White House

The White House starts demolishing part of the East Wing to build Trump’s ballroom

The White House started tearing down part of the East Wing, the traditional base of operations for the first lady, to build President Trump’s $250-million ballroom despite lacking approval for construction from the federal agency that oversees such projects.

Dramatic photos of the demolition work that began Monday showed construction equipment tearing into the East Wing façade and windows and other building parts in tatters on the ground. Some reporters watched from a park near the Treasury Department, which is next to the East Wing.

On Wednesday, the New York Times reported that the plan now called for the demolition of the entire East Wing and that the tear-down should be completed by Sunday. Citing a source, The Times said it marks an escalation over earlier plans for the ballroom.

Trump announced the start of construction in a social media post and referenced the work while hosting 2025 college baseball champs Louisiana State University and LSU-Shreveport in the East Room. He noted the work was happening “right behind us.”

“We have a lot of construction going on, which you might hear periodically,” he said, adding, “It just started today.”

The White House has moved ahead with the massive construction project despite not yet having sign-off from the National Capital Planning Commission, which approves construction work and major renovations to government buildings in the Washington area.

Its chairman, Will Scharf, who is also the White House staff secretary and one of Trump’s top aides, said at the commission’s September meeting that the agency does not have jurisdiction over demolition or site preparation work for buildings on federal property.

“What we deal with is essentially construction, vertical build,” Scharf said last month.

It was unclear whether the White House had submitted the ballroom plans for the agency’s review and approval. The White House did not respond to a request for comment and the commission’s offices are closed because of the government shutdown.

The Republican president had said in July when the project was announced that the ballroom would not interfere with the mansion itself.

“It’ll be near it but not touching it and pays total respect to the existing building, which I’m the biggest fan of,” he said of the White House.

The East Wing houses several offices, including those of the first lady. It was built in 1902 and and has been renovated over the years, with a second story added in 1942, according to the White House.

Karoline Leavitt, the White House press secretary, said those East Wing offices will be temporarily relocated during construction and that wing of the building will be modernized and renovated.

“Nothing will be torn down,” Leavitt said when she announced the project in July.

Trump insists that presidents have desired such a ballroom for 150 years and that he’s adding the massive 90,000-square-foot, glass-walled space because the East Room, which is the largest room in the White House with an approximately 200-person capacity, is too small. He also has said he does not like the idea of hosting kings, queens, presidents and prime ministers in pavilions on the South Lawn.

Trump said in the social media announcement that the project would be completed “with zero cost to the American Taxpayer! The White House Ballroom is being privately funded by many generous Patriots, Great American Companies, and, yours truly.”

The ballroom will be the biggest structural change to the Executive Mansion since the addition in 1948 of the Truman Balcony overlooking the South Lawn, even dwarfing the residence itself.

At a dinner he hosted last week for some of the wealthy business executives who are donating money toward the construction cost, Trump said the project had grown in size and now will accommodate 999 people. The capacity was 650 seated people at the July announcement.

The White House has said it will disclose information on who has contributed money to build the ballroom, but has yet to do so.

Trump also said at last week’s event that the head of Carrier Global Corp., a leading manufacturer of heating, ventilation and air-conditioning systems, had offered to donate the air-conditioning system for the ballroom.

Carrier confirmed to the Associated Press on Monday that it had done so. A cost estimate was not immediately available.

“Carrier is honored to provide the new iconic ballroom at the White House with a world-class, energy-efficient HVAC system, bringing comfort to distinguished guests and dignitaries in this historic setting for years to come,” the company said in an emailed statement.

The clearing of trees on the south grounds and other site preparation work for the construction started in September. Plans call for the ballroom to be ready before Trump’s term ends in January 2029.

Superville writes for the Associated Press.

Source link

Trump demolishes White House East Wing despite promising to protect it

President Trump has begun demolition of the East Wing as he remakes the White House in his image, ignoring rules, breaking promises and taking a wrecking ball to the approval process in an echo of the strategies he deployed in Florida and New York as he built his real estate empire.

An excavator ripped off the facade and parts of the roof on Monday, exposing the stone shell below. Windows have been removed. A truck carried trees outside the White House gates and down Pennsylvania Avenue. A crowd gathered outside to witness the partial tear-down of the historic building — which Trump said just weeks ago would not be touched in his plans to build a new ballroom.

“Over the next few days, it’s going to be demolished,” Trump said at a White House dinner last week for donors to the 90,000-square-foot structure estimated to cost between $200 million and $250 million.

“Everything out there is coming down, and we’re replacing it with one of the most beautiful ballrooms that you’ve ever seen.”

He described the forthcoming structure as “four sides of beautiful glass.”

But similar to the rule-breaking tactics he used when pushing through changes to Mar-a-Lago in Palm Beach and building his Trump Tower in New York, Trump’s sudden and dramatic White House overhaul has been made possible by his disdain for the rules that have protected Washington’s cohesive design. To date, he hasn’t submitted plans for review to the National Capital Planning Commission, which oversees renovation and additions to the federal buildings in the capital, including the president’s historic residence.

Not that the commission — now stacked with Trump’s allies — is complaining.

This summer, the president appointed his top aides — staff secretary Will Scharf, deputy chief of staff James Blair and Office of Management and Budget energy official Stuart Levenbach — to sit on the governing body.

Scharf, a longtime loyal Trump aide who hands him his executive orders to sign, was named chairman by the president. The appointments were so sudden that Scharf, at his first commission meeting on July 10, apologized for not connecting with any of his fellow commissioners ahead of time, noting his appointment had happened the night before.

At the commission’s next meeting, on Sept. 4, Scharf launched into a defense of Trump’s building project, arguing the commission does not have jurisdiction over demolition and site preparation work for federal property; that it just deals with construction.

“I think any assertion that this commission should have been consulted earlier than it has been, or it will be, is simply false,” he said.

The commission will just “play a role in the ballroom project when the time is appropriate for us to do so,” he said.

Not so fast, say past commissioners.

Preston Bryant, a former chairman of the commission, told the Miami Herald in an email that in his nine years on the job “the Commission always works on proposed capital projects in three stages — Conceptual, Preliminary Approval, and Final Approval. Even before conceptual, there’s early consultation.”

Trump is familiar with the process. When he and his Trump Organization were remodeling the Old Post Office Pavilion into a Trump Hotel in 2014, they had to get their plans approved by the commission, which was strict in its adherence to preserving the historical structure of the building.

His team submitted a 52-page proposal showing the design changes, drawings of the new interior and exterior, and detailed the effect the changes would have on local traffic.

But now Trump has plowed on, bulldozing any opposition.

“We’ll have the most beautiful ballroom in the country,” he said Monday at an event in the East Room of the White House, apologizing for any construction noise the guests may hear. “It just started today so that’s good luck.”

The White House did not respond to a request for comment. Trump, in a post on Truth Social, said the new ballroom will be “completely separate from the White House itself, the East Wing is being fully modernized as part of this process, and will be more beautiful than ever when it is complete!”

As photos and videos of the destruction went viral on social media, his top administration aides took to their accounts to defend the project, pointing out that the ballroom was being paid for with private donations and noting other presidents have made changes to the White House.

Past presidents, however, consulted advisers and architects, along with groups like the White House Historical Association and the Committee for the Preservation of the White House in addition to working with the commission, which is currently closed as part of the government shutdown.

One former commissioner noted that Washington, D.C., is a carefully planned city and that the commission strives to keep to the original vision of Pierre L’Enfant, who designed the layout of the capitol.

“If you don’t have a review process you’re basically saying one individual can say what the capital looks like. Washington doesn’t look this way by accident,” the commissioner, who asked for anonymity in order to speak freely, said.

Trump’s history of flouting the rules

Brushing aside red tape has long been a Trump strategy when it comes to changes at historic properties.

In 2006, Trump added an 80-foot flagpole with a 5-feet-by-25-feet flag on the front lawn of Mar-a-Lago — without the proper permit or permission. Palm Beach restricts flagpoles to no higher than 42 feet and flags that are a maximum of 4 feet by 6 feet.

The town fined Trump $250 a day. He countered with a $250 million lawsuit, accusing Palm Beach of violating his First Amendment rights and publicly blasted local officials for fining his patriotic display.

Trump and the town government finally came to an agreement: Trump filed for a permit and was allowed an oversized pole that was 10 feet shorter than the original pole. In return he would donate $100,000 to veterans’ charities.

He also warred with Palm Beach over his original plan for Mar-a-Lago, which was to turn its 17 acres into a subdivision. With millions in upkeep and no income generated, the property was costing him a fortune.

The Palm Beach Town Council vetoed all his construction plans. Once again, Trump sued.

Another deal was made: Trump offered to drop his lawsuit if the town let him turn the estate into a lucrative private club. The council agreed but also set a series of requirements, including capping the membership price and its capacity along with a restriction that no one was to spend more than 21 nights a year at the property.

Trump, however, has hiked the membership fees and, after he left the White House in the first term, he named Mar-a-Lago his permanent residence, getting an exemption to the 21-night stay rule.

Similar actions took place when he built Trump Tower in New York.

In 1980, Trump acquired the historic Bonwit Teller building. He demolished the 1929 Art Deco building to build his namesake tower.

Before the project began, several prominent residents expressed concern about the original building’s limestone relief panels, considered prominent works of art.

Trump agreed to preserve the panels and donate them to The Metropolitan Museum of Art.

But as construction continued, Trump changed his mind and had the panels demolished with the building, saying they had little value and were “without artistic merit.”

It’s a slight still felt in some circles in New York society.

‘Pays total respect to the existing building’

Back in Washington, heads are shaking over the demolition of one-third of the White House structure.

After all, in July, Trump said the current building wouldn’t be touched.

“It won’t interfere with the current building. It won’t be. It’ll be near it but not touching it — and pays total respect to the existing building, which I’m the biggest fan of,” he said.

Now, in addition to the destruction of the wing, he may touch parts of the original White House. Trump on Monday indicated part of one of East Wing walls will come down to connect his ballroom to the residence.

“That’s a knockout panel — you knock it out,” he explained.

The East Wing was built in 1902 as a guest entrance and expanded in 1942 by President Franklin D. Roosevelt. It houses the offices of the first lady and her staff, the military office and the visitors office.

It’s unclear what process FDR went through. The planning commission wasn’t established until 1952. But part of the reason he had it built was to cover the underground presidential bunker which was installed for security reasons.

Trump has already made his mark on the White House. He’s added gold gilding to the Oval Office and stacked its walls with portraits. He’s moved around presidential portraits throughout the complex and added paintings of himself.

On the colonnade, which is the walkway leading from the residence to the West Wing, Trump added a photo of each American president. One exception was Joe Biden. Trump instead placed a photo of a pen, referring to his constant criticism for Biden using the auto pen for his signature during his presidency.

He paved over the Rose Garden to make it look similar to the patio at Mar-a-Lago, putting out chairs and tables with yellow umbrellas brought up from his Florida club. And he’s installed two massive flags atop large poles — one on the North Lawn and one on the South Lawn.

And there could be more changes to come.

Scharf, at his September planning commission meeting, mentioned an upcoming beautification and redesign of Pennsylvania Avenue.

He didn’t offer any details but an earlier presentation to the commission showed plans to turn the iconic avenue into a more pedestrian friendly walkway, with a national stage for events, markets and green spaces.

The Eisenhower Executive Office Building, which sits next door to the White House and houses most of the administration staff, could be in his sights. In his first term, Trump mulled adding gold leaf to the white granite building.

But, for now, Trump is working on plans to build a ceremonial arch outside of Arlington National Cemetery, on a traffic circle that sits between it and Memorial Bridge.

It would commemorate the nation’s 250th anniversary next year. The president showed off design models and drawings to the ballroom donors, telling them there were three sizes to pick from and he was leaning toward the largest.

“Whichever one would look good. I happen to think the large one,” Trump said as the group laughed. “Why are you shocked?”

The drawings show an arch similar to France’s Arc de Triomphe with columns, eagles, wreaths and a gilded, winged figure.

Trump, earlier this month, had a model of it on his desk in the Oval Office when he was speaking to reporters on another matter.

The journalists noticed the piece and asked who it was for.

“Me,” he replied.

Emily Goodin writes for The Miami Herald and Tribune News Services.

Source link

What to know about the $250 million ballroom Trump is adding to the White House

Construction started this week on the $250 million ballroom that President Trump is adding to the White House as construction crews began tearing down the facade of the East Wing, where the new space is being built.

The Republican president and top White House officials had initially said nothing would be demolished during construction.

The 90,000-square-foot ballroom will dwarf the main White House itself, at nearly double the size, and Trump says it will accommodate 999 people.

Trump said on social media that the ballroom won’t cost taxpayers a dime because it is being privately funded by “many generous Patriots, Great American Companies, and, yours truly.”

Here are some things to know about the newest White House construction project:

Why is Trump building a ballroom?

Trump says the White House needs a large entertaining space and has complained that the East Room, the current largest space in the White House, is too small, holding about 200 people. He has frowned on the past practice of presidents hosting state dinners and other large events in tents on the South Lawn.

Who is paying the $250 million construction tab?

Trump says the project will be paid for with private donations and that no public money will be spent on the ballroom. The White House promised to release information on which individuals and corporations have pledged or donated money and invited some of the donors to an East Room dinner last week, but has not released a comprehensive list and breakdown of funds.

Some $22 million for the project came from YouTube, a Google subsidiary, as part of a recent settlement for a 2021 lawsuit Trump brought against the company.

The White House also has not said how much of his own money Trump is contributing.

Why tear down part of the East Wing to build the ballroom?

The East Wing is traditionally the social side of the White House and sits across East Executive Avenue from the Treasury Department. It’s where tourists and other guests enter for events.

The president and his chief spokesperson, Karoline Leavitt, said over the summer that the White House itself would remain intact as the ballroom was going up.

“It’ll be near it but not touching it,” Trump said. “Nothing will be torn down,” Leavitt added.

That turned out not to be the case.

The White House said some demolition was needed because the East Wing, the traditional home for the first lady and her staff, is being modernized as part of the ballroom project.

Can Trump build a ballroom?

He’s moving ahead with construction despite the lack of sign-off from the National Capital Planning Commission, the executive branch agency that has jurisdiction over construction and major renovations to government buildings in the region.

Trump named a top White House aide, Will Scharf, to head the commission. Scharf has made a distinction between demolition work and rebuilding, saying the commission was only required to vet the latter.

What happens to the East Room?

By Trump’s telling, it will become a space where guests will mingle, sip cocktails and eat hors d’oeuvres until they are called into the ballroom for dinner. Trump said a set of windows in the room will be removed to create a passageway to and from the ballroom.

What will the new ballroom look like?

Renderings released by the White House suggest a strong resemblance to the gilded ballroom at Mar-a-Lago, Trump’s private club and home in Palm Beach, Florida.

The project also has grown in size since it was announced, going from accommodating 650 seated guests to holding 999 people, big enough to fit an inauguration if needed, he said at a recent White House dinner for donors. Windows will be bulletproof, he said.

When will the ballroom be completed?

The White House has said the ballroom will be ready for use before Trump’s second term ends in January 2029, an ambitious timeline.

Has Trump made other changes to the White House?

Yes. He has heavily redecorated the Oval Office by adding numerous portraits, busts and gold-toned adornments. He converted the Rose Garden into a stone-covered patio, installed towering flagpoles on the north and south lawns, and decorated an exterior wall with portraits of every president except his immediate predecessor, Democrat Joe Biden.

Trump also said he renovated the bathroom in the famous Lincoln Bedroom in the private living quarters and laid down marble floors in a passageway leading to the South Lawn.

How has construction changed the White House over the years?

Presidents have added to the White House since construction began in 1792 for a host of reasons, and Trump aides say his decision to build a ballroom follows that long tradition.

Many of the prior projects were criticized as being too costly or too lavish, but eventually came to be accepted, according to the White House Historical Association.

Thomas Jefferson added the east and west colonnades.

Andrew Jackson built the North Portico on the Pennsylvania Avenue side of the White House, aligning with the South Portico that James Monroe added after the original mansion was rebuilt after the British burned it during the War of 1812.

Theodore Roosevelt added the West Wing to provide dedicated space for the president and key staff, while Franklin D. Roosevelt added the East Wing, which over time became the home base for the first lady’s staff and social functions.

One of the most significant White House renovations happened under Harry Truman, when the mansion was found to be so structurally unsound that he ordered a complete gutting of the interior that lasted from 1948 to 1952. The project, including Truman’s addition of a balcony to the second floor of the South Portico, was highly controversial.

Other changes include the creation of the Rose Garden during John F. Kennedy’s administration and Richard Nixon’s decision to convert an indoor swimming pool that was built for FDR’s physical therapy into a workspace for the growing White House press corps.

Superville writes for the Associated Press.

Source link

Trump reportedly seeks $230 million in damages for prior federal investigations

President Trump said Tuesday that the federal government owes him “a lot of money” for prior Justice Department investigations into his actions and insisted he would have the ultimate say on any payout because any decision will “have to go across my desk.”

Trump’s comments to reporters at the White House came in response to questions about a New York Times story that said he had filed administrative claims before being reelected seeking roughly $230 million in damages related to the FBI’s 2022 search of his Mar-a-Lago property for classified documents and for a separate investigation into potential ties between Russia and his 2016 presidential campaign.

Trump said Tuesday he did not know the dollar figures involved and suggested he had not spoken to officials about it. But, he added, “All I know is that, they would owe me a lot of money.”

Though the Justice Department has a protocol for reviewing such claims, Trump asserted, “It’s interesting, ‘cause I’m the one that makes the decision, right?”

“That decision would have to go across my desk,” he added.

He said he could donate any taxpayer money or use it to help pay for a ballroom he’s building at the White House.

The status of the claims and any negotiations over them within the Justice Department was not immediately clear. One of Trump’s lead defense lawyers in the Mar-a-Lago investigation, Todd Blanche, is now the deputy attorney general at the Justice Department. The current associate attorney general, Stanley Woodward, represented Trump’s valet and co-defendant, Walt Nauta, in the same case.

“In any circumstance, all officials at the Department of Justice follow the guidance of career ethics officials,” a Justice Department spokesperson said. A White House spokesperson referred comment to the Justice Department.

Trump signaled his interest in compensation during a White House appearance last week with Blanche, FBI Director Kash Patel and Atty. Gen. Pam Bondi, who was part of Trump’s legal team during one of the impeachment cases against him.

“I have a lawsuit that was doing very well, and when I became president, I said: ‘I’m suing myself. I don’t know. How do you settle the lawsuit?’” he said. ”I’ll say, ‘Give me X dollars,’ and I don’t know what to do with the lawsuit. It’s a great lawsuit and now I won, it looks bad. I’m suing myself, so I don’t know.”

The Times said the two claims were filed with the Justice Department as part of a process that seeks to resolve federal complaints through settlements and avert litigation.

One of the administrative claims, filed in August 2024 and reviewed by the Associated Press, seeks compensatory and punitive damages over the search of his Mar-a-Lago estate and the resulting case alleging he hoarded classified documents and thwarted government efforts to retrieve them.

His lawyer who filed the claim alleged the case was a “malicious prosecution” carried out by the Biden administration to hurt Trump’s bid to reclaim the White House, forcing Trump to spend tens of millions of dollars in his defense.

That investigation produced criminal charges that Justice Department special counsel Jack Smith abandoned last November because of department policy against the indictment of a sitting president.

The Times said the other complaint seeks damages related to the long-concluded Trump-Russia investigation, which continues to infuriate the president.

Source link

Senate Republicans head to the White House in a show of unity as the shutdown enters fourth week

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.

Source link

U.S. and Australia sign rare-earths deal as a way to counter China

President Trump and Australian Prime Minister Anthony Albanese signed a critical-minerals deal at the White House on Monday as the U.S. eyes the continent’s rich rare-earth resources at a time when China is imposing tougher rules on exporting its own critical minerals.

The two leaders described the agreement as an $8.5 billion deal between the allies. Trump said it had been negotiated over several months.

“Today’s agreement on critical minerals and rare earths is just taking” the U.S. and Australia’s relationship “to the next level,” Albanese added.

This month, Beijing announced that it will require foreign companies to get approval from the Chinese government to export magnets containing even trace amounts of rare-earth materials that originated from China or were produced with Chinese technology. Trump’s Republican administration says this gives China broad power over the global economy by controlling the tech supply chain.

“Australia is really, really going to be helpful in the effort to take the global economy and make it less risky, less exposed to the kind of rare-earth extortion that we’re seeing from the Chinese,” Kevin Hassett, the director of the White House’s National Economic Council, told reporters Monday morning before Trump’s meeting with Albanese.

Hassett noted that Australia has one of the best mining economies in the world, while praising its refiners and its abundance of rare-earth resources. Among the Australian officials accompanying Albanese are ministers overseeing resources and industry and science, and the continent has dozens of critical minerals sought by the U.S.

The prime minister’s visit comes just before Trump is planning to meet with Chinese President Xi Jinping in South Korea later this month.

The prime minister said ahead of his visit that the two leaders will have a chance to deepen their countries’ ties on trade and defense. Another expected topic of discussion is AUKUS, a security pact with Australia, the U.S. and the United Kingdom that was signed during President Biden’s administration.

Trump has not indicated publicly whether he would want to keep AUKUS intact, and the Pentagon is reviewing the agreement.

“Australia and the United States have stood shoulder-to-shoulder in every major conflict for over a century,” Albanese said before the meeting. “I look forward to a positive and constructive meeting with President Trump at the White House.”

The center-left Albanese was reelected in May and suggested shortly after his win that his party increased its majority by not modeling itself on Trumpism.

“Australians have chosen to face global challenges the Australian way, looking after each other while building for the future,” Albanese told supporters during his victory speech.

Kim and Madhani write for the Associated Press.

Source link

Trump commutes sentence of GOP former Rep. George Santos in federal fraud case

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.

Source link

Massive ‘No Kings’ protests against Trump planned nationwide

Protesting the direction of the country under President Trump, people gathered Saturday in the nation’s capital and hundreds of communities across the U.S. for “ No Kings ” demonstrations.

This is the third mass mobilization since Trump’s return to the White House and comes against the backdrop of a government shutdown that not only has closed federal programs and services, but is testing the core balance of power as an aggressive executive confronts Congress and the courts in ways that organizers warn are a slide toward American authoritarianism.

Trump himself is away from Washington at his Mar-a-Lago home in Florida.

“They say they’re referring to me as a king. I’m not a king,” Trump said in a Fox News interview airing early Friday, before he departed for a $1-million-per-plate MAGA Inc. super PAC fundraiser at Mar-a-Lago. Protests were expected nearby Saturday.

More than 2,600 rallies are planned Saturday in cities large and small, organized by hundreds of coalition partners.

Republicans are countering the nationwide street demonstrations by calling them “hate America” protests.

A growing opposition movement

While the earlier protests this year — against Elon Musk’s DOGE cuts in spring, then to counter Trump’s military parade in June — drew crowds, organizers say this one is building a more unified opposition movement. Top Democrats such as Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer of New York and progressive leader Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) are joining in what organizers view as an antidote to Trump’s actions, including the administration’s clampdown on free speech and its military-style immigration raids in American cities.

“There is no greater threat to an authoritarian regime than patriotic people-power,” said Ezra Levin, a co-founder of Indivisible, among the key organizers.

As Republicans and the White House try to characterize the mass protests as a rally of radicals, Levin said the sign-up numbers are growing. Organizers said rallies are being planned within a one-hour drive for most Americans.

Rallies were also held in major European cities, where gatherings of a few hundred Americans chanted slogans and held signs and U.S. flags.

‘Crooks and con men’ and fears of police response

Retired family doctor Terence McCormally was heading to Arlington National Cemetery in Virginia to join up with others Saturday morning and walk across the Memorial Bridge that enters Washington directly in front of the Lincoln Memorial. He thought the protests would be peaceful but said the recent deployment of the National Guard makes him more leery about the police than he used to be.

“I really don’t like the crooks and con men and religious zealots who are trying to use the country” for personal gain, McCormally said, “while they are killing and hurting millions of people with bombs.”

Republicans denounce rallies

Republicans have sought to portray participants in Saturday’s rallies as far outside the mainstream of American politics, and a main reason for the prolonged government shutdown, now in its 18th day.

From the White House to Capitol Hill, GOP leaders disparaged the rallygoers as “communists” and “Marxists.”

They say Democratic leaders, including Schumer, are beholden to the far-left flank and willing to keep the government shut down to appease those liberal forces.

“I encourage you to watch — we call it the ‘Hate America’ rally — that will happen Saturday,” said House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.).

“Let’s see who shows up for that,” Johnson said, saying he expected attendees to include “antifa types,” people who “hate capitalism” and “Marxists in full display.”

In a Facebook post, Sanders said, “It’s a love America rally.”

“It’s a rally of millions of people all over this country who believe in our Constitution, who believe in American freedom and,” he said, pointing at the GOP leadership, “are not going to let you and Donald Trump turn this country into an authoritarian society.”

Democrats in Congress have refused to vote on legislation that would reopen the government as they demand funding for healthcare, which has been imperiled by the massive GOP spending bill passed this summer. Republicans say they are willing to discuss the issue only after the government reopens.

But for many Democrats, the government closure is also a way to stand up to Trump and try to push the presidency back to its place in the U.S. system as a coequal branch of government.

The situation is a potential turnaround from just six months ago, when Democrats and their allies were divided and despondent, unsure about how best to respond to Trump’s return to the White House. Schumer in particular was sharply criticized by many in his party for allowing an earlier government funding bill to sail through the Senate without using it to challenge Trump.

In April, the national march against Trump and Musk — who was then leading the White House government-slashing group known as the Department of Government Efficiency, or DOGE — had 1,300 registered locations. In June, for the first “No Kings” day, there were 2,100 registered locations.

“What we are seeing from the Democrats is some spine,” Levin said. “The worst thing the Democrats could do right now is surrender.”

House Democratic leader Hakeem Jeffries of New York said he wasn’t sure if he would join the rallygoers Saturday, but he took issue with the Republicans’ characterization of the events.

“What’s hateful is what happened on Jan. 6,” he said, referring to the 2021 Capitol attack, in which a violent mob of Trump supporters stormed the building in an attempt to overturn his election loss to Joe Biden. “What you’ll see this weekend is what patriotism looks like.”

Mascaro, Riddle and Freking write for the Associated Press. Riddle reported from Montgomery, Ala. AP writer Chris Megerian in Washington contributed to this report.

Source link

Trump and Zelensky hold talks, with U.S. leader showing hesitance to send Kyiv Tomahawk missiles

President Trump is hosting Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky for talks at the White House on Friday, with the U.S. leader signaling he’s not ready to agree to sell Kyiv a long-range missile system that the Ukrainians say they desperately need.

Zelensky arrived with top aides to discuss the latest developments with Trump over lunch, a day after the U.S. president and Russian President Vladimir Putin held a lengthy phone call to discuss the conflict.

At the start of the talks, Zelensky congratulated Trump over landing last week’s ceasefire and hostage deal in Gaza and said Trump now has “momentum” to stop the Russia-Ukraine conflict.

“President Trump now has a big chance to finish this war,” Zelensky added.

In recent days, Trump had shown an openness to selling Ukraine long-range Tomahawk cruise missiles, even as Putin warned that such a move would further strain the U.S.-Russian relationship.

But following Thursday’s call with Putin, Trump appeared to downplay the prospects of Ukraine getting the missiles, which have a range of about 995 miles.

“We need Tomahawks for the United States of America too,” Trump said. “We have a lot of them, but we need them. I mean we can’t deplete our country.”

Zelensky had been seeking the weapons, which would allow Ukrainian forces to strike deep into Russian territory and target key military sites, energy facilities and critical infrastructure. Zelensky has argued that the potential for such strikes would help compel Putin to take Trump’s calls for direct negotiations to end the war more seriously.

But Putin warned Trump during the call that supplying Kyiv with the Tomahawks “won’t change the situation on the battlefield, but would cause substantial damage to the relationship between our countries,” according to Yuri Ushakov, Putin’s foreign policy adviser.

Ukrainian Foreign Minister Andrii Sybiha said that talk of providing Tomahawks had already served a purpose by pushing Putin into talks. “The conclusion is that we need to continue with strong steps. Strength can truly create momentum for peace,” Sybiha said on the social platform X late Thursday.

Ukrainian officials have also indicated that Zelensky plans to appeal to Trump’s economic interests by aiming to discuss the possibility of energy deals with the U.S.

Zelensky is expected to offer to store American liquefied natural gas in Ukraine’s gas storage facilities, which would allow for an American presence in the European energy market.

He previewed the strategy on Thursday in meetings with Energy Secretary Chris Wright and the heads of American energy companies, leading him to post on X that it is important to restore Ukraine’s energy infrastructure after Russian attacks and expand “the presence of American businesses in Ukraine.”

It will be the fourth face-to-face meeting for Trump and Zelensky since the Republican returned to office in January, and their second in less than a month.

Trump announced following Thursday’s call with Putin that he would soon meet with the Russian leader in Budapest, Hungary, to discuss ways to end the war. The two also agreed that their senior aides, including Secretary of State Marco Rubio, would meet next week at an unspecified location.

Fresh off brokering a ceasefire and hostage agreement between Israel and Hamas, Trump has said finding an endgame to the war in Ukraine is now his top foreign policy priority and has expressed new confidence about the prospects of getting it done.

Ahead of his call with Putin, Trump had shown signs of increased frustration with the Russian leader.

Last month, he announced that he believed Ukraine could win back all territory lost to Russia, a dramatic shift from the U.S. leader’s repeated calls for Kyiv to make concessions to end the war.

Trump, going back to his 2024 campaign, insisted he would quickly end the war, but his peace efforts appeared to stall following a diplomatic blitz in August, when he held a summit with Putin in Alaska and a White House meeting with Zelensky and European allies.

Trump emerged from those meetings certain he was on track to arranging direct talks between Zelensky and Putin. But the Russian leader hasn’t shown any interest in meeting with Zelensky and Moscow has only intensified its bombardment of Ukraine.

Trump, for his part, offered a notably more neutral tone about Ukraine following what he described a “very productive” call with Putin.

He also hinted that negotiations between Putin and Zelensky might be have to be conducted indirectly.

“They don’t get along too well those two,” Trump said. “So we may do something where we’re separate. Separate but equal.”

Madhani writes for the Associated Press.

Source link

Democrats say they won’t be intimidated by Trump’s threats as the shutdown enters a third week

Entering the third week of a government shutdown, Democrats say they are not intimidated or cowed by President Trump’s efforts to fire thousands of federal workers or by his threats of more firings to come.

Instead, Democrats appear emboldened, showing no signs of caving as they returned to Washington from their home states Tuesday evening and, for an eighth time, rejected a Republican bill to open the government.

“What people are saying is, you’ve got to stop the carnage,” said Virginia Sen. Tim Kaine, describing what he heard from his constituents, including federal workers, as he traveled around his state over the weekend. “And you don’t stop it by giving in.”

Hawaii Sen. Brian Schatz said the firings are “a fair amount of bluster” and he predicted they ultimately will be overturned in court or otherwise reversed. Sen. Richard Blumenthal of Connecticut, speaking about Republicans, said the shutdown is just “an excuse for them to do what they were planning to do anyway.” And Senate Democratic leader Charles E. Schumer of New York said Wednesday that the layoffs are a “mistaken attempt” to sway Democratic votes.

“Their intimidation tactics are not working,” added House Democratic leader Hakeem Jeffries of New York. “And will continue to fail.”

Democratic senators say they are hearing increasingly from voters about health insurance subsidies that expire at the end of the year, the issue that the party has made central to the shutdown fight.

Sen. Chris Coons of Delaware said that the impact of the expiring health insurance subsidies on millions of people, along with cuts to Medicaid enacted by Republicans earlier this year, “far outweighs” any of the firings of federal workers that the administration is threatening.

Republicans, too, are confident in their strategy not to negotiate on the health care subsidies until Democrats give them the votes to reopen the government. The Senate planned to vote again Wednesday and Thursday on the Republican bill, and so far there are no signs of any movement on either side.

“We’re barreling toward one of the longest shutdowns in American history,” House Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., said earlier this week.

Moderate Democrats aren’t budging

In the first hours of the shutdown, which began at 12:01 a.m. EDT Oct. 1., it was not clear how long Democrats would hold out.

A group of moderate Democrats who had voted against the GOP bill immediately began private, informal talks with Republicans. The GOP lawmakers hoped enough Democrats would quickly change their votes to end a filibuster and pass the spending bill with the necessary 60 votes.

But the bipartisan talks over the expiring health care subsidies have dragged on without a resolution so far. Two weeks later, the moderates, including Sens. Jeanne Shaheen and Maggie Hassan of New Hampshire and Gary Peters of Michigan, are still voting no.

“Nothing about a government shutdown requires this or gives them new power to conduct mass layoffs,” Peters said after the director of the White House’s budget director, Russell Vought, announced that the firings had started on Friday.

D.C.-area lawmakers see advantages to shutdown

Another key group of Democrats digging in are lawmakers such as like Kaine who represent millions of federal workers in Virginia and Maryland. Kaine said the shutdown was preceded by “nine months of punitive behavior” as the Republican president has made cuts at federal agencies “and everybody knows who’s to blame.”

“Donald Trump is at war with his own workforce, and we don’t reward CEOs who hate their own workers,” Kaine said.

Appearing at a news conference Tuesday alongside supportive federal workers, Democratic lawmakers from Maryland and Virginia called on Republicans to come to the negotiating table.

“The message we have today is very simple,” said Sen. Chris Van Hollen of Maryland. “Donald Trump and Russ Vought stop attacking federal employees, stop attacking the American people and start negotiating to reopen the federal government and address the looming health care crisis that is upon us.”

Thousands are losing their jobs, and more to follow

In a court filing Friday, the White House Office of Management and Budget said well over 4,000 federal employees from eight departments and agencies would be fired in conjunction with the shutdown.

On Tuesday, Trump said his administration is using the shutdown to target federal programs that Democrats like and “they’re never going to come back, in many cases.”

“We are closing up Democrat programs that we disagree with and they’re never going to open again,” he said.

On Capitol Hill, though, the threats fell flat with Democrats as they continued to demand talks on health care.

“I don’t feel any of this as pressure points,” Jeffries said. “I view it as like the reality that the American people confront and the question becomes, at what point will Republicans embrace the reality that they have created a health care crisis that needs to be decisively addressed?”

Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D., held firm that Republicans would not negotiate until Democrats reopen the government.

The firings, Thune has repeatedly said, “are a situation that could be totally avoided.”

Jalonick and Groves write for the Associated Press. AP writer Lisa Mascaro contributed to this report.

Source link

‘Without precedent’: News outlets reject Pentagon press policy

An extraordinary new policy from the Defense Department that equates basic reporting methods to criminal activity has prompted a revolt among Pentagon journalists that could leave the nation’s largest agency and the world’s largest military without a press corps.

The new policy, from Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, is a dramatic departure from historic standards at the department, which previously required credentialed reporters to sign a simple, single-page document laying out safety protocols.

Replacing that document is a 21-page agreement that warns reporters against “soliciting” information, including unclassified material, without the Pentagon’s official authorization, characterizing individuals who do so as a “security risk.”

The policy would force journalists and media organizations to refrain from publishing any material that is not approved by the military — a clear violation of 1st Amendment protections to free speech, lawyers for media outlets said.

Major news organizations including the New York Times, Washington Post and Wall Street Journal, as well as right-leaning outlets such as Newsmax and the Washington Times, have refused to sign the document, with only one far-right outlet — the cable channel One American News — agreeing to do so.

The Los Angeles Times also will not agree to the policy, said Terry Tang, the paper’s executive editor.

In a rare joint statement, ABC, CBS, CNN, Fox News and NBC said that the policy “is without precedent and threatens core journalistic protections.”

“We will continue to cover the U.S. military as each of our organizations has done for many decades, upholding the principles of a free and independent press,” the news outlets said.

But Hegseth, who has aggressively pursued leaks and sources of unfavorable news stories since the start of his turbulent tenure as secretary, has doubled down in recent days, posting emojis on social media waving goodbye as media organizations have issued statements condemning the policy. Journalists were given a deadline of 2 p.m. PDT on Tuesday to either sign the document or relinquish their credentials.

It is unclear whether it will be viable for the Pentagon to maintain the policy, leaving the secretary without a traveling press corps to highlight his official duties or public events. And it is also uncertain whether President Trump approves of the extreme measure.

At a White House event Tuesday, Hegseth said that the policy was “common sense” and that he was “proud” of it. He said credentials should not be given to reporters who will try to get officials “to break the law by giving them classified information.”

Asked last month whether the Pentagon should control what reporters gather and write, Trump said “no.”

“I don’t think so,” Trump said, adding: “Nothing stops reporters.”

But Trump said Tuesday that he understands why Hegseth is pushing for the new policy.

“I think he finds the press to be very destructive in terms of world peace and maybe security for our nation,” Trump said. “The press is very dishonest.”

The widespread revolt has generated a show of solidarity from the White House and State Department correspondents associations, which characterized the Pentagon policy in a joint statement Monday as an attack on freedom of the press.

“Access inside the Pentagon has never been about convenience to reporters,” the statement reads. “The public has a right to know how the government is conducting the people’s business. Unfettered reporting on the U.S. military and its civilian leadership provides a service to those in uniform, veterans, their families and all Americans.”

Beyond the restrictions on media outlets, the Pentagon has taken a series of steps this year to try and identify officials who are deemed disloyal or who provide information to reporters.

In April, the Pentagon dismissed three top officials after an investigation into potential leaks related to military operational plans. That same month, Hegseth’s team began subjecting officials to random polygraph tests, a practice that was temporarily halted after the White House intervened, according to the Washington Post.

Then, in October, the Pentagon drafted plans to renew the use of polygraphs and to require thousands of personnel to sign strict nondisclosure agreements that would “prohibit the release of non-public information without approval or through a defined process.” The nondisclosure agreements include language that is similar to what reporters are being asked to sign by Tuesday.

Notably, many of Hegseth’s plans to target leaks have been leaked to news outlets, probably contributing to the Defense secretary’s suspicion about whom he can trust.

The timing of his efforts are also noteworthy, as they gained traction after he personally shared sensitive details about forthcoming strikes in Yemen in a private Signal group chat that mistakenly included a reporter from the Atlantic. Hegseth also shared information about the attacks in a separate Signal chat that included his wife, a former Fox News producer who is not a Defense Department employee.

Hegseth denied that any classified information was shared in the chat. Yet the situation led to an internal review of whether the disclosures were in violation of Defense Department policies.

The Pentagon has taken an even more aggressive approach to restricting reporters’ access than the White House, which months ago took control over press operations from the White House Correspondents Assn. — an independent group that had organized the White House press corps for decades.

Still, the White House has refrained from implementing changes to the briefing room seating chart, evicting outlets from workspaces within the White House complex or revoking press passes, after facing a legal challenge over an attempt to bar one major outlet — the Associated Press — from covering some presidential events at the beginning of Trump’s second term.

Trump, meanwhile, has continued to single out individual outlets he dislikes. On Tuesday, for example, the president refused to take questions from ABC News because he said he did not like how a news anchor had treated Vice President JD Vance.

“You’re ABC Fake News,” Trump said at a public appearance in the White House. “I don’t take questions from ABC Fake News!”

Source link

Firings of federal workers begin as White House seeks to pressure Democrats in government shutdown

The White House budget office said Friday that mass firings of federal workers have started in an attempt to exert more pressure on Democratic lawmakers in the ongoing government shutdown.

Russ Vought, the director of the Office of Management and Budget, said on the social media site X that the “RIFs have begun,” referring to reduction-in-force plans aimed at reducing the size of the federal government.

A spokesperson for the budget office said the reductions are “substantial” but did not offer more immediate details.

The Education Department is among the agencies hit by new layoffs, a department spokesperson said Friday without providing more details. The department had about 4,100 employees when Trump took office in January, but its workforce was nearly halved amid mass layoffs in the Republican administration’s first months. At the start of the shutdown, it had about 2,500 employees.

The White House previewed that it would pursue the aggressive layoff tactic shortly before the government shutdown began on Oct. 1, telling all federal agencies to submit their reduction-in-force plans to the budget office for its review. It said reduction-in-force plans could apply for federal programs whose funding would lapse in a government shutdown, are otherwise not funded and are “not consistent with the President’s priorities.”

This goes far beyond what usually happens in a government shutdown, which is that federal workers are furloughed but restored to their jobs once the shutdown ends.

Democrats have tried to call the administration’s bluff, arguing the firings could be illegal, and seemed bolstered by the fact the White House had yet to carry out the firings.

But President Trump had said earlier this week that he would soon have more information about how many federal jobs would be eliminated.

“I’ll be able to tell you that in four or five days if this keeps going on,” he said Tuesday in the Oval Office as he met with Canada’s prime minister, Mark Carney. “If this keeps going on, it’ll be substantial, and a lot of those jobs will never come back.”

Meanwhile, the halls of the Capitol were quiet on Friday, then 10th day of the shutdown, with both the House and the Senate out of Washington and both sides digging in for a protracted shutdown fight. Senate Republicans have tried repeatedly to cajole Democratic holdouts to vote for a stopgap bill to reopen the government, but Democrats have refused as they hold out for a firm commitment to extend health care benefits.

There was no sign that the top Democratic and Republican Senate leaders were even talking about a way to solve the impasse. Instead, Senate Majority Leader John Thune continued to try to peel away centrist Democrats who may be willing to cross party lines as the shutdown pain dragged on.

“It’s time for them to get a backbone,” Thune, a South Dakota Republican, said during a news conference.

Kim and Groves write for the Associated Press. AP writer Collin Binkley contributed to this report.

Source link

Trump to undergo ‘semiannual physical’ at Walter Reed 6 months after annual exam

President Trump is undergoing what he has described as a “semiannual physical” at Walter Reed National Military Medical Center on Friday.

The visit, which the White House announced earlier this week, comes as Trump is preparing to travel to the Middle East on the heels of a ceasefire deal in the Israel-Hamas war. White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt described it as a “routine yearly checkup,” although Trump had his annual physical in April.

The White House declined to explain why Trump was getting a yearly checkup six months after his annual exam. But in an exchange with reporters Thursday, he said it was a “semiannual physical.”

“I’m meeting with the troops, and I’m also going to do a, sort of, semiannual physical, which I do,” Trump told reporters in the Oval Office. “I think I’m in great shape, but I’ll let you know.”

The president is scheduled to return to the White House after his visit to Walter Reed, which is located in Bethesda, Maryland.

Trump’s April physical found that he was “fully fit” to serve as commander in chief. The three-page summary of the exam done by his doctor, Navy Capt. Sean Barbabella, said he had lost 20 pounds (9 kilograms) since a medical exam in June 2020 and said he has an “active lifestyle” that “continues to contribute significantly” to the well-being of the president, who’s 79.

In July, the White House announced that Trump recently had had a medical checkup after noticing “mild swelling” in his lower legs and was found to have a condition common in older adults that causes blood to pool in his veins. Tests by the White House medical unit showed that Trump has chronic venous insufficiency, which occurs when little valves inside the veins that normally help move blood against gravity gradually lose the ability to work properly.

At the April physical, Trump also passed a short screening test to assess different brain functions.

Kim writes for the Associated Press.

Source link

Frustrated lawmakers say lack of trust is making it harder to end the government shutdown

A president looking to seize power beyond the executive branch. A Congress controlled by Republican lawmakers unwilling to directly defy him. And a minority party looking for any way to fight back.

The dynamic left Washington in a stalemate Thursday — the ninth day of the government shutdown — and lawmakers openly venting their frustration as they tried to gain traction without the trust that is typically the foundation of any bipartisan deal.

“To have good-faith conversations, you have to have trust. There’s a real challenge of trust,” said Rep. Brad Schneider, chair of the New Democratic Coalition, a pragmatic group of House Democrats.

Groups of lawmakers — huddled over dinners, on phone calls, and in private meetings — have tried to brainstorm ways out of the standoff that has shuttered government offices, kept hundreds of thousands of federal employees at home and threatened to leave them without a scheduled payday. But lawmakers have found themselves running up against the reality that the relationship between the two parties is badly broken.

The frustration was evident this week as House Speaker Mike Johnson and House Democratic leader Hakeem Jeffries, on separate occasions, engaged in tense exchanges in the Capitol hallways with members of the opposing party.

“We’re in an environment where we need more than a handshake,” said Sen. Chris Coons, a Delaware Democrat who has engaged in talks with Republicans.

President Trump and Republicans have so far held to the stance that they will only negotiate on Democratic demands around health care benefits after they vote to reopen the government. They also say Senate Democratic leader Charles E. Schumer is beholden to the left wing of his party and only staging the shutdown fight to stave off a primary challenge.

Schumer, a New York Democrat, told Punchbowl News in an interview that Democrats were winning the shutdown fight, saying, “Every day gets better for us.”

Republicans quickly seized on those comments, arguing it showed that Schumer is approaching the shutdown with purely political motives.

Senate Majority Leader John Thune stood on the Senate floor flanked by a poster printed with Schumer’s words.

“This isn’t a political game. Democrats might feel that way, but I don’t know anybody else that does,” said Thune, a South Dakota Republican. “The longer this goes on, the more the American people realize that Democrats own this shutdown.”

Schumer, in his own floor speech, responded that it was Trump and Republicans who are “playing with people’s lives.”

“Every day that Republicans refuse to negotiate to end this shutdown, the worse it gets for Americans and the clearer it becomes who is fighting for them,” said the New York senator.

When a handshake deal is not enough

Democrats have insisted they can’t take Trump at his word and therefore need more than a verbal commitment for any deal.

Conflicts over spending power had already been raging before the shutdown as the White House pushed to assert maximum power over congressionally approved budgets. The White House budget office had canceled scores of government contracts, including cutting out the legislative branch entirely with a $4.9 billion cut to foreign aid in August through a legally dubious process known as a “pocket rescission.”

That enraged Democrats — and disturbed some Republicans who criticized it as executive overreach.

“I hate rescissions, to be honest with you, unless they’re congressionally approved,” said Sen. Thom Tillis, a North Carolina Republican.

Matt Glassman, a fellow at the Government Affairs Institute at Georgetown University, said the president’s use of rescissions was “blowing up the underlying dynamic of the bargaining” because it inserts intense partisanship into the budget appropriations process that otherwise requires compromise, particularly in the Senate.

Then, as the government entered a shutdown, Trump’s budget director Russ Vought laid out arguments that the president would have even more power to lay off workers and even cancel pay due to furloughed federal workers once the funding lapse is solved. Vought has also announced that the administration was withholding billions of dollars for infrastructure projects in states with Democratic senators who have voted for the shutdown.

Trump has cast Vought’s actions as the consequences of Democratic obstruction, even sharing a video that depicted him as the grim reaper. But on Capitol Hill, there has been an acknowledgment that the hardball tactics are making it harder to negotiate.

“I think with senators, carrots work better than sticks,” said Sen. Kevin Cramer, a North Dakota Republican.

One Democratic idea may win GOP support

Before they vote to reopen the government, Democrats’ main demand is that Congress take up an extension of tax credits for health plans offered on Affordable Care Act marketplaces. Trump has sounded open to a deal, saying that he wants “great health care” for Americans.

What’s received less attention is that Democrats also want new safeguards in the law limiting the White House’s ability to claw back, or rescind, funding already approved by Congress. While final appropriations bills are still being worked out, Republicans have been open to the idea.

“When you end the shutdown and get back to regular order within the appropriations bills, there’s very clear language about how we feel about rescissions,” said Sen. Mike Rounds, a Republican on the Senate Appropriations Committee. “I think you’ll find hard, solid support from Republicans to see that what we agree to will be executed on.”

In the meantime, the main sticking point for lawmakers this week has been finding any agreement on extending the health care subsidies.

The consequences of an extended shutdown

As the shutdown drags on without sign of significant progress to ending the impasse, lawmakers are looking ahead to the dates when federal employees will miss a payday.

Active-duty military troops would miss a paycheck on Oct. 15. Some lawmakers are getting nervous about both the financial implications for the troops and the political blowback of allowing soldiers to go without pay.

As House Speaker Mike Johnson fielded questions on C-SPAN Thursday morning, one caller pleaded with him to pass legislation that would allow the military to get paid during the government shutdown.

The woman, identified as Samantha, said her husband serves in the military and that they “live paycheck to paycheck.”

She pleaded with Johnson to call the House back to Washington, saying, “You could stop this.”

Johnson said he was sorry to hear about her situation, blamed Democrats for refusing to pass a stop-gap spending bill and added, “I am angry because of situations just like yours.”

Groves, Jalonick and Brown write for the Associated Press. AP writers Lisa Mascaro, Kevin Freking and Joey Cappelletti contributed to this report.

Source link

Trump says Chicago mayor, Illinois governor should be jailed

Chicago is emerging as the latest testing ground for President Trump’s domestic deployment of military force as hundreds of National Guard troops were expected to descend on the city.

The president said Wednesday that Illinois Gov. JB Pritzker and Chicago Mayor Brandon Johnson should be jailed for failing to support federal agents, and continued to paint a dark and violent picture of both Chicago and Portland, Ore., where Trump is trying to send federal troops but has so far been stonewalled by the courts.

“It’s so bad,” Trump said at the White House on Wednesday. “It’s so crazy. It’s like the movies … where you have these bombed-out cities and these bombed-out people. It’s worse than that. I don’t think they can make a movie as bad.”

Pritzker this week characterized Trump’s depiction of Chicago as “deranged” and untrue. Federal agents are making the community “less safe,” the governor said, noting that residents do not want “Donald Trump to occupy their communities” and that people of color are fearful of being profiled during immigration crackdowns.

Trump has taken issue with Democrats in Illinois and Oregon who are fighting his efforts, and has twice said this week that he is willing to use the Insurrection Act of 1807 if local leaders and the courts try to stop him. White House Deputy Chief of Staff Stephen Miller also contended this week that a court ruling blocking Trump’s deployments to Portland amounted to a “legal insurrection” as well as “an insurrection against the laws and Constitution of the United States.”

In a televised interview Monday, Miller was asked about his remarks and asked whether the administration would abide by court rulings that stop the deployment of troops to Illinois and Portland. Miller responded by saying the president has “plenary authority” before going silent midsentence — a moment that the host said may have been a technical issue.

“Plenary authority” is a legal term that indicates someone has limitless power.

The legality of deployments to Portland and Chicago will face scrutiny in two federal courts Thursday.

The U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals will hear an appeal by the Trump administration in the Portland matter. A Trump-appointed judge, Karin Immergut, found the White House had not only violated the law in activating the Oregon National Guard, but it also had further defied the law by attempting to circumvent her order, sending the California National Guard in its place.

That three-judge appellate panel consists of two Trump appointees and one Clinton appointee.

Meanwhile, in Illinois, U.S. District Judge April Perry declined Monday to block the deployment of National Guard members on an emergency basis, allowing a buildup of forces to proceed. She will hear arguments Thursday on the legality of the operation.

California Gov. Gavin Newsom, one of Trump’s top political foes, has joined the fight against the president’s deployment efforts.

The Trump administration sent 14 members of California’s National Guard to Illinois to train troops from other states, according to court records filed Tuesday. Federal officials have also told California they intend to extend Trump’s federalization of 300 members of the state’s Guard through next year.

“Trump is going on a cross-country crusade to sow chaos and division,” Newsom said Wednesday. “His actions — and those of his Cabinet — are against our deeply held American values. He needs to stop this illegal charade now.”

By Wednesday evening, there were few signs of National Guard troops on the streets of Chicago. But troops from other states, including Texas’ National Guard, were waiting on the sidelines at an Army Reserve Center in Illinois as early as Tuesday.

In anticipation of the deployment, Pritzker warned that if the president’s efforts went unchecked, it would put the United States on a “the path to full-blown authoritarianism.”

The Democratic governor also said the president’s calls to jail him were “unhinged” and said Trump was a “wannabe dictator.”

“There is one thing I really want to say to Donald Trump: If you come for my people, you come through me. So come and get me,” Pritzker said in an interview with MSNBC.

As tensions grew in Chicago, Trump hosted an event at the White House to address how he intends to crack down on antifa, a nebulous left-wing anti-facist movement that he recently designated as a domestic terrorist organization.

At the event, the president said many of the people involved in the movement are active in Chicago and Portland — and he once again attacked the local and state leaders in both cities and states.

“You can say of Portland and you can say certainly of Chicago, it is not lawful what they are doing,” Trump said about the left-wing protests. “They are going to have to be very careful.”

Johnson, the mayor of Chicago, slammed Trump for saying he should be jailed for his actions.

“This is not the first time Trump has tried to have a Black man unjustly arrested,” Johnson posted on social media. “I’m not going anywhere.”

Pritzker continued to attack Trump’s efforts into the evening, accusing the president of “breaching the Constitution and breaking the law.”

“We need to stand up together and speak up,” the governor said on social media.

Times staff writer Melody Gutierrez in Sacramento contributed to this report.

Source link

Trump sends California National Guard to Illinois as White House seeks to extend control

California is challenging President Trump’s grip on the state’s National Guard, telling a federal court the White House used claims of unrest in Los Angeles as a pretext for a deployment that has since expanded nationwide — including now sending troops to Illinois.

The Trump administration deployed 14 soldiers from California’s National Guard to Illinois to train troops from other states, according to a motion California filed Tuesday asking the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals to end the federal government’s control of its National Guard.

Trump’s decision to move California troops who had been sent to Portland on Sunday and redeploy them to Illinois escalates tensions in the growing fight over who controls state military forces — and how far presidential power can reach in domestic operations.

Federal officials have told California they intend to issue a new order extending Trump’s federalization of 300 members of the state’s Guard through Jan. 31, according to the filing.

“Trump is going on a cross-country crusade to sow chaos and division,” Gov. Gavin Newsom said Wednesday. “His actions — and those of his Cabinet — are against our deeply held American values. He needs to stop this illegal charade now.”

Officials from California and Oregon sought a restraining order after Trump sent California Guard troops to Oregon on Sunday. Trump deployed the California Guard soldiers just a day after a federal judge temporarily blocked the president’s efforts to federalize Oregon’s National Guard.

That prompted Judge Karin Immergut to issue a more sweeping temporary order Sunday evening blocking the deployment of National Guard troops from any other state to Oregon.

California’s own lawsuit against Trump challenging the deployment in Los Angeles since June resulted in Senior District Judge Charles R. Breyer blocking the administration from “deploying, ordering, instructing, training, or using” the state’s troops to engage in civilian law enforcement.

The new motion filed Tuesday in that case by California Atty. Gen. Rob Bonta asks the 9th Circuit to vacate its earlier stay that allowed federalization to continue under strict limits on what they can do. California argues that the Guard’s federalized troops are now being used for missions outside the limited purposes the court allowed — drug raids in Riverside County, a show-of-force operation in MacArthur Park and deployments into other states.

“The ever-expanding mission of California’s federalized Guard bears no resemblance to what this Court provisionally upheld in June,” the state wrote in the filing. “And it is causing irreparable harm to California, our Nation’s democratic traditions, and the rule of law.”

Illinois leaders have also gone to court to attempt to block Trump from sending troops to Chicago. Trump has responded by saying that Chicago Mayor Brandon Johnson and Illinois Gov. J.B. Pritzker should be jailed.

Source link

Trump administration threatens no back pay for federal workers in shutdown

President Trump’s administration warned on Tuesday of no guaranteed back pay for federal workers during a government shutdown, reversing what has been long-standing policy for some 750,000 furloughed employees, according to a memo being circulated by the White House.

Trump signed into law after the longest government shutdown in 2019 legislation that ensures federal workers receive back pay during any federal funding lapse. But in the new memo, his Office of Management and Budget says back pay must be provided by Congress, if it chooses to do so, as part of any bill to fund the government.

The move by the Republican administration was widely seen as a strong-arm tactic — a way to pressure lawmakers to reopen the government, now in the seventh day of a shutdown.

“There are some people that don’t deserve to be taken care of, and we’ll take care of them in a different way,” Trump said during an event at the White House.

He said back pay “depends on who we’re talking about.”

Refusing retroactive pay to the workers, some of whom must remain on the job as essential employees, would be a stark departure from norms and practices and almost certainly would be met with legal action.

While federal workers — as well as service members of the military — have often missed paychecks during past shutdowns, they are almost always reimbursed once the government reopens.

“That should turn up the urgency and the necessity of the Democrats doing the right thing here,” House Speaker Mike Johnson said at a news conference at the Capitol.

Johnson, a lawyer, said he hadn’t fully read the memo but “there are some legal analysts who are saying” that it may not be necessary or appropriate to repay the federal workers.

But Democratic Sen. Patty Murray of Washington blasted the Trump administration as defying the law.

“Another baseless attempt to try and scare & intimidate workers by an administration run by crooks and cowards,” said Murray, who is the ranking lawmaker on the Senate Appropriations Committee. “The letter of the law is as plain as can be — federal workers, including furloughed workers, are entitled to their back pay following a shutdown.”

Asked a second time about back pay for furloughed federal workers given that the requirement is spelled out in law, Trump said: “I follow the law, and what the law says is correct.”

In a single-page memo from Trump’s Office of Management and Budget under Russ Vought, first reported by Axios, the office’s general counsel seeks to lay out a legal rationale for no back pay of federal workers.

The memo explains that while the Government Employee Fair Treatment Act of 2019 says workers shall be paid after federal funding is restored, it argues the action is not self-executing. Instead, the memo says, repaying the federal workers would have to be part of legislation to reopen the government.

The OMB analysis draws on language familiar to budget experts by suggesting that the 2019 bill created an authorization to pay the federal workers but not the actual appropriation.

Congress, it says, is able to decide whether it wants to pay the workers or not.

For now, Congress remains at a standstill, with neither side — nor the White House — appearing willing to budge. Democrats are fighting for healthcare funds to prevent a lapse in federal subsidies that threaten to send insurance rates skyrocketing. Republicans say the issue can be dealt with later.

Mascaro writes for the Associated Press. AP writers Will Weissert, Kevin Freking, Joey Cappelletti and Mary Clare Jalonick contributed to this report.

Source link

Amid a government shutdown, Trump joins Navy’s anniversary celebration

President Trump did not let the government shutdown interfere with a stop in Virginia on Sunday to salute the Navy as it celebrates its 250th anniversary.

“I believe, ‘THE SHOW MUST GO ON!’” Trump posted Friday night on his social media site. And he wrote before leaving the White House for Naval Station Norfolk, “This will be a show of Naval aptitude and strength.”

The government shutdown that began Wednesday has triggered partisan blame in both directions as military personnel are working without pay, several thousand federal employees are furloughed and Trump has put on hold energy projects in Democratic-run areas such as New York and Chicago.

There is the possibility that an event designed to honor the Navy could be dragged into the bitter politics.

Trump accused Democrats in his post of enabling the shutdown and trying “to destroy this wonderful celebration of the U.S. Navy’s Birthday.”

Senate Democrats rejected efforts to preserve a continuation of government operations when the new budget year started Wednesday. They cited the lapse in subsidies that could cause health insurance costs to climb rapidly for people who get coverage through the 2010 Affordable Care Act. Democratic lawmakers also have sought to reverse cuts to Medicaid that Trump signed into law.

On top of that, both sides cite a mutual sense of distrust.

Democrats oppose Trump’s move to have his administration decline to spend congressionally approved funds, saying it undermines the budgeting process, among other concerns. Meanwhile, Trump has threatened to lay off federal workers at what he called “Democrat Agencies.”

Among those joining Trump for the festivities were First Lady Melania Trump, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, Navy Secretary John Phelan, Veterans Affairs Secretary Doug Collins and U.S. Rep. Ronny Jackson (R-Texas), a former Navy rear admiral who was a White House doctor during Trump’s first term.

After his arrival in Norfolk, Trump went to the USS George H.W. Bush and spoke to the sailors and handed out challenge coins.

The Trumps watched a military demonstration while standing on the deck of the aircraft carrier. Navy destroyers launched missiles and fired shells into the Atlantic, Navy SEALs descended from helicopters and fighter jets catapulted off.

Awaiting Trump’s speech was a large crowd on a pier, mostly sailors in their dress white uniforms and some families.

Trump on Tuesday addressed a gathering of military leaders abruptly summoned by Hegseth from across the globe to Virginia. The Republican president proposed using U.S. cities as training grounds for the armed forces and spoke of needing military might to combat what he called the “invasion from within.” Hegseth declared an end to “woke” culture and announced new directives for troops that include “gender-neutral” or “male-level” standards for physical fitness.

The administration is seeking to reshape Pentagon culture and use military resources for the president’s priorities, including quelling domestic unrest and fighting what he calls a surge in violent crime, despite statistics to the contrary.

Trump has also engaged the U.S. military in an armed conflict he says is targeting foreign drug cartels, leading to four deadly strikes on boats in the Caribbean that Washington says were involved in trafficking. Critics have called the attacks extrajudicial killings in violation of international law.

Boak and Finley write for the Associated Press and reported from Washington and Norfolk, respectively.

Source link

Does California use a “loophole” to give Medicaid to undocumented immigrants?

Of all the finger-pointing and recriminations that come with the current federal government shutdown, one of the most striking elements is that the Trump administration blames it on Democratic support for granting taxpayer-funded healthcare coverage to undocumented immigrants. The White House has called out California specifically, saying the state exploits a legal “loophole” to pay for that coverage with federal dollars, and other states have followed suit.

“California utilized an egregious loophole — since employed by several other states — to draw down federal matching funds used to provide Medicaid benefits for illegal immigrants,” the White House said in a policy memo released Wednesday as a budget stalemate forced a shutdown of the U.S. government.

The administration said that the Working Families Tax Cut Act, which goes into effect in October 2026, closes the loophole by prohibiting the use of taxpayer money to provide healthcare coverage to undocumented immigrants and other noncitizens.

In the memo, the White House accused congressional Democrats of wanting to repeal those policy reforms as a condition to keep the government running.

Izzy Gardon, a spokeswoman for Gov. Gavin Newsom, said there’s nothing to the administration’s underlying assertion that California and other states have found some sort of loophole that enables them to funnel Medicaid money to noncitizens.

“This is false — CA does not do this,” Gardon said in a one-line email to the L.A. Times.

Healthcare policy experts agree. California is not exploiting a “loophole,” said Adriana Ramos-Yamamoto, a senior policy analyst at the California Budget & Policy Center, a nonprofit, nonpartisan organization that studies inequality.

“The state is making lawful, transparent budget choices to invest in health coverage with its own dollars,” Ramos-Yamamoto said in a statement to The Times. “These investments improve health outcomes, strengthen communities, and lower health care costs in the long run.”

At issue is Section 71117 of the Republican-backed “One Big Beautiful Bill Act,” which imposes nearly $1 trillion in reductions to federal Medicaid healthcare spending for low-income Americans over the next 10 years. The provision allows states “to finance the non-federal share of Medicaid spending through multiple sources, including state general funds, healthcare related taxes (or ‘provider taxes’), and local government funds,” as long as taxes on healthcare providers are imposed uniformly so as not to unfairly burden providers of Medicaid services.

The bottom line, analysts said, is the administration is citing a problem with the law that doesn’t seem to exist, at least not in California.

“The so-called California loophole references a provision in the law that ends a waiver of the uniformity requirements for provider taxes — this provision has nothing to do with using federal funds to pay for care for undocumented immigrants,” said Jennifer Tolbert, a healthcare expert at the nonprofit healthcare research, polling and news organization KFF.

“But the White House makes the claim that California uses the money they get from the provider tax to pay for care for undocumented immigrants,” Tolbert said.

Fact-checking the administration’s claim is all the more difficult because there are no official data on how states spend money collected from provider taxes, Alice Burns, another KFF analyst, added. What’s more, California is among several states that offer some level of Medicaid coverage to all immigrants regardless of status. And because California cannot be federally reimbursed for healthcare spending on people who are not in the country legally, those expenses must be covered at the state level.

The White House memo goes on to claim that if Democrats were to succeed at repealing the provisions in the Working Families Tax Act, the federal government would have to spend an additional $34.6 billion in taxpayer money “that would continue to primarily be abused by California to fund healthcare for illegal immigrants.”

This assertion also misconstrues the facts, according to KFF.

“What we do know is that the $35 billion in savings that is referenced in the White House Fact Sheet refers to the federal government’s estimated savings … resulting from states making changes to their provider tax systems,” KFF spokesperson Tammie Smith said. That is, the projected savings aren’t connected to healthcare for immigrants living in the U.S. illegally.

Political squabbling aside, California’s approach to medical coverage for low-income, undocumented immigrants is set to undergo a major shift thanks to provisions in the 2025-26 state budget that the Democrat-led legislature and Newsom approved in June.

Starting on Jan. 1, adults “who do not have Satisfactory Immigration Status (SIS)” will no longer be able to enroll in Medi-Cal, California’s Medicaid program, according to the state’s Department of Health Care Services webpage. Those who already have this coverage can keep it and continue to renew their enrollment. And starting on July 1, Medi-Cal enrollees who are age 19-59, undocumented and not pregnant will have to pay a $30 monthly premium to keep their coverage.

The changes, which Newsom called for in the spring to offset a ballooning Medi-Cal budget deficit, drew criticism from some immigrant rights groups, with the California Immigrant Policy Center describing the moves as “discriminatory.”

“In light of the militarized mass immigration raids and arrests causing fear and chaos across California, we are disappointed that the governor and the leadership in the Legislature chose to adopt a state budget that makes our communities even more vulnerable,” Masih Fouladi, the center’s executive director said at the time.

Everyone in California who qualifies for Medi-Cal will still be eligible to receive emergency medical and dental care, no matter their immigration status.

Source link

Trump signs an executive order vowing to defend Qatar in the wake of Israel’s strike

President Trump has signed an executive order vowing to use all measures, including U.S. military action, to defend the energy-rich nation of Qatar — though it remains unclear just what weight the pledge will carry.

The text of the order, available Wednesday on the White House’s website but dated Monday, appears to be another measure by Trump to assure the Qataris following Israel’s surprise attack on the country targeting Hamas leaders as they weighed accepting a ceasefire with Israel over the war in the Gaza Strip.

The order cites the two countries’ “close cooperation” and “shared interest,” vowing to “guarantee the security and territorial integrity of the state of Qatar against external attack.”

“The United States shall regard any armed attack on the territory, sovereignty or critical infrastructure of the state of Qatar as a threat to the peace and security of the United States,” the order says.

“In the event of such an attack, the United States shall take all lawful and appropriate measures — including diplomatic, economic, and, if necessary, military — to defend the interests of the United States and of the state of Qatar and to restore peace and stability.”

The order apparently came during a visit to Washington on Monday by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. Trump organized a call by Netanyahu to Qatar during the visit in which Netanyahu “expressed his deep regret” over the strike that killed six people, including a member of the Qatari security forces, the White House said.

Qatari officials did not immediately respond to a request for comment on Trump’s order. However, the Qatari-funded satellite news network Al Jazeera prominently reported about it Wednesday under the headline: “New Trump executive order guarantees Qatar security after Israeli attack.”

The true scope of the pledge remains in question. Typically, legally binding agreements, or treaties, need to receive the approval of the U.S. Senate. However, presidents have entered international agreements without the Senate’s approval, as President Obama did with Iran’s 2015 nuclear deal with world powers.

And ultimately, any decision to take military action rests with the president. That uncertainty has clouded previous U.S. defense agreements in Trump’s second term, such as NATO’s Article 5 guarantees.

Qatar, a peninsular nation that sticks out into the Persian Gulf, became fantastically wealthy through its natural gas reserves. It has been a key U.S. military partner, allowing America’s Central Command to have its forward operating base at its vast Al Udeid Air Base. President Biden named Qatar a major non-NATO ally in 2022, in part due to its help during America’s chaotic withdrawal from Afghanistan.

In the aftermath of the Israeli attack, Saudi Arabia entered a mutual defense agreement with Pakistan, bringing the kingdom under Islamabad’s nuclear umbrella. It’s unclear whether other Gulf Arab countries, worried about Israel as well as Iran as it faces reimposed United Nations sanctions over its nuclear program, may seek similar arrangements as well with the region’s longtime security guarantor.

“The Gulf’s centrality in the Middle East and its significance to the United States warrants specific U.S. guarantees beyond President Donald J. Trump’s assurances of nonrepetition and dinner meetings,” wrote Bader al-Saif, a history professor at Kuwait University who analyzes Gulf Arab affairs.

Gambrell writes for the Associated Press.

Source link