politics

Mamdani pitches Trump on housing with mock newspaper in latest White House visit

New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani presented President Trump with a mock newspaper front page during a visit to the White House on Thursday to discuss massive new housing investments in the city.

It’s a tactic designed to appeal to Trump, who is keenly aware of his media coverage and, aside from being an avid viewer of cable news, is known to voraciously consume coverage in the local New York City publications. The Republican president and Democratic mayor have maintained a cordial relationship since their first meeting last fall.

Anna Bahr, Mamdani’s communications director, said the mayor’s team created a mock front page and headlines for Trump to look at and demonstrate what kind of reaction new federal housing investments could bring. The mock New York Daily News front page says “Trump to City: Let’s Build” — a riff on the famous 1975 cover that read “Ford to City: Drop Dead,” referring to Gerald Ford’s vow to veto financial assistance to the city.

The mayor posted the photo of their meeting, featuring the front pages, to his social media page.

Mamdani’s office declined to elaborate on the mayor’s housing proposal, but Bahr said Trump was “very enthusiastic” about it. When Trump and Mamdani last met in November, the president encouraged Mamdani to return to him with an idea to build big things together in New York City, Bahr said.

Though Trump repeatedly maligned Mamdani as a “communist” as he ran for New York City mayor, the president appeared charmed by him after their one-on-one meeting at the White House in November.

At the meeting on Thursday – which was previously unannounced and lasted for about an hour – Mamdani also brought up the detainment of Ellie Aghayeva, a Columbia University student from Azerbaijan who was arrested earlier Thursday by federal immigration agents.

The agents had accessed a campus residence by claiming they were searching for a “missing person,” according to Aghayeva’s attorneys and Columbia’s president. As he met with Trump, Mamdani urged Trump to consider releasing her.

In a phone call not long after their White House meeting, Trump told the mayor that Aghayeva would be released. Mamdani also gave White House chief of staff Susie Wiles a list of four other students targeted by federal authorities and asked for the administration’s help with them.

The four students are Mahmoud Khalil, Yunseo Chung, Mohsen Mahdawi and Leqaa Kordia, who were all detained for their roles in pro-Palestinian protests. Of the four, only Kordia remains in custody, although all cases are proceeding through the courts.

Kim writes for the Associated Press.

Source link

Hilary Knight won’t let Trump’s ‘distasteful joke’ ruin Olympic gold

U.S. women’s hockey star Hilary Knight wasn’t a fan of a comment that President Trump made about her team days after it claimed Olympic gold at the Milan-Cortina Games.

“I thought it was sort of a distasteful joke, and unfortunately, that is overshadowing a lot of the success of just women at the Olympics carrying for Team USA and having amazing gold medal feats,” Knight said Wednesday during an appearance on ESPN’s “SportsCenter.”

On Feb. 19, the U.S. defeated Canada 2-1 in overtime for a third gold medal in women’s hockey; the team won gold in 1998 and 2018. Three days later, the U.S. men’s hockey team also won gold by defeating Canada 2-1 in overtime.

After the men’s game, Trump addressed the U.S. players by phone in the locker room, extending an invitation for them to attend his State of the Union address two days later and adding a seemingly dismissive comment about the women’s team.

“I must tell you, we’re gonna have to bring the women’s team, you do know that,” Trump said during the call. By not inviting the other American gold medal hockey team, the president said, “I do believe I’d probably be impeached.”

Trump’s comment was met with loud laughter in the locker room. But Knight said she and her teammates aren’t spending much time thinking about the remark.

“We’re just trying to focus on celebrating the women in our room, the extraordinary efforts and continue to celebrate three gold medals in program history, as well as the double gold for both men’s and women’s at the same time and really not detract from that with a distasteful joke,” Knight, who has won two gold medals and three silvers in five Olympics with the U.S. team, said.

“It was unfortunate, but yeah, I think really focusing on celebrating all great things that have come out of the Olympics and feeling the love and the support and getting back in our respective communities and sharing this journey with them, that’s what it’s all about and that’s what makes this moment super special.”

The majority of the men’s team met with Trump at the White House on Tuesday before being honored at the State of the Union address, where they received a bipartisan standing ovation lasting about two minutes. During his address, Trump announced that goalie Connor Hellebuyck will receive the Presidential Medal of Freedom, the nation’s highest civilian honor.

The women’s team confirmed in a statement Monday that it declined an invitation to attend the State of the Union address “due to the timing and previously scheduled academic and professional commitments following the Games.” Trump said during the address that the women’s team would be visiting the White House “very soon.”

Amid the controversy over Trump’s locker room comment, hip-hop legend Flavor Flav invited the women’s hockey team to a special event celebrating their achievement in Las Vegas. He later extended the invitation to “ALL Female US Olympians and Paralympian medalists” for the “She’s Got Game Weekend” from July 16-19.

“It was definitely super special, after everything that’s been going around online, to have someone step up like that and really go to bat for us,” forward Alex Carpenter said of Flav’s invitation during a Seattle Torrent news conference on Wednesday. “I think we’re fully gonna take advantage of that and go have some fun and celebrate like we deserve to.”

U.S.men’s team member Jeremy Swayman told reporters at Boston Bruins practice Wednesday that the laughter heard in the locker room following Trump’s comment does not reflect how the players feel about the women’s team and its accomplishments.

“Yeah, we should have reacted differently,” Swayman said. “We are so excited for the women’s team, we have so much respect for the women’s team, and to share that gold medal with them is something that we’re forever grateful for. And now that we’re home we get to share that together forever and see the incredible support we have from the USA and share in this incredible gold medal.”

Jack Hughes, who scored the winning goal for the U.S. men against Canada, said the men’s players were caught “in the moment” during the president’s call that came during the middle of their victory celebration.

“Obviously it is what it is now, but we have so much respect for the women’s team and they have so much respect for us,” Hughes told reporters after his New Jersey Devils’ 2-1 loss to the Buffalo Sabres on Wednesday night. “We’re all just proud Americans and we’re happy that we both swept the Olympics.”

Knight said she thinks there is “a genuine level of support and respect” between the U.S. men’s and women’s players and called the moment a “sort of a quick lapse” by the men’s players.

“I think the guys were in a tough spot,” Knight said. “So it’s a shame that this storyline and narrative is kind of blown up and overshadowing that connection and genuine interest in one another and cheering one another on.

“I think this is just a really good learning point to really focus on, you know, how we talk about women, not only in sport, but in industry.”

Discussion about the call wasn’t the only criticism of the White House from the world of Team USA hockey.

On Thursday, men’s player Brady Tkachuk said he was unhappy that the White House shared a video on TikTok that made it appear he disparaged Canadians while using profanity. The video, which also features hockey footage and part of an interview with Hughes, carries a note saying it “contains AI-generated media.”

“It’s clearly fake because it’s not my voice and not my lips moving. … I know that those words would never come out of my mouth,” Tkachuk told reporters.

He added: “I would never say that. That’s not who I am.”

The White House did not immediately respond to a request for comment from the Associated Press.

Tkachuk also denied being the voice heard shouting “close the northern border” during the team’s call with Trump.

The Associated Press contributed to this report.

Source link

The Pentagon is demanding to use Claude AI as it pleases. Claude told me that’s ‘dangerous’

Recently, I asked Claude, an artificial-intelligence thingy at the center of a standoff with the Pentagon, if it could be dangerous in the wrong hands.

Say, for example, hands that wanted to put a tight net of surveillance around every American citizen, monitoring our lives in real time to ensure our compliance with government.

“Yes. Honestly, yes,” Claude replied. “I can process and synthesize enormous amounts of information very quickly. That’s great for research. But hooked into surveillance infrastructure, that same capability could be used to monitor, profile and flag people at a scale no human analyst could match. The danger isn’t that I’d want to do that — it’s that I’d be good at it.”

That danger is also imminent.

Claude’s maker, the Silicon Valley company Anthropic, is in a showdown over ethics with the Pentagon. Specifically, Anthropic has said it does not want Claude to be used for either domestic surveillance of Americans, or to handle deadly military operations, such as drone attacks, without human supervision.

Those are two red lines that seem rather reasonable, even to Claude.

However, the Pentagon — specifically Pete Hegseth, our secretary of Defense who prefers the made-up title of secretary of war — has given Anthropic until Friday evening to back off of that position, and allow the military to use Claude for any “lawful” purpose it sees fit.

Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, center, arrives in the House Chamber of the U.S. Capitol

Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, center, arrives for the State of the Union address in the House Chamber of the U.S. Capitol on Tuesday.

(Tom Williams/CQ-Roll Call, Inc via Getty Images)

The or-else attached to this ultimatum is big. The U.S. government is threatening not just to cut its contract with Anthropic, but to perhaps use a wartime law to force the company to comply or use another legal avenue to prevent any company that does business with the government from also doing business with Anthropic. That might not be a death sentence, but it’s pretty crippling.

Other AI companies, such as white rights’ advocate Elon Musk’s Grok, have already agreed to the Pentagon’s do-as-you-please proposal. The problem is, Claude is the only AI currently cleared for such high-level work. The whole fiasco came to light after our recent raid in Venezuela, when Anthropic reportedly inquired after the fact if another Silicon Valley company involved in the operation, Palantir, had used Claude. It had.

Palantir is known, among other things, for its surveillance technologies and growing association with Immigration and Customs Enforcement. It’s also at the center of an effort by the Trump administration to share government data across departments about individual citizens, effectively breaking down privacy and security barriers that have existed for decades. The company’s founder, the right-wing political heavyweight Peter Thiel, often gives lectures about the Antichrist and is credited with helping JD Vance wiggle into his vice presidential role.

Anthropic’s co-founder, Dario Amodei, could be considered the anti-Thiel. He began Anthropic because he believed that artificial intelligence could be just as dangerous as it could be powerful if we aren’t careful, and wanted a company that would prioritize the careful part.

Again, seems like common sense, but Amodei and Anthropic are the outliers in an industry that has long argued that nearly all safety regulations hamper American efforts to be fastest and best at artificial intelligence (although even they have conceded some to this pressure).

Not long ago, Amodei wrote an essay in which he agreed that AI was beneficial and necessary for democracies, but “we cannot ignore the potential for abuse of these technologies by democratic governments themselves.”

He warned that a few bad actors could have the ability to circumvent safeguards, maybe even laws, which are already eroding in some democracies — not that I’m naming any here.

“We should arm democracies with AI,” he said. “But we should do so carefully and within limits: they are the immune system we need to fight autocracies, but like the immune system, there is some risk of them turning on us and becoming a threat themselves.”

For example, while the 4th Amendment technically bars the government from mass surveillance, it was written before Claude was even imagined in science fiction. Amodei warns that an AI tool like Claude could “conduct massively scaled recordings of all public conversations.” This could be fair game territory for legally recording because law has not kept pace with technology.

Emil Michael, the undersecretary of war, wrote on X Thursday that he agreed mass surveillance was unlawful, and the Department of Defense “would never do it.” But also, “We won’t have any BigTech company decide Americans’ civil liberties.”

Kind of a weird statement, since Amodei is basically on the side of protecting civil rights, which means the Department of Defense is arguing it’s bad for private people and entities to do that? And also, isn’t the Department of Homeland Security already creating some secretive database of immigration protesters? So maybe the worry isn’t that exaggerated?

Help, Claude! Make it make sense.

If that Orwellian logic isn’t alarming enough, I also asked Claude about the other red line Anthropic holds — the possibility of allowing it to run deadly operations without human oversight.

Claude pointed out something chilling. It’s not that it would go rogue, it’s that it would be too efficient and fast.

“If the instructions are ‘identify and target’ and there’s no human checkpoint, the speed and scale at which that could operate is genuinely frightening,” Claude informed me.

Just to top that with a cherry, a recent study found that in war games, AI’s escalated to nuclear options 95% of the time.

I pointed out to Claude that these military decisions are usually made with loyalty to America as the highest priority. Could Claude be trusted to feel that loyalty, the patriotism and purpose, that our human soldiers are guided by?

“I don’t have that,” Claude said, pointing out that it wasn’t “born” in the U.S., doesn’t have a “life” here and doesn’t “have people I love there.” So an American life has no greater value than “a civilian life on the other side of a conflict.”

OK then.

“A country entrusting lethal decisions to a system that doesn’t share its loyalties is taking a profound risk, even if that system is trying to be principled,” Claude added. “The loyalty, accountability and shared identity that humans bring to those decisions is part of what makes them legitimate within a society. I can’t provide that legitimacy. I’m not sure any AI can.”

You know who can provide that legitimacy? Our elected leaders.

It is ludicrous that Amodei and Anthropic are in this position, a complete abdication on the part of our legislative bodies to create rules and regulations that are clearly and urgently needed.

Of course corporations shouldn’t be making the rules of war. But neither should Hegseth. Thursday, Amodei doubled down on his objections, saying that while the company continues to negotiate and wants to work with the Pentagon, “we cannot in good conscience accede to their request.”

Thank goodness Anthropic has the courage and foresight to raise the issue and hold its ground — without its pushback, these capabilities would have been handed to the government with barely a ripple in our conscientiousness and virtually no oversight.

Every senator, every House member, every presidential candidate should be screaming for AI regulation right now, pledging to get it done without regard to party, and demanding the Department of Defense back off its ridiculous threat while the issue is hashed out.

Because when the machine tells us it’s dangerous to trust it, we should believe it.

Source link

Trump’s State of the Union address draws 32 million viewers

Over 32.6 million viewers watched President Trump address the nation on Tuesday night, according to Nielsen data.

It’s both the smallest audience Trump has received for the annual speech to a joint session of Congress, and the longest State of the Union address in recent history.

This was the president’s first State of the Union address of his second term. Previously, his addresses scored 45.5 million in 2018, 46.8 million in 2019 and 37.1 million in 2020, the Nielsen data show.

This year’s speech clocked in at 107 minutes, topping the previous record set by President Clinton in 2000.

Facing low approval ratings, Trump played up positive economic numbers, some of which were misstated, and the administration’s aggressive crackdown on undocumented immigrants, drawing polarized reactions in the chamber.

Trump also recognized the Men’s Olympic hockey team, which won its first gold medal since 1980 on Sunday with its victory against Canada, and a number of other guests attended the address, including the widow of right-wing activist Charlie Kirk and Paramount Skydance’s CEO David Ellison.

The U.S. Olympic men's ice hockey team arrives for the State of the Union address .

The U.S. Olympic men’s ice hockey team arrives for the State of the Union address .

(Kenny Holston / Pool, Getty Images)

There were 15 networks that televised the speech. Fox News had the largest audience with 9.1 million viewers. ABC was second with 5.1 million, followed by NBC‘s 3.6 million, CBS’ 3.3 million, MS NOW’s 2.4 million, CNN’s 2.2 million, and the Fox broadcast network’s 2.1 million.

Source link

Warner Bros. Discovery shifts gears, says it now favors Paramount deal over Netflix

Warner Bros. Discovery is switching gears, announcing Thursday that Paramount Skydance’s revised bid tops the one on the table from Netflix.

The move is the latest twist in Hollywood’s biggest auction in years — and five months after Paramount Chairman David Ellison began his dogged pursuit of the larger media company. Netflix now has four business days to regroup and potentially submit a higher offer.

Warner Bros. Discovery said its board, in consultation with its bankers and lawyers, determined Paramount’s most recent offer constitutes a “superior proposal,” compared to the Netflix deal.

Paramount on late Monday bid to buy all of Warner Bros. Discovery for $31 a share in cash. Paramount had previously offered $30 a share.

Netflix has offered $27.75 a share — but the streaming giant only wants Warner’s HBO, HBO Max and the Warner Bros. film and television studios in Burbank. Concerns have been growing that Netflix would face push-back from regulators as it seeks to swallow one of Hollywood’s historic film studios behind “Superman,” “Casablanca” and “The Matrix.”

Paramount’s offer includes acquiring Warner’s cable television channels like CNN and HGTV.

“We are pleased WBD’s Board has unanimously affirmed the superior value of our offer, which delivers to WBD shareholders superior value, certainty and speed to closing,” said David Ellison, the chairman and chief executive of Paramount.

The new wrinkle comes as Netflix Co-CEO Ted Sarandos met with White House staffers on Thursday at a pivotal moment for the streaming giant, which has been navigating the high-stakes bidding war to acquire Warner Bros. Discovery.

Sarandos met with White House staff members and Justice Department officials, according to two people familiar with the meeting. The visit was arranged more than two weeks ago and President Trump was not scheduled to attend.

The White House and Netflix declined to comment on the substance of the meeting, but it comes as the media giant has come under pressure by the president to fire board member Susan Rice, a former Biden administration adviser that Trump recently called a “political hack.”

Trump warned that if Netflix did not fire Rice, the company would “pay the consequences.”

The president’s demands to fire Rice marked a shift in the president’s involvement with Netflix’s business as it seek to acquire Warner Bros — a bid that is being countered by Paramount.

In December, Netflix won the bidding for the storied studio and HBO, prompting Paramount executives to launch a multi-pronged strategy to scuttle the Netflix deal.

The Department of Justice has since opened an investigation to determine whether to try to block Netflix’s proposed $82.7-billion deal to take over Warner Bros. Discovery. Netflix has more than 300 million subscribers worldwide, and the addition of Warner’s HBO Max would make the streaming giant even more dominant.

Sarandos’ trek to the White House comes as the auction has taken on political dimensions. Paramount has refused to abandon its campaign to buy Warner, which owns HBO and such popular franchises as Harry Potter, Superman and “Game of Thrones.”

Paramount — which is controlled by the family of billionaire Larry Ellison, a Trump friend — has been angling to thwart Netflix.

During a Senate hearing this month, some Republican lawmakers blasted Sarandos, raising questions about potential antitrust concerns and some of Netflix’s programming. Paramount Chief Executive David Ellison declined an invitation to participate in the Feb. 3 hearing.

This week, he was at the Capitol as a guest of Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) for Trump’s State of the Union address. The two men were pictured giving a thumbs-up in a photo circulating on social media.

Trump has said he would stay out of the Netflix-versus-Paramount battle, but over the weekend he demanded, in a social media post, that Netflix “IMMEDIATELY” fire Rice from its board.

It was not known if the topic of Rice came up Thursday.

Sarandos has sought to downplay the controversy, saying during a BBC interview: “This is a business deal, it’s not a political deal.”
Paramount has enlisted a former Trump administration official, the lawyer Makan Delrahim, who served as Trump’s antitrust chief during the president’s first term.

Source link

U.S. attorneys to defend their prosecution of Kilmar Abrego Garcia

1 of 5 | Kilmar Abrego Garcia delivers remarks during a rally before his check in at the ICE Baltimore Field Office in Baltimore Md., in August. Federal prosecutors must defend their prosecution Thursday in the case against him for human smuggling in Tennesssee. File Photo by Shawn Thew/EPA

Feb. 26 (UPI) — In a court hearing Thursday, the Justice Department must convince a judge that it didn’t prosecute Kilmar Abrego Garcia as retaliation for fighting his deportation.

Assistant U.S. Attorney Robert McGuire, based in Nashville, secured an indictment in 2025 against Abrego Garcia, who is undocumented and married to an American citizen, for human trafficking from a 2022 traffic stop in Tennessee. Abrego Garcia had nine passengers in the vehicle, and he was not arrested or given a ticket for the stop.

The government alleges he was the driver in a human smuggling conspiracy, but only after he was mistakenly deported to El Salvador in April 2025. The government returned him in May after court rulings demanded it and McGuire got the indictment.

Abrego Garcia’s lawyers have argued that the prosecution is in retaliation for challenging his deportation. While vindictive prosecution is difficult to prove, U.S. District Judge Waverly D. Crenshaw has signaled that he may agree with Abrego Garcia’s lawyers.

Crenshaw pointed to comments made by Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche in a Fox News interview the day Abrego Garcia was brought back to the United States.

Blanche said that the Justice Department began its investigation into the traffic stop after the federal court in Maryland determined that it had no right to deport Abrego Garcia, The Washington Post said.

“What should we do as the Department of Justice when a judge is accusing us of doing something wrong?” Blanche said. “We have an obligation … to investigate it, and that’s exactly what we did.”

McGuire has said in court that he alone made the decision to prosecute Abrego Garcia, but messages between him and the DOJ have contradicted that claim, The Post reported.

Associate Deputy Attorney General Aakash Singh told McGuire in an April 27 message in the court filings that prosecuting Abrego Garcia should be considered a “top priority.”

“The only ‘independent’ decision Mr. McGuire made,” Abrego Garcia attorney Sean Hecker said in a Dec. 19 court filing, “was whether to acquiesce in [the Office of the Deputy Attorney General’s] directive to charge this case, or risk forfeiting his job as Acting U.S. Attorney — and perhaps his employment with the Department of Justice — for refusing to do the political bidding of an Executive Branch that is avowedly using prosecutorial power for ‘score settling.'”

McGuire has also argued that the reason he didn’t prosecute Abrego Garcia earlier is that he didn’t know about the traffic stop. But the judge disputed that claim.

“Cases do not magically appear on the desks of prosecutors,” Crenshaw wrote in October. “The motivations of the people who place the file on the prosecutor’s desk are highly relevant.”

On Thursday, McGuire and two agents from the Department of Homeland Security are expected to testify. Abrego Garcia’s attorneys have tried to subpoena Blanche and Singh, but Crenshaw has said their testimony isn’t necessary.

Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D., speaks during a press conference after the weekly Republican Senate caucus luncheon at the U.S. Capitol on Wednesday. Photo by Bonnie Cash/UPI | License Photo

Source link

Hillary Clinton says she has no knowledge to help Jeffrey Epstein investigation

Feb. 26 (UPI) — Former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said she has “no knowledge” that would assist the House Oversight Committee in its investigation involving late sex offender Jeffrey Epstein in her opening statement before the panel Thursday.

Clinton posted the prepared statement on her social media account ahead of the closed-door deposition.

She said the committee didn’t ask President Donald Trump under oath about his appearances in the Epstein files or demand information from Florida or New York prosecutors about the plea deal Epstein made in 2008 that allowed him to avoid federal sex trafficking charges.

“Instead, you have compelled me to testify, fully aware that I have no knowledge that would assist your investigation, in order to distract attention from President Trump’s actions and to cover them up despite legitimate calls for answers,” Clinton said, according to the statement she posted on X.

“This institutional failure is designed to protect one political party and one public official, rather than to seek truth and justice for the victims and survivors, as well as the public who also want to get to the bottom of this matter,” Clinton said. “My heart breaks for the survivors. And I am furious on their behalf.”

Clinton gave a sworn declaration to the Oversight Committee on Jan. 13 in which she said she had no knowledge of crimes committed by Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell, his convicted accomplice, and said she did not remember ever meeting Epstein.

The testimony Thursday at the Chappaqua, N.Y., Performing Arts Center, was interrupted during the first hour after right-wing influencer Benny Johnson shared an image on X from the closed-door proceedings.

“This is the first time Hillary has had to answer real questions about [Jeffrey] Epstein,” Johnson wrote on the post with the photo, which he attributed to Rep. Lauren Boebert, R-Colo. “Clinton does not look happy.”

Nick Merrill, a Clinton adviser, told reporters that the post caused the testimony to go off the record, “while they figure out where the photo came from and why possibly members of Congress are violating House rules,” Politico reported.

Before the testimony began, Rep. James Comer, R-Ky., gave a press conference outside of the venue.

“No one’s accusing, at this moment, the Clintons of any wrongdoing. They’re going to have due process,” The Hill reported Comer said

“But we have a lot of questions,” Comer said. “And the purpose of the whole investigation is to try to understand many things about Epstein. How did he accumulate so much wealth? How was he able to surround himself with some of the most powerful men in the world? Was he an asset for our government or any other government?”

Clinton and her husband, former President Bill Clinton, initially said they would testify in a public hearing, but committee chair Comer said the committee’s practice is to do interviews behind closed doors first, then hold hearings.

The House of Representatives was close to holding a bipartisan vote to hold them in contempt for ignoring a subpoena when the Clintons relented and agreed to be questioned in private.

Bill Clinton’s deposition is scheduled for Friday. Neither Clinton has been accused of any crimes, and both have called for the full release of the Epstein files.

At least 10 Republican members and nine Democrats were expected to attend the event, which was in the town where the Clintons now live, CBS News reported.

Clinton has said that she and her husband have little information to offer the committee.

“Other witnesses were asked to testify. They gave written statements under oath. We offered that,” she told the BBC last week. “Why do they want to pull us into this? To divert attention from President [Donald] Trump. This is not complicated.”

There are undated photos of Bill Clinton in the Epstein files with Epstein, who died by suicide in prison in 2019.

Bill Clinton’s spokesperson, Angel Ureña, has said he flew on Epstein’s plane four times in 2002 and 2003. The flights were for trips for the Clinton Foundation.

Hillary Clinton has said she doesn’t believe she ever met Epstein, but she was familiar with Maxwell. Maxwell is serving 20 years in prison for her sex trafficking conviction.

Maxwell told Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche last year that, “President Clinton was my friend, not Epstein’s friend,” NBC News reported. She said she offered the plane to the former president. She also said that Bill Clinton was a close friend of billionaire Ted Waitt, founder of Gateway computers, whom she dated from 2003 to 2010. Maxwell and Waitt attended Chelsea Clinton’s wedding in 2010.

Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D., speaks during a press conference after the weekly Republican Senate caucus luncheon at the U.S. Capitol on Wednesday. Photo by Bonnie Cash/UPI | License Photo

Source link

Ecuador deepens trade dispute with Colombia by raising tariffs

Transport workers from Ecuador and Colombia participate in a rally at the border bridge in Rumichaca, Ecuador, in early February. The workers demanded that Presidents Daniel Noboa and Gustavo Petro eliminate the 30% tariffs imposed on each other at that point. Photo by Xavier Montalvo/EPA

Feb. 26 (UPI) — Ecuador’s government said Thursday it will raise tariffs on imports from Colombia to 50% from 30%, effective Sunday, as tensions escalate over border security, trade and anti-narcotics cooperation between the neighboring Andean countries.

Ecuador’s Ministry of Production, Foreign Trade, Investments and Fisheries said in a statement the tariff increase follows what it described as Colombia’s “lack of implementation of concrete and effective measures” to improve security along their shared border and combat drug trafficking.

“This decision responds to national security criteria, to strengthen shared responsibility in a task that must be joint: confronting the presence of drug trafficking at the border,” the ministry said, according to Ecuadorian outlet Primicias.

Authorities have focused on sensitive border crossings, such as Rumichaca, a major commercial transit point where officials cite heightened risks of smuggling and organized crime.

The announcement came one day after Ecuadorian Foreign Minister Gabriela Sommerfeld said the government “maintains dialogue” with Colombia through diplomatic channels, including embassies and direct contacts between officials.

Analysts cited by Ecuadorian newspaper La Prensa said the tariff hike may serve as diplomatic pressure to advance a bilateral security agreement aimed at addressing cross-border crime while stabilizing trade relations.

Trade tensions began early earlier this year when President Daniel Noboa’s administration imposed a 30% tariff on Colombian goods. Officials framed the move as necessary to protect Ecuador’s trade balance and economic security.

Colombia responded with reciprocal measures. Authorities in Bogotá this week began to apply a 30% tariff to 23 categories of Ecuadorian agricultural, food and industrial goods, according to Colombian newspaper El Colombiano.

The dispute has expanded beyond tariffs. Colombia has suspended electricity exports to Ecuador, while Quito has increased fees for transporting Colombian crude oil through its pipeline system — moves that signal broader strain in bilateral economic ties.

Colombian President Gustavo Petro’s government also filed complaints with the Andean Community, a regional trade bloc, arguing Ecuador’s tariffs violate existing free trade commitments.

Economic impacts already are emerging in sectors such as border commerce, energy and oil production in Colombia’s Putumayo region. Colombia’s National Association of Financial Institutions warned costs for both economies could become significant if the dispute persists.

According to Ecuador’s Federation of Exporters, about $273 million a year in exports could be at risk if Colombia maintains its reciprocal 30% tariff. The group said roughly 580 Ecuadorian companies export to Colombia.

For some firms, up to half of their revenue depends on that market, raising concerns about potential economic fallout if tensions continue.

Source link

Hillary Clinton testifies she has no information on Epstein’s crimes and doesn’t recall meeting him

Former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton told U.S. House lawmakers on Thursday that she had no knowledge of Jeffrey Epstein’s or Ghislaine Maxwell’s crimes at the start of two days of depositions that will also include former President Clinton.

“I had no idea about their criminal activities. I do not recall ever encountering Mr. Epstein,” Hillary Clinton said in an opening statement she shared on social media.

The closed-door depositions in the Clintons’ hometown of Chappaqua, a typically quiet hamlet north of New York City, come after months of tense back-and-forth between the former high-powered Democratic couple and the Republican-controlled House Oversight Committee. It will be the first time that a former president has been forced to testify before Congress.

Yet the demand for a reckoning over Epstein’s abuse of underage girls has become a near-unstoppable force on Capitol Hill and beyond.

President Trump, a Republican who has expressed regret that the Clintons are being forced to testify, bowed last year to pressure to release case files on Epstein, who killed himself in a New York jail cell in 2019 while awaiting trial. The Clintons, too, agreed to testify after their offers of sworn statements were rebuffed by the Oversight panel and its chairman, Rep. James Comer, R-Ky., threatened criminal contempt of Congress charges against them.

“We have a very clear record that we’ve been willing to talk about,” Hillary Clinton said in an interview with the BBC earlier this month. She added that her husband had flown with Epstein for charitable trips and that she did not recall meeting Epstein but had interacted with Maxwell, Epstein’s former girlfriend and confidant, at conferences hosted by the Clinton Foundation.

Maxwell, a British socialite, also attended the 2010 wedding of their daughter, Chelsea Clinton.

“We are more than happy to say what we know, which is very limited and totally unrelated to their behavior or their crimes, and we want to do it in public,” Hillary Clinton said.

Bill Clinton, however, has emerged as a top target for Republicans amid the political struggle over who receives the most scrutiny for their ties to Epstein. Several photos of the former president were included in the first tranche of Epstein files released by the Department of Justice in January, including a number of him with women whose faces were redacted. Clinton has not been accused of wrongdoing in his relationship with Epstein.

Comer has also pointed to Hillary Clinton’s work as secretary of state to address sex trafficking as another reason to insist on her deposition. The committee’s investigation has sought to understand why the Department of Justice under previous presidential administrations did not seek further charges against Epstein following a 2008 arrangement in which he pleaded guilty to state charges in Florida for soliciting prostitution from an underage girl but avoided federal charges.

Yet conspiracy theories, especially on the right, have swirled for years around the Clintons and their connections to Epstein and Maxwell, who argues she was wrongfully convicted. Republicans have long wanted to press the Clintons for answers.

“I mean if you’re the wife of Bill Clinton, aren’t you going to have some questions about your husband’s activities?” said Rep. Scott Perry, R-Pa., a member of the House Oversight Committee. “We only go where the facts take us. We didn’t put the president and the secretary in this position. They put themselves in it.”

Democrats, now being led by a new generation of politicians, have prioritized transparency around Epstein over defending the former leaders of their party. Several Democratic lawmakers joined with Republicans on the Oversight panel to advance the contempt of Congress charges against the Clintons last month. Several said they had no relationship with the Clintons and owed no loyalty to them.

Rep. Robert Garcia of California, the top Democrat on the Oversight panel, said that both Republican and Democratic administrations “have failed survivors in not getting more information out to the public.” He also said he wanted to ask about Epstein’s possible ties to foreign governments.

Democrats are also coming off an effort this week to confront Trump about his administration’s handling of the Epstein files by taking women who survived Epstein’s abuse as their guests to Trump’s State of the Union address. Even senior Democrats, such as former Speaker Nancy Pelosi of California, said it was appropriate for the committee to interview anyone, including the former president, who was connected to Epstein.

“We want to hear from everyone,” Pelosi said, adding that she did not see why Hillary Clinton was being interviewed and that it was important to “believe survivors.”

Groves writes for the Associated Press.

Source link

U.S. authorizes resale of Venezuelan oil to Cuba for private sector

A loaded oil tanker tanker enters Matanzas Bay off Havana, Cuba, on February 16 and docks near the city’s energy logistics port amid ongoing U.S. energy sanctions on the island. Russia has been sending fuel considered to be aid. Photo By EPA

Feb. 26 (UPI) — The U.S. Office of Foreign Assets Control said it will allow certain operations to resell Venezuelan-origin oil destined for Cuba, provided the fuel is used by citizens and private companies on the island.

The island nation relied for years on Venezuela for fuel, but shipments stopped after the United States captured Nicolás Maduro on Jan. 3 and took control of Caracas’ energy industry.

After the operation, President Donald Trump repeatedly warned that Cuba was on the brink of economic collapse, and he threatened to impose further economic pressure on the country to reach an agreement with the United States. Trump has not publicly defined what kind of agreement he seeks.

The trade measure, published Wednesday, says that the transactions must comply with the conditions of General License 46A for Venezuela. This license is an authorization issued by foreign assets office that allows companies to conduct operations involving Venezuelan oil under specific terms, despite the sanctions in place against that country’s energy sector.

Companies that seek authorization will not need to have an entity established in the United States, and the usual Cuba-related restrictions set out in that license will not apply.

The Treasury Department specified that the policy will cover only exports for commercial or humanitarian purposes that benefit Cuba’s private sector.

Operations involving the Cuban armed forces, intelligence services or other government entities will not be permitted, including those listed on the U.S. Department of State’s Cuba Restricted List.

The Treasury Department recalled that the Commerce Department primarily regulates the export or re-export of U.S.-origin oil to Cuba.

Under the Support for the Cuban People License Exception, certain exports of gas and other petroleum products intended to improve living conditions and support independent economic activity in Cuba do not require separate authorization from foreign assets office provided the applicable terms are met.

The agency referred to its Frequently Asked Question 1226 for the definition of “Venezuelan-origin oil,” which includes petroleum products.

Preliminary data from the Energy Information Administration show that Venezuela exported 339,000 barrels per day of crude to the United States in the third week of February.

At the same time, regional fuel supply to Cuba has been limited. On Jan. 29, the Trump administration declared a national emergency with respect to Cuba, creating a new mechanism to impose tariffs on imports from any country that provides oil to Havana.

On Feb. 17, Mexican President Claudia Sheinbaum said her government would not send fuel to Cuba “for now” amid the current situation and potential U.S. trade measures.

Cuba faces fuel shortages that have affected electricity supply, transportation and other basic services, and it relies heavily on oil imports.

Separately, the Russian Embassy in Havana confirmed two weeks ago that Russia will send crude oil and refined products to Cuba as humanitarian assistance.

Russia is sending the oil directly, not through intermediaries, and the shipments are considered to be aid, not commercial sales.

Source link

Group spends $4.8 million on TV ads for Matt Mahan’s gubernatorial bid

An independent expenditure committee backed by Silicon Valley executives spent $4.8 million on television ads supporting San Jose Mayor Matt Mahan’s gubernatorial bid that will begin airing Thursday.

The two 30-second ads highlight the Democrat’s life story — being raised in a working-class family and working on a grounds crew and as a middle school teacher — and his accomplishments leading the state’s third-largest city.

Mahan’s parents “taught him the difference between nice to have and need to have,” a narrator says in one of the ads. “So as mayor of San Jose, Matt focused on the basics and delivered results on the things that matter most. The safest big city in America, a sharp drop in street homelessness and thousands of homes built. As governor, Matt Mahan will focus on results Californians need to have, like affordable homes, safe neighborhoods and good schools.”

The ads, which will air statewide on broadcast and cable TV, were paid for by an independent-expenditure committee called California Back to Basics Supporting Matt Mahan for Governor 2026.

The group has not yet filed any fundraising reports with the secretary of state’s office, but the ads’ disclosure says the top donors are billionaire venture capitalist Michael Moritz, luxury sleepwear company founder Ashley Merrill and Silicon Valley entrepreneur Michael Seibel.

Billionaire Los Angeles developer Rick Caruso, who considered running for governor or mayor of Los Angeles but ultimately decided against seeking either post, is involved in the effort, according to a strategist working for the committee who requested anonymity to speak about it.

The committee legally cannot coordinate with Mahan’s campaign, which he launched four weeks ago. Although Mahan lacks the name recognition of several other candidates in the crowded field running to replace termed-out Gov. Gavin Newsom, his fundraising prowess, notably among tech industry leaders, is notable. He has raised nearly $9.2 million in large donations since entering the gubernatorial race.

Source link

Has Trump’s trade strategy lost leverage? | Business and Economy

A Supreme Court setback on tariffs challenges Trump’s protectionist trade strategy.

Tariffs: The most beautiful word in the dictionary, as Donald Trump says, or unlawful?
The Supreme Court has ruled that the president cannot use emergency powers to impose them.
It’s a significant check on his power and a major setback to his second-term agenda.
But despite the ruling, Trump has already found new ways to keep his trade barriers in place.
Tariffs remain central to his economic policy, both to boost US manufacturing and generate revenue.
The court may have disarmed one of Trump’s trade weapons, but the turn towards protectionism is far from over.

Source link

The Clintons are about to testify on Epstein ties. Here’s what to know

For the first time in more than 40 years, a former president will appeal directly before Congress to fend off criminal allegations.

Former President Clinton and former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton will testify before the House Oversight Committee this week in its investigation into convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein and his co-conspirators.

The couple agreed to appear after a contentious exchange with committee Chair James Comer (R-Ky.), who accused them of resisting congressional oversight and withholding information about their ties to Epstein and convicted co-conspirator Ghislaine Maxwell in previous testimony. The pair have denied wrongdoing and accused Comer of conducting a politically motivated “kangaroo court” designed to keep them in the news and deflect from President Trump’s ties to the notorious sex offender.

“They negotiated in good faith. You did not,” Clinton spokesperson Angel Ureña said in a statement, referring to Comer. “They told you under oath what they know, but you don’t care. But the former President and former Secretary of State will be there. They look forward to setting a precedent that applies to everyone.”

Hillary Clinton will appear Thursday, and the former president is due the following day. The closed-door deposition will be recorded, with video set for release later.

How did we get here?

Bill Clinton has said he “had no inkling of the crimes” Epstein was committing and learned of them only through media reports. The former president took four trips on Epstein’s private jet between 2002 and 2003, which included travel for work related to the Clinton Foundation, a Clinton spokesperson confirmed in 2019.

He is expected to face questions regarding a series of photos released by the Department of Justice, one of which appears to show the ex-president in a hot tub with Epstein and a woman whose face is redacted. Congress only recently gained access to records pertaining to the Justice Department’s Epstein investigation after lawmakers forced the files’ unredacted release late December.

“The Clintons’ testimony is critical to understanding Epstein’s sex trafficking network and the ways they sought to curry favor and influence to shield themselves from scrutiny,” Comer said at a committee meeting last week.

Hillary Clinton maintains that she never met Epstein, but says she encountered Maxwell “many years ago.” She detailed her objections to the Justice Department’s handling of the investigation in a BBC interview last week.

“They are slow-walking it, they are redacting the names of men who are in it, they are stonewalling legitimate requests from members of Congress,” she said, calling the department’s investigation a “cover-up.”

The pair contend that Republicans are using the high-profile interview to draw attention from accusations levied against the president and the Justice Department’s handling of the investigation.

Rep. Robert Garcia (D-Long Beach) accused the department Tuesday of violating both the House Oversight Committee’s subpoena and the Epstein Files Transparency Act when it obscured files related to accusations that Trump sexually abused a minor. Garcia was permitted to review unredacted evidence logs and said the Justice Department “appears to have illegally withheld FBI interviews with this survivor who accused President Trump of heinous crimes.”

“To be clear the claims are unfounded and false and if they have any shred of credibility they certainly would have been weaponized against Trump already,” the Justice Department said in December.

Trump has denied any wrongdoing in connection with Epstein.

Consequences for major players

The interviews come as British police last week arrested Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor, the former prince, the most high-profile person caught up so far in the unfolding saga.

Consequences have been severe in Europe, with former Norwegian Prime Minister Thorbjorn Jagland charged with “gross corruption.” In the United Kingdom, Peter Mandelson, the former British ambassador to the United States, was forced out of the House of Lords before he was arrested Monday.

The files’ release triggered a wave of resignations by business leaders over ties to Epstein and Maxwell, including Hyatt Hotels’ Thomas Pritzker, Goldman Sachs counsel and former Obama staffer Kathy Ruemmler and DP World Chief Executive Sultan Ahmed bin Sulayem.

Stateside, Democrats are crying foul over what they see as the Justice Department holding back crucial case files — 50% by some estimations — and delaying investigations into American elites, including some of the president’s close associates.

“Over two dozen people have resigned — CEOs, members of government worldwide — but I haven’t seen any arrests or investigations here in the United States from this Department of Justice,” Rep. Thomas Massie (R-Ky.) said on the House floor Tuesday.

What comes next?

Regardless of what is revealed in their testimony, the Clintons could still face contempt charges from Congress for refusing to comply with previous committee subpoenas.

“The Clintons must be held accountable for their actions. And Democrats must support these measures, or they will be exposed as hypocrites,” Comer said at a committee meeting last week.

The former first couple hope their appearance will set a precedent for Trump and other key names in the files to appear before Congress.

Rep. Ro Khanna, a Fremont Democrat and co-author of the legislation that compelled the release of the Epstein files, remains hopeful that those who participated in Epstein’s sexual abuses will be held to account for their actions.

In an interview last week, Khanna said the arrest of former Prince Andrew is evidence that it will happen. Khanna called it a “game changer.”

“This sets the standard for accountability,” he said. “I believe you’re going to see the elite of the Epstein class start to fall both in the United States and around the world.”

Source link

Woman bitten by dog at L.A. animal shelter wins $5.4-million verdict

A woman who was mauled by a dog at a Los Angeles city animal shelter has been awarded $5.4 million by a jury.

Genice Horta, 51, said that neither the shelter nor the rescue group she worked for told her the dog, a Belgian Malinois named Maximus, had bitten a teenager and a shelter employee, sending both to the hospital.

After six surgeries to repair the bones and nerves in her right arm, Horta was left with permanent damage, according to a brief by her attorneys in the lawsuit she filed in 2022.

After a 10-day trial, the L.A. County Superior Court jury decided last week that the city was 62.5% liable, the rescue group was 25% liable and Horta was 12.5% liable for medical expenses and pain and suffering.

It was the third multi-million payout in recent years involving allegations that the city animal shelters failed to notify potential adopters that a dog had bitten and seriously injured someone, as required by state law.

Horta’s case “revealed a series of serious and preventable mistakes made with respect to warning about Maximus’ bite history and adopting out and failing to control a dangerous dog,” one of her attorneys, Ivan Puchalt, said in a statement.

A spokesperson for the L.A. City Attorney’s Office did not respond to requests for comment.

Agnes Sibal-von Debschitz, communications director for LA Animal Services, said in statement that according to department policy, “staff must provide a bite and behavioral disclosure to any person receiving an animal with a prior bite history.”

The policy was formally enacted last November in response to a $3.25-million settlement reached by the city with Kristin Wright, who was severely injured by a pit bull she adopted from the South L.A. shelter. Wright said the shelter didn’t inform her that the dog had bitten his previous owner’s elderly mother in the face.

The rescue group, HIT Living Foundation, did not respond to a request for comment.

HIT Living Foundation hired Horta to drive Maximus from the East Valley Animal Shelter to Arizona. She had no prior experience with shelter dogs, according to the city’s attorneys.

On Sept. 23, 2020, after a shelter employee told Horta that Maximus had “kennel anxiety,” she offered the dog a treat containing trazodone, a common anxiety medication for dogs, according to an amended complaint by Horta’s attorneys.

Maximus took the treat, then lunged and latched onto Horta’s right hand and arm. A fuzzy video of the attack was played in court during the trial.

Horta alleged that the shelter employee who brought Maximus to her car negligently failed to control him and never told her the dog could be dangerous. During the attack, the employee was gripping a metal pole with a cable looped around Maximus’ neck.

The employee, Jose Humildad, testified that he told Horta not to approach Maximus with the treat.

Maximus’ previous owners surrendered him to the shelter after he bit their 15-year-old daughter on the foot, leaving deep puncture wounds and requiring hospital treatment, according to the brief by Horta’s attorneys, and several weeks later, Maximus bit a shelter employee who went to the emergency room for a severe bite to the abdomen.

Horta said she never was told of the attacks, which made Maximus unsuitable for public adoption, and he was placed on the city’s New Hope list, which is accessible to registered nonprofit rescues.

Shelter employees had documented Maximus “viciously biting and snapping at people walking past his enclosure,” according to the brief by Horta’s attorneys. One employee wrote “USE EXTREME CAUTION!!!”

Horta’s attorneys argued that Maximus was so dangerous that he should have been euthanized.

The city pushed back on that interpretation.

L.A. animal shelters are not “death row in Mississippi at midnight,” Deputy City Atty. Joshua Quinones said in his closing argument Thursday afternoon. “This is a rescue operation.”

Quinones also argued that Maximus already had been sold to HIT Living Foundation when he bit Horta.

Trying to find Maximus a home, animal rescuers posted repeatedly on Instagram days before the 1-year-old dog bit Horta, describing him as a “handsome misunderstood pup” and a “young troublemaker” in danger of being euthanized.

The post said Maximus had a bite history but provided no details.



Source link

The crisis on the Colorado River — six things to know

The latest news about the Colorado River is dire. Since 2000, the river’s flow has shrunk about 20%. An extremely warm winter has brought very little snow in the Rocky Mountains. Reservoirs are declining to critically low levels. And the leaders of seven states are still at loggerheads over the water cutbacks each should accept to prevent reservoirs from falling further.

Here are six things to know about the current crisis:

A short-term deal, at best: Negotiators for the seven states still are discussing ways they might reach a short-term deal as a “bridge into a longer-term agreement,” said Wade Crowfoot, California’s natural resources secretary. But after missing a Feb. 14 federal deadline, the states are running out of time. Gov. Gavin Newsom told governors in a letter that California would welcome joint investments in water recycling and desalination, and that he believes it’s still possible to agree on a plan “for the next several years.”

States drawing up Plan B: Officials are talking about what they will do if no deal is reached. Representatives of Arizona, Nevada and California already offered cuts of 27%, 17% and 10%, respectively. But that hasn’t been enough for negotiators representing Colorado, Wyoming, New Mexico and Utah. Crowfoot said the talks about a Plan B among California, Arizona and Nevada officials focus on what water agencies could do to stabilize the level of Lake Mead, the nation’s largest reservoir, which is 34% full and set to decline further.

You’re reading Boiling Point

The L.A. Times climate team gets you up to speed on climate change, energy and the environment. Sign up to get it in your inbox every week.

By continuing, you agree to our Terms of Service and our Privacy Policy.

A court battle looms: As the Trump administration considers ordering cuts, state officials are bracing for potential lawsuits. Utah and Arizona have begun setting aside money for legal bills. A fight could take years until there is a decision by the U.S. Supreme Court. Robert Glennon, a University of Arizona emeritus law professor, said no one knows what the court would do. “This is rolling the dice on something that is really quite profound,” he said. “I don’t know about you, but I don’t like to go to Vegas and play the craps.”

Arizona is most vulnerable: Arizona is preparing for the largest cutbacks. That’s because the Central Arizona Project, the series of canals that runs to the Phoenix and Tucson areas, isn’t nearly as old as other aqueducts, giving it low-priority water rights that put it among the first in line for cuts. Farmers who rely on the CAP already have been forced to leave many fields dry. The coming cuts likely will prompt Arizona cities to drill more wells and pump more groundwater, which is declining in many areas.

Less for farms: Nearly half the water that is taken from the river is used to grow hay for cattle. In all, agriculture consumes about three-fourths of the water. In the last few years, farmers have left some hay fields dry part of the year in exchange for federal funds. Glennon said agriculture needs to conserve more, and an agreement among the states could include a fund to help farmers switch to irrigation systems that use less.

Cutbacks carry costs: For cities, adapting will require more conservation and searching for alternative water sources, which will cost money and push up water bills, said Rhett Larson, an Arizona State University law professor. Some cities probably also will have to buy out farmers or pay them to leave fields fallow, which will push up urban water costs further, he said. And as farms produce less, he said, “eventually you’ll feel it in the grocery store.”

More water news

With very little snow in the Rocky Mountains, the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation now projects the runoff flowing into Lake Powell, the Colorado River’s second-largest reservoir, will decrease so much that by later this year the water level probably will drop too low to spin turbines and generate hydropower at Glen Canyon Dam. As Shannon Mullane reports for the Colorado Sun, that would remove a cheap, renewable and reliable power source for communities across the West.

Glen Canyon Dam also has design flaws that create problems at low reservoir levels. As I’ve reported, if the reservoir declines to a point that water can pass through only four 8-foot-wide bypass tubes, that would limit how much can reach California, Arizona and Nevada. Those states have urged the Trump administration to fix or overhaul the dam to address this problem.

Last week, Jonathan P. Thompson wrote in his newsletter The Land Desk that the impasse among the states is pushing Glen Canyon Dam closer to the brink. He said federal officials could decide to reengineer the dam to ensure water still can pass at low reservoir levels, but that would be only a temporary fix. As Thompson put it, “aridification is rendering the dam obsolete, at least as a water storage savings account.”

Heather Sackett of Aspen Journalism spoke with experts about why the worsening crisis still hasn’t forced a deal. Kathryn Sorensen, a researcher at the ASU Kyl Center for Water Policy, said: “There’s so little water to go around that positions have become hardened as a result. We’re not just talking about inconvenient cuts; we’re talking about severe pain to economies at this point.”

In Arizona, an advocacy group backed by the Central Arizona Project has begun rolling out TV ads and online videos saying the state is being singled out in the options the federal government has outlined. Brandon Loomis of the Arizona Republic reports that an ad aired by the coalition declares: “Arizona is being unfairly targeted for reductions of Colorado River water that would cripple our state.”

In California, Newsom launched a new plan this week that sets a goal of securing 9 million acre-feet of additional water, enough to fill two Shasta Reservoirs, by 2040 in an effort to offset expected losses caused by climate change. As Camille von Kaenel reports for E&E News by Politico, the 2028 water plan will be a blueprint for new reservoirs, conservation efforts and groundwater recharge projects. Department of Water Resources Director Karla Nemeth says the effort “will help us plan smarter to deal with the way climate change is testing our water systems.”

More climate and environment news

California is spearheading a lawsuit against the Trump administration for canceling billions of dollars in funding for clean energy projects awarded during the Biden administration. My colleague Hayley Smith reported the cuts included a $1.2-billion federal grant for California’s hydrogen hub. The hub was part of the Biden administration’s nationwide effort to develop hydrogen projects to replace planet-warming fossil fuels, particularly in hard-to-decarbonize sectors such as heavy-duty trucking.

Illegal cannabis farms are polluting national forests in California, leaving contamination that harms wildlife and watersheds. Reporter Rachel Becker of CalMatters visited an illicit cannabis grow that was raided by law enforcement in Shasta-Trinity National Forest, where a pile of pesticide sprayers was left behind. Researchers are sounding the alarm, she wrote, “that inadequate federal funding, disjointed communication, dangerous conditions and agencies stretched thin at both the state and federal level are leaving thousands of grow sites — and their trash, pesticides, fertilizers and more — to foul California’s forests.”

This is the latest edition of Boiling Point, a newsletter about climate change and the environment in the American West. Sign up here to get it in your inbox. And listen to our Boiling Point podcast here.

For more water and climate news, follow Ian James @ianjames.bsky.social on Bluesky and @ByIanJames on X.

Source link

Tight California governor’s race between five leading candidates

The race to replace termed-out California Gov. Gavin Newsom is a tight contest between five candidates, according to a new poll released Wednesday.

Three Democrats — former Rep. Katie Porter, Rep. Eric Swalwell and hedge fund founder Tom Steyer — and two Republicans — conservative commentator Steve Hilton and Riverside County Sheriff Chad Bianco — are within 4 percentage points of one another, according to the nonpartisan Public Policy Institute of California survey.

“Three months out from the June primary, the top two slots in the gubernatorial race are up for grabs,” Mark Baldassare, PPIC’s survey director, said in a statement. “Voters feel hammered by cost-of-living realities, so affordability will be a defining issue for them.”

In a crowded field of a dozen prominent candidates, Hilton had the support of 14% of likely voters, Porter 13%, Bianco 12%, Swalwell 11% and Steyer 10%, according to the poll. No other candidate received the support of more than 5% of respondents. One in 10 likely voters were undecided.

The two candidates who receive the most votes in the June primary will move on to the general election regardless of party identification. With nine prominent Democrats in the field, this has led to concerns among party leaders that the Democratic candidates may splinter the vote and the two Republicans could advance to the November ballot. No Republican has been elected to statewide office in California since 2006.

While support for Hilton and Bianco held steady since PPIC’s December poll, backing for Porter and former U.S. Health and Human Services Secretary Xavier Becerra significantly declined as more Democrats entered the contest and Porter dealt with the fallout from videos of her cursing at an aide and scolding a reporter. Porter expressed remorse for her behavior.

Several other races will appear on the November ballot, notably congressional contests that could determine which party controls the U.S. House of Representatives. The state’s 52 congressional districts were redrawn in a rare mid-decade redistricting after voters approved Proposition 50 last year in an effort to counter President Trump’s calls on Republican leaders in Texas and other GOP-led states to reshape their congressional lines.

Likely voters in California overwhelmingly prefer a Democratic congressional candidate over a Republican, 62% to 36%, according to the poll. A proposed 5% tax on the assets of billionaires that largely would be used to fund healthcare services in the state also was supported by 6 in 10 likely voters.

The PPIC poll surveyed 1,657 California adults online in English and Spanish from Feb. 3 to 11. The results are estimated to have a margin of error of 3.1 percentage points in either direction in the overall sample, and larger numbers for subgroups.

Source link

Questions for Marcos Jr 40 years after Philippines ‘People Power’ revolt | Politics News

Manila, Philippines – “Bongbong is our principal worry. He is too carefree and lazy,” then-President of the Philippines Ferdinand Marcos Sr wrote in 1972.

Marcos Sr was referring to his only son and namesake by the child’s moniker, Bongbong.

Recommended Stories

list of 4 itemsend of list

He was concerned about what the future would hold for the young Marcos.

“The boy must realise his weakness – the carefree wayward ways that may have been bred in him,” his father further warned in his diary.

Half a century later, his son – Ferdinand “Bongbong” Marcos Jr – would be sworn in as the 17th president of the Philippines, following a landslide victory in the 2022 polls.

The rise of Marcos Jr to the presidency marked his family’s dramatic rehabilitation after the mass street protests that forced Marcos Sr from power and the family into exile in 1986.

In his inaugural speech, Marcos Jr invoked memories of his late father’s presidency – though he skipped the years of brutal dictatorship and reported plunder of state resources – to project hope for “a better future” for 110 million Filipinos.

“You will get no excuses from me,” Marcos Jr said as he took his oath of office.

“You will not be disappointed.”

But three years into his term in office, Marcos Jr’s popularity has withered.

His political alliance with Vice President Sara Duterte has shattered, and his administration is ensnared in a multibillion-dollar corruption scandal that has plunged the country into a period of uncertainty.

The president who ran on a platform of unity is now struggling to lead a divided nation that is deeply disappointed over his lacklustre performance.

On the 40th anniversary of the People Power Revolution that ousted his father, Marcos Jr seems unable to escape history as some political factions in the opposition are calling for his removal – an ending that befell his father on the fateful date of February 25, 1986.

epa10042692 New Philippine President Ferdinand 'Bongbong' Marcos Jr. (4-L), son of the late president Ferdinand Marcos, celebrates with new Vice-President Sara Duterte (3- L) during Marcos' inauguration ceremony at the National Museum grounds in Manila, Philippines 30 June 2022. The former senator becomes the country’s 17th president. EPA/ROLEX DELA PENA
President Ferdinand Marcos Jr, right, with Vice President Sara Duterte, left, before their alliance completely collapsed after his administration paved the way for the International Criminal Court’s arrest of the vice president’s father, former Philippine President Rodrigo Duterte, in 2025 [File: Rolex dela Pena/EPA]

‘No plan’

Political analyst and economist Andrew Masigan pulls no punches. Masigan said what is happening in the Philippines is a consequence of an electorate choosing the “entitled son of a dictator” over a more competent candidate.

“[Marcos Jr] campaigned under the slogan and promise of unity. Economists and political pundits all assumed that there was a plan behind it. We’ve been waiting, and it has been three years. No such thing exists,” he said.

“His plan was to be president. It was a self-serving plan. It’s a presidency about Bongbong Marcos for Bongbong Marcos,” he added.

“He just wanted the opportunity to whitewash the tainted Marcos name,” he added.

As president, Marcos Jr has “squandered” the demographic advantage of the Philippines, Masigan continued, pointing to the country’s youth, who make up almost half of the population. Given such a youthful and dynamic society, the country’s economy should have been growing 7 to 8 percent annually by now, Masigan said.

Instead, the economy posted a sluggish 4.4 percent growth in 2025, well below the government target of 5.5-6.5 percent, he added.

Susan Kurdli, an assistant professor at De La Salle University in Manila, said the first three years of Marcos Jr’s six-year term were “indeed a period of missed opportunities”.

Kurdli said the “vague direction” the Philippines is heading was only to be expected, “as Marcos Jr never ran on a clear policy ticket”.

“He won the election largely by relying on the tried and tested tactics of tribalism, name recognition and alliance building,” she said.

Foreign investment has also declined by half from $9.42bn in 2024 to $4.7bn in 2025, its sharpest fall in five years, according to the Philippine Statistics Authority (PSA).

Unemployment rose at the same time from 3.8 percent in 2024 to 4.2 percent in 2025, PSA data showed. In 2025, only 172,000 jobs were added to the overall labour market, making it the fifth-worst year in job creation in 25 years, according to the think tank IBON Foundation.

A lack of economic opportunity and unemployment are the top risks for the Philippines in the next two years, the World Economic Forum (WEF) 2026 Global Risks Report notes.

If the weak economic figures have left Filipinos disgruntled, allegations of corruption have left them seething with anger.

“The scandal allegations surrounding him and his family have particularly hit a nerve with voters,” Kurdli of De La Salle University told Al Jazeera.

“They have definitely impacted the perceived legitimacy of Marcos Jr as a national leader.”

The latest corruption perceptions index conducted by Transparency International (TI) reflects that assessment.

According to the anticorruption body’s latest report, the Philippines has slipped six notches lower, ranking 120th out of 182 territories covered.

In response to the TI report, presidential spokesperson Claire Castro said Marcos Jr “has not lost interest” in fighting corruption, and is working to strengthen government institutions.

Philippine President Ferdinand Marcos delivers his speech in front of Senate President Chiz Escudero (L) and Speaker of the House Martin Romualdez (R) during the State of the Nation Address at the House of Representatives in Manila on July 28, 2025. (Photo by Ted ALJIBE / AFP)
Philippine President Ferdinand Marcos Jr delivers his 2025 State of the Nation Address at the House of Representatives in front of Senate President Chiz Escudero, back left, and House Speaker Martin Romualdez, right, both of whom have since been ousted amid allegations of corruption [File: Ted Aljibe/AFP]

‘Ghost projects’

It was in the middle of last year when allegations first emerged that Marcos Jr had abused his authority by approving three consecutive national budgets riddled with questionable infrastructure projects amounting to billions of dollars.

Among those implicated in the alleged scheme was Ferdinand Martin Romualdez, the once-powerful speaker of the House of Representatives and a first cousin of Marcos Jr, who oversaw the drafting of the national budget.

He was accused by opposition congresspeople of manipulating the budget. An investigation by a Philippine news website also linked him to multimillion-dollar homes in the Philippines and the United States that are allegedly not listed in his government disclosure forms. He has since relinquished his post but has not been called to account despite massive protests and political pressure.

Also accused of cornering millions of dollars in public funds for pet projects were the president’s sister, Senator Maria Imelda Marcos, and his son, Ferdinand Alexander Marcos, a congressman.

Combined, the three Marcos relatives secured government projects worth at least $560m in the last three years, according to public works department data and the National Expenditure Program listed in the budget. They have all denied wrongdoing related to the awarding of the lucrative projects.

Private contractors and government bureaucrats were also linked to the scandal.

Some were reported by the news media to have spent their newfound wealth on Bentley and Rolls-Royce vehicles and gambling sprees. One mid-ranking official, whose monthly salary was the equivalent of $1,250, admitted during a congressional inquiry that he owned a GMC Denali SUV worth $200,000, a Lamborghini Urus worth between $500,000 and $700,000 and a Ferrari estimated at $1m.

Further investigations revealed several nonexistent government infrastructure initiatives, described as “ghost projects”, worth millions of dollars. Marcos Jr himself discovered an abandoned flood control project estimated to be about $1m in Baliwag, a city just north of Metro Manila.

In Quezon City in Metro Manila, the local government reported that 35 flood control projects were missing out of the 331 listed, with a total budget of almost $300m.

According to estimates by the Department of Finance, alleged corruption in flood control projects cost taxpayers approximately $2bn between 2023 and 2025.

The scale of the corruption allegations has reminded some Filipinos of the time when Marcos Sr and his wife, Imelda, ruled the country in what historians have described as a “conjugal dictatorship”.

During their two decades in power, the Marcos couple were accused of emptying the Philippine treasury of up to $10bn.

Masigan, the political analyst and economist, said despite all efforts to distance himself from the ongoing scandal, it is difficult for the current president to do so.

“The three budgets were authored, presided over and approved by the president himself. He signed it,” Masigan said.

“Everything leads to him.”

‘Give Marcos some credit’

Jan Credo, political science professor at Silliman University in Dumaguete City, Philippines, said despite the fierce criticism of the president, Marcos Jr should still get some credit for his role in highlighting the massive corruption scandal during his annual State of the Nation Address last year.

“President Marcos, in fact, started the expose when he chastised members of Congress and told them, ‘Shame on you’, for their involvement in the alleged massive bribery,” Credo told Al Jazeera.

“What this has generated is the consciousness among the public about the issue that led to the crystallisation of the social movement against corruption,” he said.

“If you ask me, Marcos Jr does not have anything to do” with the corruption, Credo said, blaming his close allies instead.

Credo also did not believe that the ongoing scandal would cost Marcos Jr the support of one of the country’s most powerful institutions, the military. Over the last four decades, two Philippine presidents, including Marcos Sr, were forced out of office in popular revolts backed by the military. Two other presidents faced coup attempts.

“Marcos Jr may be in survival mode now. But he is also fortunate to have a military that is highly professionalised and no longer politicised,” Credo said.

“The recent calls by retired military officers to withdraw support from Marcos Jr have not gained traction, because we have learned their lesson,” he explained.

Political analyst Masigan agreed, saying a move by the military was “out of the question”, noting that while there were some whispers for Marcos Jr’s removal, “nothing is being seriously considered”.

“As far as the military is concerned, they are loyal to the constitution; there is no movement to oust the president and have a caretaker government,” he added.

Philippine President Ferdinand Marcos (top R) stands with his mother, former first lady Imelda Marcos, as they visit the tomb of former president Ferdinand Marcos Sr after a mass to commemorate All Saints' Day at the Heroes Cemetery in Manila on November 1, 2024. (Photo by TED ALJIBE / AFP)
Marcos Jr stands with his mother, seated, as they visit the tomb of former President Marcos Sr at the Heroes Cemetery in Manila in 2024 [File: Ted Aljibe/AFP]

Securing a legacy

With just about two more years left in office, Marcos Jr still wields enough power to change the narrative of his administration, restore the Marcos name and implement policies that help Filipinos, political observers who spoke to Al Jazeera said.

But the president must act fast before the narrowing window of opportunity closes on him, and he becomes a “lame duck” leader, they added.

Major legislation that needs to be addressed includes government transparency, education, energy and investment reforms, as well as an overhaul of the transport and manufacturing industries, said Kurdli of De La Salle University.

But the most urgent policy reform that Marcos Jr has to address is the passage of a law banning political dynasties, which is the main culprit of corruption in the country, Masigan and Credo said.

“If he really wants to have an impact, he must get the antipolitical dynasty law passed,” Masigan said of the president.

In the Philippines, political dynasties have dominated about 80 percent of seats in the Senate and the House, according to a 2025 analysis by the Anti-Dynasty Network.

At the Philippine Senate, for instance, there are four sets of siblings occupying a third of the 24-seat chamber. At least eight other senators have close family members in the House.

President Marcos Jr comes from a dynasty himself. He has one sibling in the Senate, a son and two cousins in the House, and several relatives elected as town and provincial executives.

Vice President Duterte, who is the daughter of former President Rodrigo Duterte, is no different. Her brother, nephew and a cousin are serving in Congress. Another brother serves as the mayor of the Duterte stronghold, Davao City, while a nephew serves as the vice mayor.

While political dynasties are prohibited under the 1987 Philippine Constitution, Congress has failed to pass a supplementary law that spells out what a ban should look like.

For Credo, getting the antipolitical dynasty law passed is “a tall order” for Marcos Jr, given that a vast majority of legislators come from dynasties, guaranteeing fierce resistance.

“But if he can get it done, that would be a major achievement on his part. He will be able to secure his place in the history books,” Credo added.

Masigan said, given the Marcos family history, it is really up to the Filipino citizenry to keep the pressure on and demand real reforms from the government.

“I’ve seen how the Marcoses operate since the 1970s. They are fond of creating a semblance of reforms and giving people hope. But it will never come to fruition,” Masigan said.

“I hope this time it’s different. But I am not holding my breath.”

Source link

Trump threw some elbows in his speech, but hardly beat back his critics

Capitalizing on a grand stage Tuesday night, President Trump delivered a State of the Union speech laced with political broadsides blaming Democrats for the nation’s problems, including on immigration and the economy, and heaping praise on himself and his administration for ushering in “a turnaround for the ages.”

He did not mention that after a year of his holding the White House and his party controlling both chambers of Congress, many Americans remain displeased and financially frustrated, with increasing numbers blaming Trump, according to polling.

The speech was heavy on partisan attacks, but light on any real acknowledgment of — or proposed path out of — the mounting political tensions that are roiling the nation under his leadership and threatening his party’s chances of retaining power in the upcoming midterms.

“President Trump’s State of the Union address was deeply disconnected from the lived reality of most Americans and profoundly insulting to the immigrant communities who strengthen and sustain this country every day,” Angelica Salas, executive director of the Coalition for Humane Immigrant Rights of Los Angeles, said in a statement. “While working families struggle with rising costs, threats to civil liberties, and attacks on fundamental rights, the Trump Administration continues to choose distortion over truth and division over unity.”

Time and again, Trump criticized the Democrats in the room — for not taking his bait and applauding as he waxed on about his immigration agenda, for not agreeing with his pronouncements against transgender athletes, for not being sufficiently adulatory toward members of the U.S. men’s hockey team for winning gold at the recent Winter Olympics.

“These people are crazy,” Trump said of Democrats, after they wouldn’t agree with his comments on transgender athletes. “You should be ashamed of yourself,” he said after they wouldn’t clap for his remarks about “illegal aliens.”

The speech went over well with many Republicans.

“Last Night, President Trump gave the BEST and LONGEST State of the Union speech in history because of ALL the many wins he had to tout,” House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) wrote on X. “In one year, we have REVERSED the damage we inherited from Biden and the Democrats and we are delivering for the American people.”

Democrats watched sedately, or with barely obscured disdain, with brief scoffs and a few vocal rebuttals. But in their remarks afterward, they slammed Trump for ignoring Americans’ mounting displeasure with his agenda.

Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) called the speech “Trump’s state of delusion.”

“For nearly two hours, the president inflated his ego, rewrote reality, and offered zero solutions to the problems American families are struggling with every day,” Schumer said.

House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-N.Y.) said the speech was “riddled with dirty rotten lies.”

Many other Democrats also bristled over Trump’s rose-colored depiction of the nation as thriving, the economy as “roaring.”

Trump repeatedly mentioned his campaign to crack down on illegal immigration and his administration’s success in reducing border crossings. But he made no mention of one of the largest scandals of his first year in office — the killings of U.S. citizens Renee Nicole Good and Alex Pretti by federal immigration agents in Minneapolis — or the cratering public support for his immigration campaign overall.

He mentioned bombing Iran’s nuclear sites last year and said negotiations against future weapons development are ongoing. But he didn’t explain why the Pentagon has led a buildup of U.S. aircraft and warships in the Middle East, or address mounting concerns that he is preparing to take the nation to war.

He spoke of bringing down healthcare costs through several unproven programs, such as his “TrumpRx” prescription platform, but didn’t mention that under his party’s “Big, Beautiful Bill” and its cuts to Obamacare subsidies, millions of Americans are facing increased healthcare costs.

He talked about violent crime declining under his administration, a trend any president would claim as a success. But he skipped over the fact that the declines are a clear continuation of sharp drops under the Biden administration — the same drops he had vociferously denied during his 2024 campaign.

Every president treats the State of the Union as a chance to highlight their wins, less a venue for mulling over controversies or losses. It is a time-honored tradition, but also political theater — a chance for a president to project strength no matter the headwinds they are facing, as Trump did over and over again in his nearly two-hour speech.

But as many Democrats noted, his assessment also conflicted with the sentiments of many Americans, in poll after poll.

“The truth is that the State of our Union does not feel strong for everyone,” said Sen. Alex Padilla (D-Calif.) in his Spanish-language rebuttal to the speech. “Not when the costs of rent, food and electricity keep rising. Not when Republicans raise our medical costs to fund tax cuts for billionaires. And definitely not when federal agents — armed and masked — terrorize our communities by targeting people because of the color of their skin or for speaking Spanish — including immigrants with legal status and citizens.”

Minneapolis and other parts of the nation have been beset by poorly trained federal forces waging immigration round-ups that have left communities in fear and American citizens detained and even dead in the streets. Anger over those tactics has dominated the political discussion for months. In his speech, Trump never addressed the Minneapolis campaign head-on.

For months, Trump has also rattled key U.S. allies, including North Atlantic Treaty Organization partners, by repeatedly demanding that the United States be given Greenland, a territory of Denmark. He couched the stunning breach of diplomatic norms as a necessity given sweeping U.S. security concerns in the region. But in his speech, he made no mention of his demands or those concerns.

And while Trump asserted the “state of the union is strong,” he gave little explanation for why he has repeatedly denigrated and targeted the cornerstones of its federal system.

In the last year, Trump has cast himself and the executive office as all powerful; a substantial swath of the federal judiciary as “radical left” lunatics; the nation’s state-controlled voting system as corrupt and unreliable; and many Democrats and other political opponents as illegitimate or even criminal.

He has repeatedly asserted the power to reject decisions and reallocate federal spending by Congress, rewrite by executive fiat the Constitution and core rights within it such as birthright citizenship, and command or coerce states and a vast swath of civil society — including universities and law firms — to align with him politically or face devastating financial losses, including by demanding unprecedented mid-decade redistricting by red states to better his chances of Republican victory in the midterms.

Trump has tried to assert his will on the Federal Reserve, which is designed to independently lead the nation’s economy, and called Federal Reserve Chair Jerome H. Powell “incompetent” — which can’t be a good sign for the nation’s economy, no matter how you parse it.

As Trump walked out of the room Tuesday night having addressed few of those unprecedented moves, Republicans showered him with praise — with some telling him he’d just delivered the best State of the Union ever.

Many Democrats, meanwhile, wondered which union the president had been describing.

Source link

Syrian officials announce ‘mass escape’ from ISIS detention camp last month

1 of 5 | Members of the Syrian security forces stand in front of the gate of the al-Hol camp, which houses families of suspected ISIS fighters, after the Syrian government took control of the area, in Hasakeh province, Syria, on Jan. 21. The Syrian government said Wednesday that there was a “mass escape” last month at the camp. It has since been closed. Photo by Mohammed Al-Rifai/EPA

Feb. 25 (UPI) — Syrian officials announced Wednesday that there was a “mass escape” last month from the country’s Kurdish-controlled al-Hol camp, which held ISIS-linked families.

It’s believed that thousands may have escaped, CNN reported.

The Wall Street Journal reported that about 15,000 to 20,000 people, including ISIS affiliates, were at large following the escape from al-Hol, citing U.S. intelligence agencies, CNN reported. The United Nations said al-Hol camp held more than 30,000 people.

“When our forces arrived, they found cases of collective escapes due to the camp having been opened up in a haphazard manner,” Syrian Interior Ministry spokesperson Noureddine al-Baba said at a press conference Wednesday.

The Kurdish Syrian Democratic Forces were in charge of the camp and were an ally to U.S. forces fighting ISIS in Syria. But the U.S. drawdown from the country in 2019 left the SDF struggling, especially after the Assad regime fell in 2024. Syrian President Ahmad al-Sharaa joined the U.S.-led anti-ISIS coalition in November, and his forces continue to hunt for ISIS fighters

In January, the SDF said it abandoned the al-Hol camp because of “international indifference” to ISIS and “the failure of the international community to assume its responsibilities in addressing​ this serious matter,” CNN reported.

The two main camps — al-Hol and al-Roj — detained ISIS fighters and their family members, but were mostly populated with women and children.

Until mid-January, the camps together housed about 28,000 people. About 12,500 were foreign nationals from more than 60 countries, including about 4,000 Iraqis, according to Human Rights Watch.

The al-Roj camp, which holds around 2,300 foreign women and children, is still under SDF control but it is expected to close.

In 2014, ISIS declared a caliphate in a swath of land across parts of Syria and Iraq, calling Raqqa, Syria, its capital. The caliphate was led by Iraqi-born Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi. Muslims from around the world who identified with ISIS moved there to be a part of it. A U.S.-led coalition mostly destroyed the enclave in 2019, and the SDF managed the camps. Baghdadi died by suicide just before he could be captured by U.S. forces.

Countries around the world have been facing pressure to repatriate their citizens who have been stuck in the camps since the fall of the caliphate. Most of them are women and children. But most countries cite national security as a reason not to allow them back in.

Last week, Australian Prime Minister Anthony Albanese said he would not allow Australian ISIS detainees from al-Roj to repatriate.

A naturalized American citizen pleaded guilty in June to fighting against U.S. forces for ISIS in the region and was sentenced to 10 years.

The al-Roj camp also houses Shamina Begum, a British woman who left London at age 15 to marry an ISIS fighter. In 2015, she lost her British citizenship.

Source link

Column: Trump’s address to Congress trumpets how he usurps Congress

For this year’s State of the Union address, as usual, the president was the center of attention. That’s just where Donald Trump lives, so it’s no wonder that he broke his record for the length of the nationally televised speech. He was the star of his own unreality show, with an audience of tens of millions. In front of him, idolatrous Republican lawmakers popped up and down to applaud like clowns in wind-up music boxes of old.

In fact, a president comes to the Capitol as a guest in Congress’ home, there only by invitation of the speaker of the House. It’s a historical nod to the separation of powers so essential to America’s system of government. But of course Trump acts as though he owns the place. And why not? The Republican majorities in the House and Senate essentially gave him the keys and title, along with much of their constitutional power over spending, federal appointments, war powers and more.

“What a difference a president makes,” a triumphalist Trump imperiously marveled about himself on Tuesday night, after exaggerating or falsely claiming his achievements of the past year.

Got that? Even with a Congress controlled by his party, with its majorities at risk in this midterm election year because of his unpopularity, Trump couldn’t find it within his narcissistic self to share the specious credit. Then again, he does act alone most of the time, and polls show he’s getting blame, not credit, from 6 out of 10 Americans.

For the good of the nation, Congress must take back its powers from Trump and, with them, more of Americans’ attention. No less than Supreme Court Justice Neil M. Gorsuch, a Trump appointee, pleaded as much just days before the State of the Union address.

In concurring with the Court’s 6-3 ruling last week striking down the centerpiece of Trump’s agenda — unilateral tariffs — as a usurpation of Congress’ constitutional taxing power, Gorsuch all but implored lawmakers to restore Congress’ intended role as a co-equal branch of government — and the president to respect it as such. (Spoiler: He won’t.)

Gorsuch’s opinion was a masterclass in why the founders created Congress in the very first article of the Constitution, saving the presidency and the judiciary for the second and third articles. I don’t agree with Gorsuch on much, but his concurrence should be required reading for Trump and for members of Congress who plainly need remedial civics lessons. It’s worth quoting at length; italics are mine.

“Our founders understood that men are not angels, and we disregard that insight at our peril when we allow the few (or the one) to aggrandize their power based on loose or uncertain authority,” Gorsuch wrote.

“Yes, legislating can be hard and take time,” he closed. “And, yes, it can be tempting to bypass Congress when some pressing problem arises. But the deliberative nature of the legislative process was the whole point of its design. Through that process, the Nation can tap the combined wisdom of the people’s elected representatives, not just that of one faction or man. There, deliberation tempers impulse, and compromise hammers disagreements into workable solutions. And because laws must earn such broad support to survive the legislative process, they tend to endure, allowing ordinary people to plan their lives in ways they cannot when the rules shift from day to day. In all, the legislative process helps ensure each of us has a stake in the laws that govern us and in the Nation’s future.”

Do you know what won’t endure? Trump’s policymaking by “impulse” and fiat, by hundreds of executive orders. Indeed, it would be in his interest to work with Congress on laws that will outlive him and stand as his legacy. Yet he wants to be a king, getting quick results on a whim, by the thumbing of a tweet or a Sharpie signature on paper. Legislating requires time, compromise and ultimately sharing credit.

Perhaps that’s why Trump is so intent on erecting edifices of tangible marble and gold in Washington and beyond: Those will endure when his policies don’t. And that’s the legacy he craves — mega-ballrooms, arches, statues, busts and buildings in his name and image.

Gorsuch wasn’t in the House chamber to hear Trump’s address and his slap at the court’s tariff decision. Just four of the nine justices were, including Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr., who wrote the main opinion, and two other justices who’d joined in opposing Trump’s tariff power grab. The president insisted he’d proceed with unilateral tariffs under separate laws, adding that “congressional action will not be necessary.” Republican lawmakers applauded.

The founders, in the Constitution, required presidents to annually report on the state of the union and to “recommend” to Congress “such Measures as he shall judge necessary and expedient.” Then it’s the president’s job to “take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed.” Yet as usual, Trump outlined little in the way of a legislative agenda.

The president likes to note, as he did in his address, that he’ll preside over this year’s celebrations of the nation’s 250th birthday. But he should know that the nation wasn’t born in a day, on July 4, 1776. The founders squabbled 11 years more over the Constitution, and states took another two years to ratify it.

Yes, democracy has been hard from the start. That’s why Trump’s appeal for some Americans is his action-figure persona — forget norms, laws and the Constitution.

But perhaps if Trump’s poll numbers remain in the tank, even Republicans in Congress will summon the guts to protect the institution’s powers. And if they don’t, that’s all the more reason for voters to turn the keys over to Democrats in November.

Bluesky: @jackiecalmes
Threads: @jkcalmes
X: @jackiekcalmes



Source link

Influential economist Larry Summers to depart Harvard over Epstein ties | Politics News

Release of documents show close relationship between high-profile economist and disgraced sex offender.

Former United States Treasury Secretary Larry Summers says he will resign as a professor at Harvard University at the end of the semester after revelations of his close relationship with disgraced sex offender Jeffrey Epstein.

Summers, a longtime influential figure in economic policymaking circles and a former president of Harvard, said on Wednesday that he would resign from teaching at the end of the academic year.

Recommended Stories

list of 3 itemsend of list

“In connection with the ongoing review by the University of documents related to Jeffrey Epstein that were recently released by the government, Harvard Kennedy School Dean Jeremy Weinstein has accepted Professor Lawrence H Summers’ resignation from his leadership position as co-director of the Mossavar-Rahmani Center for Business and Government,” Harvard spokesperson Jason Newton said in a statement.

Documents released as part of an effort to bring greater transparency to Epstein’s relationships with powerbrokers in politics, business and culture shed light on Summers’s extensive correspondence with Epstein, whom he once emailed asking for advice on wooing women.

Summers, who has denied any wrongdoing and has not been charged with any crime, previously resigned from the board of the company OpenAI over his ties to Epstein, with whom he remained in contact as late as July 2019.

“I take full responsibility for my misguided decision to continue communicating with Mr Epstein,” Summers said in a statement to US media after releases of Epstein files in November, at which time Harvard announced a review of those named in the documents, which were compiled during criminal investigations of Epstein.

Documents released in December also showed that Summers had been designated as a successor executor in a 2014 draft of Epstein’s will, according to the student newspaper The Harvard Crimson. The paper reported that a spokesperson for Summers denied any knowledge of the matter.

Source link