trump

WASHINGTON — Democrats seeking to retake control of Congress are planning broad investigations into President Trump and his family’s business dealings as part of an agenda focused on alleged corruption and economic harm, while keeping impeachment an option rather than an immediate priority.

The strategy would use subpoenas, committee hearings, possible criminal referrals and the budget as leverage to examine whether Trump, his family and close associates have used the federal government and public contracts for personal or financial gain.

House Democrats in key leadership posts told The Times the groundwork is already being laid out for probes into the president’s reported $2.2 billion in gains last year, the business ventures of his son-in-law Jared Kushner and his sons Eric and Don Jr., and the family’s crypto projects. There is also interest in scrutinizing Trump’s pardons and commutations to allies and the Department of Justice’s handling of the Jeffrey Epstein case.

With less than three months before the midterm elections, the prospect of sweeping investigations has hung over Trump as his approval ratings hit new lows and Democrats gain momentum. But the White House has dismissed Democrats’ plans as partisan and unfounded.

“President Trump only acts in the best interests of the American public — which is why they overwhelmingly re‑elected him to this office, despite years of lies and false accusations against him and his businesses from the fake news media,” White House spokesperson Anna Kelly said in a statement. “There are no conflicts of interest.”

Asked about the possibility of being impeached for a third time and being investigated, Trump told Punchbowl News last week that it would be “very unfair,” in part because “a lot of people are saying I am one of the greatest presidents ever.”

For Democrats, impeachment remains an option, but they are reluctant to make it a centerpiece of their agenda this time around. They argued the process could distract from oversight that would address alleged corruption and the ways it is hurting Americans economically.

“We shouldn’t take off the table that he can be impeached again,” Rep. Robert Garcia (D-Long Beach), the top Democrat on the House Oversight Committee, said in an interview. “But I think right now we’ve got to stop the Trump harm and investigate those who are helping him.”

Rep. Jamie Raskin, the top Democrat on the House Judiciary Committee, which plays a key role in the impeachment process, has also paused at making impeachment a priority. The Maryland lawmaker argued that Trump is “very eager” for Democrats to impeach him so he can mobilize his political base.

“We’re not going to play into the game,” Raskin told MS NOW’s “The Weekend” on Sunday.

In a statement to The Times, Raskin said the priority would be in expanding ongoing investigations into Trump’s pardons, what he called the “weaponization of the Department of Justice against chosen enemies in the nonprofit world,” “rampant violations of the foreign emoluments clause,” and the “theft and waste of public resources by Trump and his Cabinet of corruption.”

Sen. Adam Schiff (D-Calif.), who led the investigation that resulted in Trump’s first impeachment, said he is keeping his “mind open” on whether another impeachment would make sense for Democrats a third time. He argued the “power of the purse” — or using the budget to take aim at Trump’s agenda — would be a more effective tool.

“We’re going to need to do a lot of oversight of this administration, and I think it will be important in doing that oversight to always bring it back to why people should care about it and how the corruption of this regime is really raising their costs,” Schiff said.

Other Democrats are equally wary about using their renewed power to launch a third impeachment trial against Trump.

“We all know that this man has already been impeached twice. … I don’t know that we have to go to that well a third time,” Rep. Sydney Kamlager-Dove (D-Los Angeles) said.

Probes trickle down

Beyond the president’s business dealings, rank-and-file Democrats are coordinating other efforts to target Trump administration officials and senior aides over policy decisions they argue should force them out of their jobs.

Last week, Kamlager-Dove introduced articles of impeachment against Russell Vought, the White House budget director, arguing that he broke the law when the administration canceled federal funding to Democratic states including California for political reasons.

While she is cautious about impeaching Trump for a third time, she believes it would be effective to “remove Trump’s reapers who are willfully breaking the law.”

“I’m coordinating with leadership so that we have the best path forward for this,” she said. “It’s about being unified. It’s about working in a coordinated fashion, and it’s about understanding the end goal.”

Rep. James Walkinshaw (D-Va.), a member of the House Oversight Committee, said there needs to be more scrutiny over the White House’s budget-cutting team, the Department of Government Efficiency. Democrats should inquire more, he said, into allegations that a former DOGE official copied the Social Security numbers, names and personal information of millions of Americans to a private cloud that lacked adequate security.

He said the public still does not know enough about the situation or whether the data is secure or if it was breached, and said lawmakers should examine whether any laws or policies were violated.

“If there was political motivation to access and put at risk the Social Security numbers and the personal information of every single American, that sounds pretty criminal to me,” Walkinshaw said.

In May, three Democrats — Reps. Mike Levin of California, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez of New York and Jason Crow of Colorado — launched the End Corruption Caucus, creating another vehicle for oversight ideas should Democrats take control of the House.

The push and pull

As Democrats prepare for investigations, there are already questions about the type of resistance that could come from Trump and administration officials, all of whom have shown a willingness to buck Congress.

In a sign of what could be a potential hurdle, the Department of Justice issued a memo Monday evening that says communications between Trump and advisors who do not work for his administration can be protected under executive privilege.

“Restricting executive privilege to purely intragovernmental communications would foreclose the President from relying on an array of important sources that he may find necessary to the effective discharge of his responsibilities of office,” the memo from the department’s Office of Legal Counsel said.

The White House described the memo as a “narrow legal analysis, not an extension of executive privilege.”

But some Democrats see it as an example of how the Trump administration may be gearing up for Democratic-led investigations.

“This dubious expansion of executive privilege to cover Trump’s outside advisors is a clear attack on Congress’ oversight powers, and creates an environment ripe for corruption that protects only the president and his friends. We are ready to fight to uphold our power and authority,” Garcia said.

Walkinshaw added that he predicts the Trump administration is going to “flat-out refuse to engage with or respond to Democrats” if they take control.

If that happens, Democrats already expect to fight back.

“We have contempt tools, we have inherent contempt, we have criminal contempt,” he said. “We just have to be prepared to exercise the full extent of our constitutional tools, and I predict that will happen very early.”

Published on
13/08/2026 – 12:28 GMT+2

The Intercept and the Freedom of the Press Foundation went to court in New York on Wednesday to shut down Truth API, a subscription launched this month by Trump Media and Technology Group, the Nasdaq-listed company behind Truth Social.

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

The subscription provides privileged access to US President Donald Trump’s social media posts straight to trading firms, sending them fractions of a second before they appear on the public timeline, which is enough time for high-frequency algorithms to execute thousands of orders before others process the information.

Contracts run from about $60,000 (€52,000) to $100,000 (€86,600) a month and cover the platform’s 10 most-followed accounts, among them US President Donald Trump, the White House itself, US Vice President JD Vance, FBI Director Kash Patel and Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr.

More than 10 customers have signed up, mostly high-frequency trading firms, according to company executives.

Interim CEO Kevin McGurn told an earnings call on Monday that subscribers receive news “fractionally faster” than everyone else, having earlier pitched it as a real-time channel for the platform’s most market-moving posts.

US President Donald Trump holds roughly 41% of the company through a revocable trust overseen by his eldest son, Donald Trump Jr., with the stake currently worth close to $1 billion (€866mn).

Official announcements, The Intercept and the Freedom of the Press Foundation argue, belong to the public rather than to whoever pays most for them.

Two constitutional claims

The complaint, which names US President Donald Trump alongside deputy chief of staff Dan Scavino, executive assistant Natalie Harp and the Executive Office of the President, calls the arrangement “profoundly corrupt”.

It argues the service breaches the First Amendment by denying equal access to presidential announcements and the Fifth by conditioning that access on unreasonable sums, noting that many of the 9,000 to 11,000 posts Trump has published since January 2025 came with no White House statement.

“Trump is trying to enrich himself by privatizing government information,” said Ben Muessig, editor-in-chief of The Intercept.

A Trump Media spokesperson countered that critics show “a failure to grasp the distinction between public and nonpublic information”, adding that left-wing activists were weaponising the courts.

The White House has not commented on the lawsuit which follows a request last month from US Senators Elizabeth Warren and Adam Schiff for the Securities and Exchange Commission to examine whether the service undermines market integrity.

A pattern that predates the paywall

The service formalises an advantage that has drawn questions for months.

On several occasions this year, futures markets have registered unusual bursts of activity minutes before major Iran war announcements appeared on US President Donald Trump’s account.

No investigation has reached a conclusion.

The clearest case came on 23 March, when the S&P 500 and oil futures recorded isolated volume spikes at about 6:50am in New York. Fifteen minutes later Trump posted that talks with Iran had taken place and strikes on its energy infrastructure were paused.

Equity futures jumped more than 2.5% and West Texas Intermediate fell almost 6%.

According to one analysis of 1,341 posts between late January and early April, conducted by the Queensland University of Technology, there were 15 episodes that raised suspicions of insider trading.

In the grand buffet of problems explaining President Trump’s abysmal approval ratings, reserve a tray for Mexican food.

Americans are rightfully frustrated with the myriad consequences of the war with Iran he plunged us into, the rising cost of living, his pharaonic obsession with monuments to himself and his overall doddering state of mind.

But as this president afflicts the country with a prolonged civic bout of Montezuma’s Revenge, Mexican food’s role in the overall mess Trump has left us with is notable.

One of this country’s most popular cuisines has inadvertently spent this summer embarrassing Trump in fundamental ways — and I’m not just talking about TACO, the acronym referring to how Trump Always Chickens Out on his most bombastic claims and threats. The most prominent — and disgusting — example has been outbreak of foodborne illness traced back to popular Mexican restaurant chains that have sickened tens of thousands of Americans while Trump has shrugged and effectively told us to eat frijoles.

The Food and Drug administration traced an outbreak of cyclosporiasis, a parasite-born intestinal disease, to contaminated lettuce grown in Mexico by Salinas-based Taylor Fresh Foods that made its way to Taco Bell. The world’s biggest Mexican fast food chain quickly put out a statement that it removed all suspected lettuce from its restaurants and that “we encourage all relevant restaurants, retailers, and foodservice operators to do the same.”

If only the Trump administration was as proactive in caring for the well-being of Americans as the creators of Doritos Locos tacos and Crunchwrap Supremes.

It turned out that the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s Foodborne Diseases Active Surveillance Network told state inspectors last year that they were no longer required to report to the agency any instances of the parasite that causes cyclosporiasis they found in this country’s food supply. This was part of massive cutbacks at the CDC that reduced its staff by a quarter and cut billions of dollars in funding.

When reporters confronted Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. with these facts, he responded that such criticisms were “invalid” and that the cyclosporiasis outbreak was “under control.”

Make America Healthy Again? More like Make Americans Heave Always.

A bean and cheese burrito with green chile sauce at Al & Bea’s in Boyle Heights.

(Kirk McKoy/Los Angeles Times)

On Aug. 4, the Food and Drug Administration revealed that a salmonella outbreak traced back to contaminated jalapeños imported from Mexico had left hundreds of Americans sick. But the feds were two weeks late to the news: By July 20, Chipotle had already removed all suspected jalapeños from its stores. Unlike the Trump administration, it had invested in food-safety tracking that quickly spotted the problem, a system implemented after the company suffered hundreds of millions of dollars in sales losses and a $25-million federal fine last decade due to repeated foodborne illnesses originating in its stores.

I’m no fan of Chipotle’s underwhelming hipster vibe or Taco Bell’s over-salted options, but they know what the Trump administration seems to not understand: Americans deserve to eat without worrying about whether they’ll get ill as a result. And they also know Americans especially like Mexican food, a cuisine dependent on exported produce that is now more expensive than ever because of Trump’s misguided tariffs and overall bellicosity to our Latin America trading partners.

You would think Trump himself would know: Remember the infamous photo he posted on Cinco de Mayo during his first term of him smiling at his desk appearing ready to chow down on a giant taco salad bowl?

Which leads to the second section of Trump’s combo plate of bad Mexican food news this year. On the same day the FDA belatedly disclosed the jalapeño salmonella outbreak, Turning Point USA spokesperson Andrew Kolvet posted on social media that a college student complained to him that “a burrito shouldn’t cost $20.” Kolvet correctly pointed out that many people currently feel the cost of living is too high, and rightfully suggested that Republican Party leaders should sympathize with such concerns lest they lose even more voters that they already have during Trump’s second term.

Instead, Trump toadies from Vice President JD Vance to Rep. Dan Crenshaw urged young people to eat instant ramen and live frugally instead of splurge on burritos. That provoked other conservative activists to smack down the MAGA Men for showing how out of touch they are with how expensive everything is right now.

Forget the Consumer Price Index: The cost of a burrito is the best way to judge how much the cost of living actually is. I haven’t regularly bought them for years because they’re just not worth it anymore.

A delicious, slender bean-and-cheese burrito with no sauce at the venerable Al & Bea’s in Boyle Heights is going for six bucks and change right now when it was about $2 cheaper two years ago. The gargantuan breakfast burritos at my favorite place to get one, Athenian III in Buena Park, run about $13. Even my go-to fast-food treat, a half-pound Del Taco bean-and-cheese burrito, costs $2.61 with tax at the closest location to my house.

Remember when they were about a dollar? I do.

As someone whose wife runs a restaurant, I don’t blame businesses for hiking their prices; I blame Trump. He campaigned two years ago on stopping and reversing the runaway inflation that was happening toward the end of the Biden administration and won over a lot of Mexican Americans as a result. But when those voters can’t even enjoy a carne asada burrito for lunch without thinking about whether they’ll have enough money for the rest of the week, that should worry Trump and his team as the November midterms approach.

That they’re collectively still blaming Biden shows how pendejos they are at best, and uncaring at worst.

Back to that 2016 Cinco de Mayo photo of himself enjoying a taco salad sold at his Trump Hotel in Manhattan. It was peak Trump: daring opponents to call him out for appropriating a hallmark of Cal-Mex dining while thinking Americans would see the move as a metaphor for the bounties of riches and good times Trump would usher in for this country.

A decade later, Trump just makes too many Americans want to run to the proverbial toilet and barf from all the slop he and his minions have cooked up for our country.

Heidi Beirich, an expert on far-right groups, has been charged over the alleged misuse of donor funds to pay informants.

A leading expert on far-right groups in the United States has been charged by the administration of President Donald Trump for her alleged role in the use of donor money to secretly pay confidential informants.

On Wednesday, the Justice Department served an arrest warrant to Heidi Beirich, 59, the former director of intelligence for the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC), a civil rights nonprofit based in Montgomery, Alabama.

It also issued a superseding indictment to include Beirich in its ongoing prosecution of the SPLC, which the Trump administration has accused of deceiving donors. An initial indictment was made against the group in April.

Beirich has been charged with wire fraud, conspiracy to submit false statements to a bank, and conspiracy to commit money laundering, FBI Director Kash Patel said.

“Heidi Beirich was at the center of our ongoing investigation into SPLC and their previously alleged criminal activity,” Patel wrote on the social media platform X.

“SPLC knowingly misled donors, who believed their money was being used to dismantle violent extremist organizations – when in fact, part of those donations were instead being used to pay senior leadership within those extremist groups.”

But critics have questioned the Trump administration’s motivations for pursuing criminal charges against the SPLC, which has historically worked with the FBI to track alleged far-right hate groups.

The SPLC has been a frequent target of conservative critics who claim the nonprofit is politically biased.

The group’s stated mission is to fight white supremacy and create a multiracial democracy, and it has issued publications critical of conservative groups like Turning Point USA, which it characterised as a “case study of the hard right”.

Beirich’s lawyer, Michael Proctor, said his client is innocent of the charges and described the case as politically motivated. He accused prosecutors of trying to punish his client for her “decades-long record of success dismantling hate groups”.

“A free and fair society does not use the justice system to silence its political opponent,” he said.

The superseding indictment accuses the SPLC and Beirich of directing more than $4m in donations to “individuals associated with various violent extremist groups” between 2007 and 2023.

The practice, according to the Justice Department, amounted to fraud.

Beirich was part of the SPLC’s effort “to open bank accounts in completely fictitious companies’ names and make payments to individuals for reasons that were not accurate”, according to Attorney General Todd Blanche.

The SPLC has acknowledged that it used confidential informants in the past to gather intelligence on hate groups such as the Ku Klux Klan and the National Socialist Party of America, but the group said it no longer does so.

The SPLC has also said that it shared information obtained from informants with local and federal law enforcement.

“Violent extremists have not stopped or intimidated Dr Beirich from her vital work during her time at the SPLC,” Proctor said. “Dr Beirich won’t be silenced or intimidated by the government’s false and politicized allegations now.”

President Trump again insists the US has ‘total control’ of the strait, while Tehran is resolute that Washington must meet its demands.

The Trump administration again on Wednesday asked the U.S. Supreme Court to intervene — and fast — to save President Trump’s plan for the U.S. Postal Service to place new nationwide limits on mail voting ahead of the November midterms.

It did so after a lower court judge blocked the Postal Service plan from moving forward for a second time on Tuesday.

Solicitor Gen. D. John Sauer wrote to the high court that if it does not act quickly to lift both of the lower court’s “erroneous” rulings blocking the plan, those orders “will effectively run out the clock on the government’s ability to implement” the changes in time for the November election, “thereby causing irreparable harm to the federal government, the public, and election integrity.”

Sauer’s latest argument was filed in an emergency case already before the Supreme Court, in which the Trump administration is challenging a June decision blocking the Postal Service’s rule changes by U.S. District Judge Indira Talwani.

Talwani, an appointee of President Obama, ruled in favor of California and 22 other states that had challenged the new rules as coming far too late in the election year to be implemented without causing significant disruptions and harming voters. That decision, which was upheld by an appellate court in July, had barred the new measures from being implemented in the states that sued, but not elsewhere.

However, Sauer filed his latest argument in response to a second ruling by Talwani in a separate case Tuesday, in which she sided with the League of Women Voters and other voting rights groups to block the Postal Service plans from moving forward nationwide.

“That it is now less than 90 days before the November 3, 2026 midterm elections underscores the critical need for an injunction to prevent Defendants from changing election rules on the eve of the election,” Talwani wrote.

The court battle follows an executive order Trump issued in March, in which he called on the Postal Service and the Department of Homeland Security to ensure “citizenship verification and integrity in federal elections” by compiling their own state-by-state lists of citizens who are eligible to vote and then using those lists to restrict who may vote by mail in each state.

The order said the Postal Service “shall not transmit mail-in or absentee ballots from any individual unless those individuals have been enrolled on a State-specific list.”

The order was immediately slammed by Democratic attorneys general and independent voting rights groups as a ploy by the Trump administration to get its hands on state voter rolls, which it has failed to secure in separate legal challenges, and severely limit mail voting, which Trump has without evidence alleged is a major source of voter fraud.

California Atty. Gen. Rob Bonta helped lead the states’ lawsuit challenging Trump’s order, and has praised Talwani’s orders blocking it from taking effect. Bonta has said the law is clear that states control elections, not the federal government, and that Trump’s order is an illegal and dangerous power grab ahead of a pivotal election in which the president’s party is poised to lose power.

A spokesperson for Bonta’s office said it was aware of Sauer’s filing and considering “next steps” Wednesday.

The Trump administration’s appeal to the Supreme Court is limited in scope, in that it hinges on a technical argument that the challenges to the new rules are premature — and that the Postal Service should be allowed to continue preparing for the new rules to be implemented while the legal battle over their legality continues.

Sauer reiterated that argument in his filing Wednesday, asking the high court to not only issue its order soon, but to make clear in it that not one but both of Talwani’s orders are premature.

He wrote that courts cannot block the implementation of an executive order “that merely instructs agencies to pursue a proposed policy in a manner that is consistent with law,” particularly before those agencies “actually take concrete actions that injure” the groups suing to block the order.

Therefore, Sauer wrote, it would be “prudent” for the high court to make clear that it was halting Talwani’s first order “based on the uncertainty concerning the government’s future actions, not anything specific to the individual plaintiffs” — or, in other words, on grounds that would apply to her second order, too.

He wrote that it was “critical” that the court “act promptly.”

The states have asked the high court to block Trump’s order, which they said would deny mail ballots to “many of the millions of voters who rely on mail voting — especially voters with disabilities and those in rural areas.”

The League of Women Voters hailed Talwani’s order Tuesday as a win for voters and for the U.S. Constitution, which it said makes clear the president does not have the authority to rewrite election rules.

“Millions of Americans, including seniors, military voters, voters with disabilities, rural voters, and citizens living overseas, rely on voting by mail to participate in our democracy,” said Marcia Johnson, the group’s chief of activation and justice. “Today’s decision reaffirms that the rules governing our democracy must be set by the Constitution and the law, not by executive overreach.”

When the high court will rule is unclear, though the emergency nature of the appeal calls for a prompt response.

US Department of Homeland Security is expected to buy up to $20m in gloves amid criticism of the president’s immigration crackdown.

The administration of United States President Donald Trump is planning to spend tens of millions of dollars to equip federal immigration agents with gloves capable of delivering electric shocks.

According to a notice posted on Monday, the Department of Homeland Security has estimated it will invest between $10m and $20m in such gloves by the end of March 2027.

The devices are known as the CT-G5 G.L.O.V.E., an acronym that stands for “Generate Low Output Voltage Emitter”. They are currently used by some jails and police departments.

Their manufacturer, Compliant Technologies, says the gloves are used to “quickly distract with small uncomfortable electrical pulses” when applied to a person’s skin. The Department of Homeland Security indicated they would be used for “distraction and de-escalation”.

A user manual states the gloves can deliver a maximum of 380 volts, which “inhibits/distracts the subject from performing coordinated muscle movement”.

The planned purchase has already sparked a backlash among rights advocates, who fear the gloves will be used to harm protesters and immigrants in the department’s custody.

The Department of Homeland Security oversees an array of agencies, including Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), which has led Trump’s campaign of mass deportation.

Monday’s announcement specified that ICE has a requirement to make the purchase and distribute the gloves to agents within Enforcement and Removal Operations, one of its subsidiaries, and Homeland Security Investigations.

But ICE has faced increasing criticism for its tactics, including accusations of racial profiling and excessive force.

At least four people have been shot dead during encounters with ICE agents since the start of this year. Dozens more have died in ICE custody.

On Wednesday, the National Immigration Law Center (NILC) issued a statement criticising the anticipated glove purchase, calling it a path to further violence against vulnerable communities.

It also noted that, in June, the Republican-led Congress passed tens of billions of dollars in ICE spending as part of the Secure America Act.

“This is a rogue agency with an $80 billion slush fund that allows them to concoct and fund new ways to visit cruelty upon our communities,” NILC President Kica Mantos said in the statement. “Arming poorly trained agents with electric shock gloves to inflict pain on our neighbors is disgusting and barbaric.”

The Department of Homeland Security offered no immediate response to The Associated Press news agency, one of the first news outlets to report on the story.

The founder and CEO of Compliant, Jeff Niklaus, told the publication in an email, “Unfortunately, we are unable to speak on this subject.”

Compliant has argued in the past that its devices are “humane” and do not cause injury.

“The technology is safe as it does not penetrate the subject’s body, while also allowing other officers to grab the individual being stimulated with no fear of feedback into their bodies,” the manufacturer says on its website.

However, Compliant recommends avoiding use of the device on “higher risk” individuals, including the elderly, small children, pregnant people and those with severe disabilities. Officers must also complete a course to use the gloves and be recertified every two years, according to the company.

The notice, listed as a no-bid contract, could be published by Friday.

Joshua Kushner’s sudden rise to co-ownership of the most storied team in professional basketball might seem like it came out of the blue — but it’s been a long time coming.

A scion of the wealthy Kushner family whose older brother, Jared, is married to President Trump’s daughter, and whose father, Charles, is the U.S. ambassador to France, has successfully staked out his own lucrative business career.

He is worth an estimated $5.2 billion by Forbes.

And along the way, the New York-based entrepreneur and venture capitalist has exhibited a deep interest in sports investments.

Just this summer, there were reports that Joshua Kushner and new Laker’s co-owner Bob Iger, the former Walt Disney Co. chief executive, had hired investment bankers to consider a bid for the National Basketball Association’s expansion team in Las Vegas — before setting their sights on the Lakers.

Kushner already holds a stake that in the Miami Heat that he will divest, according to The Athletic, and previously sold a stake in the Memphis Grizzlies. His wife, model Karlie Kloss, has a stake in the WNBA’s New York Liberty.

Kushner’s Thrive Capital also was named the lead investor in FIFA President Gianni Infantino’s ill-fated plan this year to spin off a $20 billion commercial subsidiary to handle the soccer federation’s broadcast, sponsorship, ticketing and event operations.

Infantino withdrew the proposal last month after withering criticism that he was overly commercializing the sport, as well as of Kushner’s ties to Trump and his controversial presidency.

Kushner announced on X in April that he also was in the process of taking a stake in the San Francisco Giants. It was not his first interest in baseball. In 2017, he reached a preliminary agreement to buy the Miami Marlins for $1.6 billion, but the deal fell through.

Kushner’s father made his fortune in commercial and residential real estate, and early on his youngest son decided to go into business but forge his own career, even as he maintained his ties to Kushner Cos., the family firm.

After graduating from Harvard University, Kushner got his MBA from the school. But before he had even graduated in 2011, he founded his venture capital firm Thrive Capital. He also worked at top investment bank Goldman Sachs.

The venture capital firm reportedly scored with investments in Instagram, online eyewear retailer Warby Parker, music streaming service Spotify, payments processor Stripe and Elon Musk’s SpaceX long before it went public this year.

In 2012, Kushner displayed an entrepreneurial streak, co-founding Oscar, a health tech and insurer that is now publicly traded with a market capitalization of about $9 billion.

This year, Thrive raised $10 billion, it’s largest fundraising round yet, drawing investment’s from global billionaires such as India’s Mukesh Ambani, the world’s twelfth richest person, according to Bloomberg. Iger reportedly invested $175 million to purchase a 3.3% stake in Thrive.

Interest in the firm came after it scored a huge win with an investment in artificial intelligence pioneer OpenAI in January 2023, just months after the debut of ChatGPT. At the time, the startup was valued at $29 billion, and now its valuation is approaching $1 trillion.

A lifelong Democrat, Kushner attended the 2017 Women’s March in Washington, a day after Trump’s first inauguration. Kushner has funded Democratic politicians and causes almost exclusively, including $250,000 in donations to the Growth Democrats PAC during the 2024 election cycle.

“It is no secret that liberal values have guided my life and that I have supported political leaders that share similar values,” Kushner told Forbes in 2017.

In 2024, Kushner and Kloss purchased the iconic Midcentury Modern home in Malibu known as the “Wave House,” designed by famed architect Harry Gesner. According to The Wall Street Journal, the couple paid $29.5 million for the six-bedroom, 6,200-square-foot house that abuts the Pacific Ocean—$20 million less than the asking price when it was listed for sale in 2023.

Kushner, however, has not been able to shed his controversial association with his family or the family real estate firm.

A property management company owned by the family in 2022 agreed to pay $3.25 million in civil penalties and restitution to settle a lawsuit brought by the state of Maryland. The suit alleged that tenants in thousands of rental units were charged illegal fees while failing to maintain the properties. In reaching the settlement, the company did not admit wrongdoing.

Kushner’s effort to fashion his own identity also has been tarnished by his controversial father.

Charles Kushner was made ambassador to France last year by Trump, but only after the president pardoned the New Jersey developer in 2020. The elder Kushner spent nearly two years in custody following a federal tax fraud investigation.

Not long after assuming his post, Kushner sparked a diplomatic clash with France, accusing the country of not doing enough to stem antisemitism in the country following the start of the Hamas-Israeli conflict.

Correspondent A.J. Perez, the Associated Press and Bloomberg News contributed to this report.

DEVELOPING STORYDEVELOPING STORY,

Leavitt is departing her role to spend more time with family after giving birth to her second child, according to Trump.

White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt will be departing her role at the end of the month to prioritise her family, United States President Donald Trump announced on Truth Social.

“Karoline has been a real leader in the White House, and has done a phenomenal job fighting for Justice, Liberty, and Freedom, since 2018,” Trump wrote in a post on Wednesday, revealing the staffing shake-up.

He noted that Leavitt would remain one of his “top outside advisors” and an “influential voice within the Republican Party”.

Leavitt is the latest in a series of senior Trump officials to step down from his second administration.

Since the start of this year, high-level figures like former Attorney General Pam Bondi and ex-Secretary of Homeland Security Kristi Noem have been fired.

Other officials — including former Secretary of Labour Lori Michelle Chavez-DeRemer and Todd Lyon, acting head of Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) — have resigned amid scrutiny over their leadership.

Leavitt’s departure, however, comes on the heels of her maternity leave. She and her spouse Nicholas Riccio gave birth to their second child, a baby girl named Viviana, in early May.

The 27-year-old stepped away from her duties as White House press secretary in late April. She returned to the White House podium for her first formal press briefing in mid-July.

“Karoline has been one of the best White House Press Secretaries in the History of the Office”, Trump said in his post.

He added that Leavitt would continue to serve his administration as the Republican Party seeks to “conclusively win the Midterm Elections” in November.

This is a developing story. More details to come.

Political Pressure Puts Fed Independence Back in Focus

Federal Reserve Chair Kevin Warsh’s efforts to keep the central bank insulated from political pressure have become more difficult after President Donald Trump renewed his push to remove Fed Governor Lisa Cook.

Trump’s move, based on allegations of mortgage fraud that Cook’s attorney has called baseless, has brought the issue of Federal Reserve independence back to the centre of markets’ attention. It also suggests that the White House remains concerned that the Fed could raise interest rates as early as next month, despite Trump’s longstanding demand for lower borrowing costs.

The timing is particularly important. Futures markets put the probability of a quarter-point rate increase before the November midterm elections at about 75%, while the outcome of the Fed’s September 15-16 meeting is viewed as almost evenly balanced.

The pressure on Cook could ultimately backfire. If Trump fails to remove her, she could become more inclined to support tighter monetary policy. At the same time, the administration could be calculating that publicly challenging Cook gives Trump a political target if the Fed raises rates before the midterms.

Trump could then argue that a rate increase was politically motivated and intended to undermine his administration.

Trump Challenges Cook Ahead of Critical Fed Meeting

The White House last week sent Cook a letter saying Trump was “considering” removing her and demanded a response within three weeks to the allegations against her.

The deadline falls only weeks before the Fed’s next policy meeting, when the balance of votes could prove crucial.

The move also comes after a June Supreme Court ruling that recognised the Federal Reserve’s special statutory protections while leaving unresolved whether the allegations against Cook would provide sufficient grounds for her removal.

The dispute highlights the continuing uncertainty over how far presidential authority extends over the central bank.

“The issue of Fed independence has not yet been resolved,” said Tim Duy, chief U.S. economist at SGH Macro Advisors.

For Warsh, the confrontation creates an uncomfortable situation. He has only recently taken over as Fed chair and would likely prefer the opportunity to establish his own policy approach rather than become involved in Trump’s campaign for lower rates.

Yet maintaining that distance could be difficult. Trump has reportedly called Warsh repeatedly since he became chair in May.

Trump has also publicly praised Warsh while criticising other Fed officials for keeping interest rates too high, saying Warsh would like to see lower rates but faces a board that wants to maintain higher borrowing costs.

Inflation Keeps Pressure on the Fed

The political confrontation is taking place against a difficult economic backdrop.

Inflation has remained above the Fed’s 2% long-term target, while core price pressures remain elevated. The Iran-related energy shock of the past six months has added another source of inflationary pressure.

Those conditions complicate the case for immediate rate cuts.

At the same time, the Fed’s policy committee is becoming increasingly divided. Three members voted for a rate increase at the previous meeting, while Governors Chris Waller and Lisa Cook voted to keep rates unchanged, although both have indicated that further tightening could eventually be necessary to bring inflation back under control.

If Waller and Cook both support a rate increase at the September meeting, the previous 9-3 balance in favour of holding rates could become 7-5.

Former Fed Chair Jerome Powell could then become decisive if he switched his previous position and supported a rate increase.

That makes the political pressure on Cook particularly significant.

Bond Markets Face an Inflation Risk

The implications extend beyond the Fed itself and into financial markets.

Long-term Treasury yields have periodically risen and the dollar has weakened during previous episodes of political pressure on the central bank. Investors remain divided over whether the latest confrontation represents a temporary political storm or a deeper threat to the credibility of U.S. monetary policy.

The bigger concern for bond markets is the possibility that political pressure could lead to a Fed leadership and governing board more willing to cut rates despite persistent inflation.

That could increase the inflation risk premium demanded by investors holding longer-term government debt.

Barclays strategists warned that if confidence in the Fed’s willingness to defend its inflation target has begun to deteriorate, long-term bond markets may be underestimating the risks.

The combination of political pressure and uncertainty over Warsh’s approach to inflation could therefore become particularly important for longer-dated Treasury yields and inflation expectations.

Analysis: Why the Fed Battle Matters

The central issue is no longer simply whether the Fed cuts or raises rates at its next meeting. It is whether investors continue to believe that the central bank can make those decisions independently of the White House.

If markets begin to believe that political considerations can influence the composition of the Fed’s governing board, expectations for future inflation could become less firmly anchored. Investors may demand higher yields to compensate for the possibility that inflation remains elevated for longer.

That would make government borrowing more expensive and could create wider financial-market volatility.

Warsh therefore faces a critical test. He must balance his desire to reform the Fed with the need to demonstrate that monetary policy remains driven by inflation and economic conditions rather than presidential demands.

His decision at the next meeting could become an important signal to markets.

If Warsh supports tighter policy despite Trump’s pressure, he could strengthen perceptions of Fed independence. If he instead supports a more dovish position while political pressure intensifies, doubts about the central bank’s commitment to price stability could deepen.

For bond investors, the consequences could be significant. The immediate question may be whether rates rise in September, but the larger question is whether markets still trust the Fed to control inflation independently of the White House.

With information from Reuters.

Qatar says negotiations between Oman and Iran over the future of shipping through the Strait of Hormuz are making major progress.

President Trump secretly flew out of last month’s NATO summit in Ankara, Turkey, on an alternate military aircraft while the White House made it appear that the president was flying on Air Force One, the Washington Post reported.

The Post said Monday that the operation was prompted by an Iranian assassination threat against Trump. The ruse was carried out as journalists and some White House staff members were led to believe they were on the same plane as the president as he began his journey back to Washington from the annual gathering of leaders of North Atlantic Treaty Organization countries.

The Post cited material reviewed by the newspaper, a U.S. official familiar with the operation and another person with knowledge of the president’s travel. The Associated Press has not independently confirmed the report.

Trump had flown to the summit in a new Qatari-gifted and retrofitted red, white and navy blue jet. But ahead of departing Turkey, he said he would fly partway home on an older-model baby blue Air Force One plane instead.

The president at the time said the new luxury jet was being flown out ahead of his departure from Ankara to give some U.S. troops based in eastern England a chance to check out the new Air Force One.

In Ankara, Trump boarded the old Air Force One jumbo jet in view of television cameras ahead of the plane flying to Royal Air Force Mildenhall in the United Kingdom.

However, according to the Post report, after boarding the legacy Air Force One jet, he was secretly shuttled minutes later to a smaller plane — an Air Force C-32A — via an airport catering truck typically used to load meals and other supplies. Trump flew to Mildenhall on that smaller jet.

The White House did not respond directly to questions about the Post report of the secret operation to whisk Trump out of the country on a third aircraft, or the reported elaborate ruse to make it appear he was on the baby blue Air Force One jet flying to Mildenhall.

“As the President has said recently, there are many enemies of America who have their sights on him, and we use every tool at our disposal to address those threats,” White House communications director Steven Cheung said in a statement.

The U.S. Secret Service declined to comment. The Air Force, which maintains the fleet of executive travel aircraft, referred questions to the White House.

While Trump was in Turkey, the U.S. military conducted a series of large strikes in Iran in retaliation for its attacks on merchant shipping in the region.

The New York Times and CBS News reported last month that intelligence officials had raised concerns about a potential attack on the president or his jet, triggering additional precautions and the decision not to use the newly inaugurated aircraft gifted to Trump by Qatar for the first leg of Trump’s trip home from Ankara.

The swap had spurred questions about the security of the Qatar-provided aircraft, and Trump said last month after the trip that it would undergo additional upgrades.

Cheung on Monday maintained that the new, Qatari-gifted plane was “a state-of-the-art aircraft that has been fitted with high-level security protocols that ensure the safety of the President and his staff.”

The new Post report on clandestinely putting Trump on a third aircraft and quietly whisking him out of the country adds a fresh layer to just how seriously concerned U.S. security officials were about the threat against Trump during the ongoing war with Iran.

Paul Eckloff, a former special agent with the Secret Service, said such an unusual move could either reflect actionable intelligence or an abundance of caution given volatility in the region with the wars in Iran and Ukraine.

“I would not say unprecedented, but it is an unusual occurrence,” Eckloff told the Associated Press.

The Post reported that to exit that plane without being seen by those uninvolved in the operation, Trump and several aides stepped aboard an airport catering truck, which was elevated planeside using hydraulics and positioned at a door on the opposite side of Air Force One’s entrance.

The small group of reporters who thought they were traveling with Trump were advised to lower their window shades ahead of takeoff.

After arriving at Mildenhall, news photographers captured images of Trump getting off the presidential plane — suggesting he reboarded Air Force One out of sight of the pack of journalists who thought they were traveling with him.

Democratic Sen. Richard Blumenthal called for a congressional briefing on what happened.

“It is unprecedented and it is surreal,” he said Monday on CNN, calling the incident “downright scary.”

After the brief visit to the base at Mildenhall, Trump boarded the new Air Force One aircraft to fly the rest of the way to Washington.

During a gaggle with reporters aboard the aircraft, Trump was asked directly if there were any credible threats against Air Force One by Iran.

“Well, I have a threat all the time. I’m No. 1 on their list before you,” Trump said. He added to the traveling reporters, “But if I go, you go.”

Associated Press writers Josh Boak, Aamer Madhani and Konstantin Toropin contributed to this report.

Trump labels US Democratic nominees ‘jihadists’ in inflammatory remarks made in the Oval Office.

United States President Donald Trump has described Democratic candidates in the midterm US elections as “jihadists” in an apparent reference to Muslim Democratic candidate Abdul El-Sayed securing his party’s nomination for the Michigan primary elections last week.

The pronouncements fuel a proliferating wave of Islamophobic discourse among Republican lawmakers and elected officials in the sprint to lock down ballots ahead of November’s midterm elections.

“We have jihadists being elected all over the place, whether it’s communism [or] jihadism,” Trump told reporters in the Oval Office on Monday. “A friend of mine called up, he said, ‘You know […] you should use the word jihadist’, that’s what’s happening. If you take a look at what’s happening in other countries, I’m not really sure that’s the way we want to live.”

Trump also hurled another tirade against people of Somali descent, of which there are upwards of 260,000 across the US. He called them “not smart”, and said they have “no aptitude” and “nothing going” for them to “tell us how to run our country”.

Edward Ahmed Mitchell, the national deputy director of the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), a Muslim civil rights and advocacy organisation in the US, said that Trump’s hateful anti-Muslim rhetoric “is putting a target on the back of Muslim elected officials across our nation” and that “this type of dangerous rhetoric is fueling the surge in complaints of anti-Muslim bigotry that our civil rights organization has documented over the past three years”.

Although the president refrained from explicitly naming any individual candidate, hours later, he focused his attention on El-Sayed, who is a son of Egyptian immigrants. The president shared a photo on Truth Social showing the Democratic contender positioned before a gathering that featured two women in headscarves, accompanied by the caption: “They are coming for your home and your belongings.”

Trump also targeted El-Sayed’s victory directly last week, calling him a “hater of Jews” and “hater of Israel” who will bring “filth, crime, death, destruction, embarrassment”.

Several other Republicans also beefed up their anti-Muslim rhetoric, following El-Sayed’s win, parroting remarks that Muslims do not belong in American society. Representative Nancy Mace of South Carolina claimed on social media that “every single Muslim holding public office in America is a Trojan horse, and a threat to both national security and our republic”.

Meanwhile, Alabama Senator Tommy Tuberville labelled El-Sayed a “TERRORIST” and wrote on social media that “Abdulrahman Mohamed El-Sayed is a RADICAL ISLAMIST.”

This outburst occurred just two days after Trump shared a social media post comparing a photo of himself and First Lady Melania Trump with one of El-Sayed and his wife Dr Sarah Jukaku, who is a psychiatrist. The image was captioned: “Two VERY DIFFERENT America’s.”

Speaking on CNN’s State of the Union with host Jake Tapper on Sunday night, the Democratic Senate candidate hit back, saying, “Sarah and I actually like each other”, adding “I don’t know about the first lady and the president, but from what I’ve heard, it’s a bit of a rocky road”.

With less than 90 days to go until the highly anticipated midterm elections come to a head, and with all 435 seats in the House of Representatives and 34 Senate seats up for grabs, Democrats are confronting an ideological schism between moderate leaders and triumphing democratic progressives, some of whom are increasingly being characterised as an endangerment to Washington’s national security establishment altogether.

“People don’t want to have radical lunatics involved in running our country,” said Trump on Monday, “and that’s what we have.”

In a striking demonstration of support, hundreds of fired up Californians rallied in Santa Monica to speak out against the Trump administration’s attempt to wrest local control over the state’s beloved coastline.

The Golden State’s top environmental leaders, along with prominent elected officials, environmentalists, business coalitions, community activists, Indigenous groups and everyday citizens, packed a public hearing Monday before the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s Office of Coastal Management, which has been tasked with conducting an unprecedented investigation that could ultimately strip California of its power to say no to federal projects.

Experts see the investigation — framed as a performance review of the state’s coastal management practices — as a thinly veiled attempt by Trump officials to open California’s coast to more offshore oil drilling, more rocket launches and possibly even floating nuclear reactors. If the federal government succeeds, many worry it could set the stage for similar actions in other coastal states.

“I’m scared, not because we haven’t built something worth protecting — we have. I’m scared because this meeting is performance theater. In some ways, the decision seems already made,” said Maureen Ellenberger, a resident of Santa Barbara who said she is haunted by the possibility of another oil spill. “But I’m speaking today anyway, so there’s a record. So years from now… everyone will know we fought, that we did not consent.”

Kate Huckelbridge, executive director of the California Coastal Commission, speaks during a NOAA hearing as Larry Goldzband, executive director of the San Francisco Bay Conservation and Development Commission, awaits his turn to make comments.

(Eric Thayer/Los Angeles Times)

Citing California’s “environmental extremism,” Trump officials are attempting to decertify the state’s authority under the federal Coastal Zone Management Act, or CZMA. The act grants coastal states the right to review and object to any project in federal waters that clashes with state policy.

For the last five decades, the CZMA has been celebrated as a bipartisan co-management framework between coastal states and the federal government — and in California, the process had been relatively smooth through every presidential administration until Trump’s.

Tensions escalated in May when U.S. Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick declared that “California has repeatedly and unfoundedly obstructed spaceport development in bad faith” and announced that he was ordering a fresh evaluation of the state’s CZMA compliance using a “new approach.” He specifically instructed NOAA, which is under his purview, to take offshore oil production, pipeline maintenance, spaceport infrastructure, desalination projects and undersea cables into consideration, citing national priorities and economic interests.

Performance reviews under the CZMA are not uncommon (most states are subject to a routine review every five to 10 years) but what’s unusual in this case is the callout to specific industries, as well as the politically charged nature of how the review was announced (state officials learned they were under review through a social media post from the U.S. Department of Commerce.)

What was also unusual was the fact California had also just undergone a routine review during the Biden administration.

A draft of that review, which was completed in 2024, but not finalized because of the change in administration, gave top marks to the three California agencies charged with implementing the CZMA — the California Coastal Commission, the California State Coastal Conservancy and the San Francisco Bay Conservation and Development Commission. The review found no issues.

Joelle Gore, left, chief of the stewardship division at the NOAA Office for Coastal Management and Keelin Kuipers, right, acting director at NOAA’s Office for Coastal Management, listen to more than four hours of public comments.

(Eric Thayer/Los Angeles Times)

The new Lutnick-ordered review began in earnest on Monday with the only hearing that people can attend in-person during the 45-day-public comment period. (Two virtual hearings will be held Tuesday and Wednesday, and NOAA is required to review all written comments that are submitted from members of the public through Aug. 22.)

More than 15,000 people have written comments so far, and for more than four hours Monday, surfers, fishers, marine scientists, community activists, business owners, real estate brokers and Californians from a wide swath of interest groups — many traveling from Marin, San Jose, Mendocino and other parts of the state — lined up to speak before NOAA’s acting director for coastal management.

Nobody in attendance spoke in favor of the federal review. As people in the crowd held up signs declaring “NO FEDERAL TAKEOVER” and “NO SELLOUTS FOR BIG OIL,” speakers expressed their love for the California coast and urged federal officials to take note of the state’s thriving marine economy.

The crowd erupted in whoops and applause after each person spoke their three minutes of public comments. A number of speakers, some moved to tears, expressed afterward that they had never been more proud to be a Californian.

“It was just example after example after example of how the state’s coastal management program is working — it was really putting into the record those facts and also just so many personal stories,” said Jennifer Savage, a longtime policy advocate for Surfrider Foundation who drove more than 670 miles from Humboldt to testify at the hearing. “It showed more than anything that being able to go to the beach is such a unifying shared joy in California.”

The State’s top environmental leaders also took turns speaking about how the CZMA has long facilitated open dialogue and collaboration between the state and federal government.

“We sincerely hope that this review is not merely a pretense for removing California’s ability to hold public hearings on offshore oil and gas projects,” said Kate Huckelbridge, executive director of the Coastal Commission. “California has received very little information about why this new federal review is being undertaken. Still, we welcome a fair and transparent evaluation. Our record speaks for itself.”

Wade Crowfoot, California Secretary for Natural Resources, provides public comment during a NOAA hearing.

(Eric Thayer/Los Angeles Times)

Out of the more than 3,700 federal actions that have come before the Coastal Commission for review since the 1970s, the commission has aligned with the federal actions 96% of the time, Huckelbridge said.

Current and former coastal officials also spoke about their experiences with past reviews and questioned the unusual timing of this evaluation and how it doesn’t follow standard procedure.

“I have personally participated in several periodic reviews, and what has happened in this review is unprecedented and, quite frankly, bizarre. There is absolutely no basis for reopening the periodic review conducted in 2024,” said Jack Ainsworth, who had worked at the coastal commission for 34 years and led it for seven of those years. “I would also note that California is recognized as the gold standard for integrated coastal management in the United States and around the world.”

At a NOAA hearing Monday, the crowd applauded after each speaker expressed their love for the California coast and urged federal officials to keep things the way they are.

(Eric Thayer/Los Angeles Times)

What happens after this week’s hearings will be uncharted territory, but experts say that if the review does end up taking issue with California’s coastal management program, the state should be given the opportunity to respond to any proposed changes. The process laid out in the law appears to include multiple steps and opportunities for discussion, they said.

At a rally outside the meeting room Monday, more than a hundred environmentalists gathered alongside congressmembers, county supervisors, Indigenous leaders, environmental justice groups and business coalitions to further amplify the many voices that represent California.

Toni Cordero, a board member of Sacred Places Institute for Indigenous Peoples, Surfrider Foundation, and Environmental Defense Center, speaks at a rally before a NOAA hearing Monday.

(Eric Thayer / Los Angeles Times)

“The Creator put us here to coexist and to collaborate in caring for our mother ocean and for all her relatives, all of her inhabitants and all those who call this coast home,” said Toni Cordero, a former tribal chair of the Coastal Band of the Chumash Nation who also served as a deputy state attorney general for more than 25 years. “We must remember them. It is their homelands, their well-being and their futures that are also at stake under the guise of ensuring compliance with the Coastal Zone Management Act.”

The crowd waved signs and cheered again as Wade Crowfoot, California’s Secretary for Natural Resources, stepped up to speak.

“It has been clear from Governor Newsom to Attorney General Bonta to our legislators to our congressional delegation: California’s coast is not for sale, and a hostile takeover of our coast by the federal government… won’t be tolerated,” Crowfoot declared.

“So rest assured,” he said. “We stand in strong solidarity with everyone here today — whether you’re a tribal government, a local government, a conservation organization or just somebody that likes to get out and be on a beach that’s safe and healthy, we are making our voices heard.”

Published on
11/08/2026 – 13:25 GMT+2

Crude and US Treasury yields rose together as traders judged that the exchange of compensation demands between the US and Iran has pushed any potential deal further out of reach.

ADVERTISEMENT

ADVERTISEMENT

The US president said on Monday he had told his negotiators to seek payment from Iran for Americans killed and wounded in attacks he attributes to Tehran going back decades, including the bombing of the USS Cole in the year 2000 and for Iranians killed in protest crackdowns.

In a follow-up post on Truth Social he expanded on the demand, saying Iran should also pay for “the damages and death caused to the people of Lebanon, Syria, Yemen, and Gaza”.

Tehran, whose representatives had sought compensation for five months of US and Israeli bombardment, says the Strait of Hormuz will stay shut until Washington lifts its naval blockade, ends sanctions and releases frozen Iranian assets.

The front month contract on Brent traded at around $89.8 a barrel on Tuesday and West Texas Intermediate at about $84.2, both up roughly 2.5%.

The US bond market read it the same way, with yields rising across the US curve in a modest global sell-off, the two-year over 4.25%, the ten-year above 4.7% and the thirty-year higher than 5.27%. The yields for all durations are trading at the highs of this year.

Since yields move inversely to prices, the rise means investors are selling government debt as they expect that costlier oil will feed into inflation and strengthen the case for higher interest rates.

Money markets now put roughly even odds on a Federal Reserve rate hike in September, with July inflation data due on Wednesday.

Control claimed, traffic missing

The current stalling of US-Iran negotiations is deliberate as US President Donald Trump appears to have been favouring a slower approach as of late.

The US president told Axios in an interview published on Sunday that the US is “low-keying it,” meaning Washington was only semi-negotiating and content to watch Iran’s inflation and empty coffers do the work, a signal he is prepared to let economic pressure mount rather than order a fresh military campaign.

In the Oval Office on Monday, he struck a triumphant note, claiming the US controls “100%” of the Strait of Hormuz, that only the US Navy holds sway in the region, that American forces have swept it clear of Iranian mines and that the blockade of Iranian ports is impenetrable.

However, shipping data tells another story.

Confirmed crossings have run at 6 to 11 vessels a day recently, against the 130 to 140 daily before the war, according to Kpler data, leaving traffic at a fraction of normal levels throughout the five-month conflict.

For most golfers, the biggest hazards are ponds and sand traps. President Donald Trump, the target of frequent attempts on his life, including while golfing, has bigger threats to worry about, especially from Iran. Which is why images and videos have emerged showing U.S. Army Humvee-based Avenger system short-range air defense systems (SHORAD) in the background when Trump hits the links.

The latest such imagery was from Sunday, when Trump was attending the final round of the LIV Golf Bedminster tournament at his New Jersey golf course.

One photo shows Trump wielding a wedge with an Avenger behind concertina wire in the background. There is another photo of an Avenger, but it is unclear it is the same one. There are certainly other protection platforms we don’t see, especially electronic warfare systems.

The White House on Monday confirmed the authenticity of the photos to us.

The following video shows the Avenger and an AN/MPQ-64 Sentinel air defense radar in the background.

As if to highlight the concerns, while Trump was at Bedminster on Sunday, North American Aerospace Defense Command (NORAD) F-16 Fighting Falcons intercepted two general aviation aircraft that violated the Temporary Flight Restriction (TFR) airspace over the area.

“All general aviation aircraft were safely escorted out of the area by NORAD aircraft,” the command stated on X.

On Aug. 1, the White House shared a video of Trump talking with soldiers at Bedminster. In the background was an Avenger.

“I’m not worried about missiles and drones,” the president joked.

“We got it covered,” a colonel responded with a smile, pointing his right thumb over his shoulder to the Humvee-mounted SHORAD system.

The Avengers, which fire Stinger heat-seeking surface-to-air missiles, are a fast-reacting point defense asset, and do make some sense for protecting a golfing president. They have been upgraded to deal with drones and there is also a known rooftop Avenger missile turret near the White House for air defense purposes, which was installed not long after 9/11.

When deployed to assist the Secret Service in protecting POTUS, the Avenger systems are operated by the 263rd Army Air and Missile Defense Command, NORAD told us. A spokesperson declined to provide further details about how often the Avengers are used this way.

Drone technology, including first-person view types and those equipped with fiber optics, is rapidly proliferating around the world and Iran has been both a user and distributor of these weapons.

Trump, as we noted earlier in this story, has already been the subject of several assassination attempts and threats. A number of these threats involve golf. The most recent incident came earlier this month. 

“Authorities arrested a suspect who was allegedly photographing and recording security preparations ahead of a scheduled fundraising dinner at the Trump National Golf Club in Rancho Palos Verdes, California,” Fox News reported. “The suspect, Jeanine John Taele, 38, was found carrying a 16-round magazine loaded with ammunition, while investigators recovered an additional pistol and a fake ‘security protection agent’ badge from his truck.”

Prior to that, there was an attempt against Trump on Sept. 15, 2024, at the Trump International Golf Club in West Palm Beach, Florida. 

As Trump golfed, a Secret Service agent conducting a perimeter security sweep saw the partially obscured face of a man in the brush along the fence line near the sixth hole, according to a Justice Department media release at the time. 

“The agent observed the barrel of a rifle aimed directly at him,” the release stated. “As the agent began backing away, he saw the rifle barrel move, and the agent fired” at the man, later identified as Ryan Wesley Routh, 58, of Hawaii. Routh survived and is currently in prison awaiting trial.

A few months earlier, on July 13, 2024, at a campaign event in Butler, Pennsylvania, a man fired a shot at Trump, then the Republican presidential nominee. Thomas Matthew Crooks, 20, of Bethel Park, Pennsylvania, was later killed, and a bloodied Trump was whisked away. 

Prior to those attempts, Iran made a golf-related threat against Trump.

An image highly suggestive of a drone targeting the then-former President Trump on a golf course in a “vengeance” strike in retaliation for the death of Iranian General Qassem Soleimani was posted on Twitter by an account for Iran’s then-Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei. The U.S. military killed Soleimani in a drone strike in Iraq in January 2020, which had already prompted public threats from Iranian officials, including against Trump specifically.

Twitter suspended the @khamenei_site account around 15 hours after the post when the image first appeared on Jan. 21, 2020.

Khamenei himself was killed Feb. 28 during the opening night of Operation Epic Fury.

There has been extreme concern for Trump’s safety following the launch of that operation, with an Iranian revenge hit on the president being more plausible now than ever. This has triggered major changes in safety protocols, some of which have made headline news.

The Avenger isn’t the only specialized vehicle used to protect Trump while he golfs. As we previously reported, during a golf outing with his son Eric at his course in Scotland last year, Trump was trailed by an armored Polaris Ranger X utility task vehicle (UTV) designed to provide ballistic protection. The vehicle, dubbed Golf Force One by the press, was “part of the Presidential fleet of specialty vehicles,” a White House spokesperson told The War Zone at the time. The White House provided no further details. Trump was in Scotland to host a meeting with former British Prime Minister Keir Starmer at his resort, where security was beefed up.

So the next time you are having a tough time on the course, just remember this. At least you probably don’t need a Stinger-launching weapons system to ensure you make it safely to the clubhouse.

Contact the author: howard@twz.com

President Donald Trump has signed an order that calls for fewer childhood vaccines and also recommends splitting the mumps, measles and rubella (MMR) shots.

“Decades ago, children received only a small fraction of the vaccines required today,” Trump said on Monday. “In those times, people were much healthier and of course the high rates of autism now observed did not exist.”

The president has long cast doubt on the safety of MMR vaccines, but multiple studies have found no connection between the shots and autism.

The order also recommends that the number of childhood vaccines drop to 11 from the existing 18 recommended by the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP).

Speaking in the Oval Office, Trump said that his administration “is recognising gold standard childhood vaccine recommendations for only 11 core vaccinations against the most serious and dangerous diseases”.

The immunisations recommended for all children under the order are for measles, mumps, rubella, diphtheria, tetanus, pertussis, polio, Haemophilus influenzae type B, pneumococcal disease, human papillomavirus, and varicella or chicken pox.

“We’re reducing them,” Trump said. “It’s not only that you’re doing fewer vaccines, or jabs, as they say, but you’re doing them in a series of visits to the doctor.”

The president suggested that the MMR vaccine could be “quite lethal” if given at once. He compared it to pouring a bottle of soda into a child’s body.

Experts say that allowing time between jabs means children are more likely to contract diseases in the interim or that they are more likely to miss appointments if there are multiple shots.

According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, external (CDC), there is “no published scientific evidence that shows any benefit in separating the combination MMR vaccine into three individual shots”.

The agency says “most people who get MMR vaccine do not have any serious problems with it”, and that getting the vaccine “is much safer than getting measles, mumps, or rubella”.

Trump’s Secretary of Health and Human Services (HHS) Robert F Kennedy Jr said the proposed changes were meant to give parents choice, not prohibit access to childhood vaccines.

The federal government does not have the authority to implement the new recommendations. Shots that are required for school attendance are set at the state level.

Dr Andrew Racine, president of the American Academy of Pediatrics, called Trump’s executive order “disheartening” and “dangerous”, pointing out it comes as measles cases reach a 35-year high in the US. Measles cases have also been rising globally.

“Instead of ensuring every family can access life-saving vaccines for measles, influenza, RSV and more, federal leaders are once again spreading misleading claims,” Racine said in a statement on Monday.

He said there was no new evidence to justify the significant changes, adding that the order was not based on “gold-standard science”.

“Delaying or skipping shots is risky, especially as measles continues to spread and children go back to school,” Racine said.

Republican Senator Bill Cassidy also admonished Trump’s executive order on Monday, labelling it “wrong”.

“The President does not have the expertise to make these changes,” Cassidy, who is a physician, wrote on social media. “Vaccines are overwhelmingly safe. Vaccines are effective. Vaccines DO NOT cause autism.”

The lawmaker, who chairs the Senate health committee, urged parents to “listen to their child’s pediatrician about vaccines rather than listening to an inaccurate executive order”.

Experts fear that if parents refrain from getting their children vaccinated as a result of the discredited idea that childhood vaccines are linked to autism, it risks the re-emergence of diseases like measles.

Multiple studies have found no link between the MMR vaccine and autism. A recent high-quality study from Denmark in 2019 looked at 657,461 children and concluded that the data did not support the MMR vaccine causing or triggering autism.

On its website, the US CDC recommends that two doses of the combined MMR vaccine be given to children, starting with the first dose at 12-15 months and the second between the ages of four and six.

How often and how many vaccines children in the US receive is based on the times when vaccines will work best with their immune systems and when they are most vulnerable to certain diseases, according to the AAP.

There is no medical reason to delay or skip recommended immunisations, the AAP says.

Aug. 10 (UPI) — President Donald Trump signed an executive order Monday to reduce the number of vaccines recommended for children.

At the signing of the executive order, Trump shared claims that childhood vaccines are linked to an increase in autism diagnoses without evidence. Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr., who was present for the signing, has maintained this stance as well.

Scientific research into potential links between vaccines and autism have consistently found no connection.

Trump’s executive order also advises breaking up MMR vaccines for the mumps, measles and rubella, a vaccine Trump called “quite lethal,” into three separate vaccines. In the more than 50 years since the MMR vaccine was developed there has been no evidence that it is deadly.

“Nothing bad can happen from what we’re doing,” Trump said.

Vaccine advocates and researchers have warned that reducing the distribution of childhood vaccines will make children more vulnerable to disease. Sen. Bill Cassidy, R-La., who is a medical doctor, posted on social media that the executive order “is wrong.”

“The President does not have the expertise to make these changes,” Cassidy wrote. “Vaccines are overwhelmingly safe. Vaccines are effective. Vaccines DO NOT cause autism. Breaking up vaccines will mean children have to get more shots to get the same protection, not fewer shots. It will increase hesitancy and make children less safe.”

Trump acknowledged the increased burden of breaking up vaccines when addressing reporters after the signing.

“It’s inconvenient. It’s five stops but it’s something that I think will have a huge impact on autism,” Trump said.