,” Lipsky added.
The two sides have until August 10 to negotiate a more comprehensive agreement to ease trade tensions, or tariff rates will snap back from about 30% to 145% on the U.S. side and from 10% to 125% on the Chinese side.
Investors, who have been badly burned by trade turmoil before, offered a cautious response and MSCI’s broadest index of Asia-Pacific shares outside Japan rose 0.57%.
“The devil will be in the details, but the lack of reaction suggests this outcome was fully expected,” said Chris Weston, head of research at Pepperstone in Melbourne.
“The details matter, especially around the degree of rare earths bound for the U.S., and the subsequent freedom for U.S.-produced chips to head east, but for now as long as the headlines of talks between the two parties remain constructive, risk assets should remain supported.”
RESOLVING RESTRICTIONS
Lutnick said China’s restrictions on exports of rare earth minerals and magnets to the U.S. will be resolved as a “fundamental” part of the framework agreement.
“Also, there were a number of measures the United States of America put on when those rare earths were not coming,” Lutnick said. “You should expect those to come off … in a balanced way.”
U.S. President Donald Trump’s shifting tariff policies have roiled global markets, sparked congestion and confusion in major ports, and cost companies tens of billions of dollars in lost sales and higher costs. The World Bank on Tuesday slashed its global growth forecast for 2025 by four-tenths of a percentage point to 2.3%, saying higher tariffs and heightened uncertainty posed a “significant headwind” for nearly all economies.
A resolution to the trade war may require policy adjustments from all countries to treat financial imbalances or otherwise greatly risk mutual economic damage, European Central Bank President Christine Lagarde said on a rare visit to Beijing on Wednesday.
PHONE CALL HELPED
The second round of U.S.-China talks was given a major boost by a rare phone call between Trump and Chinese President Xi Jinping last week, which Lutnick said provided directives that were merged with Geneva truce agreement.
Customs data published on Monday showed that China’s exports to the U.S. plunged 34.5% in May, the sharpest drop since the outbreak of the COVID pandemic.
While the impact on U.S. inflation and its jobs market has so far been muted, tariffs have hammered U.S. business and household confidence and the dollar remains under pressure.
Lutnick was joined by U.S. Trade Representative Jamieson Greer and Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent at the London talks. Bessent departed hours before their conclusion to return to Washington to testify before Congress on Wednesday.
China holds a near-monopoly on rare earth magnets, a crucial component in electric vehicle motors, and its decision in April to suspend exports of a wide range of critical minerals and magnets upended global supply chains.
In May, the U.S. responded by halting shipments of semiconductor design software and chemicals and aviation equipment, revoking export licences that had been previously issued.
China, Mexico, the European Union, Japan, Canada and many airlines and aerospace companies worldwide urged the Trump administration not to impose new national security tariffs on imported commercial planes and parts, according to documents released Tuesday.
Just after the framework deal was announced, a U.S. appeals court allowed Trump’s most sweeping tariffs to stay in effect while it reviews a lower court decision blocking them on grounds that they exceeded Trump’s legal authority by imposing them.
The decision keeps alive a key pressure point on China, Trump’s currently suspended 34% “reciprocal” duties that had prompted swift tariff escalation.
Tesla tentatively plans to begin offering rides on its self-driving robotaxis to the public on June 22, CEO Elon Musk said on Tuesday, as investors and fans of the electric vehicle maker eagerly await rollout of the long-promised service.
Musk has staked Tesla’s future on self-driving vehicles, pivoting away from plans to build a cheaper EV platform, and much of the company’s valuation hangs on that vision.
But commercializing autonomous vehicles (AV) has been challenging with safety concerns, tight regulations and soaring investments, and many have been skeptical of Musk’s plans.
“We are being super paranoid about safety, so the date could shift,” Musk said in a post on X in response to a question from a user about public robotaxi rides that the EV maker plans to first offer in Austin, Texas.
Musk also said starting June 28, Tesla vehicles will drive themselves to a customer’s house from the end of the factory line.
A successful robotaxi launch is crucial for Tesla as sales of its EVs have softened due to rising competition and a backlash against Musk’s embrace of far-right political views in Europe, and his recent work for U.S. President Donald Trump before their public falling out.
Musk has promised a paid robotaxi service in Austin starting with about 10-20 of its Model Y SUVs that will operate in a limited area and under remote human supervision.
The company then plans to expand operations to other U.S. states later in the year, including California which has stringent AV regulations.
“Austin >> LA for robotaxi launch lol,” Musk said on X, in an apparent reference to the southern Californian city of Los Angeles.
Tesla has been testing its self-driving vehicles on public streets in Austin, Musk said last month. Earlier on Tuesday, Musk re-posted a video on X that showed a Model Y making a turn at an Austin intersection with no human driver and the word “Robotaxi” written on it, and followed closely by another Model Y.
The vehicles were using a new version of Tesla’s advanced driver assistance software, called Full Self-Driving (FSD), Musk said in a separate X post.
Little else is known about Tesla’s robotaxi service, including where it will operate, the extent of remote supervision and how the public can use the service.
Los Ángeles — En un discurso pronunciado esta noche ante casi 40 millones de californianos y estadounidenses en todo el país, el Gobernador Gavin Newsom condenó la militarización ilegal de Los Ángeles por parte del Presidente Trump y advirtió que las acciones del Presidente marcan un peligroso punto crucial para la nación.
“Lo que estamos atestiguando no es la aplicación de la ley, sino el autoritarismo,” dijo el Gobernador Newsom a los californianos. “Lo que más desea Donald Trump es su lealtad. Su silencio. Que sean cómplices en este momento. No se rindan ante él.”
El Gobernador Newsom relató recientes redadas federales en comunidades latinas, la apropiación de 4,000 miembros de la Guardia Nacional de California y el despliegue de más de 700 miembros de la Infantería de Marina en las calles de una ciudad estadounidense – todo ello sin consultar con las autoridades estatales ni locales. “Trump está desplegando una redada militar en Los Ángeles,” dijoNewsom. “Sus acciones son cobardía disfrazada como fortaleza.”
El Gobernador, al calificar este momento de reflexión nacional, le pidió a los estadounidenses tomar medidas pacíficas. “El cargo más importante en una democracia no es el de Presidente ni el de Gobernador, sino el de ciudadano.”
Vea y lea el discurso completo en inglés abajo, como escrito:
[embedded content]
Discurso del Gobernador Newsom a California: La Democracia en una Encrucijada
Quiero decir algunas palabras sobre los acontecimientos de los últimos días.
El fin de semana pasado, agentes federales realizaron redadas a gran escala en sitios de trabajo en Los Ángeles y sus alrededores.
Estas redadas continúan hasta en este momento.
California no es un estado ajeno a la aplicación de la ley migratoria.
Pero en lugar de enfocarse en inmigrantes indocumentados con antecedentes penales graves y personas con órdenes de deportación firmes —una estrategia que ambos partidos han apoyado desde hace tiempo— esta administración está impulsando deportaciones masivas.
Atacando indiscriminadamente a familias inmigrantes trabajadoras, sin importar sus orígenes ni el riesgo que corren.
Lo que está sucediendo ahora es muy diferente a todo lo que hemos visto antes.
El sábado por la mañana, cuando agentes federales saltaron de una camioneta sin identificación cerca del estacionamiento de un Home Depot, empezaron a detener a la gente.
Un ataque deliberado contra una comunidad mayoritariamente latina.
Una escena similar se desarrolló cuando una empresa de ropa fue allanada en el centro de Los Ángeles.
En otras acciones: una ciudadana estadounidense, con 9 meses de embarazo, fue arrestada. Se llevaron a una niña de cuatro años.
Familias separadas. Amigos desaparecidos.
En respuesta, los angelinos salieron a ejercer su derecho constitucional a la libertad de expresión y reunión.
Para protestar contra las acciones de su gobierno.
A su vez, el Estado de California y la Ciudad y el Condado de Los Ángeles enviamos a nuestros agentes de policía para ayudar a mantener la paz, y con algunas excepciones, tuvieron éxito.
Como muchos estados, California no es ajeno a este tipo de disturbios civiles. Los gestionamos con regularidad… y con nuestros propios cuerpos policiales.
Pero esto, de nuevo, fue diferente.
Lo que siguió fue el uso de gas lacrimógeno. Granadas aturdidoras. Balas de goma.
Agentes federales deteniendo a personas y socavando sus derechos al debido proceso.
Donald Trump, sin consultar con las autoridades policiales de California, desplegó a 2,000 miembros de la Guardia Nacional de nuestro estado en nuestras calles.
Ilegalmente y sin motivo alguno.
Este descarado abuso de poder por parte de un Presidente avivó la situación… poniendo en riesgo a nuestra gente, a nuestros oficiales y a la Guardia Nacional.
Fue entonces cuando comenzó una espiral de declive. El redobló la apuesta por su peligroso despliegue de la Guardia Nacional, poniendole más leña al fuego.
Y el Presidente lo hizo a propósito.
Mientras que la noticia se difundía por Los Ángeles, la ansiedad de familiares y amigos aumentaba. Las protestas se reanudaron.
Por la noche, varias docenas de infractores de la ley se volvieron violentos y destructivos. Vandalizaron propiedades. Intentaron agredir a agentes de policía.
Muchos de ustedes han visto videos de autos incendiándose en las noticias.
Si incitan a la violencia o destruyen nuestras comunidades, rendirán cuentas.
Ese tipo de comportamiento criminal no será tolerado. Punto final.
Ya se ha arrestado a más de 370 personas. Estamos revisando las grabaciones para abrir casos adicionales, y serán perseguidos con todo el peso de la ley.
Una vez más, gracias a nuestro cuerpo policial y a la mayoría de los angelinos que protestaron pacíficamente, esta situación se estaba calmando y se había concentrado en tan solo unas pocas cuadras en el centro de la ciudad.
Pero eso no era lo que quería Donald Trump.
Una vez más, él optó por la escalación; optó por aún más fuerza.
El prefirió el teatro por encima de la seguridad pública: federalizó a 2,000 miembros adicionales de la Guardia Nacional.
Desplegó a más de 700 miembros de Infantería de Marina Estadounidense.
Estos son hombres y mujeres entrenados a combatir en suelo extranjero, no en la aplicación de la ley nacional.
Honramos su servicio. Honramos su valentía. Pero no queremos que nuestras calles sean militarizadas por nuestras propias Fuerzas Armadas. Ni en Los Ángeles. Ni en California. Ni en ninguna parte.
Hemos visto vehículos de policía no distintivos en los estacionamientos de las escuelas. Niños, con miedo de asistir a su propia graduación.
Trump está desplegando una redada militar en Los Ángeles, que va mucho más allá de su intención declarada de perseguir a delincuentes violentos y peligrosos.
Sus agentes están arrestando a trabajadores de restaurante, jardineros, jornaleros y costureras. Eso es simplemente cobardía. Sus acciones son cobardía disfrazada como fortaleza.
El gobierno de Donald Trump no está protegiendo a nuestras comunidades – las está traumando. Y ese parece ser el objetivo.
California seguirá luchando por nuestra gente, por toda nuestra gente, incluso ante las cortes.
Ayer, presentamos una impugnación legal contra el imprudente despliegue de tropas estadounidenses por parte del Presidente Trump en una ciudad principal estadounidense.
Hoy, solicitamos una orden judicial de emergencia para detener el uso del ejército estadounidense en actividades policiales en Los Ángeles.
Si cualquiera de nosotros puede ser secuestrado de las calles sin orden judicial, basándose únicamente en sospechas o el color de la piel, entonces ninguno de nosotros está a salvo.
Los regímenes autoritarios empiezan por atacar a las personas con menos capacidad de defensa. Pero no se detienen ahí.
Trump y sus leales se alimentan de la división porque les permite tomar más poder y ejercer aún más control.
Por cierto, Trump no se opone a la anarquía ni a la violencia, siempre y cuando le sirvan a él mismo.
¿Qué más evidencia necesitamos que el 6 de enero?
Les pido a todos que se tomen un momento para reflexionar sobre este peligroso momento.
Un presidente que no quiere regirse por ninguna ley ni constitución.
Perpetrando un ataque unificado contra las tradiciones estadounidenses.
Este es un Presidente que, en poco más de 140 días, ha despedido a los organismos de control del gobierno que podrían exigirle responsabilidades por corrupción y fraude.
Ha declarado una guerra contra la cultura, la historia, la ciencia; contra el conocimiento mismo. Bases de datos, literalmente desapareciendo.
Está deslegitimando a las organizaciones de noticias y atacando la Primera Enmienda.
Amenazando con desfinanciarlas, él está dictando lo que las universidades pueden enseñar.
Atacando a los bufetes de abogados y al poder judicial, que son la base de una sociedad civil ordenada.
Exigiendo que un gobernador sea arrestado sin otra razón más que, en sus propias palabras, “por haber sido elegido.”
Y todos sabemos que este sábado ordenará a nuestros héroes estadounidenses —el ejército de los Estados Unidos— a realizar una exhibición vulgar para celebrar su cumpleaños, tal como lo han hecho otros dictadores fallidos en el pasado.
Miren, esto no se trata sólo de las protestas en Los Ángeles.
Cuando Donald Trump buscó la autoridad absoluta para comandar la Guardia Nacional, hizo que esa orden se aplicara a todos los estados de esta nación.
Se trata de todos nosotros. Se trata de ustedes.
California puede ser el comienzo, pero claramente no terminará aquí. Otros estados son los siguientes.
La democracia es la siguiente.
La democracia está bajo ataque ante nuestros ojos; el momento que temíamos ha llegado.
Está demoliendo el proyecto histórico de nuestros padres fundadores.
Las tres ramas de gobierno independientes e iguales.
Ya no hay pesos y contrapesos. El Congreso no existe. El líder Johnson ha abdicado por completo de esa responsabilidad.
El estado de derecho ha cedido cada vez más ante el gobierno de Don.
Los padres fundadores de esta nación no vivieron ni murieron para presenciar este momento.
Es hora de que todos nos levantemos pacíficamente.
El Juez Brandeis lo expresó mejor: en una democracia, el cargo más importante no es el de Presidente, ni mucho menos el de Gobernador. El cargo más importante es el de ciudadano.
En este momento, todos debemos levantarnos y rendir cuentas ante un mayor nivel de responsabilidad.
Si ejercen sus derechos bajo la Primera Enmienda,por favor, háganlo pacíficamente.
Sé que muchos de ustedes sienten profunda ansiedad, estrés y miedo.
Pero quiero que sepan que USTEDES son el antídoto contra ese miedo y esa ansiedad.
Lo que más desea Donald Trump es su lealtad. Su silencio. Ser cómplices en este momento.
NO se rindan ante él.
Recent news
Jun 10, 2025
News What you need to know: In an address delivered to nearly 40 million Californians and Americans nationwide tonight, Governor Gavin Newsom condemned President Trump’s unlawful militarization of Los Angeles and warned that the President’s actions mark a dangerous…
Jun 10, 2025
News LOS ANGELES – Governor Newsom and Attorney General Bonta are standing up all states by filing a lawsuit and request to block President Trump and the Department of Defense’s illegal militarization of Los Angeles and the takeover of a California National Guard (Cal…
Jun 10, 2025
News “Turning the military against American citizens” What you need to know: Standing up for American citizens and the Nation’s foundational ban on martial law in peacetime, California Governor Newsom and Attorney General Bonta are requesting the court step in to…
Source: United States Senator for Kansas Roger Marshall
Washington – U.S. Senator Roger Marshall, M.D. (R-Kansas) applauded today’s announcement from General Motors that they will be investing $4 billion into U.S. manufacturing plants, including in Kansas City, Kansas.
“General Motors’ announcement to expand production in Kansas is a clear sign that President Trump’s policies are working and bringing back good-paying manufacturing jobs,” said Senator Marshall. “This investment will be a huge boon for the hard-working men and women in the area, and I look forward to seeing what developments come next under this White House.”
Under President Trump’s leadership, Made-in-America is being incentivized again, giving companies more reasons than ever to invest in America.
Additionally, the President’s ‘One Big, Beautiful Bill’ will lower the tax rate for those producing products, like vehicles, in the United States, and those who purchase American-made cars will receive Made-in-America Auto Tax breaks.
Background:
Senator Marshall previously introduced the Choice in Automobile Retail Sales (CARS) Act to counter the Biden Administration’s radical environmental agenda and executive overreach by preventing the implementation of a proposed rule and other regulations that essentially seek to eliminate the internal combustion engine.
Senator Marshall also previously led calls for the withdrawal of the Biden Administration’s proposed Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) standards for passenger cars and light-duty trucks, which would have effectively mandated the mass production of electric vehicles (EVs) and a phase-out of gas-powered cars and trucks.
Source: United States Senator for New York Charles E Schumer
Washington, D.C. – U.S. Senator Chuck Schumer today released the following statement on President Trump announcing the Army would be renaming Fort Johnson, named in honor of the Medal of Honor recipient, Albany Resident, Harlem Hellfighter, and New York Army National Guard Sgt. William Henry Johnson, back to Fort Polk:
“This is a vile insult to the memory and heroic patriotism of Sgt. Henry Johnson, a Medal of Honor recipient and Albany resident who Theodore Roosevelt called ‘one of the five bravest Americans’ to have served in World War I. Allied Commander Gen. John Pershing singled out Johnson for his valor in repelling a German raider party of at least 12 men, and Johnson protected his fellow soldiers under heavy fire and repelled the raiding party resulting in several enemy casualties, engaging in hand to hand combat. For this he received no American military honor because of a racist and segregated military,” said Senator Schumer. “For nearly a century, the nation for which he was willing to give his life shamefully failed to recognize Henry Johnson’s heroics, simply because of the color of his skin, and now they are disgracefully removing his name from an honor he unquestionably earned via superhuman heroism on the battlefield. Henry Johnson loved America when America did not love him back. Yet he still willingly put his life on the line for our great nation. Some might call that the warrior spirit. I call it patriotism of the very highest order.”
Schumer continued, “Sgt. Johnson is a true American hero who displayed the most profound bravery on the battlefield, and returning this fort to its former name, and taking this honor away from a medal of honor recipient is a disgusting new low for the Trump administration. It is utterly indefensible. All of America should be outraged at this slap in the face of a war hero. The Trump administration should be ashamed and should immediately reverse this decision.”
Australia, together with the United Kingdom, Canada, New Zealand and Norway, has imposed sanctions on two ministers in the Israeli government for “inciting violence against Palestinians in the West Bank”.
Australia and the other countries were immediately condemned by the United States Secretary of State Marco Rubio, who called for them to be lifted.
The move comes as Prime Minister Anthony Albanese prepares to leave on Friday for the G7 in Canada, where he is expected to meet UN President Donald Trump on the sidelines of the conference.
Australia’s signing up for the sanctions is just another complication for the anticipated meeting. The Australian government is under pressure from the US administration to significantly boost its defence spending. Meanwhile, Australia is seeking a deal to get some exemption from the Trump tariffs.
The sanctions are on National Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir and Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich.
They include bans on travel to Australia, a freeze on any assets they might have here, and a prohibition on anyone in Australia directly or indirectly making assets available to them.
Foreign Minister Penny Wong said the two ministers “have been the most extremist and hard line of an extremist settler enterprise which is both unlawful and violent”.
The Israeli ministers are accused of major violations of human rights, including escalating physical violence and abuse by Israeli settlers. A few days ago they marched through Jerusalem’s Muslim Quarter with a group that chanted “death to Arabs”.
In a social media post, Rubio said the sanctions “do not advance US-led efforts to achieve a ceasefire, bring all hostages home, and end the war”.
“We reject any notion of equivalence: Hamas is a terrorist organization that committed unspeakable atrocities, continues to hold innocent civilians hostage, and prevents the people of Gaza from living in peace. We remind our partners not to forget who the real enemy is.”
Urging the reversal of the sanctions, Rubio said the US “stands shoulder-to-shoulder with Israel”.
Asked whether he was concerned the sanctions would damage Australia’s relations with the US, Albanese told reporters he was not: “Australia makes its own decisions based upon the assessments that we make”. He pointed out the action was in concert with the Five Eyes countries of Canada, the UK and new Zealand.
Shadow Foreign Minister Michaelia Cash said sanctioning democratically elected officials of a key ally was “very serious”.
“Labor should be clear who initiated this process, on what basis they have done so and who made the decision”, Cash said. The government should also say what, if any, engagement it had had with the US on the matter, she said.
Michelle Grattan does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.
After United States Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents arrested multiple people on alleged immigration violations, protests broke out in Los Angeles.
Authorities have been using “less lethal” weapons against crowds of civilians, but these weapons can still cause serious harm.
Footage of an Australian news reporter being shot by a rubber bullet fired by police – who appeared to deliberately target her – has been beamed around the world. And headlines this morning told of an ABC camera operator hit in the chest with a “less lethal” round.
This has provoked debate about police and military use of force.
As the term suggests, less lethal (also called non lethal or less-than-lethal) weapons are items that are less likely to result in death when compared with alternatives such as firearms.
Less lethal weapons include weapons such as:
pepper spray
tear gas
tasers
batons
water cannons
acoustic weapons
bean-bag rounds
rubber bullets.
They are designed and used to incapacitate people and disperse or control crowds.
They are meant to have temporary and reversible effects that minimise the likelihood of fatalities or permanent injury as well as undesired damage to property, facilities, material and the environment.
In Australia in 2023, for example, 95-year-old aged care resident Clare Nowland was tasered, fell backwards, hit her head and died from her head injury.
In 2012, responding to a mistaken report about an armed robbery, police physically restrained, tasered and pepper sprayed 21-year-old Roberto Curti multiple times. He died but his exact cause of death (and whether the use of less lethal weapons played a causal role) was not clear.
Do these weapons work to quell unrest?
The impetus for police and military use of less lethal force came about, in part, from backlash following the use of lethal force in situations where it was seen as a gross overreaction.
One example was the 1960 Sharpeville massacre in South Africa, when police officers in a black township opened fire on an anti-apartheid protest, killing 69 civilians.
In theory, less lethal force is meant to provide a graduated level of response to events such as riots or protests, where the use of lethal force would be disproportionate and counter-productive.
It is sometimes described as the “next step” to use after de-escalation techniques (like negotiation or verbal commands) have failed.
Less lethal weapons can be used when some degree of force is considered necessary to restore order, neutralise a threat, or avoid full-blown conflict.
How well this works in practice is a different story.
There can be unintended consequences and use of less lethal force can be seen as an act of aggression by a government against its people, heightening existing tensions.
The availability of less lethal weapons may also change perceptions of risk and encourage the use of force in situations where it would otherwise be avoided. This in turn can provoke further escalation, conflict and distrust of authorities.
Samara McPhedran does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.
Last week, President Donald Trump ordered an investigation into “who ran the United States while President Biden was in office”, alleging top aides masked the “cognitive decline” of his predecessor. The announcement referenced revelations in a new book by journalists Jake Tapper (CNN) and Alex Thompson (Axios).
Original Sin made headlines last month for revealing that Biden’s declining physical and cognitive health had been hidden from the public by his closest aides and his loyal but overly protective wife, Jill Biden.
Whatever merit there is in Trump’s order must be seen alongside his bottomless cynicism. He seizes on the two authors’ investigative journalism to continue tarnishing his predecessor’s reputation, while doing everything in his power to bully news companies such as CBS over almost meritless defamation cases and to cut the funding of public media organisations PBS and NPR.
Review: Original Sin – Jake Tapper and Alex Thompson (Hutchinson Heinemann)
In November 2020, Biden was seen by many as a hero. He won the American election and saved the country from Donald Trump, who scholars judged among the worst presidents in the nation’s history, not least because just over 384,500 people died from COVID-19 that year.
Today, just as many see Biden as a villain. He said he would be a “bridge” president. He knew he would have ended his second term aged 86 if he had won and served it, so said he would hand over to a successor well in time for the 2024 election. But he didn’t. Not until three and a half weeks after his wincingly bad performance in a debate with Trump last June.
By then it was too late for his Democratic Party to go through its usual primaries process. Biden anointed his vice president Kamala Harris as his successor, but with only 107 days to campaign before the election, it is more accurate to say he gave her what football commentators call a “hospital pass”.
Donald Trump regained the presidency. Four months into his second term, all but his most loyal supporters (and this time he has made sure to surround himself only with loyal supporters) think it is already much worse than his first.
Whatever Biden achieved in his presidency is being forgotten amid the horror at watching America’s democratic institutions assaulted by an authoritarian leader determined to undo Biden’s policies, especially on climate change.
What on earth happened? How much responsibility does Biden bear? Did the news media subject Biden to sufficient scrutiny before the debate last June? Was everyone except the MAGA base suffering from a new variant of what conservative commentators long ago dubbed “Trump derangement syndrome”?
In short order, the answers are: Biden declined faster and worse than had been anticipated; a lot; the media possibly didn’t scrutinise him enough, but it’s more complicated than that – and, yes, “Trump derangement syndrome” was a factor, though not quite in the way conservative commentators thought.
Clooney’s alarm
Original Sin’s most spectacular revelation was that at a Democrat fundraising event last year, Biden did not appear to recognise George Clooney – who as well as being an actor, is a longtime Democrat supporter and a friend of the president.
Clooney was shocked by Biden’s frail appearance. “Holy shit,” he thought, according to the authors, as he watched Biden enter the room, taking tiny steps with “an aide guiding him by his arm”. The book describes the excruciating moment in detail:
“You know George,” the assisting aide told the president, gently reminding him who was in front of him.
“Yeah, yeah,” the president said to one of the most recognizable men in the world, the host of this lucrative fundraiser. “Thank you for being here.”
“Hi, Mr. President,” Clooney said.
“How are ya?” the president replied.
“How was your trip?” Clooney asked.
“It was fine,” the president said.
It was obvious to many standing there that the president did not know who George Clooney was. […]
“George Clooney,” the aide clarified for the president.
“Oh, yeah!” Biden said. “Hi, George!”
A Hollywood VIP who witnessed the moment told the authors “it was not okay”, describing it as “uncomfortable”. Clooney felt he had to sound the alarm publicly, which he did in an impassioned opinion piece for The New York Times a few weeks later, on July 10. He wrote about how he loved and respected Biden, but
the one battle he cannot win is the fight against time. None of us can. It’s devastating to say it, but the Joe Biden I was with three weeks ago at the fund-raiser was not the Joe ‘big F-ing deal’ Biden of 2010. He wasn’t even the Joe Biden of 2020. He was the same man we all witnessed at the debate.
Just days after publicity about the book began, news broke that Biden has stage four prostate cancer – and that he had not had a prostate test for more than a decade.
The ‘loyalty police’
Tapper and Thompson’s book derives not only from their day jobs, but from reporting they have done since last November’s election, including interviews with 200 people. Some of them, even now, prefer to speak on background rather than be named.
Through them, they tell a bracing story with three main themes.
First, there is the unblinking loyalty of close aides. Chief strategist Mike Donilon had been with Biden since 1981. Bruce Reed was a speechwriter and longtime political consultant. Steve Ricchetti had been Biden’s chief of staff when he was vice president, and was also a friend who would watch the morning political shows with him. All four of Richetti’s children worked in the Biden administration, the authors write.
Jill Biden’s longtime aides, Annie Tomasini and Anthony Bernal, were fiercely protective of the Bidens as much as the office of the president. “Are you a Biden person?” they would ask, leading other aides to label them the “loyalty police”.
Collectively, the close aides were known as The Politburo. Kamala Harris’ aides called them a “cabal of the unhelpful”. Time and again, they responded to queries about Biden’s health with firm assurances he was doing fine – even though the president needed to be supplied with cue cards when he was meeting his cabinet secretaries.
Biden, like previous presidents, had an annual medical check-up and was given a clean bill of health. But doctors outside the White House noted that his cognitive abilities were not tested. Asked about this, aides – and Biden himself – would say he passed a cognitive test every day of his presidency, which was a superficially plausible but practically meaningless statement.
Some aides genuinely believed in Biden, while others harboured doubts. The latter suppressed those to focus on the task of defeating Trump in 2024. One told Tapper and Thompson: “He just had to win, and then he could disappear for four years – he’d only have to show proof of life every once in a while.” Which sounds pretty much like the plot of the 1989 movie, Weekend at Bernie’s, except the situation was anything but comic.
Biden’s aides admonished journalists, including Alex Thompson, for even raising the issue of the president’s health. Worse, they shielded Biden from what his own pollsters were saying about his dire prospects for re-election.
The oldest presidential candidates
For Biden, work usually began at 9am, included two hours in the afternoon for “POTUS time”, and finished at 4.30pm when he had dinner. Availability for evening events was limited. By 2024, cabinet secretaries in the Biden administration told Tapper and Thompson that Biden could not be relied upon to be available at 2am for the kind of emergency the presidency can require.
After the Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell, born the same year as Biden, froze in public a second time, in 2023, his fellow Republican Nikki Haley said, “The Senate is the most privileged nursing home in the country […] You have to know when to leave.”
When the Democrats did unexpectedly well at the 2022 midterm elections, Biden’s aides took that as a sign he should run again, rather than note the level of protest in the midterm vote, which came soon after the Supreme Court overturned the 1973 Roe v Wade decision on abortion.
The opinion polls, though, were telling. An early November 2022 Ipsos poll had the president’s approval rating at a low 39%, Tapper and Thompson report. Two thirds of those surveyed said they thought the country was on the wrong track. When Ipsos ran a poll after the midterm election, 68% said Biden might not be up for the challenge of running in 2024. Worse, almost half of Democrats agreed.
Biden’s aides may have been right to marvel at what their boss could still do, and to resent the media harping on about Biden’s age while turning a blind eye to his cheeseburger-chomping, Coke-slurping political nemesis, only four years younger. The bitter fact for them is that by 2020 Biden looked and sounded frail while Trump looked and sounded commanding.
Trump may have lied repeatedly during the debate last June, but in a real sense that was not news; Trump lies as easily as he breathes. What was news was watching a mumbling, open-mouthed US president freeze on live television.
Grisly anecdotes and Hunter Biden
Original Sin is replete with grisly anecdotes about Biden’s decrepitude. “The guy can’t form a fucking sentence”, thought one aide attending to him onboard Air Force One. This leads to the second main theme: the tragic circumstances that appear to have accelerated the decline.
It is well known that personal tragedy has scarred – and in crucial ways shaped – Biden’s life and career. He lost his first wife, Neilia, and their one-year-old daughter, Naomi, in a car accident in 1972. Their young sons, Beau and Hunter, were in the car. They survived but Hunter suffered a fractured skull, an injury with lifelong effects, according to Tapper and Thompson.
Beau served as an army officer in the Iraq war. On his return, he was elected attorney-general of Delaware in 2006 and 2010. He planned to run for governor in 2016. But a year earlier, the brain cancer for which he was first treated in 2013 recurred; he died in May 2015. In a worrying precursor to later actions, the Bidens kept Beau’s illness a secret. “Beau’s death aged him significantly,” a longtime Biden confidant told Tapper and Thompson. “His shoulders looked smaller. His face looked more gaunt. In his eyes, you could just see it.”
A year later, Hunter Biden became addicted to crack cocaine. Ashley, Biden’s daughter by his second wife Jill, also struggled with addiction. Both spiralled downwards after Beau’s death, which weighed heavily on their father. As the authors write:
After Beau’s death in 2015, Biden desperately and understandably clung to Hunter. He would privately refer to him as ‘my only living son.’ But Biden aides felt that Hunter manipulated his father’s blind love for his own aims. The president struggled to say no to Hunter. Aides felt that he had tragically become Hunter’s chief enabler.
In 2021 Hunter published a memoir, Beautiful Things, and travelled round the country in an effort to provide hope to others struggling with addiction. The memoir’s candour provided valuable information to David Weiss, a special counsel appointed by Attorney-General Merrick Garland in 2023.
Weiss had been previously appointed by the first Trump administration to investigate the contents of a laptop Hunter Biden left at a repair shop. Biden had not interfered with Garland’s decision, as he did not want to be seen as behaving the way his predecessor had.
Weiss charged Hunter Biden over his possession of a handgun while being addicted to cocaine. A plea deal broke down and Hunter faced trial in 2024. The Biden family attended each day of the trial. Biden felt guilty, believing Hunter would never have been on trial if he wasn’t the president’s son.
There is little doubt the Republicans weaponised Hunter Biden’s actions, but he gave them plenty of ammunition. He had had an extramarital affair with his brother’s widow and had introduced her to cocaine, to which she became addicted. There is more, but you get the (tawdry) picture.
Then, after the election in November, Biden did what he had repeatedly said he wouldn’t, exercising his power as president to pardon his son. It may have been the understandable action of a besieged father, but Biden did not frame it that way, blaming Garland, wrongly, for pursuing the case.
Equally to the point, the authors report that Trump’s lawyers took note, believing the Hunter Biden pardon “gave them a great deal of leeway on whether they could pardon and free from prison the hundreds of convicted January 6 insurrectionists” from the 2021 Capitol riot. Which of course Trump did as soon as he took office in January 2025.
The old adage has it that two wrongs don’t make a right. But for a politician who had won the presidency promising to be everything Trump was not, it was a fatal, final blow to Biden’s credibility.
The media ‘missed a lot’
The third theme of the book asks how much of all this the news media reported during Biden’s presidency. Some, but not all of it – including some by Thompson, who recently won a White House Correspondents’ Association award for his disclosures.
Both he and his co-author acknowledge they and other journalists did not dig hard enough to reveal the extent to which the Biden administration was hampered by the president’s declining health. Said Thompson:
Being truth-tellers also means telling the truth about ourselves. We – myself included – missed a lot of this story, and some people trust us less because of it […] We should have done better.“
It is worth keeping this in perspective. The news media’s failings in the lead up to the Iraq war in 2003 were more significant. Then, too many journalists swallowed the administration’s lines justifying its decision to invade a country, while the work of those who did report sceptically was buried well inside the newspaper. There, it “played as quietly as a lullaby”, as The New York Times’ first public editor, Daniel Okrent, wrote in 2003.
The war’s reporting led to a lot of soul searching in American newsrooms. If there was a coverup in the media about the Biden administration, it wasn’t very effective, wrote media critic Jon Allsop in the New Yorker. “Not least because the majority of the public thought Biden was too old long before the debate.”
The other element infecting both the mainstream media and social media is divisiveness, rancour and hostility. It is hard, for journalists and the public, to see political information other than through a hyper-partisan lens. I felt this acutely when reading the section in Original Sin about Biden getting drawn into the FBI’s investigation of Trump for withholding classified documents – when the FBI found Biden had done essentially the same thing. (Though it should be stressed Biden, unlike Trump, cooperated at all times.)
‘Well-meaning, elderly man with a poor memory’
It was through this investigation that special counsel Robert Hur’s recording of a long interview with Biden came to light. Journalists were backgrounded that Hur was a right-wing operative; he was anything but that, write Tapper and Thompson. He treated Biden fairly and respectfully. In the interview, excerpts of which run to seven pages of the book, Biden rambles and needs regular reminding of facts – including the year his son Beau died.
In Hur’s report, released in 2024, he found Biden had inappropriately retained classified documents but he did not recommend pressing charges. To a jury, Hur concluded, Biden would present “as a sympathetic, well-meaning, elderly man with a poor memory”. He was making the kind of decision prosecutors routinely make about the likelihood of a conviction.
Hur was attacked by the White House and much of the media as a partisan warrior who had brought up the death of the president’s son in the interview, when it was Biden who mentioned it himself. If Hur really had been a partisan warrior, the authors write, he would have recommended continuing with the prosecution.
Several months later, after the disastrous Biden-Trump debate, friends and colleagues texted Hur saying he must have felt vindicated. “Hur told them that all he felt was sad. How could anyone look at Joe Biden at that debate and not feel bad?”
It is true that aides, and sometimes the news media, have covered up previous presidents’ health issues, such as Franklin Roosevelt’s paralysis from polio, John Kennedy’s debilitating back pain that required heavy doses of painkillers, and Ronald Reagan’s Alzheimer’s disease.
Tapper and Thompson argue the coverup of Biden’s health problems is the most consequential in presidential history.
Underplays Biden’s achievements
The authors successfully prosecute their case about Biden’s responsibility for his own demise. Perhaps worried they may not be believed by Democrat supporters, they continue amassing evidence well beyond that point, which means the minutiae of aides continuing to deny the reality of Biden’s decline becomes repetitive.
Their relentless focus on Biden’s decline also means they underplay both his achievements as a president and the breadth of his character. At one point, they admiringly refer to Richard Ben Cramer’s book about the 1988 presidential campaign, What it Takes, which includes Biden’s failed attempt to win the Democratic nomination for the presidency.
Cramer’s book is a massive 1,047 pages. He interviewed more than a thousand people and took so long on the book it came out during the next presidential campaign, in which Bill Clinton was elected.
One reviewer, Richard Brownstein, wrote of it: “Presidential elections are the white whale of American journalism – and in Cramer they have found a manic Melville.” But it is written in an intimate, novelistic style, taking the reader deep into the lives and thoughts and feelings of the candidates, George H.W Bush, Bob Dole, Michael Dukakis, Richard Gephardt, Gary Hart and Biden.
Cramer told Robert Boynton in an interview for his 2005 book, The New New Journalism, he was amazed political journalists spend so little time talking to childhood friends, family and early colleagues.
If you want to understand how someone got to the point where he [sic] is a credible candidate for president of a nation of 250 million people, you’d better godamn-well know how he is wonderful. But most journalists don’t care about that.
As such, Cramer provides a deeper, richer portrait of Biden as an idiosyncratic and flawed, but also impressive politician, who was a force of nature in his youth. By comparison, Original Sin reads like an autopsy: which in a way, it is. If you want to remember why Biden became an effective politician in the first place, seek out a copy of What it Takes.
In the end, though, whatever achievements Biden had as president are being overtaken by his disastrous decision to try to hang on for a second term. By the evidence presented in Original Sin, “Honest Joe” was, like many politicians, prey to ego and overvaulting ambition, and prone to secrecy when it suited him.
He and his aides thought – and astonishingly still do think – he was the person best able to repel the return of a person they feared (with good reason) would do enormous damage to the country. Biden said this after the November election, earning Harris’s ire, for which he apologised, and Donilon affirmed it in an interview with the authors early this year.
The savage irony is, by their actions, Biden and his team eased Trump’s path to victory last November. Now, it is not just Americans but the rest of the world who are left to deal with the second Trump administration.
Matthew Ricketson does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.
Source: United States Senator for Mississippi Roger Wicker
WASHINGTON, D.C. – U.S. Senators Roger Wicker (R-Miss.) and Cindy Hyde-Smith (R-Miss.) have joined colleagues in demanding the Federal Emergency Management Agency end Risk Rating 2.0, the Biden-era flood insurance policy that has caused premiums to skyrocket and thousands of homeowners to abandon their policies.
Wicker and Hyde-Smith signed a letter, led by U.S. Senator Bill Cassidy, M.D. (R-La.), that calls for halting further Risk Rating 2.0 premium increases and demanding greater transparency from FEMA. The lawmakers have long questioned the pricing methodology used by FEMA in setting Risk Rating 2.0 premiums, which have increased for an estimated 84 percent of Mississippi flood insurance policyholders.
“Since the Biden Administration’s rollout of Risk Rating 2.0, premiums under the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) increased in every state. By FEMA’s own estimates, 77 percent of all NFIP policies now pay more than under the old system,” the Senators wrote.
“The lack of transparency surrounding Risk Rating 2.0 is beyond troubling. FEMA has never allowed for meaningful public comment nor has it published the underlying data or assumptions used to justify the steep premium increases and refuses to disclose its actuarial model. Without transparency, communities cannot plan mitigation projects, lenders cannot accurately underwrite mortgages, and citizens cannot appeal punitive rate increases. Worse still, rising costs encourage policy lapses—shifting risk back to taxpayers when disasters strike,” the Senators continued.
“Time is of the essence. Each month that Risk Rating 2.0 continues unchecked, more families are forced to abandon their insurance coverage, neighborhoods face economic strain, and entire communities risk collapse after the next disaster. We respectfully urge you to act now—before further harm is done—to protect vulnerable Americans, preserve homeownership, and ensure the NFIP fulfills its mission as Congress intended,” the Senators concluded.
The letter sent to FEMA Acting Administrator David Richardson was also signed by U.S. Senators John Kennedy (R-La.), Shelley Moore Capito (R-W.Va.), Jim Justice (R-W.Va.), Katie Britt (R-Ala.), Tommy Tuberville (R-Ala.), and John Cornyn (R-Texas).
Read the full letter here or below.
Dear Acting Administrator Richardson,
We write to draw your urgent attention to the increasingly untenable flood insurance premiums paid by American homeowners as a result of the Biden-era policy, Risk Rating 2.0, administered by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). We respectfully ask for your leadership to halt further premium increases under Risk Rating 2.0 and implement much needed transparency from FEMA.
On January 20, 2021, President Biden issued Executive Order (EO) 13990, directing every federal agency to target and modify Trump-era regulations under the auspice of combating climate change. A few months later, Biden signed EO 14030, requiring agencies to integrate up-to-date flood risk considerations into federal actions. Collectively, both of these EOs laid the groundwork for FEMA’s implementation of a new rating system known as Risk Rating 2.0, which was enacted on October 1, 2021.
Since the Biden Administration’s rollout of Risk Rating 2.0, premiums under the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) increased in every state. By FEMA’s own estimates, 77 percent of all NFIP policies now pay more than under the old system. According to a 2023 Government Accountability Office (GAO) report, premiums on primary residences under Risk Rating 2.0 are subject to a maximum 18 percent increase each year until such premiums reflect “the full risk loss of the insured property,” as determined by FEMA.
Families in the following Republican states are especially hard-hit.
Louisiana:
It is estimated that 80% of Louisiana NFIP policyholders experienced monthly premium increases in 2025 as a result of Risk Rating 2.0.
In 2023 alone, the average flood insurance premium in our state jumped by 234%, forcing more than 52,000 Louisianans—many of them seniors on fixed incomes—out of the program.
Coastal parishes, which depend on flood insurance to secure mortgages and rebuild after storms, are now facing premiums that exceed 2% of median household income—a threshold that federal guidance deems “cost prohibitive.”
West Virginia:
It is estimated that 83% of West Virginia NFIP policyholders experienced monthly premium increases in 2025 as a result of Risk Rating 2.0.
As of August 2023 (the latest available FEMA data), Risk Rating 2.0 would increase annual NFIP premiums for homeowners in West Virginia by ~176%
Over the last 12 months, ~600 West Virginians have left the NFIP as a result of premium increases.
Texas:
It is estimated that 86% of Texas NFIP policyholders experienced monthly premium increases in 2025 as a result of Risk Rating 2.0.
As of August 2023 (the latest available FEMA data), Risk Rating 2.0 would increase annual NFIP premiums for homeowners in Texas by ~53%.
Over the last 12 months, ~26,300 Texans have left the NFIP as a result of premium increases.
Alabama:
It is estimated that 79% of Alabama NFIP policyholders experienced monthly premium increases in 2025 as a result of Risk Rating 2.0.
As of August 2023 (the latest available FEMA data), Risk Rating 2.0 would increase annual NFIP premiums for homeowners in Alabama by ~106%.
Over the last 12 months, ~1,200 Alabamians have left the NFIP as a result of premium increases.
Mississippi:
It is estimated that 84% of Mississippi NFIP policyholders experienced monthly premium increases in 2025 as a result of Risk Rating 2.0.
As of August 2023 (the latest available FEMA data), Risk Rating 2.0 would increase annual NFIP premiums for homeowners in Mississippi by ~103%.
Over the last 12 months, ~2,200 Mississippians have left the NFIP as a result of premium increases.
Rural and low-income homeowners, along with high-risk coastal areas, are being priced out at far higher rates than urban or wealthier communities. In ten states, full risk NFIP premiums today exceed 2 percent of median household income. This undermines home values, depresses property tax revenues, and ultimately inflates federal disaster assistance costs when uninsured homeowners cannot rebuild.
The lack of transparency surrounding Risk Rating 2.0 is beyond troubling. FEMA has never allowed for meaningful public comment nor has it published the underlying data or assumptions used to justify the steep premium increases and refuses to disclose its actuarial model. Without transparency, communities cannot plan mitigation projects, lenders cannot accurately underwrite mortgages, and citizens cannot appeal punitive rate increases. Worse still, rising costs encourage policy lapses—shifting risk back to taxpayers when disasters strike.
The President has long championed policies that reduce federal overreach and protect everyday Americans from burdensome costs. To limit the damage caused by this harmful Biden era policy, we urge you to:
Direct FEMA to terminate the Risk Rating 2.0 pricing methodology.
Require FEMA to publish all actuarial inputs and outputs of future flood insurance premium increases exceeding the 5% statutory minimum so stakeholders can verify fairness and accuracy.
Restore targeted affordability measures for coastal, low income, and historically underinsured communities—ensuring NFIP remains accessible to those who need it most.
Time is of the essence. Each month that Risk Rating 2.0 continues unchecked, more families are forced to abandon their insurance coverage, neighborhoods face economic strain, and entire communities risk collapse after the next disaster. We respectfully urge you to act now—before further harm is done—to protect vulnerable Americans, preserve homeownership, and ensure the NFIP fulfills its mission as Congress intended.
Thank you for your attention to this urgent matter.
Source: United States Senator for Wisconsin Tammy Baldwin
WASHINGTON, D.C. – Today, U.S. Senator Tammy Baldwin (D-WI), Ranking Member of the Senate Appropriations Subcommittee on Labor, Health and Human Services, and Education (LHHS), led a hearing on the National Institutes of Health (NIH) budget and questioned NIH Director Jay Bhattacharya about why the Trump administration is ripping away NIH funding that supports lifesaving research into cures for cancer, Alzheimer’s, and other diseases. Baldwin pressed Dr. Bhattacharya on both why he has effectively delayed or cut thousands of NIH grants in the first few months of 2025, and also how his proposal for next year would slash the NIH budget and lifesaving research by 40%. Senator Baldwin also specifically pressed Dr. Bhattacharya on a new policy scheme that the administration is implementing right now that hides even deeper cuts to research.
“If Donald Trump gets his way, billions in funding for lifesaving research will be ripped away to fund tax breaks for the rich, and it’s American families that will pay the price with their health,” said Senator Baldwin. “It’s not just wrong – it’s cruel. I won’t stop fighting on behalf of the millions of families who are holding out hope their loved one battling cancer, ALS, or Alzheimer’s disease has a fighting chance.”
Dr. Bhattacharya testified in front of the Senate LHHS Appropriations Subcommittee today to defend President Trump’s Fiscal Year 2026 budget proposal for the NIH, which would rip away $18 billion – a 40% cut – in NIH funding for lifesaving breakthroughs. The budget request shows that it plans to cut the number of grants NIH awards by 4,000 this year and 15,000 next year, which would be a devastating blow for research institutions, scientists, and patients nationwide. A recent report found that nearly 2,500 NIH grants have been ended or delayed. In addition to terminating $4.9 billion in active research grants, the NIH has awarded 3,288 fewer disease studies and research projects compared to the same time period last year. Senator Baldwin pressed Director Bhattacharya specifically about the disastrous new forward funding policy that would dramatically reduce the number of grants NIH awards next year, and the need for Congress to step in and stop NIH from implementing it.
Senator Baldwin led a forum earlier this year to spotlight how cuts are impacting researchers and Americans in clinical trials. Senator Baldwin also sent a letter, together with Senator Murray and Representative DeLauro, to Director Bhattacharya pressing him for information about the thousands of NIH grants that have been terminated under his watch.
A full recording of Senator Baldwin’s opening remarks is available here.
A full recording of Senator Baldwin’s questions is available here.
Source: United States Senator Alex Padilla (D-Calif.)
Padilla, Schiff Demand Answers From Trump Administration on Reckless Decision to Deploy Hundreds of Marines to Los Angeles
Senators: “We strongly oppose this deployment and request you clarify the legal authority that purports to grant the President and you the ability to deploy active-duty personnel on American streets under these circumstances.”
WASHINGTON, D.C. — Today, U.S. Senators Alex Padilla, Ranking Member of the Senate Judiciary Immigration Subcommittee, and Adam Schiff (both D-Calif.) demanded answers regarding the Trump Administration’s decision to deploy approximately 700 Marines to Los Angeles. In their letter to Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth and Secretary of the Navy John Phelan, the Senators requested that the Administration clarify and provide the legal authority that purports to grant the President and the Department of Defense the ability to deploy active-duty military personnel on American streets.
“The presence of the Marines was not requested by Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass, the Los Angeles Board of Supervisors, or California Governor Gavin Newsom. Moreover, local and state law enforcement officers are carrying out their missions to protect the public amid ongoing immigration raids by Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) personnel. We strongly oppose this deployment and request you clarify the legal authority that purports to grant the President and you the ability to deploy active-duty personnel on American streets under these circumstances,” wrote the Senators.
“A decision to deploy active-duty military personnel within the United States should only be undertaken during the most extreme circumstances, and these are not them. That this deployment was made over the objections of state authorities is all the more unjustifiable. In this instance, this extraordinary action was also irresponsibly rushed and lacked clear communication to government officials or the U.S. public. The notification from NORTHCOM did not provide critical information to understand the legal authority, mission, or rules of engagement for Marines involved in this domestic deployment,” continued the Senators.
Senator Padilla has been outspoken in slamming the Los Angeles ICE raids and Trump’s misguided mobilization of the National Guard and U.S. Marine Corps. Earlier today, Padilla spoke on the Senate floor to blast President Trump for manufacturing a crisis by launching indiscriminate ICE raids across Los Angeles and deploying the National Guard and active-duty servicemembers to the region. Yesterday, Padilla, Schiff, and Senate Democratic Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) demanded answers from top Trump Administration officials regarding the arrest and detention of David Huerta, President of Service Employees International Union (SEIU) California and SEIU-United Service Workers West. Padilla has joined national and local TV and radio broadcasts in the past few days to condemn the Trump Administration’s cruel immigration enforcement in Los Angeles and across the country.
Full text of the letter is available here and below:
Dear Secretary Hegseth,
According to a U.S. Northern Command (NORTHCOM) notification to Congress on June 9, 2025, approximately 700 Marines have been deployed in support of Task Force 51, the unit comprised of National Guard troops called into federal service by President Trump and operating in Los Angeles. You explained subsequently that these “… active-duty U.S. Marines from Camp Pendleton are being deployed to Los Angeles to restore order.”
The presence of the Marines was not requested by Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass, the Los Angeles Board of Supervisors, or California Governor Gavin Newsom. Moreover, local and state law enforcement officers are carrying out their missions to protect the public amid ongoing immigration raids by Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) personnel. We strongly oppose this deployment and request you clarify the legal authority that purports to grant the President and you the ability to deploy active-duty personnel on American streets under these circumstances.
A decision to deploy active-duty military personnel within the United States should only be undertaken during the most extreme circumstances, and these are not them. That this deployment was made over the objections of state authorities is all the more unjustifiable. In this instance, this extraordinary action was also irresponsibly rushed and lacked clear communication to government officials or the U.S. public. The notification from NORTHCOM did not provide critical information to understand the legal authority, mission, or rules of engagement for Marines involved in this domestic deployment. As such, we ask that you provide immediate answers to the following questions:
What is the legal authority for the Marine deployment and any activity they will be authorized to undertake? Please provide any Department of Defense analysis on the legal authority for this action. What is the specific mission for the Marine deployment and how has that mission been communicated to the Marines?
Will the Marines engage in, and have legal authority to engage in, law enforcement activities?
Please also clarify any requests made of the Department of Defense by other federal entities, such as the White House and the Department of Homeland Security, regarding the scope of the Marines’ mission and duties.
What are the rules of engagement for the Marines while deployed to Los Angeles? The NORTHCOM notification indicates that “Task Force 51 forces have been trained in de-escalation, crowd control, and standing rules for the use of force.” How much training was provided to the Marines involved and at what time? What crowd control equipment was issued to the Marines prior to or during their deployment, and what training have they received on proper use of that equipment? Given that the Marines, who are trained to be among the most lethal forces in the U.S. military, may have direct contact with U.S. civilians as part of the domestic deployment, please clarify the precise rules of engagement that have been provided to them or under which they are expected to operate.
Given the significant questions about the role of the Marines as part of this operation, we respectfully request answers to these questions within 48 hours or a stand down of their mobilization.
Source: United States Senator Alex Padilla (D-Calif.)
WATCH: Padilla Slams Trump’s Unprecedented Mobilization of Marines and National Guard in LA, Pushes for Permanent DACA Protections
WATCH: Padilla: “Immigrants are not political pawns for his agenda. Just as servicemembers … are not political pawns for his agenda.”
WASHINGTON, D.C. — Today, U.S. Senator Alex Padilla (D-Calif.), Ranking Member of the Senate Judiciary Immigration Subcommittee, spoke on the Senate floor to condemn President Trump’s move to federalize the California National Guard and mobilize U.S. Marine Corps elements, sending 4,000 National Guard troops and 700 active-duty Marines to Los Angeles. Padilla delivered remarks ahead of the 13th anniversary of the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program, pushing for permanent protections for Dreamers rather than indiscriminate Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) raids.
Padilla called out President Trump for trying to scapegoat immigrants to distract from Republicans’ unpopular billionaire-first budget bill, which would deliver tax breaks for the ultra-wealthy at the expense of working families. As part of this manufactured crisis, Trump has caused a chaotic escalation of the conflict in Los Angeles while ignoring fundamental due process rights.
“Time and time again, we’ve seen one of the most frequently called plays out of the Trump playbook. When everything else is going wrong, shift the narrative, scapegoat immigrants, blame immigrants for whatever your failure is at the moment.”
“Well today, between his failing trade wars that are raising the cost of living on working families across the country, to his losses in federal court and delays in Congress on their efforts to give billionaires even bigger tax breaks, and even the embarrassing breakup recently with his former BBFF, billionaire best friend forever, Elon Musk, it’s safe to say that Donald Trump is grasping for anything he can do to change the narrative, to distract us of the damage that his political agenda is going on.”
“In order to distract the country from his failures and his efforts to ‘flood the zone,’ Donald Trump is expanding his deportation agenda far beyond the focus and targeting of violent and dangerous criminals that he claimed would be the strategy.”
“He’s so desperate to show quick results that he’s even throwing due process rights out the window for so many. The due process rights, by the way, that I know most of you, if not all of you, should agree are paramount, foundational to our democracy.”
Padilla emphasized that the Trump Administration’s cruel immigration enforcement in Los Angeles is deeply personal for him, and that he would keep fighting against Trump’s mass deportation agenda and demonizing of immigrant communities.
“It’s personal for me not just because Los Angeles is home — I was born and raised in Los Angeles — but as a proud son of immigrants, I know the true story of the vast majority of immigrants and immigrant families in Los Angeles, throughout California and throughout the country.”
“But instead of honoring those contributions … Donald Trump is manufacturing a crisis to once again, not just distract us, but divide us. And just as he’s always done, he’s using immigrants to do it.”
“So I can’t help but speak up and remind us, immigrants are not political pawns for his agenda. Just as servicemembers — women and men — are not political pawns for his agenda.”
As the nation approaches the 13th anniversary of the DACA program, Padilla pushed his Republican colleagues to finally pass permanent protections for DACA recipients, including over 160,000 in California alone. He highlighted that most Dreamers have been contributing to our communities and economy for years, and underlined that if DACA ended, it could cost the country nearly $650 billion while potentially cutting over 400,000 workers.
“As we should be celebrating the 13th anniversary of DACA this week, hundreds of thousands of DACA recipients and Dreamers are actually now worried that they are at risk, at further risk. That they could be next as President Trump struggles to find enough violent criminals to detain and deport to meet a campaign promise. Since he can’t get his numbers there, he’ll look elsewhere. So I want to take this moment to make very clear: Dreamers are our neighbors. Dreamers are our loved ones.”
“These are young people who are Americans in every sense of the word, except for one important piece of paperwork. … Yet because of Congressional Republicans’ refusal to act, Dreamers live at a minimum in a constant state of uncertainty, but oftentimes in a constant state of fear. They deserve better. Mr. President, they deserve permanent protections.”
“If through the President or through Republicans’ actions in Congress, you were to take away work authorization for hundreds of thousands of DACA recipients, that’s reducing our workforce at a time when we’re trying to grow the workforce and grow the economy.”
“I’m talking about Dreamers who work as teachers, as caregivers, as nurses and doctors, as construction workers, as food service workers, and so many other key industries for our economy. And they’re hardworking community members who pay taxes just like the rest of us and just want a chance to work hard and raise a family in the country that they love. They deserve peace of mind, the piece of mind to know that they are safe here at home.”
Padilla concluded by pushing his colleagues to pass the DREAM Act to finally provide permanent protections for Dreamers who have long contributed to our economy and communities, yet are forced to live in uncertainty.
“For my Republican colleagues who may be caught up in the heat of the moment and trapped in this anti-immigrant rhetoric in our current political climate on the right, I’ll say this: Dreamers make our communities better. Dreamers make our economy stronger. And Dreamers make our nation stronger.”
“The DREAM Act is a commonsense bill that has enjoyed bipartisan support. So I urge you to join me in supporting the DREAM Act now and giving these young people the certainty and the protections that they deserve, and strengthen our nation in the process.”
Video of Padilla’s full remarks is available here.
Senator Padilla has been outspoken in calling out the Los Angeles ICE raids and Trump’s misguided mobilization of the National Guard and U.S. Marine Corps. Earlier today, Padilla and U.S. Senator Adam Schiff (D-Calif.) demanded answers regarding the Trump Administration’s decision to deploy approximately 700 Marines to Los Angeles. Padilla also spoke on the Senate floor today to blast President Trump for manufacturing a crisis by launching indiscriminate ICE raids across Los Angeles and deploying the National Guard and active-duty servicemembers to the region. Yesterday, Padilla, Schiff, and Senate Democratic Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) demanded answers from top Trump Administration officials regarding the arrest and detention of David Huerta, President of Service Employees International Union (SEIU) California and SEIU-United Service Workers West. Padilla has joined national and local TV and radio broadcasts in the past few days to condemn the Trump Administration’s cruel immigration enforcement in Los Angeles and across the country.
Senator Padilla is a leading voice in Congress for immigration reform. To commemorate the 12th anniversary of DACA, Padilla joined immigration advocates, DACA recipients, and other lawmakers to urge Congress to pass a pathway to citizenship for Dreamers and call on former President Biden to protect Dreamers and long-term undocumented communities through executive action. He previously joined his Senate colleagues and directly impacted immigrant youth leaders for a press conference calling on Republicans in Congress to work with Democrats to pass permanent protections for DACA recipients after the 5th Circuit’s 2022 ruling left these recipients in limbo.
Source: United States Senator for Connecticut – Chris Murphy
[embedded content]
WASHINGTON—U.S. Senator Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) on Monday spoke on the U.S. Senate floor to call on his Senate colleagues to stand up to President Trump’s brazen corruption of U.S. foreign policy. Murphy will force a vote as early as this week on two joint resolutions of disapproval to block multi-billion-dollar weapons sales to Qatar and the UAE after Trump demanded billions of dollars in luxury gifts and business deals from the two countries, including a $400 million dollar luxury plane that he intends to keep for personal use.
Murphy exposed the historic nature of Trump’s corruption and the danger it poses to national security: “The blatant exchange of U.S. national security secrets, our most sensitive drone technology and our most sensitive chip technology, in exchange for cash into Donald Trump’s pocket, is perhaps the most brazenly corrupt act in the history of the American presidency. And we cannot normalize it just because he is doing it out in the open, in public.
On Trump demanding Qatar gift him a luxury jet for his own personal use, Murphy said: “Now, this kind of gift, a $400 million luxury jet, it has no precedent in American history. No President has ever asked for, never mind been given, a $400 million gift from a foreign nation. Why? Well, because presidents know that that’s crossing a line. That is a massive abuse of their power. The leverage that presidents have over other countries, that they could use to ask for millions of dollars in gifts, it’s supposed to be used to benefit the nation’s security, not to enrich themselves. But also, it’s just illegal. There is a very specific clause in the Constitution that forbids this kind of gift from a foreign government to a president. And this body is supposed to be in charge of helping to enforce the Constitution. Our founders wrote that clause into the Constitution because they worried about this exact situation, where a president is using his authority like a monarch or a king to make himself the richest person in the world.
Murphy stressed that Republicans and Democrats must unite to protect the U.S. Constitution and preserve a foreign policy rooted in furthering American interests: “Donald Trump is using the power of his office not to help or protect us, but to enrich himself and his family. He is doing it publicly, brazenly, out in the open. He is, in effect, daring us – specifically daring the legislative branch, the co-equal branch – to stop him…Republicans can’t ignore this just because the president is their party’s leader. We have that independent obligation to protect the Constitution, which clearly says that these gifts are illegal, whether they’re going to a Democratic president or a Republican president. We have a responsibility to our taxpayers to stop a president from immorally enriching himself, using the power we give him to help himself instead of helping us.
He concluded: “The net result is an American public that is poorer, and weaker, and less secure. And a president who is richer. It’s corrupt. It’s corrupt. We’ve never, ever, in the history of this country, allowed for a president to do this. Never in the 250 years that our republic has been on the Earth has a president ever asked another nation to enrich himself in this way, in exchange for preferential treatment from the U.S. taxpayers. If you are a Republican or a Democratic senator, you have to see this as unprecedented, as terrible for our nation, as corruption. American foreign policy should not be for sale. If we let these arms sales go through, we are greasing the wheels of that corruption. If we vote for these resolutions of disapproval, at least we have a shot to stop it.”
Murphy filed these joint resolutions of disapproval last month.
A full transcript of his remarks can be found below:
MURPHY: “The U.S. Constitution and the American people give the American president vast power: the power to decide how billions of dollars are spent; the power to oversee the entire federal criminal justice system; the power to sell arms around the world; to deploy millions of American soldiers; to negotiate peace treaties. We give him these powers – the Constitution gives the president these powers – so that he uses them on our behalf: to deploy that vast power of the American presidency; to increase our quality of life; to protect the American people. We place immense trust in the president not to abuse these incredible authorities that are given to him. But Donald Trump is abusing that authority in ways that honestly shock the conscience.
“Donald Trump is using the power of his office not to help or protect us, but to enrich himself and his family. He is doing it publicly, brazenly, out in the open. He is, in effect, daring us – specifically daring the legislative branch, the co-equal branch – to stop him.
“Nearly three weeks ago, news broke that the White House had dialed up one of our key allies in the Middle East, the government of Qatar, and it asked that the Qataris give the president a luxury jet that is reportedly worth upwards of $400 million.
“Now, the nicest jet that I have ever been on is Air Force One, and it’s really nice. But the jet that Trump wants to make Air Force One, that he’s asking for from the Qataris, makes Air Force One, the current version, look like a tenement house. The Qatari jet that he is asking for, its interior is designed by a famed French designer, complete with a flowing grand staircase, sculpted ceilings, plush carpeting, leather couches, gold furnishings. The plane has been called the world’s most luxurious private jet. It includes nine bathrooms, five kitchens, swanky lounges, and a master bedroom suite. The arrangement that Trump proposed to the Qataris would briefly pass the jet through U.S. government hands, but only, as reported, for just a year or two before it would end up belonging personally to Donald Trump. The U.S. Government would essentially be a straw purchaser. The real owner of the jet, for all practical purposes, would be Donald Trump.
“Now, this kind of gift, a $400 million luxury jet, it has no precedent in American history. No President has ever asked for, never mind been given, a $400 million gift from a foreign nation. Why? Well, because presidents know that that’s crossing a line. That is a massive abuse of their power. The leverage that presidents have over other countries, that they could use to ask for millions of dollars in gifts, it’s supposed to be used to benefit the nation’s security, not to enrich themselves. But also, it’s just illegal. There is a very specific clause in the Constitution that forbids this kind of gift from a foreign government to a president. And this body is supposed to be in charge of helping to enforce the Constitution. Our founders wrote that clause into the Constitution because they worried about this exact situation, where a president is using his authority like a monarch or a king to make himself the richest person in the world.
“Now, the Qatar government feels like it had little choice but to say yes when asked for this $400 million gift – again, briefly to the U.S. Government – but really, for all practical purposes, to the president. They felt like they had no choice precisely because an American president has so much power. They have so much leverage, especially over a vulnerable country in the Middle East. In this case, Qatar really needs to keep the United States on its side. Middle East politics, they shift really quickly, and during Trump’s first term, when the Qataris were not close to Trump, they paid a price. They found themselves badly and dangerously isolated in the region. Saudi Arabia and the UAE, if you remember, effectively ganged up to blockade Qatar, and Trump gave that move implicit consent. Qatar, frankly, is willing to pay a very high price to avoid that fate again.
“But Qatar also has things that it wants from the United States. No Middle East country has ever been allowed to buy MQ-9 Reaper drones. These are the most lethal armed drone that America makes. We have previously judged that the region is just too volatile to allow any nation to possess the Reaper, and arguably there’s an arms control regime that doesn’t allow us to transfer that technology, but Qatar wanted to break that precedent. Of course they did. They wanted to be the first nation to have the Reaper technology, and Trump seemed willing to go along. So, a $400 million gift to the president, again, that the president was asking for, it’s a relatively small price to pay for that kind of military edge over your rivals in the region.
“But there was one more reason that Qatar had no choice but to give Trump, or at least they felt they had no choice but to give Trump, this wildly illegal gift: because Trump had made it clear to the whole region, to the whole of the Gulf region in the Middle East, that he was for sale and that preferential American treatment was for sale. And if Qatar didn’t pay, another country would. Qatar wasn’t going to be protected, frankly, by a collective refusal of Trump’s extortion in the region. And they had only to look next door to the United Arab Emirates to see how high the price was getting to win Trump’s affection.
“At the exact moment that Trump was leaning on Qatar to give him the luxury plane, he was also leaning on UAE to give him not a $400 million gift, but a $2 billion gift. And he didn’t have to lean hard. Just before the Qataris committed to give Trump the plane, an investment firm, backed by the Emirati government and chaired by Emirati government’s national security advisor, shocked the world and announced that it would use Trump’s brand-new stablecoin, this is a form of cryptocurrency, in a $2 billion investment deal that this investment fund, essentially an arm of the UAE government, was doing. And because of that $2 billion deal, overnight Trump’s stablecoin became one of the five largest stablecoins in the world, massively inflating the president’s wealth due to this one single investment. Now this wasn’t an ordinary investment decision. Out of all the stablecoin companies in the world, the Emiratis chose what at the time was a brand-new, relatively small crypto company, run by two people who had very little background in the industry. Why? To put money directly into the pocket of Donald Trump. On the website of World Liberty Financial – that’s the company that is issuing the Trump coin – they don’t hide the fact that this isn’t the Trump kids that own the business. On the website, it states 60% of this company, World Liberty Financial, is owned by an entity affiliated with Donald J. Trump.
“But it gets even more corrupt because World Liberty Financial’s other cofounder is a guy named Zach Witkoff, who, not coincidentally, is the son of Steve Witkoff, Trump’s top Middle East advisor. The Trumps could have picked anybody in the world to run this stablecoin business with but they chose the son of the Middle East envoy, just so that when they were going around asking for money in the region, it was crystal clear that if you were doing business with World Liberty Financial, you were doing business with the people in the Trump administration who make all the decisions about the Middle East. So, in one fell swoop, the Emiratis can put money into the family that controls the White House and the family that deploys and decides Middle East policy.
“Now, just like the Qataris, the Emiratis want something in return, too. Their ask was for the U.S. to remove restrictions on selling the most advanced American-made computer chips to the UAE. The restrictions have been in place under Republican and Democratic administrations for a really good reason. The UAE has a very close, too close, relationship with China. And the U.S. is always rightly worried that if we gave advanced technology to UAE, it would pretty quickly, potentially, fall into the hands of the Chinese. Now, this would be really bad – especially regarding these microchips, these computer chips – because these chips power the most advanced and proprietary American A.I. systems. Losing these chips to China could cost us the lead to China on the global A.I. race. The UAE also wanted the United States to look the other way while they helped fund a death-spiral civil war in Sudan. The UAE is the main supplier of weapons to the worst of the two parties that are involved in the brutal, catastrophic, deadly, civil war in Sudan. And they want the United States to keep giving them weapons, most recently asking for a resupply of Chinook helicopters, even as they use their military prowess to destroy Sudan.
“Now, the end of this chapter of the story will not shock you. In coordination with the $400 million luxury plane and the $2 billion investment in Trump crypto, Qatar got sign-off on buying the Reaper drones. And Steve Witkoff, father of the co-owner of World Liberty Financial, marched over to UAE, right before the president was showing up himself, and announced that the United States would, in fact, magically lift those restrictions on the microchips. And just as unsurprisingly, Trump announced that he’ll sell the Chinooks to Abu Dhabi, with no requirement that they stop fueling the war in Sudan.
“The blatant exchange of U.S. national security secrets, our most sensitive drone technology and our most sensitive chip technology, in exchange for cash into Donald Trump’s pocket, is perhaps the most brazenly corrupt act in the history of the American presidency. And we cannot normalize it just because he is doing it out in the open, in public.
“The Senate, which is given the responsibility by the Constitution to be a coequal branch with the president, we have independent responsibility to uphold and protect the Constitution, to set American foreign policy. We cannot pretend this is not happening. We cannot look the other way while the entire moral foundation of our foreign policy is being shattered. Republicans can’t ignore this just because the president is their party’s leader. We have that independent obligation to protect the Constitution, which clearly says that these gifts are illegal, whether they’re going to a Democratic president or a Republican president. We have a responsibility to our taxpayers to stop a president from immorally enriching himself, using the power we give him to help himself instead of helping us.
“What makes this moment so dangerous is that both UAE and Qatar, but especially Qatar, are key partners of the United States. They aren’t our adversaries. They are our allies. They’re imperfect allies, but they are our allies. In fact, I’ve been down on this floor in the past arguing on behalf of Qatar and the U.S.-Qatar relationship, when other senators have tried to denigrate the Qataris’ contributions to regional peace. The Qataris have been a critical partner of ours on so many important issues. It’s worth saying that. There’s no way that we would have been able to evacuate 124,000 people from Afghanistan on the eve of the Taliban takeover without Qatar’s help. The Qataris today host thousands of U.S. troops at Al Udeid Air Force Base. That’s the largest base in the region. The Qataris are critical mediators who helped us send back-channel messages to secure the release of American hostages or negotiate peace deals. There’s no question that Qatar is a country that helps stabilize the region and often is indispensable in protecting U.S. interests overseas. So, I want to cultivate and strengthen that important relationship. I honor the work that the United States and UAE does all around the region to try to track down and hold accountable terrorists. These are real partnerships. But our relationship with Qatar and the UAE, it can’t be a corrupt relationship. We can’t sell drones to Qatar, our friend, if our friend is willing to take part in Trump’s corruption. We cannot sell weapons to the UAE, our ally, if our ally is willing to take part in Trump’s corruption.
“We’ll have a chance this week to make this clear: that the United States Senate will not facilitate, will not grease the wheels of Trump’s corruption of our foreign policy. We can do that by voting to block these two arms sales to Qatar and the UAE. Not permanently, but until both countries commit to deny Trump’s requests for personal enrichment as part of the bilateral relationship. That’s why Senators Van Hollen, Kaine, Schatz, and Sanders have joined me in two resolutions of disapproval for those Reaper drone sales and the Chinook sale, and we’ll have a vote on these two resolutions as early as this week.
“President Trump has declared that U.S. foreign policy is for sale. And the opening bids, from two of the richest nations in the world, is a $2 billion investment in Trump’s crypto company, from the UAE, and a $400 million luxury plane, essentially for the president’s permanent personal use. At the exact same moment that Trump is trying to push a bill through this Congress that is going to ruin a lot of people’s lives, cutting off their health care or leaving kids without food at night, he’s making himself even richer by trading American national security policy for gifts. And, to make it worse, trading away U.S. national security secrets in exchange. The net result is an American public that is poorer, and weaker, and less secure. And a president who is richer. It’s corrupt. It’s corrupt. We’ve never, ever, in the history of this country, allowed for a president to do this. Never in the 250 years that our republic has been on the Earth has a president ever asked another nation to enrich himself in this way, in exchange for preferential treatment from the U.S. taxpayers. If you are a Republican or a Democratic senator, you have to see this as unprecedented, as terrible for our nation, as corruption. American foreign policy should not be for sale. If we let these arms sales go through, we are greasing the wheels of that corruption. If we vote for these resolutions of disapproval, at least we have a shot to stop it.
“I yield the floor.”
What you need to know: In an address delivered to nearly 40 million Californians and Americans nationwide tonight, Governor Gavin Newsom condemned President Trump’s unlawful militarization of Los Angeles and warned that the President’s actions mark a dangerous inflection point for the nation.
LOS ANGELES — In an address delivered to nearly 40 million Californians and Americans nationwide tonight, Governor Gavin Newsom condemned President Trump’s unlawful militarization of Los Angeles and warned that the President’s actions mark a dangerous inflection point for the nation.
“What we’re witnessing is not law enforcement — it’s authoritarianism,”Governor Newsom said to Californians. “What Donald Trump wants most is your fealty. Your silence. To be complicit in this moment. Do not give in to him.”
Governor Newsom recounted recent federal raids in Latino neighborhoods, the unlawful commandeering of 4,000 California National Guard members, and the deployment of over 700 active-duty Marines to the streets of an American city — all done without consultation with state or local officials. “Trump is pulling a military dragnet across Los Angeles,”Newsom said. “It’s weakness masquerading as strength.”
Calling this a moment of national reckoning, the Governor urged Americans to take peaceful action. “The most important office in a democracy is not President or Governor — it’s citizen.”
Watch and read the entire speech here:
Governor Newsom’s Address to California: Democracy at a Crossroads
I want to say a few words about the events of the last few days.
This past weekend, federal agents conducted large-scale workplace raids in and around Los Angeles.
Those raids continue as I speak.
California is no stranger to immigration enforcement.
But instead of focusing on undocumented immigrants with serious criminal records and people with final deportation orders – a strategy both parties have long supported – this administration is pushing mass deportations.
Indiscriminately targeting hardworking immigrant families, regardless of their roots or risk.
What’s happening right now is very different than anything we’ve seen before.
On Saturday morning, when federal agents jumped out of an unmarked van near a Home Depot parking lot, they began grabbing people.
A deliberate targeting of a heavily Latino suburb.
A similar scene also played out when a clothing company was raided downtown.
In other actions: a US citizen, 9 months pregnant – arrested. A four-year-old girl – taken.
Families separated. Friends disappearing.
In response, everyday Angelinos came out to exercise their Constitutional right to free speech and assembly
To protest their government’s actions.
In turn, the State of California and the City and County of Los Angeles sent our police officers to help keep the peace, and with some exceptions, they were successful.
Like many states, California is no stranger to this sort of civil unrest. We manage it regularly … and with our own law enforcement.
But this, again, was different.
What then ensued was the use of tear gas. Flash-bang grenades. Rubber bullets.
Federal agents, detaining people and undermining their due process rights.
Donald Trump, without consulting with California’s law enforcement leaders, commandeered 2,000 of our state’s National Guard members to deploy on our streets.
Illegally, and for no reason.
This brazen abuse of power by a sitting President inflamed a combustible situation … putting our people, our officers, and the National Guard at risk.
That’s when the downward spiral began. He doubled down on his dangerous National Guard deployment by fanning the flames even harder.
And the President did it on purpose.
As the news spread throughout LA, anxiety for family and friends ramped up. Protests started again.
By night, several dozen lawbreakers became violent and destructive. They vandalized property. They tried to assault police officers.
Many of you have seen video clips of cars burning on cable news.
If you incite violence or destroy our communities, you are going to be held accountable.
That kind of criminal behavior will not be tolerated. Full stop.
Already, more than 370 people have been arrested. And we’re reviewing tapes to build additional cases, and people will be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law.
Again, thanks to our law enforcement officers and the majority of Angelenos who protested peacefully, this situation was winding down and was concentrated in just a few square blocks downtown.
But that’s not what Donald Trump wanted.
He again chose escalation; he chose more force.
He chose theatrics over public safety – he federalized another 2,000 Guard members.
He deployed more than 700 active U.S. Marines.
These are men and women trained in foreign combat, not domestic law enforcement.
We honor their service. We honor their bravery. But we do not want our streets militarized by our own Armed Forces. Not in L.A. Not in California. Not anywhere.
We’re seeing unmarked cars in school parking lots. Kids, afraid to attend their own graduation.
Trump is pulling a military dragnet across LA, well beyond his stated intent to just go after violent and serious criminals.
His agents are arresting dishwashers, gardeners, day laborers and seamstresses – That’s just weakness. Weakness, masquerading as strength.
Donald Trump’s government isn’t protecting our communities – they are traumatizing our communities. And that seems to be the point.
California will keep fighting on behalf of our people – all of our people – including in the courts.
Yesterday, we filed a legal challenge to President Trump’s reckless deployment of American troops to a major American city.
Today, we sought an emergency court order to stop the use of the American military to engage in law enforcement activities across Los Angeles.
If some of us can be snatched off the streets without a warrant, based only on suspicion or skin color, then none of us are safe.
Authoritarian regimes begin by targeting people who are least able to defend themselves. But they do not stop there.
Trump and his loyalists thrive on division because it allows them to take more power and exert even more control.
By the way, Trump – he’s not opposed to lawlessness and violence, as long as it serves HIM.
What more evidence do we need than January 6th?
I ask everyone to take the time to reflect on this perilous moment.
A president who wants to be bound by no law or constitution.
Perpetrating a unified assault on American traditions.
This is a President who, in just over 140 days, has fired government watchdogs that could hold him accountable for corruption and fraud.
He’s declared a war on culture, on history, on science – on knowledge itself. Databases, quite literally vanishing.
He’s delegitimizing news organizations and assaulting the First Amendment.
At the threat of defunding them, he’s dictating what universities can teach.
Targeting law firms and the judicial branch that are the foundation of an orderly, civil society.
Calling for a sitting Governor to be arrested for no other reason than – to use his words – “for getting elected.”
And we all know, this Saturday, he’s ordering our American heroes – the United States military – forcing them to put on a vulgar display to celebrate his birthday, just as other failed dictators have done in the past.
Look, this isn’t just about protests in LA.
When Donald Trump sought blanket authority to commandeer the National Guard, he made that order apply to every state in this nation.
This is about all of us. This is about you.
California may be first – but it clearly won’t end here. Other states are next.
Democracy is next.
Democracy is under assault right before our eyes – the moment we’ve feared has arrived.
He’s taking a wrecking ball to our founding fathers’ historic project.
Three independent, coequal branches of government.
There are no longer any checks and balances. Congress is nowhere to be found. Speaker Johnson has completely abdicated that responsibility.
The rule of law has increasingly given way to the rule of Don.
The founding fathers did not live and die to see this moment.
It’s time for all of us to stand up.
Justice Brandeis said it best: in a democracy, the most important office is not president, it’s certainly not governor. The most important office is office of citizen.
At this moment, we must all stand up and be held to a higher level of accountability.
If you exercise your First Amendment rights, please do so peacefully.
I know many of you are feeling deep anxiety, stress, and fear.
But I want you to know that YOU are the antidote to that fear and anxiety.
What Donald Trump wants most is your fealty. Your silence. To be complicit in this moment.
Do NOT give in to him.
Press releases
Recent news
Jun 10, 2025
News LOS ANGELES – Governor Newsom and Attorney General Bonta are standing up all states by filing a lawsuit and request to block President Trump and the Department of Defense’s illegal militarization of Los Angeles and the takeover of a California National Guard (Cal…
Jun 10, 2025
News “Turning the military against American citizens” What you need to know: Standing up for American citizens and the Nation’s foundational ban on martial law in peacetime, California Governor Newsom and Attorney General Bonta are requesting the court step in to…
Jun 9, 2025
News What you need to know: California is surging mutual aid resources to support law enforcement as they clean up the actions caused by President Trump. LOS ANGELES – Moving quickly to support local response to federal actions that have caused unrest in Los Angeles,…
The Trump Assassination Attempt, Security Failures, The Politics and What Happens Next? – Firstly, in this episode of A View from Afar, political scientist and former Pentagon analyst, Dr Paul Buchanan, provides us a preliminary assessment of the assassination attempt on former United States president Donald Trump.
Today we will examine:
How could an assassin get inside a security parameter, and in to a position with direct line of sight to his target Donald Trump?
And specifically, while the gunman was outside the immediate venue, it would appear the shooter’s location was within the security parameters, a position obvious to him as a prime area, with direct line of sight to his intended target.
So why wouldn’t that fact be obvious to the US security services who were responsible for ensuring the parameters were safe and clear?
And, importantly too, what are the political implications of this assassination attempt?
For example; does this assassination attempt accentuate Trump’s mythology as an invincible born to rule leader? And as such, draw contrast to the incumbent US President Joe Biden’s frailty?
In this regard, Paul and Selwyn assess what is likely to happen next?
INTERACTION WHILE LIVE:
Paul and Selwyn encourage their live audience to interact while they are live with questions and comments. So, we encourage you to Subscribe and Engage.
To interact during the live recording of this podcast, go to Youtube.com/c/EveningReport/
Remember to subscribe to the channel.
For the on-demand audience, you can also keep the conversation going on this debate by clicking on one of the social media channels below:
A View from Afar with Paul G Buchanan and Selwyn Manning.
Building upon recent episodes of A View from Afar, Political Scientist Paul G Buchanan and journalist Selwyn Manning discuss The Politics of Desperation. This episode flows on from discussions about long transitions and the moment of friction.
As the old status quo begins to crumble (under the weight of fraction), political leaders and elites invested in it get increasingly desperate, leading to more dangerous decisions, more acute moments, and, increased chances of mistake, miscalculation and unanticipated backlash.
The Politics of Desperation accentuates an ongoing downward spiral. And, the Politics of Desperation takes form in differing degrees. For some, the risk of losing is merely a dent in the leader’s ego, reputation, and an awakening that voters have moved on from their style of politics.
But for others, a loss will prove to be devastating, for example; should Donald Trump lose his bid to regain the United States presidency, he will face sentencing as a felon and perhaps even face jail time. For Israel’s Prime Minister Netanyahu, a future loss or a collapse of his right-wing coalition would likely see him facing domestic charges and possibly charges laid by the International Criminal Court for his role in the disproportionate use of military might in Israel’s war on Gaza.
So, Paul and Selwyn discuss the examples of the Politics of Desperation from around the world and assess the risks as the world rests on the cusp of an unknown future.
INTERACTION WHILE LIVE:
Paul and Selwyn encourage their live audience to interact while they are live with questions and comments.
A View from Afar – Dr Paul G. Buchanan and Selwyn Manning deep-dive into the United States November 5, 2024 Elections and consider the ‘what, where, how and why’ questions as they detail the rise and fall and rise of Donald John Trump and Trumpism.
Background Image courtesy of Nick Minto, Copyright 2024 Nick Minto; photographed November 6, 2024, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA.
In this episode Paul and Selwyn discuss:
Why Democrats Lost: Incumbency, Elitism, Class & Alienation, Identity Politics…
Why Trump Won: Anti-Establishment, Populism, Avatar for the Alienated…
What to Expect Next: Trump Appointments, Isolationism, Geopolitical Impact & Response…
INTERACTION WHILE LIVE: Paul and Selwyn encourage interaction while live, and encourage their audience to lodge comments and questions. Please subscribe to our YouTube channel and click on notification-bell for an alert for future programmes.
Here’s the link: https://www.youtube.com/c/EveningReport/
Background image: courtesy of and Copyright Nick Minto 2024. Image taken November 6 2024, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA.
RECOGNITION: The MIL Network’s podcast A View from Afar was Nominated as a Top Defence Security Podcast by Threat.Technology – a London-based cyber security news publication. Threat.Technology placed A View from Afar at 9th in its 20 Best Defence Security Podcasts of 2021 category.
In this episode of A View From Afar political scientist Paul Buchanan and host Selwyn Manning analyse how conflicts are expanding, arguably with warring sides taking an opportunity to take as much territory, while a ‘Lame-Duck Window’ exists in the United States.
For example;
In Syria, opposition-baked forces have taken Aleppo city and other strategic centres in an attempt to remove Syria’s authoritarian leader Assad. Assad’s forces are resisting on the ground while Russian air forces attacked the opposition force’s positions. Israel announced it may strike Syria government munitions sites in a move to ensure opposition forces do not take possession of such weaponry.
Meanwhile, fighting has intensified on the Ukraine-Russia frontlines after:
North Korea deployed a 10,000-strong assistance force to the Kursk region;
Outgoing US President Joe Biden authorised Ukraine to fire ATTACM missiles deep into Russia;
Ukraine indeed fired ATTACMs into the Russian motherland and has increased its drone attacks on military targets in cities once regarded as safe from attack.
Also, and significantly, Russia fired into Dnipro City in Ukraine a hypersonic “experimental” Medium-Range-Ballistic-Missile – and followed up with the biggest barrage of drone and missile strikes on Ukraine’s energy infrastructure since the conflict began.
So-called “red-lines” have been crossed and all sides appear determined to take as much territory as possible before US President-Elect Donald Trump is sworn into office in January.
Paul and Selwyn assess what we can expect to witness in the next two months, how other state actors are being drawn into conflict, and what objectives are driving warring sides at flashpoints around the world.
Live Audience: Remember, we welcome your comments and questions. And also remember to Subscribe. Thank you!
Source: United States Senator for Massachusetts – Elizabeth Warren
June 10, 2025
Warren gains key concessions from Secretary McMahon in a private meeting.
Washington, D.C. – Today, U.S. Senator Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) met with Secretary of Education Linda McMahon. Senator Warren also delivered over 1,000 letters to McMahon that the senator had received from people in all 50 states who are worried about the Secretary’s efforts to dismantle the Department of Education (ED).
“My job as a U.S. Senator is to conduct oversight and hold officials’ feet to the fire when they are actively harming the American people. I was able to secure important commitments from Education Secretary McMahon, which will make a real difference for people with student loans,” said Senator Warren. “But at a time when President Trump and Republicans in Congress are trying to make it more expensive for students from working-class families to get ahead, I will not stop fighting to ensure that every student has access to affordable, quality education in America.”
During the meeting, Secretary McMahon revealed four key pieces of information to Senator Warren:
Secretary McMahon conceded that she has no statutory authority to move the responsibilities of the Department of Education to other agencies without Congress passing legislation first. This comes as the Trump administration tries to abolish the Department by shifting its responsibilities to the Small Business Administration and the Department of Health and Human Services, among other agencies that are ill-equipped to take on the Department of Education’s responsibilities. “McMahon didn’t just say she didn’t have the intention to do it—she said that she is legally barred from doing it,” said Senator Warren. “I asked her about the legal authority she would have to transfer any part of the functions of the Department of Education somewhere else, for example, to the SBA, and she said, ‘I can’t do that. That is the job of Congress.’ There was no ambiguity in her answer.”
Secretary McMahon confirmed that she does not intend to restart Social Security offsets for people with defaulted student loans. McMahon told Senator Warren that she personally decided to pause the seizure of Social Security benefits after the Trump administration had announced that it would start forced Social Security collections.“The Education Secretary has assured me that the pause that is currently in place will stay in place and if there is to be any change in that, she would get in touch with me directly before we go there,” said Senator Warren.
Secretary McMahon stated that she intends to soon restore the income-driven repayment (IDR) payment count tracker to studentaid.gov, allowing borrowers to track their progress towards receiving debt relief, after taking down the tracker earlier in the Trump administration.
Secretary McMahon admitted that she recommended cuts to the Pell Grant program because of the program’s budgetary shortfall, but that it was ultimately up to Congress to fund the Pell program. “McMahon purported to be a supporter of Pell and said that she thought these changes were necessary for fiscal responsibility,” said Senator Warren. “The idea that the Republicans want to cut Pell further, I can already say categorically, is a really bad idea and it’s going to mean that we’re going to lose some number of young people who want to get an education and who ultimately benefit this country when they get an education.”
Secretary McMahon also committed to responding in writing to Senator Warren’s June 4, 2025 letter containing 66 questions regarding her policies as Education Secretary. Last month, Senator Warren invited Secretary McMahon to a public forum Warren held on May 14, 2025 on higher education affordability. Secretary McMahon refused the invitation in a May 12 letter and instead agreed to a meeting with Senator Warren.
Senator Warren launched the Save Our Schools campaign in a coordinated effort to fight back against President Trump’s attempts to abolish the Department of Education:
On June 9, 2025, Senator Warren led her colleagues in pushing the Acting Inspector General of ED to open an investigation into new information obtained by her office revealing that DOGE may have gained access to two FSA internal systems, in addition to sensitive borrower data.
On May 20, 2025, Senator Warren and 27 other senators pushed for full funding for the Office of Federal Student Aid.
On May 20, 2025, Senator Warren and 27 other senators pushed for full funding to the Office of Federal Student Aid.
On May 14, 2025, Senator Warren led a Senate forum entitled “Stealing the American Dream: How Trump and Republicans Are Raising Education Costs for Families,” highlighting the consequences of Secretary Linda McMahon’s reckless dismantling of the Department of Education (ED) and President Trump’s “big, beautiful bill” for working- and middle-class students and borrowers.
On May 13, 2025, Senator Warren agreed to meet with Education Secretary Linda McMahon and promised to bring questions and stories from Americans across the country to highlight how the Trump administration’s attacks on education are hurting American families.
On May 6, 2025, Senator Elizabeth Warren highlighted the consequences of President Trump and Secretary Linda McMahon’s reckless dismantling of the Department of Education for American families in a Senate forum.
On April 24, 2025, Senator Warren launched a new investigation into the harms of President Trump’s attacks on the Department of Education, seeking information on the impact of the Trump administration’s actions from the members of twelve leading organizations representing schools, parents, teachers, students, borrowers, and researchers.
On April 10, 2025, following a request led by Senator Warren, the Department of Education’s Acting Inspector General agreed to open an investigation into the Trump administration’s attempts to dismantle the Department of Education.
On April 2, 2025, Senators Elizabeth Warren and Mazie Hirono, along with Senate Democratic Leader Chuck Schumer, sent a letter to Secretary of Education Linda McMahon regarding the Department of Government Efficiency’s proposed plan to replace the Department of Education’s federal student aid call centers with generative artificial intelligence chatbots.
On April 2, 2025, Senator Elizabeth Warren launched the Save Our Schools campaign to fight back against the Trump administration’s efforts to dismantle the Department of Education (ED) and highlight the consequences for every student and public school in America.
On March 27, 2025, Senator Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) led a letter to Acting Department of Education Inspector General (IG) René Rocque requesting that the IG conduct an investigation of the Trump Administration’s attempts to dismantle the Department of Education.
On March 20, 2025, Senators Elizabeth Warren and Bernie Sanders led a letter to Secretary of Education Linda McMahon regarding the Trump Administration’s decision to slash the capacity of Federal Student Aid to handle student aid complaints.
On February 24, 2025, in a response to Senator Warren, Secretary McMahon gave her first public admission that she “wholeheartedly” agreed with Trump’s plans to abolish the Department of Education.
On February 11, 2025, Senators Elizabeth Warren and Andy Kim sent Linda McMahon, Secretary-Designate for the U.S. Department of Education, a 12-page letter with 65 questions on McMahon’s policy views in advance of her nomination hearing.
