US Politics

Subterms

    More stories

    • 138 Shares130 Views

      in US Politics

      More than 1,000 ‘Hands Off’ anti-Trump protests begin across the US

      by

      People across the US took to the streets on Saturday to oppose what left-leaning organizations called Donald Trump’s “authoritarian overreach and billionaire-backed agenda”.Organizers were expecting more than 500,000 people to demonstrate in Washington DC, Florida and elsewhere.At Washington’s national mall, demonstrators from as far afield as New Hampshire and Pennsylvania gathered in the shadow of the George Washington memorial monument, in advance of the anti-Trump rally there.In overcast conditions, protesters displayed a vast array of placards and, in some cases, Ukrainian flags, expressing opposition to the policies of the administration which has sought cordial relations with Russia amid its invasion of Ukraine.Some protesters said they hoped the event – the first mass demonstration in Washington DC since Trump took office – would act as an example to inspire others to register opposition. “The aim is get people to rise up,” said Diane Kolifrath, 63, who had travelled from New Hampshire with 100 fellow members of New Hampshire Forward, a civic society organisation.“Many people are scared to protest against Trump because he has reacted aggressively and violently to those who have stood up,” Kolifrath said. The goal of this protest is to let the rest of Americans who aren’t participating see that we are standing up and hopefully when they see our strength, that will give them the courage to also stand up.”MoveOn, one of the organizations planning the day of protest they’re calling “Hands Off” along with dozens of labor, environmental and other progressive groups, said that more than 1,000 protests are planned across the US, including at state capitols.“This is shaping up to be the biggest single-day protest in the last several years of American history,” Ezra Levin, a founder of Indivisible, one of the groups planning the event, said on a recent organizing call.The largest event was expected to be the one at the National Mall, where members of Congress, including the Democrats Jamie Raskin of Maryland, Maxwell Frost of Florida and Ilhan Omar of Minnesota, are scheduled to speak to crowds.The scene in Hollywood, Florida, about an hour south of Trump’s Mar-a-Lago resort, was lively as well. Referring to the White House’s billionaire business adviser Elon Musk and the government cuts he has overseen, predominantly white protesters chanted: “Hey, hey, ho, ho, Trump and Musk have got to go.They jeered motorists in Tesla Cybertrucks manufactured by Musk’s electric vehicle maker – and wielded colorful placards that left little doubt as to where they stood with the Trump administration.“Prosecute and jail the Turd Reich,” read one. Some reserved special ire for the world’s richest person: “I did not elect Elon Musk.” Others emphasized the protesters’ anxieties about the future of democracy in the US. “Hands off democracy,” declared one placard. “Stop being [Vladimir] Putin’s puppet,” enjoined another, referring to Russia’s dictator.Many motorists driving past the assembled demonstrators honked their horns and flashed thumb’s-up gestures in solidarity. Broward county was one of only six counties in Florida that voted for Kamala Harris in November – she defeated Trump there by 16 percentage points – and it is host to one of the US’s most vibrant LGBTQ+ communities.“This is an assault on our democracy, on our economy, on our civil rights,” said Jennifer Heit, a 64-year-old editor and resident of Plantation who toted a poster that read: “USA: No to King or Oligarchy.” She added: “Everything is looking so bad that I feel we have to do all we can while we can, and just having all this noise is unsettling to everyone.”Heit attended a protest outside a Tesla dealership in Fort Lauderdale recently, and she has been outraged by the Trump administration’s frontal assault on the rule of law and the judiciary – including with respect to people who have been deported without due process. “We’re supposed to be a nation of laws and due process,” she said.Public health researcher Donna Greene, 62, came dressed as France’s beheaded queen Marie Antoinette and carried a placard that said: “Musk and Trump Say Let Them Eat Cake.”She said she is proud of the 65 missions that her father Sam Ragland flew for the US military during the second world war. But, she said, the country her dad fought for is not the same one she sees emerging under Trump.skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotion“Everything my father fought for and everything we hold dear as a country is being dismantled,” Greene said. “I am beyond incredulous at how quickly our country’s institutions have been dismantled with no pushback from the Republicans who are currently in charge.”In Ventura, California, Sandy Friedman brought her eight-year-old graddaughter, Harlow Rose Rega, to demonstrate. Friedman said she was worried about her social security, remarking: “I worked my whole life and so did my husband. Now I’m afraid Trump will take it away.”Harlow held up a sign reading: “Save my future.”The protest’s website called Saturday “a nationwide mobilization to stop the most brazen power grab in modern history”.“Trump, Musk, and their billionaire cronies are orchestrating an all-out assault on our government, our economy, and our basic rights – enabled by Congress every step of the way.“They want to strip America for parts – shuttering social security offices, firing essential workers, eliminating consumer protections, and gutting Medicaid – all to bankroll their billionaire tax scam. They’re handing over our tax dollars, our public services, and our democracy to the ultra-rich. If we don’t fight now, there won’t be anything left to save.”The protests come after the stock market plummeted this week following Trump’s 1 April announcement of tariffs. Despite the economic fallout, Trump said on Friday: “My policies will never change.”Trump’s approval rating this week fell to 43%, his lowest since taking office, according to a Reuters poll.After Trump was first elected to the White House in 2016, at least 470,000 people – three times the size of the crowd at Trump’s inauguration – joined the Women’s March protest in Washington DC, and millions more rallied around the country, making it the largest single-day protest in US history. More

    • 150 Shares130 Views

      in US Politics

      Ted Cruz warns of midterm ‘bloodbath’ if Trump tariffs cause a recession

      by

      Ted Cruz, the US senator from Texas, has warned that his fellow Republicans risk a “bloodbath” in the 2026 midterm elections if Donald Trump’s “liberation day” tariffs cause a recession.Cruz also warned that the president’s tariffs, if they stay in place for long and are met by global retaliation on American goods, could trigger a full-blown trade war that “would destroy jobs here at home, and do real damage to the US economy”.“A hundred years ago, the US economy didn’t have the leverage to have the kind of impact we do now. But I worry, there are voices within the administration that want to see these tariffs continue for ever and ever,” he added.The Texan’s comments, made on his Verdict podcast on Friday, were a further sign that the imposition of global “reciprocal” duties on imported goods is causing unease among Republicans.The Republican US senator Chuck Grassley of Iowa introduced bipartisan legislation on Thursday to grant Congress more power over placing tariffs on US trading nations. The bill, co-sponsored by the Democratic senator Maria Cantwell, would “reaffirm” the role of Congress in setting and approving trade policy.The Republican senators Lisa Murkowski, Mitch McConnell, Jerry Moran and Thom Tillis have since signed on as co-sponsors. Though the legislation is considered largely symbolic, it telegraphs anxiety over the $5.4tn loss of stock market capitalization over two days and signs of an electoral backlash to Trump administration policies in the form of a defeat at the ballot box by a Wisconsin supreme court race candidate backed by Trump’s billionaire business adviser Elon Musk.In two Florida congressional races, the Republican winners also underperformed.On his podcast, Cruz warned that tariffs and trade retaliation over the long term could push the US into “a recession, particularly a bad recession – 2026 in all likelihood politically would be a bloodbath”.“You would face a Democrat House, and you might even face a Democrat Senate,” Cruz said.“If we’re in the middle of a recession and people are hurting badly, they punish the party in power,” Cruz warned, adding he did not share the White House’s position that the tariffs would usher in “a booming economy”.But if “every other country on Earth” hits the US with retaliatory tariffs and Trump’s so-called reciprocal levies remain in place, “that is a terrible outcome” that “would destroy jobs here at home, and do real damage to the US economy”.Cruz, nonetheless, held out an olive branch to the administration.“Look, I want this to succeed … but my definition of succeed may be different than the White House’s,” he said, adding that his definition of success “is dramatically lower tariffs abroad and result in dramatically lowering tariffs here”.“That’s success for the American workers, American businesses, American growth, American prosperity,” he continued. “That’s a great outcome.” More

    • 175 Shares145 Views

      in US Politics

      Barack Obama calls on Americans to defend democratic values in face of Trump agenda

      by

      Barack Obama has called on US citizens, colleges and law firms to resist Donald Trump’s political agenda – and warned Americans to prepare to “possibly sacrifice” in support of democratic values.“It has been easy during most of our lifetimes to say you are a progressive or say you are for social justice or say you’re for free speech and not have to pay a price for it,” Obama said during a speech at Hamilton College in Clinton, New York, on Thursday.The two-term former Democratic president painted a picture of the Trump White House looking to upend the international order created after the second world war – and a domestic political reconfiguration in which ideological disagreement falling within mutual respect for free speech and the rule of law being eroded.“It is up to all of us to fix this,” Obama said, including “the citizen, the ordinary person who says: ‘No, that’s not right.’”Obama said he disagreed with some of the president’s economic policies, including widespread new tariffs. But the former president said he is “more deeply concerned with a federal government that threatens universities if they don’t give up students who are exercising their right to free speech”.That referred to decisions by the Trump administration to pull federal funding for top universities unless they agreed to abandon student diversity programs and implement guidelines on what it considered to be the line between legitimate protest in support of Palestinians and antisemitism.Obama also said schools and students should review campus environments around issues of academic freedom and to be prepared to lose government funding in their defense.“If you are a university, you may have to figure out: ‘Are we, in fact, doing things right?’” he said during the conversation at Hamilton College. “Have we in fact violated our own values, our own code, violated the law in some fashion?“If not, and you’re just being intimidated, well, you should be able to say: ‘That’s why we got this big endowment.’”Columbia University, in New York, has become the centerpiece of administration efforts to crack down via federal funding on what it contends were campus protests over the Israel-Hamas war that strayed into antisemitism.Federal immigration agents have arrested and sought to deport one graduate student whom they claimed violated immigration rules by engaging in pro-Palestinian demonstrations. Another student sued after immigration agents tried to arrest and deport her after she also engaged in such demonstrations.The university agreed to make policy changes, including hiring security officers with arrest powers and banning protests in academic buildings, after the Trump administration stripped it of $400m in federal grants. The administration says it may now reinstate the money.Harvard, Princeton University and other institutions are also under federal funding review over their policies on the issue.“Now we’re at one of those moments where, you know what? It’s not enough just to say you’re for something; you may actually have to do something,” Obama said.The former president went on to question deals between corporate law firms and the administration after they were hit by executive orders over their connection to attorneys involved in prosecution efforts against Trump during Joe Biden’s presidency – or for representing the current administration’s political opponents.“It’s unimaginable that the same parties that are silent now would have tolerated behavior like that from me or a whole bunch of my predecessors,” Obama said, going on to question a decision by the White House to restrict access of the Associated Press to official events over the news agency’s decision to reject Trump’s renaming of the Gulf of Mexico to the Gulf of America. More

    • 138 Shares99 Views

      in US Politics

      ‘A case study in groupthink’: were liberals wrong about the pandemic?

      by

      Were conservatives right to question Covid lockdowns? Were the liberals who defended them less grounded in science than they believed? And did liberal dismissiveness of the other side come at a cost that Americans will continue to pay for many years?A new book by two political scientists argues yes to all three questions, making the case that the aggressive policies that the US and other countries adopted to fight Covid – including school shutdowns, business closures, mask mandates and social distancing – were in some cases misguided and in many cases deserved more rigorous public debate.In their peer-reviewed book, In Covid’s Wake: How Our Politics Failed Us, Stephen Macedo and Frances Lee argue that public health authorities, the mainstream media, and progressive elites often pushed pandemic measures without weighing their costs and benefits, and ostracized people who expressed good-faith disagreement.View image in fullscreen“Policy learning seemed to be short-circuited during the pandemic,” Lee said. “It became so moralized, like: ‘We’re not interested in looking at how other people are [responding to the pandemic], because only bad people would do it a different way from the way we’re doing’.”She and Macedo spoke to the Guardian by video call. The Princeton University professors both consider themselves left-leaning, and the book grew out of research Macedo was doing on the ways progressive discourse gets handicapped by a refusal to engage with conservative or outside arguments. “Covid is an amazing case study in groupthink and the effects of partisan bias,” he said.Many Covid stances presented as public health consensus were not as grounded in empirical evidence as many Americans may have believed, Macedo and Lee argue. At times, scientific and health authorities acted less like neutral experts and more like self-interested actors, engaging in PR efforts to downplay uncertainty, missteps or conflicts of interest.It’s a controversial argument. Covid-19 killed more than a million Americans, according to US government estimates. The early days of the pandemic left hospitals overwhelmed, morgues overflowing, and scientists scrambling to understand the new disease and how to contain it.Still, Macedo and Lee say, it is unclear why shutdowns and closures went on so long, particularly in Democratic states. The book argues that in the US the pandemic became more politically polarized over time, after, initially, “only modest policy differences between Republican- and Democratic-leaning states”.After April 2020, however, red and blue America diverged. Donald Trump contributed to that polarization by downplaying the severity of the virus. Significant policy differences also emerged. Ron DeSantis, the Republican governor of Florida, moved to re-open physical schools quickly, which progressives characterized as irresponsible.Yet in the end there was “no meaningful difference” in Covid mortality rates between Democratic and Republican states in the pre-vaccine period, according to CDC data cited in the book, despite Republican states’ more lenient policies. Macedo and Lee also favorably compare Sweden, which controversially avoided mass lockdowns but ultimately had a lower mortality rate than many other European countries.The shutdowns had foreseeable and quantifiable costs, they say, many of which we are still paying. Learning loss and school absenteeism soared. Inflation went through the roof thanks in part to lockdown spending and stimulus payments. Small businesses defaulted; other medical treatments like cancer screenings and mental health care suffered; and rates of loneliness and crime increased. The economic strain on poor and minority Americans was particularly severe.Covid policies escalated into culture wars, amplifying tensions around other social issues. Teachers’ unions, which are often bastions of Democratic support, painted school re-openings as “rooted in sexism, racism, and misogyny” and “a recipe for … structural racism”, the book notes, despite the fact that minority and poor students were most disadvantaged by remote learning.These measures also had a literal price. “In inflation-adjusted terms,” Macedo and Lee write, “the United States spent more on pandemic aid in 2020 than it spent on the 2009 stimulus package and the New Deal combined” – or about what the US spent on war production in 1943.View image in fullscreenYet of the $5tn that the US Congress authorized in 2020 and 2021 for Covid expenditure, only about 10% went to direct medical expenses such as hospitals or vaccine distribution, according to the book; most of the spending was on economic relief to people and businesses affected by shutdowns. Ten per cent of that relief was stolen by fraud, according to the AP.The pandemic was an emergency with no modern precedent, of course, and hindsight is easy. But In Covid’s Wake tries to take into account what information was known at the time – including earlier pandemic preparedness studies. Reports by Johns Hopkins (2019), the World Health Organization (2019), the state of Illinois (2014) and the British government (2011) had all expressed ambivalence or caution about the kind of quarantine measures that were soon taken.“We take a look at the state of the evidence as it was in early 2020,” Lee said. “It was clear at the time that the evidence was quite unsettled around all of this, and if policymakers had been more honest with the public about these uncertainties, I think they would have maintained public trust better.”The Johns Hopkins Center for Health Security hosted a wargaming exercise in October 2019, shortly before the pandemic began, to simulate a deadly coronavirus pandemic; the findings explicitly urged that “[t]ravel and trade … be maintained even in the face of a pandemic”. Similarly, a WHO paper in 2019 said that some measures – such as border closures and contact tracing – were “not recommended in any circumstances”.“And yet we did all of that in short order,” Macedo said, “and without people referring back to these plans.”He and Lee also believe there was a strong element of class bias, with a left-leaning “laptop class” that could easily work from home touting anti-Covid measures that were much easier for some Americans to adopt than others. Many relatively affluent Americans became even wealthier during the pandemic, in part due to rising housing values.At the same time, the laptop class was only able to socially isolate at home in part because other people risked exposure to provide groceries. Stay-at-home measures were partly intended to protect “essential workers”, but policymakers living in crisis-stricken major metropolitan areas such as New York or Washington DC did not reckon with why social distancing and other measures might be less important in rural parts of the country where Covid rates were lower.Lockdowns were intended to slow Covid’s spread, yet previous pandemic recommendations had suggested they only be used very early in an outbreak and even then do not buy much time, Macedo said.View image in fullscreenPolicymakers and experts often embraced stringent measures for reasons that are more political than medical, Macedo and Lee argue; in a pandemic, authorities are keen to assure anxious publics that they are “in charge” and “doing something”.In strange contrast, policymakers and journalists in the US and elsewhere seemed to take China as a model, the book argues, despite the fact that China is an authoritarian state and had concealed the scale of the outbreak during the crucial early days of the pandemic. Its regime had obvious incentives to mislead foreign observers, and used draconian quarantine measures such as physically welding people into their homes.When the WHO organized a joint China field mission with the Chinese government, in February 2020, non-Chinese researchers found it difficult to converse with their Chinese counterparts away from government handlers. Yet the WHO’s report was “effusive in its praise” of China’s approach, the book notes.“My view is that there was just a great deal of wishful thinking on the part of technocrats of all kinds,” Lee said. “They wanted there to be an answer – that if we do X and Y, we can prevent this disaster. And so they’re kind of grasping at straws. The Chinese example gave them hope.” She noted that Covid policymakers might have been better served if there had been people assigned to act as devil’s advocates in internal deliberations.Lee and Macedo are not natural scientists or public health professionals, they emphasize, and their book is about failures in public deliberation over Covid-19, rather than a prescription for managing pandemics.But they do wade into the debate about Covid-19’s origin, arguing that the “lab leak” hypothesis – that Covid-19 accidentally leaked from the Wuhan Institute of Virology, rather than spontaneously leaping from animals to humans – was unfairly dismissed.The Wuhan Institute studied coronaviruses similar to the one responsible for Covid-19, had a documented history of safety breaches, was located near the outbreak, and is known to have experimented on viruses using controversial “gain-of-function” methods funded by the US, which involve mutating pathogens to see what they might look like in a more advanced or dangerous form.Perhaps because Trump had fanned racial paranoia by calling Covid-19 the “China virus” and rightwing influencers were spreading the notion that it had been deliberately engineered and unleashed on the world by China, many scientists, public health experts and journalists reacted by framing the idea of a lab leak – even an accidental one – as an offensive conspiracy theory. Dr Anthony Fauci and other top public health figures were evasive or in some cases dishonest about the possibility of a lab leak, Macedo and Lee say, as well as the fact that a US non-profit funded by the National Institutes of Health allegedly funded gain-of-function research at the Wuhan Institute.Since then, though, the CIA and other US intelligence agencies have cautiously endorsed the lab leak theory, and the discourse around Covid has softened somewhat. The economist Emily Oster sparked immense backlash by arguing against school closures in 2020. Now publications such as New York Magazine and the New York Times have acknowledged the plausibility of the lab leak hypothesis, for example, and there is growing consensus that school closures hurt many children.The reception to In Covid’s Wake has been more positive than Macedo and Lee expected – perhaps a sign that some of their arguments have penetrated the mainstream, if not that we’ve gotten better as a society at talking about difficult things. “The reception of the book has been much less controversial [and] contentious than we expected,” Macedo said.Yet the wounds fester and debates continue. Some readers of the New York Times were furious when The Daily, the newspaper’s flagship podcast, recently interviewed them, with subscribers arguing that the episode was not sufficiently critical of their stance. And some coverage of the book has criticized it for underplaying the danger of the disease.Macedo and Lee said that a few of their colleagues have expressed concern that their critique could fuel political attacks on science – a worry that crossed their minds too. “Our response is that the best way to refute criticisms that science and universities have been politicized is to be open to criticism and willing to engage in self-criticism,” Macedo said.“We need to make sure these institutions are in the best possible working order to face the challenges ahead. And we think that’s by being honest, not by covering over mistakes or being unwilling to face up to hard questions.” More

    • 125 Shares130 Views

      in US Politics

      Melania Trump’s secret to getting through hard times? Love (actually)

      by

      Melania’s guide to getting through hard timesLet’s take a quick break from the increasingly dreadful news for a little check-in, shall we? So … how are you holding up right now? How are those stress levels?Mine aren’t great, to be honest. I’m pickling in my own cortisol as I write this. But I’m not here to moan. I am here to share some helpful advice, courtesy of our inspiring first lady Melania Trump, about how to get through these challenging times.Now, I know what you may be thinking: what on earth does Melania Trump know about adversity? The woman divides her time between a gold penthouse in Manhattan and a mansion in Florida, occasionally dropping into the White House to wave at commoners. She’s not exactly worrying about the price of eggs or the balance of her 401(k).But let’s not be too quick to judge. Money doesn’t insulate you from everything, and I’m sure Melania has her own problems. I mean, the poor woman is probably forced to regularly socialize with Elon Musk – which would drain the lifeblood from anyone. Then there’s the fact her husband has taken to using the stomach-turning nickname the “fertilization president”.Melania’s also not just lounging around in luxury: I am sure she is working extremely hard for the millions of dollars Amazon has thrown at her for the privilege of making a sycophantic documentary about her life. And then there’s all the annoying first lady admin; her office has just had to reschedule the White House spring garden tours – which Melania is not expected to actually attend – because of some pesky protesters.So how does our first lady navigate these very stressful challenges? While presenting the state department’s 19th International Women of Courage awards, which honored eight women from around the world, Melania shared her secret trick for getting through hard times. It’s … wait for it … love.“Throughout my life, I have harnessed the power of love as a source of strength during challenging times,” Melania said. “Love has inspired me to embrace forgiveness, nurture empathy and exhibit bravery in the face of unforeseen obstacles.”Melania noted that the award recipients – which included women from Yemen, South Sudan, Israel and the Philippines – “came from diverse backgrounds and regions, yet love transcends boundaries and territories”. She further added that she was inspired by “the women who are driven to speak out for justice, even though their voices are trembling”.The first lady deserves an award of her own for that speech because I have absolutely no idea how she managed to say all that with a straight face. I mean, seriously, is she trolling us? How can she talk about love while her husband’s hate-filled administration is deporting everyone they can? Having the wrong tattoo – or just a stroke of bad luck – can now get you sent to a prison in El Salvador. (The secretary of state Marco Rubio, by the way, who is presiding proudly over these deportations, also made a speech at the International Women of Courage awards.)How can Melania talk about justice when the Trump administration is currently doing their best to deport or imprison anyone who speaks out for justice for Palestinians? And how dare she talk about diversity and women’s rights, when the Trump administration is erasing women from government websites as part of their crackdown on diversity, equity and inclusion.But, look, I don’t want to completely dismiss Melania’s advice. Perhaps she has a point. Perhaps, in these challenging times, we should all just channel Melania and reach for the power of love. So: if you happen to get into trouble with any US border guards because you’ve indulged in a little wrongthink online, just remind them of Melania’s words. Remind them that love transcends borders and territories. And then sit back, and enjoy your free trip to El Salvador.Katy Perry says she is ‘going to put the “ass” in astronaut’Please don’t, Katy. For more cringeworthy quotes on how “space is finally going to be glam”, read this feature in Elle. It profiles the all-women crew that has been chosen to joyride around space on Jeff Bezos’s Blue Origin rocket. They’re all going to be glammed up with lash extensions, folks! It’s gonna be one giant leap for womankind.Women in the US are dying preventable deaths because of abortion bansNew research details how three critically ill patients in the US could have survived if they’d been able to access abortions.How Taliban male-escort rules are killing mothers and babiesEven before the Taliban took power, Afghanistan had a maternal mortality rate three times higher than the global average. Now draconian policies, including guardianship rules that mean a woman can’t travel to hospital without being accompanied by a man, are contributing to an increase in maternal deaths in Afghanistan.House revolts over Republican bid to stop new parents from voting by proxyA small group of Republicans joined forces with Democrats to stop the GOP from blocking consideration of a measure that would allow new parents to temporarily designate someone else to vote in their place. “I think that today is a pretty historical day for the entire conference. It’s showing that the body has decided that parents deserve a voice in Washington,” the Republican Anna Paulina Luna said.The US woman with the world’s longest tongueImagine people screaming in shock every time you stick your tongue out. Such is the life of Chanel Tapper, a California woman who holds the Guinness World Record for woman with the globe’s longest tongue.US anti-abortion group expands campaign in UKA rightwing US group has been trying to export abortion extremism to the UK, lobbying heavily against the introduction of buffer zones around reproductive health clinics.Russell Brand charged with rape and sexual assault“Nation Could Have Sworn Russell Brand Was Already Convicted Sex Offender”, reads an Onion headline from 2023.At least 322 children killed since Israel’s new Gaza offensive, Unicef saysUnicef said “relentless and indiscriminate bombardments” had resulted in 100 children killed or maimed every day in the 10 days to 31 March.How Gina Rinehart is pushing the Maga message in AustraliaSome fascinating details in this Guardian series about Rinehart, who has been described as a “female Donald Trump” and is Australia’s richest person. Money clearly can’t buy taste because Rinehart is renovating her company headquarters to include a sculpture of Peanut the squirrel, Maga’s favourite rodent, and etchings of inspirational Elon Musk quotes.The week in pawtriarchyTrump’s tariffs are so far-reaching that they’ve even been imposed on the Heard and McDonald islands near Antarctica, inhabited only by penguins. (And a few seals.) I am sure the penguins, already suited up for an emergency meeting on the tariffs, are not too happy about this development – but the rest of us have been gifted some brrrrilliant memes. More

    • 188 Shares84 Views

      in US Politics

      ‘False teacher’: Trump’s pick to head the ‘White House faith office’ roils some fellow Christians

      by

      On the campaign trail, Donald Trump repeatedly promised to “protect religious liberty”, and two weeks after his inauguration he acted: creating a “White House faith office”, which will be led by Paula White, a millionaire televangelist known to speak in tongues who called the Black Lives Matter movement the “Antichrist” and once encouraged people to buy “resurrection seeds” for $1,114.The move brought renewed focus on White, Trump’s longtime spiritual guru. And for White, not all of it will be welcome.In March, she was criticized over an alleged cash-for-blessings scandal, while other rightwing Christians are unhappy with her new government role, with one describing White as “100% a false teacher”.White will be “senior adviser” of Trump’s faith office, which Trump announced along with an executive order which created a “Task Force to Eradicate Anti-Christian Bias”.View image in fullscreen“While I am in the White House, we will protect Christians in our schools, in our military, in our government, in our workplaces, hospitals, and in our public squares, and we will bring our countries back together as one nation under God, with liberty and justice for all,” Trump said in a speech announcing the creation of the faith office.The appointment of White suggests some of those methods of protection could be unorthodox. In March, as Easter approached, White was criticised for a video in which she appeared to offer “seven supernatural blessings” for the price of $1,000, including the assignation of a personal angel. White, whose preaching has been described as adhering to “prosperity gospel” theology – the belief that praying will result in financial gains – said the blessings would also include prosperity and “increase in inheritance”.White denied that people had to pay to receive the blessings, a spokesperson for Paula White Ministries telling the Christian Post: “This story is a deceptive smear. Pastor White specifically says in the very same video, ‘you’re not doing this to get something,’ and the solicitation, which was later in the program, makes it clear that any donation to the ministry should only be ‘as the Holy Spirit leads.’ Moreover, donations to the ministry do not directly benefit Pastor White.”Still, even some rightwing Christians were unimpressed with White’s appointment. Jon Root, a Turning Point USA contributor and conservative influencer who supports Trump, told Notus: “Anybody that you know holds true to strong biblical conviction and discernment wouldn’t be involved with Paula White. She’s 100% a false teacher.”In any case, the “seven supernatural blessings” was not the first time White has introduced finances into faith. In 2016, she offered “resurrection seeds” for sale for $1,144, claiming in a recorded speech that God had told her the price point.View image in fullscreen“There’s someone that God is speaking to, to click on that donation button by minimizing the screen. And when you do, to sow $1,144,” she said. “It’s not often I ask very specifically but God has instructed me and I want you to hear. This isn’t for everyone but this is for someone. When you sow that $1,144 based on John 11:44, I believe for resurrection life.”White said people could also pay $144 or $44 if they could not afford God’s suggested total. The money appeared to grant individuals a metaphorical, rather than physical, seed, and the price included a prayer cloth, which White said could bring “special miracles”, and recommended it be placed under a loved one’s bed.skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotionIt is unclear how many seeds were sold. But it is known that there have been questions over White’s financial maneuvers. CNN reported that White’s former church, Without Walls International, received $150m between 2004 and 2006, and a three-year investigation by Chuck Grassley, a Republican senator from Iowa, described how the church and White’s personal ministry used tax-exempt funds to pay a million dollars in salaries to family members and spent money on a private jet. The investigation closed with no penalties – although investigators said they were stifled by lifelong confidentially agreements that had been signed by church employees.Other questions about White relate to her beliefs and statements on issues including race and immigration. The Grio reported that White had particular animus for the Black Lives Matter movement, and said in a 2020 speech: “Christ’s likeness is not found in my gender, it is not found in my culture, it is not found in my ethnicity, it is not found in KKK, it is not found in Antifa, and it is not found in Black Lives Matter. All of which are anti-Christ, and even terrorist organizations.”Trump, whose commitment to true freedom of religion has repeatedly been questioned, in January rescinded guidance that prevented Immigration and Customs Enforcement and Customs and Border Protection from carrying out immigration enforcement in churches – more than two dozen Christian groups are suing the government over the policy – but that apparent lack of sympathy appears to match White’s views. During Trump’s first term, White, then the president’s spiritual adviser, raised eyebrows when she said Jesus would have been “sinful” and not “our Messiah” if he had broken immigration law.“I think so many people have taken biblical scriptures out of context on this, to say stuff like: ‘Well, Jesus was a refugee,’” White told the Christian Broadcasting Network.“And yes, he did live in Egypt for three and a half years. But it was not illegal. If he had broke the law, then he would have been sinful and he would not have been our Messiah.”From questionable financial accounting, to strident views on protests against the killings of young Black men, to a disdain for immigrants, it seems White could be a perfect match for Trump. More

    • 188 Shares137 Views

      in US Politics

      Trump’s ‘Liberation Day’ could mean recession in the US and pain worldwide | Steven Greenhouse

      by

      With the huge and painful tariffs that Donald Trump announced on Thursday, “Tariff Man” is acting like a paranoid 12-year-old bully who is convinced that everyone has wronged him, and he wants revenge. But the president’s instrument of revenge – massive tariffs – is going to do serious damage to the US and global economies. Stock market investors are convinced that’s the case, with Wall Street and world stock markets losing trillions of dollars in value in recent days as a result of Trump’s obsession.The president has escalated his risky, vengeful trade war even though the US economy was in strong shape when he took office – the jobless rate was just 4.1%, inflation was below 3% and US economic growth was the strongest in the industrial world, with its stock market at record levels. So it’s unclear whether the US economy needed the shock treatment that Trump is inflicting. The price increases resulting from his tariffs – which are a tax on imports – will cost the average American family $3,800 a year, according to the Budget Lab at Yale.Trump is right that the number of manufacturing jobs is down substantially from decades ago, and he is intent on getting that number back up. But he’s taking a very high-stakes bet that he can significantly increase the number of factory jobs, even as many economists say the horses have left that barn, and it is too late or will be too painful to do much about it. In 1979, the US had a record 19.5m factory jobs. That number fell to 17m in 2001 and to 12.7m today (having risen by 600,000 during Joe Biden’s presidency).Trump’s new tariffs result from a combination of impulsiveness, impetuousness and ignorance, although some economists say that idiocy and economic illiteracy also play a big part. Paul Krugman says that Trump’s tariffs reflect the “whims of a mad king”, adding that the administration’s case for tariffs is “completely incoherent”, as it insists that the tariffs won’t raise prices but will still raise hundreds of billions of dollars in revenue.The tariffs that Trump announced on Thursday are staggering – 50% on tiny Lesotho, 49% on Cambodia, 46% on Vietnam, 34% on China, 32% on Taiwan, 24% on Japan and 20% on European Union countries. These percentages were arrived at not by careful, probing analysis that took months, but by some slapdash, Keystone Kops math.It would be generous to say it’s the one-eyed leading the blind. Rather, it’s an economically blind, impetuous president leading a mum, intimidated Republican-controlled Congress. One of the tragedies here is that many congressional Republicans see the grievous damage Trump is doing, but they’re too craven to speak out and risk Trump’s and Elon Musk’s social media wrath.Mark Zandi, the chief economist at Moody’s Analytics, is predicting disaster. He says that as a result of Trump’s tariffs a recession “will hit imminently and extend until next year”. Zandi says that economic growth could fall by 2 percentage points, while the jobless rate could leap to a very painful 7.5%. On Friday, the Federal Reserve chair, Jerome Powell, also sounded the alarm, saying that Trump’s tariffs could cause even slower economic growth and higher inflation than originally expected.With Trump’s 50% tariff rate on Lesotho, 46% on Vietnam and 37% on Bangladesh, those countries – with their export-dependent apparel industries – will suffer terribly. There will be huge layoffs and no doubt an increase in hunger and immiseration – just as Trump-Musk’s tremendous foreign aid cuts at USAID have already resulted in increased hunger and deaths. And one has to wonder: by pummeling poor, apparel-producing countries such as Lesotho, Cambodia, Vietnam and Bangladesh, what is Trump trying to achieve? Does he want to bring back to the US low-paying, garment-industry jobs making jeans and sneakers?Carefully crafted tariffs can be helpful. They can be used to help build important industries or prevent the wholesale destruction of industries due to other countries’ bad behavior, like China’s improperly subsidizing its industries or dumping goods on the world market far below the cost of production. Unfortunately, Trump’s so-called “liberation day” tariffs are not a scalpel designed to help specific industries, but rather a blunderbuss mess, hitting everyone and everything, including US consumers and industries. Let’s not forget that the tariffs will raise costs at many US manufacturers and make them less competitive by, for instance, greatly increasing the price of imported steel and auto parts.The tariffs that Trump is imposing are even greater than the infamous Smoot-Hawley tariffs, which are widely seen as having worsened the Great Depression. Krugman noted that Trump’s tariffs could also do serious damage because “imports as a share of the [US] economy are three times what they were in the 1920s”.Even if Trump’s tariffs were to do what he hopes – create another million or two factory jobs – the cost would be immense. A recession. Millions of families hurt by higher prices. Trillions and trillions in lost stock market value. Far worse relations with our close allies and other countries. Opening the door to Trump’s adversary, China, significantly improving its trade and economic relations with other countries. Plus, a severe economic shock to many poorer nations.And it’s not at all certain that Trump’s tariffs will create a million or more manufacturing jobs: US economic growth and jobs will be hurt by a possible tariff-induced recession, trade retaliation from other countries, a long-term loss of markets as traditional trading partners turn away from the US, and a possible long-term decline in US industrial competitiveness as tariff protections enable inefficient companies to succeed.skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotionTrump’s big hope is that corporations will build new factories and create more factory jobs in the US, but corporate executives won’t do that unless they’re convinced that there’s economic stability and predictability. They’re not blind to how capricious and unpredictable Trump is, and they know that he loves to play master dealmaker and win concessions from other countries and then immediately slash their tariffs. Trump’s team says these tariffs will be here for the long haul, but can corporate CEOs count on those claims when they’re deciding to spend $400m on a new factory?In announcing his huge new tariffs last Thursday, Trump proclaimed: “April 2, 2025 will forever be remembered as the day American industry was reborn, the day America’s destiny was reclaimed, and the day that we began to make America wealthy again.” As usual, Trump failed to note some extremely important things.Although he won’t admit it, the US is already very wealthy. If he were truly serious about fixing the economy and making it fairer, he wouldn’t be rushing to give massive tax cuts to the ultra-rich and sparking fears of vast cuts Medicaid and food stamps that struggling American families rely on.What Trump and his team will never admit is that 2 April 2025 may for ever be remembered as the day the US economy took a grievous, Trump-induced tumble toward recession and higher prices. And not that Trump cares, but 2 April 2025 may also be remembered overseas for creating tremendous pain for struggling workers from Bangladesh to Lesotho to Honduras.

      Steven Greenhouse is a journalist and author focusing on labor and the workplace, as well as economic and legal issues More