Trump

Relations between the United States and China are tense, once again, with experts saying that the administration of US President Donald Trump “doesn’t quite know how to deal with China”.

The latest flare-up took place when Beijing, on October 9, expanded its restrictions on the export of rare-earth metals, increasing the number of elements on the list.

China has the largest reserves and the majority of processing facilities of rare-earth metals that are used in a range of daily and critical industries like electric vehicles, smartphones, laptops and defence equipment.

In a first, it also required countries to have a licence to export rare-earth magnets and certain semiconductor materials that contain even trace amounts of minerals sourced from China or produced using Chinese technology.

China’s actions on rare-earths also came after the US expanded its Entity List, a trade restriction list that consists of certain foreign persons, entities or government, further limiting China’s access to the most advanced semiconductor chips, and added levies on China-linked ships both to boost the US shipbuilding industry and loosen China’s hold on the global shipping trade. China retaliated by applying its own charges on US-owned, operated, built or flagged vessels.

“For the US, its actions on chip exports and shipping industry fees were not related to the trade deal with China,” said Vina Nadjibulla, vice president for research and strategy at the Asia Pacific Foundation of Canada.

Since then, the two countries have also been in an “information war”, said Nadjibulla, each blaming the other for holding the world hostage with its policies.

But beyond the rhetoric, the world is seeing China really up its game.

“For the first time, China is doing this extra-terrestrial action that applies to other countries as well [with its amped up export restrictions on rare-earths]. They are prepared to match every US escalation, and have the US back down,” Nadjibulla said. “This is a very different kind of a trade war than we were experiencing even three months ago.”

This was a “power play” by China in the run-up to a planned meeting later this month between Trump and Chinese President Xi Jinping at the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation summit in South Korea because “China has decided that the leverage is on their side,” said Dexter Tiff Roberts, a nonresident senior fellow at the Atlantic Council Global China Hub, pointing out that after some initial noise with Trump saying there was no reason to meet Xi any longer, the meeting is back on.

“If you look at the approach of the Trump administration right now, they are all over the place,” said Roberts.

Roberts was referring not only to the multiple tariff threats that the US has issued both on China and on specific industries and the carve-outs that were soon announced on those, but also in its statements on the Trump-Xi meeting, with Trump saying it was not happening, only to reverse that two days later.

“The Trump administration doesn’t quite know how to deal with China,” said Roberts. “They don’t understand that China is willing to accept a lot of pain,” and will not be easily cowed by US threats.

Beijing, on the other hand, has realised that Trump is determined to get his big deal with China and wants his state visit to seal that, maybe because “he feels that is important to his credentials as a big deal maker,” added Roberts, but that he cannot get there without giving more to China.

“China saw that they could push harder in the lead-up to the meeting.”

Wei Liang, a professor at the Middlebury Institute of International Studies who specialises in international trade and Chinese economic foreign policy, agrees.

“Trump has a track record of TACO,” she said, referring to a term coined by a Financial Times columnist in May, which stands for “Trump always chickens out” in reference to his announcing tariffs and then carving out exemptions and pushing out implementation dates.

“He cares more than any other US president [about] stock market reactions, so definitely will be more flexible to making concessions. This is the inconsistency that has been captured by his negotiation partners,” Liang said.

China’s defiant stance also comes at a time of its own political concerns, Liang added.

While the domestic economy is “a black box” with no reliable data available on growth, employment and other criteria, the consensus among China experts is that the country has been hit by the tariffs, economic growth has slowed, and unemployment has ramped up.

As China started its four-day fourth plenary session on Monday where it plans to approve the draft of its next five-year national economic and social development plan, Xi can use the moment to tell his domestic audience that the country’s problems are stemming from Trump’s policies and the whole world is suffering because of those tariffs and it’s not related to Chinese policies, Liang said.

A possible decoupling

All of this also signals that Beijing seems to be prepared to “decouple” from the US more than ever, a significant change in mentality, as, in the past, the standard response to the idea was that it would be a “lose-lose” situation for both countries, Liang told Al Jazeera.

But in the last few years, China has diversified its exports to other countries, especially those in its Belt and Road Initiative, the ambitious infrastructure project that it launched in 2013 to link East Asia through Europe and has since expanded to Africa, Oceania and Latin America.

Even when it comes to things that it needs from the US – soya beans, aeroplanes and high-tech chip equipment – it can find other suppliers or has learned to work around that need, as is the case for the chip equipment, Liang pointed out.

In the meantime, especially in the years since the US-China trade war started under Trump as president in his first term, China has brought in a set of national security laws – including its version of the US Entity List, through which it is setting limits on those exports, Nadjibulla said.

“Everybody should have been preparing the way the Chinese have been preparing. We breathed a sigh of relief when there was a change in government [in the US after the first Trump administration], but China kept preparing,” she said.

“This should be a wake-up call for all countries to find other sources for its needs. Everyone should be redoubling their efforts to diversify, because we have now seen the Chinese playbook.”

MEXICO CITY — The small Central American nation of Belize has signed a “safe third country” agreement with the United States, the two sides said on Monday, as the Trump administration seeks to ramp up deportations and dissuade migration north.

What the agreement entails wasn’t immediately clear, but it comes as President Trump has increasingly pressured countries in Latin America and Africa to help him carry out his immigration agenda.

The deal appears to be similar to one with Paraguay announced by the U.S. State Department in August that included a “safe third country” agreement in which asylum seekers currently in the U.S. could pursue protections in the South American nation.

In Trump’s first term, the U.S. signed several such agreements that would instead have asylum seekers request protections in other nations, like Guatemala, before proceeding north. The policy was criticized as a roundabout way to make it harder for migrants to seek asylum in the U.S. and was later rolled back by the Biden administration.

Earlier this year, Panama and Costa Rica also accepted U.S. flights of hundreds of deportees from Asian countries – without calling the deals “safe third country” agreements – and thrusting the migrants into a sort of international limbo. The U.S. has also signed agreements, such as deportation agreements, with war-torn South Sudan, Eswatini and Rwanda.

The Belize government said in a statement on Monday that it “retains an absolute veto over transfers, with restrictions on nationalities, a cap on transferees, and comprehensive security screenings.”

The government of the largely rural nation wedged between Mexico and Guatemala reiterated its “commitment to international law and humanitarian principles while ensuring strong national safeguards.” No one deemed to be a public safety threat would be allowed to enter the country, it said.

On Monday, the State Department’s Bureau of Western Hemisphere Affairs thanked Belize in a post on X, calling the agreement “an important milestone in ending illegal immigration, shutting down abuse of our nation’s asylum system, and reinforcing our shared commitment to tackling challenges in our hemisphere together.”

The decision prompted fierce criticism from politicians in Belize, who railed against the agreement, calling it a “decision of profound national consequence” announced with little government transparency. The agreement must be ratified by Belize’s Senate to take effect.

“This agreement, by its very nature, could reshape Belize’s immigration and asylum systems, impose new financial burdens on taxpayers, and raise serious questions about national sovereignty and security,” Tracy Taegar Panton, an opposition leader in Belize’s parliament, wrote on social media.

She noted fierce criticisms of human rights violations resulting from similar policies carried out by both the U.S. and Europe.

“Belize is a compassionate and law-abiding nation. We believe in humanitarian principles. But compassion must never be confused with compliance at any cost. Belize cannot and must not be used as a dumping ground for individuals other countries refuse to accept,” she wrote.

Janetsky writes for the Associated Press.

US Vice President JD Vance says, one week into the Gaza ceasefire, he has “great optimism” the peace deal will hold. He declined to set a deadline for Hamas to disarm. Vance was speaking at a newly established centre in Israel for civilian and military cooperation.

After the U.S.–Russia summit between President Donald Trump and Vladimir Putin in Budapest this October, diplomatic attention swiftly shifted eastward to a region where Trump once scripted some of his most dramatic foreign policy moments. In Washington, Seoul, and even Pyongyang, speculation is mounting about the possible revival of a U.S.–North Korea summit.

According to Reuters, some American officials have begun preliminary discussions on the feasibility of such a meeting, while South Korea’s Unification Minister Chung Dong-young noted that “there is no reason to rule out that possibility.” Though no official confirmation has been made, the very reemergence of this idea signals a subtle but notable shift in Trump’s diplomatic playbook.

Although there has been no official confirmation, the idea of ​​a US-North Korea summit being brought back to the table reflects a notable shift in the diplomatic direction of the Trump 2.0 administration. After making initial strides in Gaza and Ukraine, Washington appears to be shifting its pivot to Northeast Asia, a region that was a symbol of Trump’s diplomatic breakthrough in his first term in 2018.

Trump’s diplomatic instinct

Diplomacy under Trump has always been intensely personal. His style relies less on institutions or multilateral mechanisms and more on leader-to-leader engagement, what some in Washington describe as “summit diplomacy.”

For Trump, a renewed meeting with Kim Jong Un could serve two political purposes. First, it would remind the world that it is Trump, not Xi Jinping or Vladimir Putin, who remains at the center of managing the world’s flashpoints. Second, it would demonstrate his unique ability to “talk to the untouchables,” those seen as beyond the reach of traditional diplomacy.

Trump doesn’t necessarily need an agreement to declare victory. What he needs is a story, one that projects confidence, leadership, and America’s capacity to command global attention. The Korean Peninsula remains the perfect stage for that story to unfold.

America’s strategic calculus

Beyond the spectacle, Washington’s calculus is deeply strategic. Trump’s contemplation of reopening dialogue with Kim is less about denuclearization per se and more about repositioning U.S. influence within two intersecting triangles of power: U.S.–China–Russia and U.S.–Japan–South Korea.

By reaching out directly to Kim, Trump could dilute the dual leverage that Moscow and Beijing currently exert over Pyongyang. Both powers have increasingly treated North Korea as a tactical card in their broader geopolitical standoff with the United States. A Trump–Kim channel could, at least temporarily, limit that dependency, allowing Washington to reassert itself as an independent broker on the Peninsula.

At the same time, reviving engagement with Pyongyang could help reboot the stalled trilateral coordination between Washington, Tokyo, and Seoul. For the U.S., this is not only about deterring the North but also about reaffirming its leadership at a time when East Asia’s security architecture is under strain from renewed great-power rivalry.

Pyongyang’s position: bargaining from strength

From Pyongyang’s perspective, the motivation to reopen a “high-level dialogue” is equally clear. Negotiating with Washington offers a path, however narrow, toward easing economic isolation or securing limited political concessions.

A statement from North Korea’s Foreign Ministry in October 2025 captured this tone of calibrated openness. “There is no reason to avoid dialogue with the United States, as long as it proceeds with mutual respect.” Behind this carefully crafted language lies a familiar tactic: engage only when leverage is high.

Unlike in 2019, Pyongyang is no longer fully isolated. Its deepening military cooperation with Russia, particularly since the escalation of the Ukraine conflict, has yielded tangible benefits, from battlefield experience to access to advanced military technology. Meanwhile, China continues to view North Korea as an indispensable strategic buffer in its rivalry with the United States.

Most importantly, North Korea’s nuclear deterrence capability has grown substantially. The October 11 military parade unveiled the new Hwasong-20 intercontinental ballistic missile, symbolizing both technological progress and political confidence. The reactivation of the Yongbyon nuclear complex further signals that Pyongyang now approaches negotiations not from weakness, but from perceived strength.

As Pyongyang frames these moves as “necessary deterrence measures,” they also function as a form of crisis manufacturing, a deliberate escalation designed to increase bargaining value. For Trump, whose instincts favor transactional, hard-nosed diplomacy, this is a game he believes he can play and win.

Yet, the road to a new U.S.–North Korea summit remains fraught with risks. Washington harbors no illusion about the prospects of full denuclearization, while Pyongyang remains unwilling to trade its strategic assets for what it sees as reversible or symbolic commitments.

The question for Trump 2.0 is no longer whether to meet or not to meet Kim Jong Un, but rather, why meet, and what follows afterward?

If Trump manages to sustain dialogue with both Putin and Kim, he could reposition the United States as a balancer in an international order increasingly defined by overlapping rivalries rather than clear blocs. But if his efforts falter, Washington risks ceding ground to Moscow and Beijing, both of which are expanding their influence through direct engagement with Pyongyang.

A new kind of summit

If another Trump–Kim summit materializes in the coming months, it will not be a replay of Singapore 2018 or Hanoi 2019. This time, the performance will likely be more pragmatic, less idealistic, and perhaps even more calculated. Both leaders now understand the limits of what diplomacy can achieve and also the power of what a meeting alone can symbolize.

In a region where every gesture carries strategic weight, even the act of “showing up” becomes a message in itself. For Trump, that message would be simple but powerful: that the U.S. still holds the initiative, not through coercion, but through presence.

And for Kim Jong Un, it would reaffirm that Pyongyang, once again, cannot be ignored.

Whether or not the summit happens, Trump’s renewed focus on the Korean Peninsula reveals something deeper about his worldview. In an era where global power is contested on multiple fronts, symbolic diplomacy—the art of turning visibility into leverage—has become a strategic tool in its own right.

The question is not whether Trump and Kim can achieve a breakthrough. It is whether both can once again use each other to tell the stories they need: one of restored American dominance and one of North Korean resilience.

Either way, the stage is set. The spotlight, once more, is on the Peninsula.

WASHINGTON — As the government shutdown enters its fourth week, Senate Republicans are headed to the White House on Tuesday — not for urgent talks on how to end it but for a display of unity with President Trump as they refuse to negotiate on any Democratic demands.

Senate Democrats, too, are confident in their strategy to keep voting against a House-passed bill that would reopen the government until Republicans, including Trump, engage them on extending health care subsidies that expire at the end of the year.

With both sides showing no signs of movement, it’s unclear how long the stalemate will last — even as hundreds of thousands of federal workers will miss another paycheck in the coming days and states are sounding warnings that key federal programs will soon lapse completely. And the lunch meeting in the White House Rose Garden appears unlikely, for now, to lead to a bipartisan resolution as Senate Republicans are dug in and Trump has followed their lead.

Asked about the message at lunch, Sen. John Barrasso of Wyoming, second in Senate GOP leadership, told Fox News Channel’s “Fox & Friends” on Tuesday that it will be, “Republicans are united, and I expect the president to say, ‘Stand strong.’”

Senate Republican leader John Thune, of South Dakota said on Monday that he thinks Trump is ready to “get involved on having the discussion” about extending the subsidies. “But I don’t think they are prepared to do that until (Democrats) open up the government,” he said.

Missed paychecks and programs running out of money

While Capitol Hill remains at a standstill, the effects of the shutdown are worsening.

Federal workers are set to miss additional paychecks amid total uncertainty about when they might eventually get paid. Government services like the Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants and Children, known as WIC, and Head Start preschool programs that serve needy families are facing potential cutoffs in funding. On Monday, Energy Secretary Chris Wright said the National Nuclear Security Administration is furloughing 1,400 federal workers. The Federal Aviation Administration has reported air controller shortages and flight delays in cities across the United States.

And as the shutdown keeps future health costs in limbo for millions of Americans, most U.S. adults are worried about health care becoming more expensive, according to a new Associated Press-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research poll, as they make decisions about next year’s health coverage.

Still, there has been little urgency in Washington as each side believes the other will eventually cave.

“Our position remains the same: We want to end the shutdown as soon as we can and fix the ACA premium crisis that looms over 20 million hardworking Americans,” said Senate Democratic leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., on Monday, referring to the expanded Affordable Care Act subsidies that expire in December.

Schumer called the White House meeting a “pep rally” and said it was “shameful” that House Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., has kept the House out of town during the shutdown.

November deadlines

Members of both parties acknowledge that as the shutdown drags on, it is becoming less likely every day that Congress will be able to either extend the subsidies or fund the government through the regular appropriations process. The House GOP bill that Senate Democrats have now rejected 11 times would only keep the government open through Nov. 21.

Thune on Monday hinted that Republicans may propose a longer extension of current funding instead of passing individual spending bills if the shutdown doesn’t end soon. Congress would need to pass an extension beyond Nov. 21, he said, “if not something on a much longer-term basis.”

Democrats are focused on Nov. 1, when next year’s enrollment period for the ACA coverage begins and millions of people will sign up for their coverage without the expanded subsidy help that began during the COVID-19 pandemic. Once those sign-ups begin, they say, it would be much harder to restore the subsidies even if they did have a bipartisan compromise.

“Very soon Americans are going to have to make some really difficult choices about which health care plan they choose for next year,” Schumer said.

What about Trump?

Tuesday’s White House meeting will be a chance for Republican senators to engage with the president on the shutdown after he has been more involved in foreign policy and other issues.

The president last week dismissed Democratic demands as “crazy,” adding, “We’re just not going to do it.”

North Dakota Sen. John Hoeven said that Republican senators will talk strategy with the president at Tuesday’s lunch. “Obviously, we’ll talk to him about it, and he’ll give us his ideas, and we’ll talk about ours,” Hoeven said. “Anything we can do to try to get Democrats to join us” and pass the Republican bill to reopen the government, Hoeven said.

Still, GOP lawmakers expect Trump to stay in line with their current posture to reject negotiations until the government is open.

“Until they put something reasonable on the table to talk about, I don’t think there’s anything to talk about,” said Louisiana Sen. John Kennedy.

Democrats say Trump has to be more involved for the government to reopen.

“He needs to get off the sidelines, get off the golf course,” said House Democratic leader Hakeem Jeffries, D-N.Y. “We know that House and Senate Republicans don’t do anything without getting permission from their boss, Donald J. Trump.”

Jalonick writes for the Associated Press. AP writers Kevin Freking, Stephen Groves and Matt Brown contributed to this report.

WASHINGTON — In a day of bitter partisan skirmishing, President Trump’s allies and his Democratic antagonists took to the nation’s talk shows Sunday to present stridently opposing views of the impeachment inquiry that hit Washington last week like a tornado, sweeping nearly all other priorities aside.

The sharply dueling narratives showed that the impeachment battle will be one of bitter political messaging as much as impartial sifting of evidence. Initial polls showed a majority of Americans approve of the inquiry — but no national consensus on how to assess the president’s actions.

While the president spent the day golfing, his allies angrily attacked the legitimacy of the House inquiry, excoriated the whistleblower whose complaint sparked the crisis, and repeated debunked allegations against former Vice President Joe Biden and his son.

Trump later upped the ante on Twitter, leveling an incendiary charge against Rep. Adam B. Schiff (D-Burbank), chairman of the House Intelligence Committee that is spearheading the impeachment process. Schiff, the president wrote, should be “questioned at the highest level for Fraud & Treason.”

Democrats pushed back, saying that if the whistleblower’s complaint is borne out, Trump’s misconduct was egregious enough to merit ouster from office.

“This is classic abuse of power. This is as serious as it gets,” Rep. Hakeem Jeffries, (D-N.Y.), chairman of the Democratic caucus, said on “Fox News Sunday.”

At issue is whether Trump abused his authority for personal gain, and put national security at risk, by withholding hundreds of millions of dollars in promised military aid to Ukraine while urging its president to do him a “favor” by digging up dirt on his potential Democratic rival in the 2020 election.

Schiff said lawmakers had reached an agreement with the whistleblower who filed an anonymous complaint about Trump’s July 25 phone call with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky, and subsequent White House efforts to “lock down” evidence, to testify behind closed doors.

Schiff did not give a date, but said he expects it as soon as the individual’s lawyers are granted an appropriate security clearing to attend the hearing. “We’ll get the unfiltered testimony of that whistleblower,” Schiff said on ABC News’ “This Week.”

“We are taking all the precautions we can to protect the whistleblower’s identity,” Schiff added. “With President Trump’s threats, you can imagine the security concerns here.”

Mark Zaid, one of the lawyers representing the whistleblower, tweeted, “We continue to work w/both parties in House & Senate & we understand all agree protecting whistleblower’s identity is paramount.” He added that no date or time had been set for the testimony.

Schiff, asked if Rudolph W. Giuliani, Trump’s personal lawyer and a central figure in the impeachment storm, would also be called to testify, said it was too soon to say.

“I don’t want to commit myself to that at this point,” he said on NBC’s “Meet the Press.” “We certainly need to do a lot of work to find out what Giuliani has been doing in Ukraine.”

Giuliani, a private citizen who claims the State Department approved his back-channel dealings with Ukrainian officials on Trump’s behalf, said during a testy exchange on ABC’s “This Week” that he “wouldn’t cooperate” with Schiff.

He derided Schiff, who has served nearly two decades in the House, as an “illegitimate chairman” who “wants to hang the president.”

Stephen Miller, a senior White House aide who has mounted scorched-earth campaigns for Trump’s controversial immigration crackdown, branded the whistleblower’s complaint a “little Nancy Drew novel” that “drips with condemnation, condescension and contempt for the president.”

Appearing on “Fox News Sunday,” Miller called the whistleblower “a saboteur trying to undermine a democratically elected government,” and endorsed Trump’s menacing characterization of the whistleblower — made in a closed-door meeting in New York last week — as “close to a spy.”

The acting director of national intelligence, Joseph Maguire, told Schiff’s committee last week that the whistleblower, who is reportedly a CIA analyst who was assigned to the White House, had acted “in good faith” and had followed the law.

Republicans have generally stood behind Trump, but in an administration beset by near-constant turnover and turmoil, some former White House officials began to venture criticism.

Trump’s former homeland security advisor, Tom Bossert, told ABC’s “This Week” that “it is a bad day and a bad week for the president and for this country if he is asking for political dirt on an opponent.”

But Trump’s staunchest congressional supporters — including Sen. Lindsey Graham, (R-S.C.), who once called Biden “as good a man as God ever created” — sought to counter allegations against Trump by insisting it was the Democratic presidential candidate whose actions needed investigating.

Giuliani and other Trump supporters have repeatedly claimed that in 2016, Biden, then vice president, acted improperly to help his son, Hunter, by pushing for the firing of Ukraine’s prosecutor general, the country’s senior law enforcement official.

The prosecutor, Viktor Shokin, was ousted at the request of not only the Obama administration but also the European Union and the International Monetary Fund, who were seeking to stem corruption in Ukraine and believed Shokin was obstructing that work.

Shokin had once looked into the oligarch who owned Burisma, the energy company that had given a lucrative job to Hunter Biden, but the younger Biden was not the target or accused of any wrongdoing. In any case, the probe was already dormant when Shokin was pushed out.

Graham said on “Face the Nation” Sunday that “I love Joe Biden” but added, “somebody ought to look at whether or not Joe Biden had the prosecutor fired, and in a proper way.” Graham also said the whistleblower’s complaint “smells to high heaven.”

Sen. Christopher S. Murphy (D-Conn.), who recently traveled to Ukraine, said attacks on the former vice president were groundless, noting that no evidence of any criminal conduct has emerged in either Ukraine or the U.S.

“All these insinuations around Joe Biden — there is zero evidence for the claims the president is making,” Murphy said, describing them as a deliberate attempt to distract attention from Trump’s own comments in his July phone call to Zelensky.

“The whistleblower complaint is absolutely credible, but frankly you don’t need it because you have a transcript of a conversation in which the president of the United States tried to convince a foreign leader to interfere in the 2020 election,” he said.

“And you have Rudy Giuliani on TV every morning and every night, openly admitting that as an agent of the president’s campaign, he has been coordinating with the State Department in order to try to perpetuate the president’s political agenda,” Murphy added. “This is not allowable in a democracy.”

An estimated 7 million Americans turned out Saturday to peacefully protest against the breakdown of our checks-and-balances democracy into a Trump-driven autocracy, rife with grift but light on civil rights.

Trump’s response? An AI video of himself wearing a crown inside a fighter plane, dumping what appears to be feces on these very protesters. In a later interview, he called participants of the “No Kings” events “whacked out” and “not representative of this country.”

I’m beginning to fear he’s right. What if the majority of Americans really do believe this sort of behavior by our president, or by anyone really, is acceptable? Even funny? A recent Economist/YouGov poll found that 81% of Republicans approve of the way Trump is handling his job. Seriously, the vast majority of Republicans are just fine with Trump’s policies and behavior.

According to MAGA, non-MAGA people are just too uptight these days.

Vice Troll JD Vance has become a relentless force for not just defending the most base and cruel of behaviors, but celebrating them. House Speaker Mike Johnson has made the spineless, limp justification of these behaviors an art form.

Between the two approaches to groveling to Trump’s ego and mendacity is everything you need to know about the future of the Republican Party. It will stop at nothing to debase and dehumanize any opposition — openly acknowledging that it dreams of burying in excrement even those who peacefully object.

Not even singer Kenny Loggins is safe. His “Top Gun” hit “Danger Zone” was used in the video. When he objected with a statement of unity, saying, “Too many people are trying to tear us apart, and we need to find new ways to come together. We’re all Americans, and we’re all patriotic. There is no ‘us and them’,” the White House responded with … a dismissive meme, clearly the new norm when responding to critics.

It may seem obvious, and even old news that this administration lacks accountability. But the use of memes and AI videos as communication, devoid of truth or consequence, adds a new level of danger to the disconnect.

These non-replies not only remove reality from the equation, but remove the need for an actual response — creating a ruling class that does not feel any obligation to explain or defend its actions to the ruled.

Politico published a story last week detailing the racist, misogynistic and hate-filled back-and-forth of an official, party-sanctioned “young Republican” group. Since most of our current politicians are part of the gerontocracy, that young is relative — these are adults, in their 20s and 30s — and they are considered the next generation of party leaders, in a party that has already skewed so far right that it defends secret police.

Here’s a sample.

Bobby Walker, the former vice chair of the New York State Young Republicans, called rape “epic,” according to Politico.

Another member of the chat called Black Americans “watermelon people.”

“Great. I love Hitler,” wrote another when told delegates would vote for the most far-right candidate.

There was also gas chamber “humor” in there and one straight up, “I’m ready to watch people burn now,” from a woman in the conversation, Anne KayKaty, New York’s Young Republican’s national committee member, according to the Hill.

Group members engaged in slurs against South Asians, another popular target of the far right these days. There’s an entire vein of racism devoted to the idea that Indians smell bad, in case you were unaware.

Speaking of a woman mistakenly believed to be South Asian, one group member — Vermont state Sen. Samuel Douglass, wrote: “She just didn’t bathe often.”

While some in the Republican party have denounced, albeit half-heartedly, the comments, others, including Vance, have gone on the attack. Vance, whose wife is Indian, claims everyone is making a big deal out of nothing.

“But the reality is that kids do stupid things. Especially young boys, they tell edgy, offensive jokes. Like, that’s what kids do,” Vance said. “And I really don’t want us to grow up in a country where a kid telling a stupid joke — telling a very offensive, stupid joke — is cause to ruin their lives.”

Not to be outdone, Johnson responded to the poop jet video by somehow insinuating there is an elevated meaning to it.

“The president was using social media to make a point,” Johnson said, calling it “satire.”

Satire is meant to embarrass and humiliate, to call out through humor the indefensible. I’ll buy the first part of that. Trump meant to embarrass and humiliate. But protesting, of course, is anything but indefensible and the use of feces as a weapon is a way of degrading those “No Kings” participants so that Trump doesn’t have to answer to their anger — no different than degrading Black people and women in that group chat.

Those 7 million Americans who demonstrated on Saturday simply do not matter to Trump, or to Republicans. Not their healthcare, not their ability to pay the bills, not their worry that a country they love is turning in to one where their leader literally illustrates that he can defecate on them.

But not everyone can be king.

While the young Republicans believe they shared in their leader’s immunity, it turns out they don’t. That Vermont state senator? He resigned after the Republican governor put on pressure.

Maybe 7 million Americans angry at Trump can’t convince him to change his ways, but enough outraged Vermont voters can make change in their corner of the country.

Which is why the one thing Trump does fear is the midterms, when voters get to shape our own little corners of America — and by extension, whether Trump gets to keep using his throne.

Published on
21/10/2025 – 9:22 GMT+2

ADVERTISEMENT

Kenny Loggins has reacted to Donald Trump using his song ‘Danger Zone’ in the president’s “disgusting” AI-generated video showing himself wearing a crown, flying a “KING TRUMP” fighter jet and bombing a crowd of protesters with feces.

The video was published as a response to the historic “No Kings” protests which took place across the US on Saturday.

The American singer-songwriter recorded the hit song for the soundtrack of the 1986 Tom Cruise movie Top Gun. He has now called for Trump’s video to be taken down on copyright grounds.

In a statement to Variety, Loggins said: “This is an unauthorized use of my performance of ‘Danger Zone.’ Nobody asked me for my permission, which I would have denied, and I request that my recording on this video is removed immediately.”

He continued: “I can’t imagine why anybody would want their music used or associated with something created with the sole purpose of dividing us. Too many people are trying to tear us apart, and we need to find new ways to come together.”

“We’re all Americans, and we’re all patriotic. There is no ‘us and them’ — that’s not who we are, nor is it what we should be. It’s all of us. We’re in this together, and it is my hope that we can embrace music as a way of celebrating and uniting each and every one of us.”

Well put – especially considering the video has provoked widespread outrage online, with many expressing dismay over the way it shows Trump’s clear disdain for people exercising their right to protest.

Social media users accused Trump of having “the maturity and decorum of a 12-year-old boy”, while others commented: “Can’t believe that’s a president of a country.”

Many posts also pointed out that Trump’s “childish” and “disgusting” AI post revealed a transparent representation of his genuine feelings toward the American people. “It tells you everything you need to know about what he thinks about the people of America who are, in fact, America,” one person commented, while another added: “Him taking a dump on the country is the most honest thing he’s ever posted.”

This is far from the first time that Trump and his administration have used artists’ work without authorisation.

There is an extensive list of musicians who have objected to Trump’s authorized use of their songs. These include ABBA, The Rolling Stones, Bruce Springsteen, Rihanna, Neil Young, R.E.M., Woodkid, Beyoncé and Semisonic.

Sinead O’Connor’s estate previously issued Trump with cease-and-desist orders, while Isaac Hayes’ estate sued him for 134 counts of copywright infringement.

Céline Dion also condemned the use of her song from the Oscar-winning film Titanic, ‘My Heart Will Go On’, which was used at one of Trump’s rallies. Dion’s team questioned the song choice, writing: “And really, THAT song?”

Another band which added their name to the ever-growing list of artists who have sued Trump over the illegal use of their songs in campaign videos was The White Stripes. Last year, the rock band highlighted the “flagrant misappropriation” of their hit song ‘Seven Nation Army’. Jack White captioned a copy of the legal complaint in an Instagram post with: “This machine sues fascists.”

The most recent example to date is Metallica, who forced the US government to withdraw a social media video that used their song ‘Enter Sandman’ without authorisation.

This weekend’s “No Kings” protests saw millions of Americans marching against Trump’s administration, opposing the president’s “authoritarian power grab.”

The 18 October protest, the third mass mobilisation since Trump’s return to the White House, drew nearly 7 million people across all 50 states according to organisers. This figure would make it the largest single-day mobilisation against a US president in modern history.

Oct. 21 (UPI) — The Trump administration is surging U.S. Coast Guard resources to the Rio Grande River to prevent migrants and drugs from making their way from Mexico across the body of water into Texas.

Since his inauguration in January, President Donald Trump has been seeking to seal off the U.S.-Mexico border as part of his immigration crackdown.

Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem announced Operation River Wall in a statement Monday, calling it an “unprecedented mobilization” of Coast Guard boats, shallow watercraft, tactical teams and command and control assets to the Rio Grande in eastern Texas.

The exact number of resources deployed was not made public, though DHS said the operation is “beginning” with more than 100 boats and hundreds of personnel.

According to a statement from the Coast Guard, it has been deploying resources to the Rio Grande since Oct. 9 with the mission to “ensure operational control of the border” where Trump declared a national emergency on his first day in office.

That declaration, stating that the United States is “under attack” and experiencing an “invasion” via its southern border, has faced and continues to face legal challenges, particularly over its scope and the powers it affords the president.

“President Trump delivered the most secure southern border in U.S. history in record time, and now, our goal is to make sure it stays that way for the long run,” Noem said.

“Now, Coast Guard Forces Rio Grande and Operation River Wall will be a force multiplier in defending against illegal immigration.”

Dissenting justice says decision ‘erodes core constitutional principles’ and risks violating freedom of expression.

A United States court of appeals has ruled that the administration of President Donald Trump can move forward with plans to deploy soldiers to Portland, Oregon, despite the absence of any serious emergency and the objections of state and local officials.

The Monday ruling by the Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit Court will allow the Trump administration to send 200 National Guard members to the Democrat-run city.

“After considering the record at this preliminary stage, we conclude that it is likely that the President lawfully exercised his statutory authority” when he federalised the state’s National Guard, the three-judge panel stated.

The Trump administration has deployed armed forces to Democrat-run cities across the country, along with aggressive immigration raids in which heavily-armed federal agents wearing masks have pulled people off the streets, demanding that they prove their legal status.

Many US citizens have also been swept up in those raids, during which civil liberty groups have accused immigration agents of operating based on racial profiling, and detaining people without cause.

The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) expressed disappointment in the court’s decision.

“As the founders emphasised, domestic deployment of troops should be reserved for rare, extreme emergencies as a last resort, but that is far from what the Trump administration is doing in Portland, Chicago, Los Angeles, and DC,” Hina Shamsi, the director of the ACLU’s National Security Project, said in a statement.

“The presence of troops in otherwise beautiful vibrant American cities erodes a sense of safety and undermines the core freedoms to assemble and voice dissent.”

The Trump administration has claimed that Portland is “war-ravaged” by protesters, who it says are blocking immigration enforcement measures, despite the absence of any serious crisis conditions in the city. Trump and his allies have often employed vague allegations of emergency conditions as a pretext for wielding extraordinary powers both at home and abroad.

Demonstrators have worn costumes while protesting outside of immigration facilities, sometimes donning dinosaur and frog outfits and blasting music. Federal agents have faced criticism of using excessive force against peaceful demonstrators.

“Given Portland protesters’ well-known penchant for wearing chicken suits, inflatable frog costumes, or nothing at all when expressing their disagreement with the methods employed by ICE [Immigration and Customs Enforcement], observers may be tempted to view the majority’s ruling, which accepts the government’s characterization of Portland as a war zone, as merely absurd,” Circuit Judge Susan Graber wrote after casting the dissenting vote on the panel’s ruling.

“But today’s decision is not merely absurd. It erodes core constitutional principles, including sovereign States’ control over their States’ militias and the people’s First Amendment rights to assemble and to object to the government’s policies and actions.”

Oct. 20 (UPI) — A federal appeals court Monday cleared the way for President Donald Trump to federalize and deploy the Oregon National Guard into what he is calling “war-ravaged” Portland.

Monday’s 2-1 ruling by a three-judge panel on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit reverses a temporary restraining order that blocked the troops, as the administration challenges a lawsuit filed by Oregon and Portland officials. The case is still scheduled for trial on Oct. 29.

Last month, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth authorized the deployment of 200 Oregon National Guard troops after the president called Portland a “war-ravaged” city and said the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement offices there were “under siege.”

Last week, U.S. District Judge Karin Immergut extended two temporary restraining orders, saying the president could not federalize Oregon’s National Guard as, “This is a nation of Constitutional law, not martial law.” The Trump administration promptly appealed Immergut’s first restraining order to the Ninth Circuit.

“Even if the president may exaggerate the extent of the problem on social media, this does not change that other facts provide a colorable basis to support the statutory requirements,” Monday’s order read.

“Rather than reviewing the president’s determination with great deference, the district court substituted its own determination of the relevant facts and circumstances.”

At a hearing on Oct. 9, the 9th Circuit judges heard 20-minute arguments from Oregon attorneys and from the U.S. Department of Justice. Justice Department attorneys argued that the troops are needed to protect Portland’s ICE facility following protester clashes with federal agents. Oregon officials claimed the administration was exaggerating.

Portland is one of several cities where the Trump administration has deployed the National Guard. The administration has also deployed troops to Memphis, Tenn., and is working to deploy the National Guard to Chicago to curb crime and protect federal buildings, as ICE agents crack down on illegal immigration.

Trump said earlier this month he would be open to invoking the Insurrection Act, “if necessary” to deploy the National Guard.

The 9th Circuit Court of Appeals handed command of Oregon National Guard troops to the president Monday, further raising the stakes in the ongoing multifront judicial battle over military deployments to cities across the U.S.

A three-judge appellate panel — including two members appointed by Trump during his first term — found that the law “does not limit the facts and circumstances that the President may consider” when deciding whether to dispatch soldiers domestically.

The judges found that when ordering a deployment, “The President has the authority to identify and weigh the relevant facts.”

The ruling was a stark contrast to a lower-court judge’s finding earlier this month.

U.S. District Judge Karin Immergut of Portland previously called the president’s justification for federalizing Oregon troops “simply untethered to the facts” in her Oct. 4 temporary restraining order.

The appellate judges said they were guided by a precedent set in the 9th Circuit this summer, when California tried and failed to wrest back control of federalized soldiers in and around Los Angeles.

Another proceeding in California’s case is scheduled before the appellate court this week and the court’s earlier decision could be reversed. At the same time, an almost identical deployment in Illinois is under review by the Supreme Court.

For now, exactly which troops can deploy in Portland remains bitterly contested in U.S. District court, where Immergut blocked the administration from flooding Portland with Guardsmen from California.

The issue is likely to be decided by Supreme Court later this fall.

The judges who heard the Oregon case outlined the dueling legal theories in their opinions. The two members of the bench who backed Trump’s authority over the troops argued the law is straightforward.

“The President’s decision in this area is absolute,” wrote Judge Ryan D. Nelson, a Trump appointee, in a concurrence arguing that the court had overstepped its bounds in taking the case at all.

“Reasonable minds will disagree about the propriety of the President’s National Guard deployment in Portland,” Nelson wrote. “But federal courts are not the panacea to cure that disagreement—the political process is (at least under current Supreme Court precedent).”

Susan P. Graber, a Clinton appointee, said the appellate court had veered into parody.

“Given Portland protesters’ well-known penchant for wearing chicken suits, inflatable frog costumes, or nothing at all when expressing their disagreement with the methods employed by ICE, observers may be tempted to view the majority’s ruling, which accepts the government’s characterization of Portland as a war zone, as merely absurd,” she wrote in her stinging dissent.

But the stakes of sending armed soldiers to American cities based on little more than “propaganda” are far higher, she wrote.

“I urge my colleagues on this court to act swiftly to vacate the majority’s order before the illegal deployment of troops under false pretenses can occur,” Graber wrote. “Above all, I ask those who are watching this case unfold to retain faith in our judicial system for just a little longer.”

Health officials in the United States are reviewing whether to remove aluminium from some common vaccines, as part of the Trump administration’s escalating attacks on vaccines.

The Department of Health and Human Services has reduced some vaccine access. The agency scaled back COVID-19 vaccine recommendations, approved COVID-19 vaccines for fewer people and aimed to remove the preservative thimerosal from US vaccines. Experts told PolitiFact scientific research did not support its removal.

During a September 22 news conference, in which US President Donald Trump told people not to take Tylenol during pregnancy, he also mentioned another objective. “We want no aluminium in the vaccine,” he said. The administration was already in the process of removing aluminium from vaccines, he added.

About two weeks later, on October 8, the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s (CDC) Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices, or ACIP, announced a new working group focused on the childhood vaccine schedule. Its discussion topics include vaccine ingredient safety and aluminium adjuvants.

Robert Malone, an ACIP member who has opposed COVID-19 vaccines, told Axios he expected the ACIP would determine there was “a lot of evidence” of “issues” with aluminium in vaccines. The committee would likely vote to re-categorise vaccines containing aluminium adjuvants so that people would have to discuss with their doctor before getting them, Malone told Axios.

That could have far-reaching ramifications. Here’s what to know about aluminium in vaccines.

A: Small amounts of aluminium are sometimes included in vaccines as adjuvants, or substances that boost the body’s immune response to the vaccine to ensure protection from infection.

That boost means people can get fewer vaccine doses in smaller quantities.

Q: When used, how much aluminium is in a vaccine?

A: Vaccines with aluminium adjuvants usually contain less than 1mg aluminium per dose, according to the Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia.

That is a pretty abstract number. To help make it more concrete: a milligram is one-thousandth (1/1,000th) of 1g. One gram is about the weight of a raisin or a stick of gum. Imagine cutting one of those items into 1,000 equal pieces. One of the pieces would be about 1mg.

Here is another way to think about it.

People come in contact with and consume aluminium all of the time. It is one of the most abundant metal elements in the Earth’s crust, according to the US Geological Survey. It is naturally occurring in soil, air and water. Food is the main way people are exposed to aluminium. The average adult eats 7mg to 9mg of aluminium per day, according to the CDC.

A baby in its first six months might receive a total of about 4.4mg of aluminium from recommended vaccines. In the same period of time, a breastfed infant would ingest about 7mg of aluminium from breastmilk, and a formula-fed baby would ingest about 38mg from formula.

Q: How long have vaccines contained aluminium?

A: Aluminium adjuvants have been used in vaccines for more than 70 years, the CDC said.

“Aluminium is one of our oldest adjuvants; it’s been used in vaccines since the 1920s,” said Dr Peter Hotez, a Baylor College of Medicine professor and codirector of Texas Children’s Hospital Center for Vaccine Development.

Q: How do we know it’s safe to include small amounts of aluminium in vaccines?

A: Every vaccine’s safety and efficacy are tested in animal studies and human clinical trials before the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) licenses it for public use. Every vaccine containing adjuvants has been tested, and health agencies continuously monitor their safety, the CDC said.

Over several decades of use, vaccines with aluminium adjuvants have been proven safe, the FDA said.

Vaccines containing aluminium have been “given to billions of people worldwide now”, said Dr Kawsar Talaat, a professor at Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health.

A growing body of research has also found that aluminium adjuvants do not cause aluminium toxicity or other adverse outcomes.

Q: Do aluminium adjuvants have any risks?

A: Rarely, some people have allergic reactions to aluminium in the same way they might have allergic reactions to other substances, Talaat said.

In 2022, researchers published a retrospective, observational study on more than 325,000 children that found an association between vaccine-related aluminium exposure and persistent asthma. Association is not the same as causation, meaning the study did not prove a link between aluminium in vaccines and asthma.

Experts from the CDC and the American Academy of Pediatrics encouraged more research on the subject because the backwards-looking observational study did not prove causation and also had limitations, including that it excluded many children who developed asthma before they turned two years old.

A 2025 study found no increased risk of asthma associated with childhood exposure to aluminium-absorbed vaccines.

Q: Which vaccines contain aluminium adjuvants?

A: At least 25 vaccines approved for use in the US have aluminium adjuvants, the CDC says. That includes vaccines that protect against HPV, hepatitis A and B and diphtheria, tetanus, and acellular pertussis (whooping cough).

Q: Which vaccines do not contain aluminium adjuvants?

The CDC’s list of vaccines without adjuvants includes vaccines against COVID-19, Ebola, meningococcal, polio and rabies. Additionally, most seasonal flu shots and the vaccine against measles, mumps and rubella do not contain aluminium adjuvants.

Q: Can we remove aluminium from vaccines?

A: Not quickly. If it could be done at all, it would take years to develop, test and license new, aluminium-free vaccines. Many of the vaccines with aluminium adjuvants do not have aluminium-free formulas.

“A vaccine is licensed based on all of its ingredients and the exact manufacturing process,” Talaat said. “If you were to take an ingredient out of a vaccine, you would have to start all over with the clinical trials and the manufacturing, and it is highly possible that some of these vaccines wouldn’t work without the aluminium in there.”

Although other adjuvants exist, they are newer and often more scarce than aluminium, which is abundant.

An immediate ban on aluminium in vaccines would drastically reduce people’s ability to protect themselves and others against numerous diseases.

“I think we’d see outbreaks of vaccine-preventable diseases,” Talaat said.

Q: Why do people think aluminium in vaccines is causing autism?

A: A 2011 study said vaccines with aluminium adjuvants “may be a significant” contributing factor to the rising number of autism diagnoses in kids, Nature reported.

A year later, a World Health Organization vaccine safety committee called the 2011 study “seriously flawed”. The 2011 study and another by the same authors compared vaccines’ aluminium content and autism rates in several countries, the WHO group said, but that cannot be used to establish a causal relationship.

“We studied aluminium, and have no link between aluminium and autism,” Talaat said.

Oct. 20 (UPI) — U.S. President Donald Trump insisted that a fragile cease-fire between Israel and Hamas remained in place after Israel carried out a series of deadly strikes in the south of the Palestinian enclave and the sides traded blame for clashes.

Speaking aboard Air Force One on Sunday evening Trump said the agreement would hold and that “rebels” that he did not identify were responsible for alleged violations, not, Hamas.

“Either way, it’s going to be handled properly. It’s going to be handled toughly, but properly,” Trump added.

The Israeli military said it struck dozens of targets through Sunday evening in retaliation for Hamas’ alleged “anti-tank missile and gunfire” that killed two soldiers in Rafah. Sources from hospitals in Gaza told the BBC that at least 44 people had been killed. Aid deliveries were suspended.

Hamas denied all knowledge of the attack in Rafah and reiterated its commitment to the cease-fire. It accused Israel of violations, warning that the attacks were jeopardizing the truce.

Israel Defense Forces announced late Sunday that the operation was over and that it was resuming “enforcement of the cease-fire” and would permit aid to begin to flow again Monday, but warned that any violation of it would be met with a “firm response.”

This was the worst setback since the deal came into force Oct. 10 came as Trump’s special envoy, Steve Witkoff, and son-in-law Jared Kushner were due to arrive in Israel on Monday to shore up the cease-fire and move the process forward. They were due to be joined by Vice President JD Vance on Tuesday.

The three were expected to meet with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and other top Israeli officials.

Before departing the United States, Kushner told CBS News that while the truce was fragile, he believed Hamas was acting in good faith to stick to the agreement and was “seriously looking for the bodies” of the 16 Israeli hostages it had promised to return but had yet to do so.

Vance also sought to explain the violence, saying some turbulence was normal in the early stages of any cease-fire. His schedule also includes meetings with hostage families and a visit to a humanitarian facility in Gaza.

“Hamas is going to fire on Israel. Israel’s going to have to respond, of course. There are going to be moments where you have people within Gaza that you’re [not] quite sure what they’re actually doing. But we think it has the best chance for sustainable peace,” he said.

Hamas, which has been struggling to recover the bodies of 28 hostages it agreed to hand back to Israel as part of the cease-fire deal, said Monday it had found the remains of a 13th hostage. Further details were as yet unavailable.

WASHINGTON — President Trump said Friday that he had commuted the sentence of former U.S. Rep. George Santos, who is serving more than seven years in federal prison after pleading guilty to fraud and identity theft charges.

Joseph Murray, one of Santos’ lawyers, told the Associated Press late Friday that the former lawmaker was released from the Federal Correctional Institution in Fairton, N.J., around 11 p.m. and was greeted outside the facility by his family.

The New York Republican was sentenced in April after admitting last year to deceiving donors and stealing the identities of 11 people — including his own family members — to make donations to his campaign.

He reported to FCI Fairton on July 25 and was housed in a minimum-security prison camp with fewer than 50 other inmates.

“George Santos was somewhat of a ‘rogue,’ but there are many rogues throughout our Country that aren’t forced to serve seven years in prison,” Trump posted on his social media platform. He said he had “just signed a Commutation, releasing George Santos from prison, IMMEDIATELY.”

“Good luck George, have a great life!” Trump said.

Santos’ account on X, which has been active throughout his roughly 84 days in prison, reposted a screenshot of Trump’s Truth Social post Friday.

During his time behind bars, Santos has been writing regular dispatches in a local newspaper on Long Island, N.Y., in which he mainly complained about the prison conditions.

In his latest letter, he pleaded to Trump directly, citing his fealty to the president’s agenda and to the Republican Party.

“Sir, I appeal to your sense of justice and humanity — the same qualities that have inspired millions of Americans to believe in you,” he wrote in the South Shore Press on Monday. “I humbly ask that you consider the unusual pain and hardship of this environment and allow me the opportunity to return to my family, my friends, and my community.”

Santos’ commutation is Trump’s latest high-profile act of clemency for former Republican politicians since retaking the White House in January.

Like Santos, Trump has been convicted of fraud. He was found guilty last year on 34 felony counts in a case related to paying hush money to a porn actor. He is the only president in U.S. history convicted of a felony.

In granting clemency to Santos, Trump was rewarding a figure who has drawn scorn from within his own party.

After becoming the first openly gay Republican elected to Congress in 2022, Santos served less than a year after it was revealed that he had fabricated much of his life story.

On the campaign trail, Santos had claimed he was a successful business consultant with Wall Street cred and a sizable real estate portfolio. But when his resume came under scrutiny, Santos eventually admitted he had never graduated from Baruch College — or been a standout player on the Manhattan college’s volleyball team, as he had claimed. He had never worked at Citigroup and Goldman Sachs.

He wasn’t even Jewish. Santos insisted he meant he was “Jew-ish” because his mother’s family had a Jewish background, even though he was raised Catholic.

In truth, the then-34-year-old was struggling financially and faced eviction.

Santos was charged in 2023 with stealing from donors and his campaign, fraudulently collecting unemployment benefits and lying to Congress about his wealth.

Within months, he was expelled from the U.S. House of Representatives — with 105 Republicans joining with Democrats to make Santos just the sixth member in the chamber’s history to be ousted by colleagues.

Santos pleaded guilty as he was set to stand trial.

Still, Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-Ga.) urged the White House to commute Santos’ sentence, saying in a letter sent just days into his prison term that the punishment was “a grave injustice” and a product of judicial overreach.

Greene was among those who cheered the announcement Friday. But Rep. Nick LaLota, a Republican who represents part of Long Island and has been highly critical of Santos, said in a post on social media that Santos “didn’t merely lie” and his crimes “warrant more than a three-month sentence.”

“He should devote the rest of his life to demonstrating remorse and making restitution to those he wronged,” LaLota said.

Santos’ clemency appears to clear not just his prison term, but also any “further fines, restitution, probation, supervised release, or other conditions,” according to a copy of Trump’s order posted on X by Ed Martin, the Justice Department’s pardon attorney.

As part of his guilty plea, Santos had agreed to pay restitution of $373,750 and forfeiture of $205,003.

In explaining his reason for granting Santos clemency, Trump claimed the lies Santos told about himself were no worse than misleading statements U.S. Sen. Richard Blumenthal — a Democrat and frequent critic of the administration —had made about his military record.

Blumenthal apologized 15 years ago for implying that he served in Vietnam, when he was stateside in the Marine Reserve during the war. The senator was never accused of violating any law.

“This is far worse than what George Santos did, and at least Santos had the Courage, Conviction, and Intelligence to ALWAYS VOTE REPUBLICAN!” Trump wrote.

Marcelo writes for the Associated Press. AP writers Michael R. Sisak in New York and Susan Haigh in Connecticut contributed to this report.

LAS VEGAS — Aaron Mahan is a lifelong Republican who twice voted for Donald Trump.

He had high hopes putting a businessman in the White House and, although he found the president’s monster ego grating, Mahan voted for his reelection. Mostly, he said, out of party loyalty.

By 2024, however, he’d had enough.

“I just saw more of the bad qualities, more of the ego,” said Mahan, who’s worked for decades as a food server on and off the Las Vegas Strip. “And I felt like he was at least partially running to stay out of jail.”

Mahan couldn’t bring himself to support Kamala Harris. He’s never backed a Democrat for president. So when illness overtook him on election day, it was a good excuse to stay in bed and not vote.

He’s no Trump hater, Mahan said. “I don’t think he’s evil.” Rather, the 52-year-old calls himself “a Trump realist,” seeing the good and the bad.

Here’s Mahan’s reality: A big drop in pay. Depletion of his emergency savings. Stress every time he pulls into a gas station or visits the supermarket.

Mahan used to blithely toss things in his grocery cart. “Now,” he said, “you have to look at prices, because everything is more expensive.”

In short, he’s living through the worst combination of inflation and economic malaise he’s experienced since he began waiting tables after finishing high school.

Views of the 47th president, from the ground up

Las Vegas lives on tourism, the industry irrigated by rivers of disposable income. The decline of both has resulted in a painful downturn that hurts all the more after the pent-up demand and go-go years following the crippling COVID-19 shutdown.

Over the last 12 months, the number of visitors has dropped significantly and those who do come to Las Vegas are spending less. Passenger arrivals at Harry Reid International Airport, a short hop from the Strip, have declined and room nights, a measure of hotel occupancy, have also fallen.

Mahan, who works at the Virgin resort casino just off the Strip, blames the slowdown in large part on Trump’s failure to tame inflation, his tariffs and pugnacious immigration and foreign policies that have antagonized people — and prospective visitors — around the world.

“His general attitude is, ‘I’m going to do what I’m going to do, and you’re going to like it or leave it.’ And they’re leaving it,” Mahan said. “The Canadians aren’t coming. The Mexicans aren’t coming. The Europeans aren’t coming in the way they did. But also the people from Southern California aren’t coming the way they did either.”

Mahan has a way of describing the buckling blow to Las Vegas’ economy. He calls it “the Trump slump.”

::

Mahan was an Air Force brat who lived throughout the United States and, for a time, in England before his father retired from the military and started looking for a place to settle.

Mahan’s mother grew up in Sacramento and liked the mountains that ring Las Vegas. They reminded her of the Sierra Nevada. Mahan’s father had worked intermittently as a bartender. It was a skill of great utility in Nevada’s expansive hospitality industry.

So the desert metropolis it was.

Mahan was 15 when his family landed. After high school, he attended college for a time and started working in the coffee shop at the Barbary Coast hotel and casino. He then moved on to the upscale Gourmet Room. The money was good; Mahan had found his career.

From there he moved to Circus Circus and then, in 2005, the Hard Rock hotel and casino, where he’s been ever since. (In 2018, Virgin Hotels purchased the Hard Rock.)

Mahan, who’s single with no kids, learned to roll with the vicissitudes of the hospitality business. “As a food server, there’s always going to be slowdowns and takeoffs,” he said over lunch at a dim sum restaurant in a Las Vegas strip mall.

Mahan socked money away during the summer months and hunkered down in the slow times, before things started picking up around the New Year. He weathered the Great Recession, from 2007 to 2009, when Nevada led the nation in foreclosures, bankruptcies soared and tumbleweeds blew through Las Vegas’ many overbuilt, financially underwater subdivisions.

This economy feels worse.

Over the last 12 months, Las Vegas has drawn fewer visitors and those who have come are spending less.

(David Becker / For The Times)

With tourism off, the hotel where Mahan works changed from a full-service coffee shop to a limited-hour buffet. So he’s no longer waiting tables. Instead, he mans a to-go window, making drinks and handing food to guests, which brings him a lot less in tips. He estimates his income has fallen $2,000 a month.

But it’s not just that his paychecks have grown considerably skinnier. They don’t go nearly as far.

Gasoline. Eggs. Meat. “Everything,” Mahan said, “is costing more.”

An admitted soda addict, he used to guzzle Dr Pepper. “You’d get three bottles for four bucks,” Mahan said. “Now they’re $3 each.”

He’s cut back as a result.

Worse, his air conditioner broke last month and the $14,000 that Mahan spent replacing it — along with a costly filter he needs for allergies — pretty much wiped out his emergency fund.

It feels as though Mahan is just barely getting by and he’s not at all optimistic things will improve anytime soon.

“I’m looking forward,” he said, to the day Trump leaves office.

::

Mahan considers himself fairly apolitical. He’d rather knock a tennis ball around than debate the latest goings-on in Washington.

He likes some of the things Trump has accomplished, such as securing the border with Mexico — though Mahan is not a fan of the zealous immigration raids scooping up landscapers and tamale vendors.

He’s glad about the no-tax-on-tips provision in the massive legislative package passed last spring, though, “I’m still being taxed at the same rate and there’s no extra money coming in right now.” He’s waiting to see what happens when he files his tax return next year.

He’s not counting on much. “I’m never convinced of anything,” Mahan said. “Until I see it.”

Something else is poking around the back of his mind.

Mahan is a shop steward with the Culinary Union, the powerhouse labor organization that’s helped make Las Vegas one of the few places in the country where a waiter, such as Mahan, can earn enough to buy a home in an upscale suburb like nearby Henderson. (He points out that he made the purchase in 2012 and probably couldn’t afford it in today’s economy.)

Mahan worries that once Trump is done targeting immigrants, federal workers and Democratic-run cities, he’ll come after organized labor, undermining one of the foundational building blocks that helped him climb into the middle class.

“He is a businessman and most businesspeople don’t like dealing with unions,” Mahan said.

There are a few bright spots in Las Vegas’ economic picture. Convention bookings are up slightly for the year, and look to be strengthening. Gaming revenues have increased year-over-year. The workforce is still growing.

“This community’s streets are not littered with people that have been laid off,” said Jeremy Aguero, a principal analyst with Applied Analysis, a firm that provides economic and fiscal policy counsel in Las Vegas.

“The layoff trends, unemployment insurance, they’ve edged up,” Aguero said. “But they’re certainly not wildly elevated in comparison to other periods of instability.”

That, however, offers small solace for Mahan as he makes drinks, hands over takeout food and carefully watches his wallet.

If he knew then what he knows now, what would the Aaron of 2016 — the one so full of hope for a Trump presidency — say to the Aaron of today?

Mahan paused, his chopsticks hovering over a custard dumpling.

“Prepare,” he said, “for a bumpy ride.”

Maria worked cleaning schools in Florida for $13 an hour. Every two weeks, she’d get a $900 paycheck from her employer, a contractor. Not much — but enough to cover rent in the house that she and her 11-year-old son share with five families, plus electricity, a cellphone and groceries.

In August, it all ended.

When she showed up at the job one morning, her boss told her that she couldn’t work there anymore. The Trump administration had terminated the Biden administration’s humanitarian parole program, which provided legal work permits for Cubans, Haitians, Venezuelans and Nicaraguans like Maria.

“I feel desperate,’’ said Maria, 48, who requested anonymity to talk about her ordeal because she fears being detained and deported. “I don’t have any money to buy anything. I have $5 in my account. I’m left with nothing.’’

President Trump’s sweeping crackdown on immigration is throwing foreigners like Maria out of work and shaking the American economy and job market. And it’s happening at a time when hiring is already deteriorating amid uncertainty over Trump’s tariffs and other trade policies.

Immigrants do jobs — cleaning houses, picking tomatoes, painting fences — that most native-born Americans won’t, and for less money. But they also bring the technical skills and entrepreneurial energy that have helped make the United States the world’s economic superpower.

Trump is attacking immigration at both ends of the spectrum, deporting low-wage laborers and discouraging skilled foreigners from bringing their talents to the United States.

And he is targeting an influx of foreign workers that eased labor shortages and upward pressure on wages and prices at a time when most economists thought that taming inflation would require sky-high interest rates and a recession — a fate the United States escaped in 2023 and 2024.

“Immigrants are good for the economy,’’ said Lee Branstetter, an economist at Carnegie-Mellon University. “Because we had a lot of immigration over the past five years, an inflationary surge was not as bad as many people expected.”

More workers filling more jobs and spending more money has also helped drive economic growth and create still more job openings. Economists worry that Trump’s deportations and limits on even legal immigration will do the reverse.

In a July report, researchers Wendy Edelberg and Tara Watson of the centrist Brookings Institution and Stan Veuger of the right-leaning American Enterprise Institute calculated that the loss of foreign workers will mean that monthly U.S. job growth “could be near zero or negative in the next few years.’’

Hiring has already slowed significantly, averaging a meager 29,000 a month from June through August. (The September jobs report has been delayed by the ongoing shutdown of the federal government.) During the post-pandemic hiring boom of 2021-23, by contrast, employers added a stunning 400,000 jobs a month.

The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office, citing fallout from Trump’s immigration and trade policies, downgraded its forecast for U.S. economic growth this year to 1.4% from the 1.9% it had previously expected and from 2.5% in 2024.

‘We need these people’

Goodwin Living, an Alexandria, Va., nonprofit that provides senior housing, healthcare and hospice services, had to lay off four employees from Haiti after the Trump administration terminated their work permits. The Haitians had been allowed to work under a humanitarian parole program and had earned promotions at Goodwin.

“That was a very, very difficult day for us,” Chief Executive Rob Liebreich said. “It was really unfortunate to have to say goodbye to them, and we’re still struggling to fill those roles.’’

Liebreich is worried that 60 additional immigrant workers could lose their temporary legal right to live and work in the United States. “We need all those hands,’’ he said. “We need all these people.”

Goodwin Living has 1,500 employees, 60% of them from foreign countries. It has struggled to find enough nurses, therapists and maintenance staff. Trump’s immigration crackdown, Liebreich said, is “making it harder.’’

The ICE crackdown

Trump’s immigration ambitions, intended to turn back what he calls an “invasion’’ at America’s southern border and secure jobs for U.S.-born workers, were once viewed with skepticism because of the money and economic disruption required to reach his goal of deporting 1 million people a year. But legislation that Trump signed into law July 4 — and which Republicans named the One Big Beautiful Bill Act — suddenly made his plans plausible.

The law pours $150 billion into immigration enforcement, setting aside $46.5 billion to hire 10,000 Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents and $45 billion to increase the capacity of immigrant detention centers.

And his empowered ICE agents have shown a willingness to move fast and break things — even when their aggression conflicts with other administration goals.

Last month, immigration authorities raided a Hyundai battery plant in Georgia, detained 300 South Korean workers and showed video of some of them shackled in chains. They’d been working to get the plant up and running, bringing expertise in battery technology and Hyundai procedures that local American workers didn’t have.

The incident enraged the South Koreans and ran counter to Trump’s push to lure foreign manufacturers to invest in America. South Korean President Lee Jae Myung warned that the country’s other companies might be reluctant about betting on America if their workers couldn’t get visas promptly and risked getting detained.

Sending Medicaid recipients to the fields

America’s farmers are among the president’s most dependable supporters.

But John Boyd Jr., who farms 1,300 acres of soybeans, wheat and corn in southern Virginia, said that the immigration raids — and the threat of them — are hurting farmers already contending with low crop prices, high costs and fallout from Trump’s trade war with China, which has stopped buying U.S. soybeans and sorghum.

“You’ve got ICE out here, herding these people up,’’ said Boyd, founder of the National Black Farmers Assn. “[Trump] says they’re murderers and thieves and drug dealers, all this stuff. But these are people who are in this country doing hard work that many Americans don’t want to do.’’

Boyd scoffed at Agriculture Secretary Brooke Rollins’ suggestion in July that U.S.-born Medicaid recipients could head to the fields to meet work requirements imposed as part of the One Big Beautiful Bill Act. “People in the city aren’t coming back to the farm to do this kind of work,’’ he said. “It takes a certain type of person to bend over in 100-degree heat.’’

The Trump administration admits that the immigration crackdown is causing labor shortages on the farm that could translate into higher prices at the supermarket.

“The near total cessation of the inflow of illegal aliens combined with the lack of an available legal workforce results in significant disruptions to production costs and [threatens] the stability of domestic food production and prices for U.S. consumers,’’ the Labor Department said in an Oct. 2 filing to the Federal Register.

‘You’re not welcome here’

Jed Kolko of the Peterson Institute for International Economics said that job growth is slowing in businesses that rely on immigrants. Construction companies, for instance, have shed 10,000 jobs since May.

“Those are the short-term effects,’’ said Kolko, a Commerce Department official in the Biden administration. “The longer-term effects are more serious because immigrants traditionally have contributed more than their share of patents, innovation, productivity.’’

Especially worrisome to many economists was Trump’s sudden announcement last month that he was raising the fee on H-1B visas, meant to lure hard-to-find skilled foreign workers to the United States, from as little as $215 to $100,000.

“A $100,000 visa fee is not just a bureaucratic cost — it’s a signal,” said Dany Bahar, senior fellow at the Center for Global Development. “It tells global talent: You are not welcome here.”

Some are already packing up.

In Washington, D.C., one H-1B visa holder, a Harvard graduate from India who works for a nonprofit helping Africa’s poor, said Trump’s signal to employers is clear: Think twice about hiring H-1B visa holders.

The man, who requested anonymity, is already preparing paperwork to move to the United Kingdom.

“The damage is already done, unfortunately,’’ he said.

Associated Press writers Wiseman and Salomon reported from Washington and Miami, respectively. AP writers Fu Ting and Christopher Rugaber in Washington contributed to this report.

Thousands converged on New York’s Times Square Saturday for a ‘No Kings’ protest against President Donald Trump. It was part of a nationwide event that comes amid military crackdowns in US cities, deportations and revenge indictments of political foes and in the wake of the Gaza peace deal.

US leader says suspected drug traffickers to be sent to their home countries of Ecuador and Colombia.

President Donald Trump says two surviving “narcoterrorists” from a semi-submersible vessel destroyed by the US military in the Caribbean will be sent to their home countries of Ecuador and Colombia.

“It was my great honor to destroy a very large DRUG-CARRYING SUBMARINE that was navigating towards the United States on a well known narcotrafficking transit route,” Trump wrote on Truth Social on Saturday.

He said that US intelligence has confirmed the vessel was carrying fentanyl and other narcotics.

The vessel was targeted on Thursday in what Trump described as a strike aimed at disrupting a major drug trafficking route.

Two crew members were killed, he said, while two others survived and were airlifted by US forces in a helicopter rescue operation to a nearby US Navy warship.

The US military held the survivors on board at least until Friday evening.

The press office for Ecuador’s government said it was not aware of the plans for repatriation. There was no immediate comment from Colombian authorities.

At least six vessels, most of them speedboats, have been targeted by US strikes in the Caribbean since September, with Venezuela alleged to be the origin of some of them.

Washington says its campaign is dealing a decisive blow to drug trafficking, but it has provided no evidence that the people killed were drug smugglers.

With Trump’s confirmation of the death toll on his Truth Social platform, that means US military actions against vessels in the region have killed at least 29 people.

The president has justified the strikes by asserting that the United States is engaged in an “armed conflict” with drug cartels. He is relying on the same legal authority used by the administration of former President George W Bush when it declared a war on terrorism after the September 11 attacks on the US. This includes the ability to capture and detain combatants and use lethal force to take out their leadership. Trump is also treating the suspected traffickers as if they were enemy soldiers in a traditional war.

Previous similar strikes have raised concerns from Democratic lawmakers and legal experts who argue that such operations may exceed accepted wartime authority and risk violating international law.

Speaking to reporters on Friday, Trump said the latest targeted vessel had been “built specifically for the transportation of massive amounts of drugs”.

US military buildup

The mission comes amid a sharp US military buildup across the Caribbean, involving guided missile destroyers, F-35 fighter jets, a nuclear-powered submarine and about 6,500 troops. The escalation has fuelled accusations that Washington is inching towards direct confrontation with Venezuela.

On Wednesday, Trump confirmed that he had authorised the CIA to carry out covert operations inside Venezuela, intensifying fears in Caracas that the US is attempting to topple President Nicolas Maduro.

Maduro has repeatedly denied involvement in drug trafficking and accused Washington of fabricating a narco-terrorism narrative as a pretext for trying to change the government. He condemned the recent maritime strikes as “a violation of Venezuela’s sovereignty and international law”.

Venezuela’s ambassador to the United Nations, Samuel Moncada, has formally requested the UN Security Council to issue a determination that the US strikes are illegal and to reaffirm Venezuela’s sovereign rights.

Crowds packed the US capital on Saturday, part of nationwide ‘No Kings’ protests against President Donald Trump’s policies on immigration, education, and security. Al Jazeera’s Shihab Rattansi reports from the scene.