Donald Trump

Subterms

    More stories

    • 125 Shares32 Views

      in US Politics

      Trump has ‘blurred’ line between military and politics, ex-officers warn

      by

      With months of escalation between US cities and the Trump administration amid the deployment of national guard troops, former military officials released a report on Monday about the risks of politicizing the nation’s armed forces.The report warns that increasing domestic military deployments, such as using national guard troops for immigration enforcement in the US, and removing senior military officers and legal advisers have made the armed forces appear to serve partisan agendas.“The use of troops, bases, and ceremonies in partisan settings has blurred the line between military service and political messaging, eroding morale and public trust in the military’s apolitical character,” the report reads.The report, The Perils of Politicizing the US Military, was authored by six former service secretaries and retired four-star admirals and generals, including former army secretary Louis Caldera, former air force secretary Deborah Lee James, former navy secretary Sean O’Keefe, retired navy admiral Steve Abbot, retired coast guard admiral Thad Allen, and retired army general George Casey.The white paper comes as the Trump administration continues to battle the courts over deploying the national guard in Portland. In Washington DC, where the president has more control over the guard than in states, troops were ordered to remain there through at least February.After sending troops to the nation’s capital, Trump sent others to Chicago and threatened to send more to other Democratic-run cities such as San Francisco and New York.Meanwhile, months of upheaval at the defense department have been a hallmark of Pete Hegseth’s tenure. Last month, Hegseth, the US defense secretary, abruptly fired the navy chief of staff. In May, he ordered the military to cut 20% of its four-star generals and admirals, while Hegseth and Trump have fired more than half a dozen top generals since January.The Trump administration has also fired the only two women serving as four-star officers. In February, Hegseth also fired air force general CQ Brown Jr, the chair of the joint chiefs of staff and the second Black man to serve in that role.Monday’s report warns about the consequences of such efforts, most acutely the “erosion of the armed forces’ apolitical character”.“When service members, senior leaders, or military symbols are perceived as aligned with political agendas, the public begins to see the institution as partisan rather than national – and once eroded, that trust is difficult to rebuild,” reads the report. “This loss of trust makes it harder to recruit across the political spectrum, harder to retain talent, and harder to reassure allies and deter adversaries abroad.”Jack Reed, the top Democrat on the Senate armed services committee, urged members of Congress last month to put a halt to Trump’s efforts to deploy national guard troops in US cities without the consent of local leaders, as well as to consider the implications such actions will have for trust in the military.skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotion“Congress has the Constitutional authority and moral obligation to stop this,” Reed said in a statement. “We are not powerless. We control the purse. We have oversight authority. We can pass legislation. And we must act now.”Reed called on lawmakers to pass legislation that requires the administration to publicly explain to and notify Congress when it removes senior generals or admirals, as well as measures that would “establish clear standards requiring congressional approval for domestic military deployments except in genuine emergencies”.The report by former military leaders outlines similar recommendations to Congress, calling on lawmakers to require “clear justification and post-action review of significant domestic deployments and high-level personnel changes”. More

    • 175 Shares32 Views

      in US Politics

      US unveils World Cup visa system but warns fans could still be denied entry

      by

      The Trump administration on Monday unveiled a new fast-track visa system for the millions of visitors expected to come to the US for the 2026 World Cup, but said fans could still be denied entry to the country despite holding tickets.The Fifa prioritized appointment scheduling system, announced at the White House on Monday, will push World Cup ticket-holders to the front of the line for visa interviews. However, secretary of state Marco Rubio made clear that expedited processing does not mean automatic entry.“Your ticket is not a visa. It doesn’t guarantee admission to the US,” Rubio said. “It guarantees you an expedited appointment. You’re still going to go through the same vetting. We’re going to do the same vetting as anybody else would get. The only difference here is we’re moving them up in the queue.”The warning suggests non-American citizens within the roughly million people who have already bought tickets could find themselves barred from entering the country despite holding valid match passes and securing faster appointment slots.Fifa president Gianni Infantino said World Cup officials would eventually sell up to 6 to 7 million tickets and told reporters in the Oval Office “we’ll have between five and 10 million people coming to America from all over the world”.So far, most demand has been domestic: the US, Mexico and Canada will be co-hosting the tournament next June and make up the majority of ticket holders. But Fifa said people from 212 different countries and territories have also already bought their tickets.To handle the surge in applications, Rubio said the state department has deployed more than 400 additional consular officers worldwide, in some cases doubling embassy staff. The measures have already slashed visa wait times from up to a year to 60 days or less in approximately 80% of countries, according to Rubio.“In places, for example, like Brazil and Argentina, you would have [had] over a year to get an appointment. Now you can get [one] in less than two months,” Rubio said.Separately, Trump threatened to relocate matches from host cities he deems problematic, singling out Seattle and its new democratic socialist mayor. The city is scheduled to host six games.“If we think there’s going to be the sign of any trouble, I would ask [Fifa president] Gianni [Infantino] move that to a different city. We have a lot of cities that would love to have it,” Trump said. “If we think there’s a problem in Seattle where you have a very, very liberal-slash-communist mayor … we’re going to move the event to some place where it’s going to be appreciated and safe.”The president said he would be willing to deploy the national guard to Los Angeles, another host city, citing concerns with crime and demanding California officials request federal assistance immediately.“I would love to send in [the] national guard, or whoever’s necessary to help them,” Trump said. “If there’s even a hint of a problem, we want to get in there before the problem. We want to make it totally safe for [Infantino] and Fifa and all the great people that are going to be there.”Trump called the tournament a “once-in-a-lifetime opportunity” for the country. The US previously hosted the World Cup in 1994. The 2026 edition kicks off in the summer, and will be the first to feature 48 teams, expanded from the traditional 32. More

    • 150 Shares32 Views

      in US Politics

      Acting Fema head resigns after furor over handling of deadly Texas flooding

      by

      The acting administrator of the Federal Emergency Management Agency (Fema) is leaving the agency, a senior Trump administration official said on Monday.David Richardson resigned after only a brief stint leading the agency amid a furor over his responsiveness, especially during the catastrophic flooding in Texas during the summer that swept away a children’s camp and killed more than 130 people.The Trump administration has been vocal about wanting to dismantle Fema and the Washington Post was first to report on Monday that Richardson had handed in his resignation after six months doing the job.Richardson’s departure was confirmed by an unnamed official, according to Reuters, and is taking place while the Atlantic hurricane season is still under way.He is a former US Marine Corps officer and becomes the second Fema head to leave or be fired since May. Richardson has been accused of keeping a low profile during the deadly Texas flash floods in July. He had already baffled staff in June when he said he was unaware the country had a hurricane season.His staff later insisted that the comment had been meant as a joke, an explanation greeted with skepticism by former Fema personnel.The Trump administration official familiar with Richardson’s departure gave no reasons for the Fema chief stepping down.In a statement, a spokesperson for the Department of Homeland Security (DHS)– which has overall responsibility for Fema – said Richardson would be returning to “the private sector” and would be replaced by the agency’s chief of staff, Karen Evans, from the beginning of next month.Evans would oversee a radical overhaul of Fema, as set out in a forthcoming report from a review council set up by the White House for that purpose, the statement said.The spokesperson praised Richardson for “[leading] Fema through the 2025 hurricane season, delivering historic funding to North Carolina, Texas, Florida, New Mexico and Alaska, and overseeing a comprehensive review that identified and eliminated serious governmental waste and inefficiency, while refocusing the agency to deliver swift resources to Americans in crisis.“We anticipate the forthcoming release of the Fema Review Council’s final report, which will inform this administration’s ongoing efforts to fundamentally restructure Fema, transforming it from its current form into a streamlined, mission-focused disaster-response force. Starting December 1, Fema Chief of Staff Karen Evans will step into this important role.”Richardson’s predecessor was fired in May, after pushing back against Trump administration efforts to dismantle the agency.Donald Trump has said he wants to greatly reduce the size of Fema, which is the agency currently responsible for preparing for and responding to natural disasters in the US, although the president has said state governments can handle many of the federal agency’s functions.Richardson’s abrupt departure is an ignominious end for an official who told staff when he first arrived in May that he would “run right over” anyone who resists changes and that all decisions must go through him.“I, and I alone in Fema, speak for Fema,” he said at the time. Fema has lost about 2,500 employees since January through buyouts, firings and other incentives for staff to quit, reducing its overall size to about 23,350, according to a September Government Accountability Office report.The cuts are part of Trump’s broader push to cut the cost and size of the federal civilian workforce.Reuters contributed reporting More

    • 138 Shares36 Views

      in US Politics

      What are the Jeffrey Epstein files, and will more be released?

      by

      Tens of thousands of documents have been released by members of Congress related to Jeffrey Epstein, the child sexual abuser, that shed light on his communications with and about powerful people, including the president.Last week, Democratic members of Congress released three emails pertaining to Trump and Epstein, then Republican members released more than 20,000 emails.But the issue is not over – and more documents could be coming soon.Trump has now reversed course on releasing the files, calling on the US House to vote on Tuesday to force the justice department to release more Epstein documents. He has previously fought against the idea and referred to the issue as the “Epstein hoax”.While campaigning, Trump said he would release the so-called “Epstein files”, the documents about criminal investigations into his former friend, who died in jail by hanging in 2019. But since taking office, Trump has appeared to have broken that promise, rankling ardent Maga allies who have spent years calling for the documents’ release.Epstein knew powerful people of all political persuasions and counted them as friends. Releasing the documents has become a rallying cry to reveal more details about Epstein, including how he made his money, and the extent of involvement by those who supported him in his criminal activity, especially those with wealth and political sway.Earlier in July, the US justice department said it would not be releasing more documents, saying it could harm victims and insisting there was not a “client list”.The refusal to release documents has roiled the right, with some Republicans pushing strongly to compel the files to be public as others downplayed the issue or sided with Trump. Democrats have seized on the schism, calling for Congress to compel the release of the documents and calling out Trump’s hypocrisy.What are the ‘files’? What kinds of documents?The federal government has a “truckload” of documents from and about Epstein related to his criminal cases, according to reported comments of Pam Bondi, the US attorney general. This includes his flight logs for private planes and contacts, which is sometimes referred to as his “black book” – which has already been publicly posted online.A memo released by the justice department in July said the agency searched through its databases, hard drives and physical areas to find Epstein-related information, locating “more than 300 gigabytes of data and physical evidence”.Within those files were images and videos of Epstein and his victims, some of whom are minors, and more than 10,000 downloaded videos and images of “illegal child sex abuse material and other pornography”.Some documents related to Epstein are under court-ordered seals. For instance, a federal judge this week denied a request from the justice department to unseal grand jury transcripts in a south Florida criminal investigation. Some of those that were once sealed have been unsealed, including some unsealed in early 2024 that identified names of people included in depositions and motions who previously were listed as John Does.“Much of the material is subject to court-ordered sealing,” the justice department memo said. “Only a fraction of this material would have been aired publicly had Epstein gone to trial, as the seal served only to protect victims and did not expose any additional third parties to allegations of illegal wrongdoing.”There are also serious concerns about identifying victims if some documents are released. The department said Epstein had harmed more than 1,000 victims, some minors, all of whom “suffered unique trauma”.“Sensitive information relating to these victims is intertwined throughout the materials. This includes specific details such as victim names and likenesses, physical descriptions, places of birth, associates, and employment history,” the memo said.Is there a ‘client list’?In its memo, the department says there was no “client list”, despite it being a longtime claim and rallying call for those embedded in the Epstein case, especially on the right.“There was also no credible evidence found that Epstein blackmailed prominent individuals as part of his actions,” the memo says. “We did not uncover evidence that could predicate an investigation against uncharged third parties.”Julie K Brown, an investigative journalist with the Miami Herald who has been uncovering the Epstein case for years, said earlier this year that there was “no Jeffrey Epstein client list. Period. It’s a figment of the internet’s imagination – and a means to just slander people.”In an interview with the Atlantic, Brown said the list idea was a “red herring” that seems to have been born out of a phone directory Epstein’s girlfriend, Ghislaine Maxwell, compiled, often referred to as the “black book”. People such as Trump and other celebrities were in the directory, but so were Epstein’s gardeners, barbers and others, Brown said.What has Trump said about the files?After Epstein’s death by suicide, Trump shared a tweet that claimed the Clintons were involved in his death. He also told reporters at the time that he had questions about whether Bill Clinton went to Epstein’s infamous island.While campaigning for the 2024 election, Trump said, when asked, that he would declassify the Epstein files, though he prioritized them below files about September 11 and the John F Kennedy assassination. “You don’t want to affect people’s lives if there’s phoney stuff in there, because there’s a lot of phoney stuff with that whole world,” he said then.Bondi said earlier this year that the justice department would be releasing a list of Epstein’s clients, telling Fox News that it was “sitting on my desk right now to review” – though she later said she was talking about case files and not a client list. The department released some information, dubbed a “first phase of files”, to rightwing influencers, though those files did not contain much new information.Trump has grown increasingly angry at those calling for the files to be released, and dismissed the entire controversy as “boring” and a “hoax”, something that “nobody cares about”.“I have had more success in 6 months than perhaps any President in our Country’s history, and all these people want to talk about, with strong prodding by the Fake News and the success starved Dems, is the Jeffrey Epstein Hoax,” he wrote on Truth Social on 16 July.On 16 November, Trump said the files should be released.“House Republicans should vote to release the Epstein files, because we have nothing to hide, and it’s time to move on from this Democrat Hoax perpetrated by Radical Left Lunatics in order to deflect from the Great Success of the Republican Party, including our recent Victory on the Democrat ‘Shutdown,’” he wrote on Truth Social.Is Trump named in the files?Yes. Trump is known to be a one-time friend of Epstein’s. His name’s inclusion in the documents does not mean he was a party to any of Epstein’s criminal activity.Documents released by Democratic members of the House oversight committee included an email from Epstein to Trump biographer Michael Wolff in which Epstein said of Trump: “Of course, he knew about the girls as he asked Ghislaine to stop.” In another, he called Trump the “dog that hasn’t barked”.Epstein emailed people about Trump regularly, usually derogatorily. “I have met some very bad people,” he wrote in one email. “None as bad as Trump. Not one decent cell in his body.”What questions could these files help answer?There are many legitimate questions that the files could shed light on about Epstein and his circle.How Epstein made his money is still of much interest, as is how he financed his extensive sex-trafficking operation. Often referred to as a financier, he had vast wealth, owning expensive real-estate including two private islands, and a private jet.Ron Wyden, the Democratic senator from Oregon who is the ranking Democrat on the Senate finance committee, told the New York Times that four major banks had “flagged more than $1.5bn in transactions – including thousands of wire transfers for the purchase and sale of artwork for rich friends, fees paid to Mr Epstein by wealthy individuals, and payments to numerous women”.Questions still swirl over potential ties to the intelligence community. Bondi told reporters: “To him being an agent, I have no knowledge about that. We can get back to you on that.” The former Israeli prime minister Naftali Bennett denied Epstein was an Israeli agent, a frequent claim made without evidence. “The accusation that Jeffrey Epstein somehow worked for Israel or the Mossad running a blackmail ring is categorically and totally false,” Bennett said.And suspicion over the manner of Epstein’s death is still in the mix. The justice department released an 11-hour video of jail footage in the hours before and after his death, though there seems to be almost three minutes of footage missing, leading to further scrutiny. Bondi has said that missing footage is because the Bureau of Prisons was resetting video.There is also much to be discovered on how Epstein was able to evade justice for so long. Brown, the Miami Herald reporter, told the Atlantic her “one nagging question” goes back to 2008, when the justice department decided not to fully go after Epstein after local and state authorities first were looking into his crimes.“Who were the people behind that in the beginning?” Brown said. “Because if they had done their jobs, of all these people in 2006, 2007, and 2008 – if all those people working for us, the American public, had done their jobs, we wouldn’t be sitting here right now. A lot of those victims would’ve never been victimized.” More

    • 163 Shares32 Views

      in US Politics

      Trump is turning the US military into a political prop | Jan-Werner Müller

      by

      Of all the reasons Americans have been losing sleep recently – hunger, canceled flights, Democrats betraying them – the most ominous has to do with an institution usually absent from discussions about the fate of our democracy: the military. No need to be starry-eyed about US imperialism and what has long been criticized as an ever-expanding “national security state”; one can still appreciate that it is a good thing if generals do not take sides in politics – just ask anyone from the many countries around the world where they do. But a pattern is becoming clear: Donald Trump is purging the higher ranks based on his prejudices and demands for loyalty; the military is being turned into a partisan instrument and a political prop; more dangerous still, the president is instilling the logic of impunity that has come to characterize his entire approach to governance.Figures deemed too close to Trump critics, such as Gen Mark Milley, have seen promotions delayed or canceled; those targeted by far-right influencers might face professional backlash. Trump used Maga-fied soldiers as background to a Fort Bragg speech, violating longstanding norms against instrumentalizing state institutions for partisan purposes. Every violation becomes a test of who will be loyal: critics – the potentially disloyal – will identify themselves.With every illegal order, such as attacking boats in the Caribbean, he manages to have those who carry them out compromise themselves morally and potentially render themselves liable for criminal prosecution, thereby generating an incentive for members of the military to make sure Trumpists stay in power. At the same time, prominent pardons – most recently of those trying to steal the 2020 election – establish the promise of impunity. As plenty of observers have pointed out, under Trump, law will protect the Maga faithful but will not bind them; those declared the president’s enemies will be bound by the law, but not be protected by it. It is not an accident that Pete Hegseth’s first 15 minutes of fame consisted of passionate pleas on Fox to let those accused of war crimes go unpunished.Hegseth has carried the primacy of the performative from TV into the Pentagon. Just think of his self-branding through dress and over-the-top speeches littered with alliterations – suggesting that words drive thinking, as opposed to thinking leading to choosing the right words (most prominently, there is “lethality” having to replace “legality”). The great 18th-century writer and feminist Mary Wollstonecraft drew a surprising parallel between stereotypes about women and a certain type of soldier in standing (and largely underemployed) armies. She observed that soldiers might acquire manners before morals: “Like the fair sex, the business of their life is gallantry. They were taught to please, and they only live to please.”The point is not that Hegseth’s ideal soldiers are effeminate; rather, it is that the song and dance about a “warrior ethos” is pure made-for-TV-affectation, as if hand-to-hand combat were the essence of 21st-century warfare. Central Command becomes subject to the logic of “central casting” (Trump’s own words when looking at the officers Hegseth assembled in Virginia in September). The Prussian general Carl von Clausewitz’s memorable dictum that war is the continuation of politics by other means is replaced with something like “war is the continuation of fitness and fashion by other means” (as Hegseth made it a priority to remove personnel deemed fat).Yet sending soldiers into Democratic cities should not be dismissed as purely performative. It serves to normalize the image of soldiers on the street; it blurs the distinction between military and civilian life, and, as the Israeli scholar Avishay Ben Sasson-Gordis has argued, it sends a message that citizens can be treated as enemies. In the process, it is also becoming increasingly unclear which uniformed personnel belong to which unit and who is really authorized to do what, since the Pentagon and homeland security are explicitly encouraged to be in “lockstep” as part of a shared “homeland mission”. Trump is merging everyone into something the political scientist Dan Moynihan terms the “omniforce”, the kind of omnipresent army, combined with what James Madison called an “overgrown executive”, which the American founders rightly dreaded.skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotionThe effect is twofold: impunity is made more likely, since those who cannot be identified will not be held accountable, and the omniforce will feel like Trump’s personal creation and loyal guard (as one investigation revealed, at least six of Trump’s political appointees now live in military housing). The image of Trump as padrone was reinforced by his trying to grab funds appropriated by Congress for other purposes in order to pay soldiers during the shutdown – not to speak of having a pro-regime oligarch fund the military with private wealth. Other aspiring autocrats have made similar moves, though at a much smaller scale: Viktor Orbán has instituted a special counter-terror unit, headed by his former bodyguard and aide, that is widely seen as primarily loyal to the Hungarian prime minister.Many remember the great democratization wave of the 1970s and 1980s, forgetting how easily things might have turned out differently. We are often oblivious to how critical the role of the military was in transitions to democracy. Not only because juntas were willing to relinquish power but also because individuals made the right moral choice. Augusto Pinochet, after losing a plebiscite in 1988, had been ready to declare an emergency and keep himself in power by force. One general, Fernando Matthei, rejected the plan and told journalists that Pinochet had lost the plebiscite. The US is not Chile, but the question of what those in uniform will do in pivotal moments for democracy is, alas, becoming more relevant by the day.

      Jan-Werner Müller is a Guardian US columnist and a professor of politics at Princeton University More

    • 200 Shares30 Views

      in US Politics

      Trump tells Republicans to vote to release Epstein files, in a reversal of his previous stance

      by

      US president Donald Trump has urged his fellow Republicans in Congress to vote for the release of files related to the late convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein, reversing his earlier resistance to such a move.Trump’s post on his Truth Social came after House speaker Mike Johnson said earlier that he believed a vote on releasing justice department documents in the Epstein case should help put to rest allegations “that he [Trump] has something to do with it”.Trump wrote on his Truth Social platform on Sunday: “House Republicans should vote to release the Epstein files, because we have nothing to hide.“And it’s time to move on from this Democrat Hoax perpetrated by Radical Left Lunatics in order to deflect from the Great Success of the Republican Party, including our recent Victory on the Democrat ‘Shutdown’,” he said.Although Trump and Epstein were photographed together decades ago, the president has said the two men fell out before Epstein’s convictions. Emails released last week by a House committee showed the disgraced financier, who died by suicide in jail in 2019, believed Trump “knew about the girls,” though it was not clear what that phrase meant.Trump, who has recently dismissed the Epstein files as a Democratic smear campaign, has since instructed the justice department to investigate prominent Democrats’ ties to Epstein.Some critics have accused Trump of trying to conceal details – something the president denies – by looking to block the vote, which has divided his typically loyal Republican party.“The House Oversight Committee can have whatever they are legally entitled to, I DON’T CARE! All I do care about is that Republicans get BACK ON POINT, which is the Economy, “Affordability”, Trump wrote on Truth Social.On Sunday Republican congressman Thomas Massie challenged Trump over whether the president was making a “last-ditch effort” to keep the full files on Epstein from becoming public by ordering a fresh investigation.Massie and Democratic congressman Ro Khanna, the two US representatives leading the bipartisan push to make all the files held by the government public both raised concerns about the latest actions by the White House.Speaking on ABC’s This Week, Massie criticised Trump for ordering attorney general Pam Bondi on Friday to examine Democrats with ties to Epstein.Trump late on Friday withdrew his support for US representative Marjorie Taylor Greene of Georgia, long one of his staunchest supporters in Congress, following her criticism of Republicans on certain issues, including the handling of the Epstein files.Khanna, an original sponsor of the petition calling for a vote on the files’ release, said on Sunday that he expected more than 40 Republicans to vote in favor.Republicans hold the majority in the House, with 219 seats, versus 214 for Democrats.With Agence France-Presse More

    • 150 Shares38 Views

      in US Politics

      Trump news at a glance: Another Republican challenges Trump over Epstein files

      by

      Republican congressman Thomas Massie has challenged Donald Trump over whether the US president is making a “last-ditch effort” to keep the full files on the late sex offender Jeffrey Epstein from becoming public by ordering a fresh investigation.Massie and Democratic congressman Ro Khanna, the two US representatives leading the bipartisan push to make all the files held by the government public both raised fresh concerns about the latest actions by the White House.Speaking on ABC’s This Week, Massie criticized Trump for ordering attorney general Pam Bondi on Friday to examine Democrats with ties to Epstein.Massie’s comments come after Georgia Republican congresswoman Marjorie Taylor Greene demanded the release of all the Epstein documents, despite it causing a rift with Trump.Here are today’s top stories:Trump’s investigation into Epstein ties to political foes might be ‘smokescreen’, Republican says“The president’s been saying this is a hoax,” Republican congressman Thomas Massie has told ABC’s This Week, referring to several claims Trump has made in reaction to repeated calls for full disclosure of the files. “He’s been saying that for months. Well, he’s just now decided to investigate a hoax, if it’s a hoax. And I have another concern about these investigations that he’s announced. If they have ongoing investigations in certain areas, those documents can’t be released.“So, this might be a big smokescreen, these investigations, to open a bunch of them, as a last-ditch effort to prevent the release of the Epstein files,” he added.Read the full storyMarjorie Taylor Greene says Trump’s remarks hurtful Marjorie Taylor Greene on Sunday called Donald Trump’s remarks labeling her a traitor and a lunatic “hurtful” but said she hopes she and the US president can “make up”, despite stark differences over policy and the release of documents about Jeffrey Epstein.Greene, a longtime ally and fierce defender of Trump and the “Make America great again” (Maga) base, pushed back against his name-calling in her first interview since Trump withdrew his support for her on Friday.She told CNN’s State of the Union show: “His remarks, of course, have been hurtful … the most hurtful thing he said, which is absolutely untrue, is he called me a traitor and that is so extremely wrong.”Read the full storyTrans air force members sue Trump administration over denied pensionA group of 17 transgender US air force members has sued the Trump administration for denying them early retirement pensions and benefits.The complaint, submitted in federal court, describes the government’s move against them as “unlawful and invalid”.The legal action follows the air force’s confirmation it would deny early retirement benefits to all transgender service members with 15 to 18 years of military experience, a decision that effectively pushes them out of the military with no retirement support at all.Read the full storyUS military attacks another alleged drug boat in eastern Pacific, killing threeThe United States conducted another attack on an alleged drug trafficking boat in the eastern Pacific on Saturday, killing three people aboard, the Pentagon said on Sunday.“Intelligence confirmed that the vessel was involved in illicit narcotics smuggling, transiting along a known narco-trafficking route, and carrying narcotics,” the US Southern Command announced in a post on social media.The announcement said the boat was in international waters when it was struck by the Southern Spear joint taskforce. It did not give details on where the vessel was traveling from or what organization it was associated with.Read the full storyWhat else happened today:

      A top border patrol commander touted dozens of arrests in North Carolina’s largest city on Sunday as Charlotte residents reported a surge of encounters with federal immigration agents near churches and apartment complexes.

      The BBC should not pay any money to Donald Trump, the former BBC director general Tony Hall has said.

      The White House has made it a top priority to return the rare-earth industry to US shores. But is it really feasible?
      Catching up? Here’s what happened 15 November, 2025. More

    • 163 Shares38 Views

      in US Politics

      Trump’s investigation into Epstein ties to political foes might be ‘smokescreen’, Republican says

      by

      Republican congressman Thomas Massie challenged Donald Trump on Sunday over whether the US president is making a “last-ditch effort” to keep the full files on the late sex offender Jeffrey Epstein from becoming public by ordering a fresh investigation.Massie and Democratic congressman Ro Khanna, the two US representatives leading the bipartisan push to make all the files held by the government public both raised fresh concerns about the latest actions by the White House.Speaking on ABC’s This Week, Massie criticized Trump for ordering attorney general Pam Bondi on Friday to examine Democrats with ties to Epstein.This despite emails released last week by the House of Representatives’ oversight committee that suggest Trump was aware of Epstein’s conduct and that Epstein had also advised Steve Bannon, a key figure in Trump’s Make America Great Again (Maga) base.“The president’s been saying this is a hoax,” Massie said, referring to several claims Trump has made in reaction to repeated calls for full disclosure of the files. “He’s been saying that for months. Well, he’s just now decided to investigate a hoax, if it’s a hoax. And I have another concern about these investigations that he’s announced. If they have ongoing investigations in certain areas, those documents can’t be released.“So, this might be a big smokescreen, these investigations, to open a bunch of them, as a last-ditch effort to prevent the release of the Epstein files,” he added.ABC anchor Jonathan Karl asked Massie about what the Epstein records might contain and why Trump appears afraid of what they might reveal.“You know, I’ve never said that these files will implicate Donald Trump,” Massie replied. “And I really don’t think that they will. I think he’s trying to protect a bunch of rich and powerful friends, billionaires, donors to his campaign, friends in his social circles. That’s my operating theory on why he’s trying so hard to keep these files closed.”Massie also said it was possible that more than 100 House Republicans may vote in favor of releasing the Epstein files, documents currently held by the justice department related to the alleged crimes and alleged clientele of the late financier and sex offender, when the measure reaches the House floor for a vote this week. He urged skeptics to rethink their position.“I would remind my Republican colleagues who are deciding how to vote: Donald Trump can protect you in red districts right now by giving you an endorsement. But in 2030, he’s not going to be the president, and you will have voted to protect pedophiles if you don’t vote to release these files, and the president can’t protect you then. This vote, the record of this vote, will last longer than Donald Trump’s presidency,” Massie said.Meanwhile, Khanna of California said moments later on NBC News’ Meet the Press that the effort was “not about Donald Trump” and encouraged the president to meet with the victims who have survived Epstein’s alleged sex-trafficking ring and have since spoken out.“What we’re asking for is justice for the survivors,” Khanna said. “So, it’s not about Donald Trump. I don’t even know how involved Trump was. There are a lot of other people who are involved who have to be held accountable.”He also noted that many survivors who have spoken publicly about their abuse will be in Washington on Tuesday, where they plan to request a meeting with Trump.Epstein killed himself in prison in 2019 while awaiting federal trial in New York on sex crimes, having previously served time in Florida for sex offenses after negotiating a plea deal there in 2008. His associate, Ghislaine Maxwell, is currently in prison.Mike Johnson, the Republican speaker of the House, said on Sunday he believed the approaching vote would help put an end to allegations that the president had any ties to Epstein’s abuse and trafficking of underage girls.“They’re doing this to go after President Trump on this theory that he has something to do with it. He does not,” Johnson said of critics, on the Fox News Sunday program.“Epstein is their [Democrats] entire game plan, so we’re going to take that weapon out of their hands,” Johnson said. “Let’s just get this done and move it on. There’s nothing to hide.”The Senate is thought unlikely to produce the necessary support to advance the legislation, however, and Senate majority whip John Barrasso, speaking on NBC on Sunday, declined to commit to holding a vote even if the pending bill passes in the House.Georgia Republican congresswoman Marjorie Taylor Greene has also demanded the release of all the Epstein documents, despite it causing a rift with Trump. More