Donald Trump

Subterms

    More stories

    • 150 Shares199 Views

      in US Politics

      Pam Bondi turning DoJ into Trump’s ‘personal law firm’, top experts warn

      by

      Donald Trump’s Department of Justice has taken radical steps to target his political foes, back a harsh agenda against undocumented immigrants and help business allies – steps which underscore its politicization under the attorney general Pam Bondi and undermine the rule of law, say ex-prosecutors and legal experts.Some even say that the department has in effect become Trump’s “personal law firm”.Since taking office a second time, Trump has relied on staunch loyalist Bondi and an elite group of justice department lawyers to investigate critics from his first administration plus political opponents and curb prosecutions of US business bribery overseas.Ex-prosecutors point to how Bondi and the department’s top lawyers have halted some major prosecutions, fired or forced out lawyers who didn’t meet Maga litmus tests, and were instructed by Trump to investigate a key Democratic fundraising vehicle as examples of how Trump and Bondi have politicized the justice department.Critics note that once Bondi became attorney general, she issued a memo establishing a “weaponization working group”, which pushed a false narrative that investigations by a special counsel into Trump’s efforts to overturn his 2020 election and his improperly retaining classified documents were politically motivated.The transformation of the Department of Justice under Bondi has put a premium for staff on “personal loyalty” to Trump, say ex-prosecutors, which has damaged the rule of law and provoked multiple rebukes from courts and the resignations or firings of veteran prosecutors.“The steps Trump and Bondi have taken using DoJ to punish enemies and reward allies while firing those who object radically transforms and politicizes DoJ in a way that not even the worst who have gone before them ever contemplated,” the former federal prosecutor Paul Rosenzweig said.“Trump’s transmuting DoJ into his personal law firm is, in effect, a rejection of the founding principle of the rule of law.”Other ex-prosecutors see the department marching in dangerous legal lockstep with Trump’s agenda and damaging its mission to protect the rule of law.“Bondi and DoJ lawyers have certainly tried to make personal loyalty to Trump the justice department’s guiding principle,” said the Columbia law professor and ex-federal prosecutor Daniel Richman.Critics note Bondi has also echoed Trump’s dangerous rhetorical blasts against judges who have ruled against his administration’s sweeping and haphazard drive to deport undocumented immigrants by labeling them “low-level leftist judges who are trying to dictate President Trump’s executive powers”.After the FBI arrested a Milwaukee judge for allegedly obstructing the arrest of an undocumented immigrant, Bondi went on Fox News to threaten other judges who may defy their agenda. “They’re deranged. I think some of these judges think they are beyond and above the law, and they are not. We will come after you and we will prosecute you,” she said.Hundreds of lawyers and staff in the justice department’s civil rights division are now leaving the storied unit as its focus has shifted to Trump priorities such as pursuing cases against elite universities and student protesters, while curbing some civil and voting rights cases it has traditionally pursued, say critics.Other actions by the department under Bondi, an ex-Florida attorney general who later worked on Trump’s legal team during his first impeachment trial in 2020, and some elite justice department lawyers reflect its strong allegiance to Trump and have sparked strong criticism.They include an investigation of two officials, Chris Krebs and Miles Taylor, who served in his first term and clashed with him for, respectively, not backing his false claims that the 2020 election was stolen and for voicing strong concerns in a 2018 New York Times op ed about how Trump threatened democracy.In another radical move, Trump issued an executive order in April telling the justice department to investigate unverified allegations that ActBlue, a major Democratic online fundraising vehicle, had engaged in improper fundraising schemes.Trump also reportedly prodded the Department of Justice to drop a five-count criminal fraud prosecution of the New York mayor, Eric Adams, that the elite justice department southern district had worked on for months, as Trump was eager to secure public support from Adams for his immigration agenda in the city.Some actions also appear aimed at helping allied business interests. In April, the justice department abruptly closed a cryptocurrency unit that was launched in 2022 and had successfully prosecuted dangerous criminal schemes involving North Korean hackers and other fraudsters, but which had come under fire from cryptocurrency leaders who helped fund Trump’s campaign last year.Trump’s justice department also has paused for six months prosecuting businesses that have been charged with violating the 1977 Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA), which bars paying bribes to win deals abroad.Other moves seem to reflect Trump’s enmity towards journalists who report critically about his administration. In a reversal of recent department policy, Bondi revoked journalists’ free-speech protections by greenlighting authorities to force journalists to reveal confidential sources in leak investigations. Meanwhile, Bondi also seems willing to protect political allies, such as when she declined to open an investigation into “Signalgate” despite extensive documentation that top national security officials had improperly shared classified information as an attack was imminent in Yemen against the Houthis.Ex-prosecutors say that Bondi and the justice department’s willingness to make personal loyalty to Trump paramount damages the rule of law.Critics note the justice department has been rebuked by federal courts for stonewalling court orders and questions about some of its deportation actions and for not bringing home a Maryland man originally from El Salvador who was sent to a notorious Salvadorian prison as a result of what Ice has called an “administrative error”.“Never in history has DoJ broken so defiantly from respecting, as it’s obligated to do, the decisions of federal courts,” said the former prosecutor Ty Cobb, who was a counsel in the White House during Trump’s first term. “This is a war that Trump and Bondi are waging against the rule of law.”Richman noted more broadly that “outside the immigration area, most of what Bondi has actually done so far, however, has been negative – like dropping the case against Mayor Adams and cases against FCPA defendants and firing prosecutors”.Richman added: “We will soon see how this administration fares when it actually seeks a result in court, even if it’s only defensive. As the proceedings in the recent Maryland deportation case highlighted, courts demand a candor and respect for law that the justice department’s leadership finds inconsistent with the loyalty it demands.”Some veteran prosecutors who quit the department after Trump and Bondi took office say that the pair’s first moves raised red flags that prompted their departures.“Bondi has made clear – before becoming attorney general, and since – that she wants the Department of Justice to support President Trump unconditionally,” said Mike Romano, who resigned from the department in late March.Before he quit, Romano spent almost four years working on the prosecutions of Trump allies who stormed Congress on 6 January 2021 in an effort to thwart Joe Biden’s certification by Congress.Romano said that the night Bondi was confirmed “she issued a memorandum to all justice department employees in which she threatened to fire employees who refuse to defend the Trump administration’s actions, advance its arguments or sign its briefs. She and her subordinates have made good on those threats by firing people and forcing them to resign.”Romano stressed that “some of my colleagues were fired, and others were demoted, because they prosecuted people who rioted at the Capitol. At the public integrity section, four of my managers resigned, in lieu of being fired, when they refused to sign a motion to dismiss the case against Mayor Adams. These actions send a clear message to people still at the department: if you want to keep your job, disagreement won’t be tolerated.”Similarly, Barbara McQuade, a former prosecutor for Michigan’s eastern district who now teaches law at the University of Michigan, warned that Bondi’s memo setting up a “weaponization working group” actually “weaponizes law enforcement and undermines public confidence in government” because it pushes a “false narrative” about the two investigations of Trump by the former special counsel Jack Smith.McQuade emphasized that “in fact federal grand juries returned indictments in both cases, meaning that they found probable cause that the crimes were committed. DoJ’s Principles of Federal Prosecution prohibit prosecutors from making charging decisions on the basis of partisan politics.”Pointing to a further symbol of the justice department’s politicization under Bondi, McQuade cited her statement that a federal judge “supported Tren de Aragua terrorists over the safety of Americans” and charged he “cannot be objective” because he issued a temporary restraining order blocking deportation of Venezuelan men to El Salvador without due process.“There is no evidence to suggest that the judge did anything other than apply the law to the case,” McQuade stressed. “He was applying the law to a highly suspect use of the Alien Enemies Act, a statute to be used during wartime.”Assessing Trump’s politicization of the Department of Justice, Rosenzweig said the department was betraying its historic mission to protect the rule of law.“DoJ isn’t just another department like agriculture or HHS. It has a unique place in the US government as the home of the ‘rule of law’ and the guardian of what makes America special,” he said.“Thomas Paine said: ‘In America, the law is king.’ Trump wants to make his word the law and himself the king.” More

    • 213 Shares199 Views

      in US Politics

      Canada has long been seen as the cool cousin next door. Here’s the truth | Noel Ransome

      by

      Canada has been canonized – safely, predictably.It’s the great, grave story we’ve exported – retold in economic rankings, stitched into tourism ads, held up in classrooms and cable news panels. We’re the cooler, mellower cousin nextdoor. The country that has it figured out. Where healthcare is universal, democracy is calm and diversity is politely managed.This image has been shared like a TikTok meme for decades – forwarded, favourited, lightly interrogated. Over time, we’ve become more vibe than nation; contradictions, history and horrors flattened into brand energy. Place that flag in your Twitter bio, mention how “we’ll never become like America,” and you’ve bought into the sauce. You’re not the problem, you’re proof the problem lives somewhere else.This kind of deception has always been fundamental to our story. But we need only a glimpse at our neighbour’s constitutional preamble – “We the people of the United States” – to get a hint of the delusion. Canada’s constitutional language, by contrast, never used the populist “we”. From the start, there was no sweeping assertion of collective identity. Instead, the Constitution Act, 1867, opened with:
      Whereas the Provinces of Canada, Nova Scotia, and New Brunswick have expressed their desire to be federally united into One Dominion under the Crown of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland …
      Granted, Canada’s constitutional framework evolved. But from the beginning, the difference in language spoke to the shaping of our identity – through agreements, compromises, legal frameworks, not a people-centered vision. This historical nuance, while subtle, now echoes in modern politics.All that to say: times are spooky for the average Canadian forced to define and defend Canada’s sovereignty. Spooky in ways that can cause one to reflexively feed into a myth, rather than confront the truth of who we are. The gap between our negotiated past and our branded present has never been more plain. Our current leaders are no exception.To any Canadian progressive, it’s stating the obvious to say that Justin Trudeau, the figure most associated with Canada’s progressive identity, was more committed to feeding the myth than confronting it. With his well-timed, photogenic smile – post-blackface, naturally – Trudeau was the perfect mascot. Our self-image personified: tolerant, polished, unthreatening. But branding aside, his government sidestepped moral clarity at home – from pipeline expansions and broken promises to Indigenous communities, to a foreign policy on Gaza that rarely strayed from Washington’s script. In moments that demanded progressive definition, he was formless.It would have been naive to think many Canadians would take Donald Trump seriously when he half-jokingly suggested in November 2024 that Canada become the 51st state. After all, those words came from someone familiar to us – a man and a Maga movement forged in the belief that something sacred was always being stolen. The enemy, the fuel for his fervor, shifted with the news cycle: migrants, trans youth, teachers, climate scientists, Muslims, Black Americans, DEI initiatives, and the very idea of truth.But the speaker of those words wore the same jacket as Pierre Poilievre, who, just before Trump’s threat, was the undeniable favourite among Canadians to become the next prime minister.His rhetoric tapped into the same fears and scapegoating, presenting itself as the antidote to a broken system. Poilievre ticked off his own list of Trump-style grievances: DEI initiatives? “Garbage.” Trans women in women’s spaces? “No place at all.” Immigration policies? “Destroying” a system that requires caps over compassion to curb economic and social pressure. It’s as if he were part of the same tired flock – one that targets the marginalized while promising to fix what he claims is broken. The popular sentiments of a supposedly morally superior land.And this isn’t new. In 2008, as the country prepared to confront the brutal legacy of residential schools, Poilievre dismissed the moment sanctimoniously, arguing that Indigenous people needed to learn “the values of hard work” more than they needed compensation for past abuses. That’s who was in line to lead the country, as anointed by our polls.In the end, his opponent Mark Carney was victorious. But it should be clear that a shift toward the Liberal leader isn’t clarity about who we are, as much as it is a hedge against a man who seeks to claim us from afar.Carney is no antidote – just a bandage. Cutting ministries for gender equality and disability rights isn’t healing; it’s harm. His economic nationalism is safer than the far-right’s bluster, but it’s closer to US centrism than a remedy.As one union representing more than 80,000 educators put it, the move signals “an unwise change of direction” for a country where vulnerable groups are already living in fear. And while Carney served as an executive at Brookfield Asset Management, the company faced accusations of violating Indigenous rights.What Canadians and others need to confront is that the Trump machine wasn’t purely fueled by cultural resentment. It was powered, in no small part, by the United States’ historic desire to promote and believe the best of itself – even when the evidence said otherwise.For me, as a Black Canadian, home has rarely been the gentle myth so many sing about. Always polite and tolerant it wasn’t. I’ve seen just as much of the opposite: unmarked graves, flickers of grief, and then silence. I’ve seen headlines and acknowledgments of systematic racism turn to indifference: police brutality, missing Indigenous women, gone like breath during our winters. And yes, I’ve seen the Proud Boys, too. Their founder, Gavin McInnes? Canadian.Canada holds beauty, but it harbours moral rot just as much as the neighbour it claims to rise above. Myth-making can’t save us. If we want to hold onto our sovereignty in this moment, maybe it’s time we stop lying like them – to others, and most of all, to ourselves.

      Noel Ransome is a Toronto-based freelance writer More

    • 200 Shares179 Views

      in US Politics

      The way universities can survive the Trump era? Band together in an alliance | David Kirp

      by

      Higher education is under attack from the person who inhabits the White House. Universities are being threatened with an array of punishments, including the cutoff of their federal contracts and grants, the loss of their nonprofit status and a tax on their endowment. The Trump administration is demanding a say in whom they admit, whom they hire and even what courses they teach.It’s a grim message – abandon your fundamental values, or else. The idea of an “existential moment” has become a cliche, but this situation warrants that grim description. Academic freedom, the lifeblood of higher education, is being threatened.How should these colleges and universities respond?Columbia University has learned the hard way that you can’t negotiate with an autocrat – give an inch and he’ll just come back for more. Harvard has been widely praised for saying “no” to Trump, and justifiably so. But Harvard couldn’t have done anything else. The demands were so outrageous that if the university had capitulated it might as well have closed its doors.The cutoff of $2.2bn in federal contracts and grants, as well as the threat to rescind the university’s tax-exempt status, will take a bite out of research, teaching and financial aid, if ultimately upheld by the courts. But Harvard is, far and away, the richest university in the world, with an endowment north of $50 billion. That’s larger than the gross domestic product of nearly 100 countries. With its deep pockets, it is uniquely situated to carry on, while its phalanx of best-in-the-nation lawyers do battle in the courtroom.Other schools in Trump’s sight include far less wealthy private universities like Northwestern, as well as flagship public universities like the University of California-Berkeley, which have a comparative pittance to draw on. If they say shut the door when Trump & Co. come calling, the consequences would doubtlessly be devastating. But the Columbia debacle shows that there is really no option.Universities compete on many fronts. They vie for contracts and grants, professors and students and endowment contributions. Because they fetishize prestige, they take aggressive action to boost their place in the US News pecking order.But in these desperate times such competition is a ruinous course. The only strategy with a prayer of succeeding is for universities – public and private, well-endowed and scraping by – to come together, making it crystal-clear that they won’t give in to assaults on academic freedom.That’s precisely what happened last week, when more than 200 college and university presidents signed a statement, issued by the American Association of Colleges and Universities, which forcefully condemns the federal government’s “political interference” and overreach” for “endangering higher education.”Stanford, Chicago and Dartmouth are among the top-ranking schools that didn’t sign on. Perhaps their presidents believe that “duck and cover” is their best strategy. As Columbia – which did sign – can tell them, good luck with that.Higher education has long rested on its laurels, confident that Americans appreciate its intrinsic value, but that hasn’t been true for years. The just-issued statement of principle should be coupled with a full-throated campaign to make their case—to demonstrate the importance of universities and colleges in preparing the coming generation to contribute to society as well as carrying out essential, cutting-edge research.skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotionThe AACU manifesto makes a great start, but more is needed to win this war. Well-off universities need to come to the aid of their financially weaker brethren, underwriting essential and expensive legal support, when the anti-university forces come calling.“Nato for higher education” – a mutual defense pact is a long-shot approach, but it might just convince the bully in the White House to back off. The tariff mess is just the latest example of how the Mister “Art of the Deal” turns tail when confronted with strong opposition.What’s more, colleges and universities have no viable option – to borrow a line from Benjamin Franklin, they can “hang together or hang separately.”

      David Kirp is professor emeritus at the University of California-Berkeley and the author of The College Dropout Scandal More

    • 150 Shares199 Views

      in US Politics

      Trump 100 days: White House action plan makes Project 2025 look mild

      by

      When Donald Trump chose a Project 2025 author to lead a key federal agency that would carry out the underpinnings of the conservative manifesto’s aims, he solidified the project’s role in his second term.Shortly after he won re-election, the US president nominated Russ Vought to lead the office of management and budget. Vought wrote a chapter for Project 2025 about consolidating power in the executive branch and advances a theory that allows the president to withhold funds from agencies, even if Congress has allocated them. Consolidating power, in part through firing a supposed “deep state” and hiring loyalists, is a major plank of the project – and of Trump’s first 100 days.Trump tried, repeatedly, to distance himself from the project, led by the conservative thinktank the Heritage Foundation, on the campaign trail after the left used it as shorthand for the dismantling of government that would take place if he won. Since he’s taken office, the illusion that his ideas were drastically different from the project has fallen.“The whole distancing themselves from Project 2025 may have pulled some voters,” said Manisha Sinha, a history professor at the University of Connecticut, but “my sense is that they’re going to try and push all the items within Project 2025 as much as they can.”Many of Trump’s moves in his first 100 days come directly from Project 2025, which involved more than 100 conservative organizations and represented a sort of consensus among the Trumpist right about what he should do in a second term. In some instances, he has gone beyond the project’s suggestions. And in other cases, because the project was written in 2023, subsequent policy ideas from the Heritage Foundation have shaped his actions and goals.For instance, the project predated Elon Musk’s outsized role in the election and then in the Trump administration, but the goal to slash government programs using the so-called “department of government efficiency” fits the spirit of the project. It also predates the war in Gaza and the crackdown on speech in the US in the name of antisemitism, but Heritage’s Project Esther laid out a strategy to crack down on civil society groups that support Palestinian rights.Trump’s campaign once said people associated with the project wouldn’t get jobs in his administration. Instead, several hold prominent roles, in some cases now carrying out the plans they wrote about in the project.He chose Peter Navarro as a trade adviser; Navarro wrote a chapter for the project that advocates for increased tariffs and a restructuring of US trade, which Trump is now working on. His press secretary, Karoline Leavitt, appeared in training videos for Project 2025. Brendan Carr, Trump’s nominee to chair the Federal Communications Commission, wrote the chapter on the FCC.The former director of the project, Paul Dans, stepped down from his role amid concerns that the project was derailing Trump’s re-election effort. Dans told Politico in March that Trump’s second term was “actually way beyond my wildest dreams”.“What we had hoped would happen has happened. So I can’t imagine how anything could end really any better,” Dans said.Will Dobbs-Allsopp, policy director of Governing for Impact, and James Goodwin, policy director at the Center for Progressive Reform, have publicly tracked the executive actions suggested for 20 different agencies in Project 2025 as Trump has carried some of them out. Of the 532 proposals in the project that fall under these actions, Trump has already proposed, attempted or completed 153 of them – about 29%.The belief that Trump was not fully prepared, and the broader conservative ecosystem was not aligned completely with his agenda, underpinned his first term. For his second term, conservative donors put major money into efforts to get the right on the same page and to come up with plans and personnel who would stand ready to implement these plans immediately if Trump won.While thinktanks often seek to influence policymakers, the project stands out for its focus on Trump.“Really, it was written for Trump or Trumpism,” Goodwin said. “There really was an audience of one in mind … Trump had as much gravitational pull on Project 2025 as Project 2025 hopes to have on Trump. It’s just a very unusual thinktank-policymaker relationship.”Where Trump has used the projectThe threads of Project 2025 are visible across the federal government in Trump’s second term.He is in the process of firing people disloyal to the Trump agenda, a first step in creating a government more beholden to him. An executive order signed in April called for tens of thousands more roles being listed as political appointments rather than career civil servants, a move Project 2025 promoted as a way to drive out the kinds of people who stood in the way of success in his first term.Project 2025 called for dismantling the Department of Education, which would require congressional action. Trump signed an executive order calling on the education secretary to start the dismantling process by shutting down major parts of the department’s work.The project wanted to scale back the US Agency for International Development. Trump axed it.“Libs are realizing that Project 2025 was the watered down version of this White House action plan,” Tyler Bowyer, a leader with conservative youth group Turning Point, said on X in early February.skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotionThe project said that programs related to climate change should be ended; Trump has ended a host of climate programs and has withdrawn from the Paris climate agreement.The Department of Justice should be reconfigured, ending a host of policies and enforcement that came during the Biden years, the project says. Trump has weaponized the department to achieve his goals and to go after his enemies.In nearly all agency recommendations, the project suggested scrapping any diversity efforts. Trump ended diversity, equity and inclusion programs government-wide. He has taken actions to prohibit transgender people in sports and in the military and limited access to gender-affirming care, which aligns with ideas in the project that seek to reinforce binary genders.The project recommended a host of ways to deport undocumented immigrants, end visa programs for people to come to the US legally, and restrict border crossings – a key part of Trump’s first 100 days, though the project didn’t suggest using the Alien Enemies Act, as Trump has, or going after birthright citizenship.Trump signed an executive order that would make states carry more of a burden for disaster relief, another idea suggested by Project 2025, which also said withholding disaster funds was one way to enforce immigration laws.The FCC, now led by a Project 2025 author appointed by Trump, is investigating National Public Radio and the Public Broadcasting System and will potentially defund them, which Carr wrote about in the project.What could happen nextThe first wave of Project 2025-aligned actions has been conducted largely by executive orders. A second wave of recommendations requires the rulemaking process at agencies and others would require congressional action.“They’re only just now starting their kind of policy, deregulatory effort, rescinding regulations in earnest. They haven’t even really gotten there yet. They’ve been so focused on agency operations and personnel for the past few months,” Dobbs-Allsopp said. “We would expect that at six months or a year, they will be even further along.”Sinha predicted that the full-scale dismantling of the administrative state, if successful, could bring the US “back to the era of tainted meat and lead in hot water”.Project 2025 represented the extreme version of what the Republican party has been selling since the Nixon and Reagan years, she said. It mixes the anti-government rhetoric with demonizing immigrants, poor people and people of color. “The Republicans have trafficked on this for a very long time,” she said.“The people who hate government basically are running government,” she said. More

    • 138 Shares169 Views

      in US Politics

      May Day: protesters rally across US over workers’ and immigrants’ rights

      by

      Protesters rallied nationwide on Thursday in support of workers’ and immigrants’ rights in the latest round of demonstrations against Donald Trump and his administration.May Day, commemorated as international workers’ day, comes after two massive days of protests in April – 5 April’s hands off rallies and 19 April’s day of action – drew millions to the streets across the country.The 1 May protests were supported by hundreds of organizations and set to take place in nearly 1,000 cities, organizers said, with a focus on rallying against the Trump administration and “billionaire profiteers”. Turnout was predicted to be lower than the previous two April protests because 1 May is a weekday, but tens of thousands were expected to turn out. Cities across the US from New York to Seattle to Anchorage, Alaska, saw major demonstrations.“This is a war on working people – and we will not stand down,” a website for the national day of action says. “They’re defunding our schools, privatizing public services, attacking unions, and targeting immigrant families with fear and violence. Working people built this nation and we know how to take care of each other. We won’t back down – we will never stop fighting for our families and the rights and freedoms that propel opportunity and a better life for all Americans. Their time is up.”View image in fullscreenA map of May Day protests showed several major metro areas had more than one rally planned. A coalition of groups in Los Angeles started the day with an early morning rally, then a program and march to show solidarity with the city’s workers and immigrants. In New York, protests were planned throughout the day.In New York, protesters turned out to support workers, immigrants and others under attack by the Trump administration. Some of those attending the New York rally spoke against Columbia University’s capitulation to Trump’s demands.“Today, we saw lots of new people who are getting energized and activated. The Trump administration is clearly coming for all of these rights that we’ve won, and all of us are taking up the task to fight back,” said Saidi Moseley, 25, an education coordinator and one of the organizers of the May Day march in Union Square.Betsy Waters held a sign saying “due process for all”. The 67-year-old retiree who volunteers full-time said she had come to several marches. “I feel that we have to be out here. We have to be out here making a stand as much as we can,” Waters said. “So I am out here making a stand, saying that what is happening in our country is just not right.”Lydia Howrilka, a 25-year-old librarian from Queens, was holding a “only you can stop fascism” sign. “I am standing in solidarity with my immigrant brothers and sisters in New York. I am standing in defense of democracy,” Howrilka said.Grant Miner, one of a handful of speakers at the New York rally, was abruptly expelled by Columbia University in March for participating in pro-Palestinian protests.View image in fullscreen“I’m trying to speak out about the things that are affecting my workers, which include the ongoing cuts to higher education, as well as the targeting of students for student protests, which are two very big issues facing our workplace reality,” said Miner, who also serves as president of UAW 2710, the Student Workers of Columbia union.As Trump surpassed 100 days in office, a period filled with slashing and burning of the federal government and democratic norms, a resistance has taken shape, growing in size since February. People have started to organize in larger numbers to pressure Democrats to stand up more strongly to Trump.Trump’s approval ratings have fallen from positive to negative, with more people disapproving of him than approving. The focus on workers and immigrants comes as Trump has fired a host of federal workers and his administration has ramped up deportations, including of people who the courts have said were not supposed to be deported.“Everyone deserves respect and dignity, no matter who they are, where they were born, or what language they speak,” the May Day protest website says. “Immigrants are workers, and workers are immigrants. Our fight for fair wages, safe workplaces, and dignity on the job is the same fight for immigrant justice.”Organizers behind the May Day protest in Washington DC said they expected to see up to 3,000 people join the rally in the nation’s capital to demand safety on the job, legal protections and an end to unjust deportations.“We’re seeing people abducted off the streets every day in some of the most violent and cruel ways. We’re seeing people like Kilmar Ábrego García – and he’s only one story. His story is not unusual,” said Cathryn Jackson, the public policy director at Casa, a group that provides critical services to immigrant and working-class families.View image in fullscreenÁbrego García’s wife, Jennifer Vasquez Sura, was expected to speak at Thursday’s rally as she continues to fight for her husband to be released from prison in El Salvador and to be returned to the US.“Hundreds and hundreds of people are being deported to some of the worst prisons across the country with no due process,” Jackson said. “This rally today is about solidarity. It’s about saying no matter what the Trump administration tries to do, we are determined to fight back.”Also among the speakers scheduled to address the Washington rally was María del Carmen Castellón, whose husband, Miguel Luna, died in the Key Bridge collapse in Baltimore last year.The story of Luna and the five other construction workers who died during the tragedy is “symbolic”, Jackson said. The six men were all construction workers originally from Latin American countries.“This is the story of men working in the middle of the night while all of us were sleeping, getting the roads together, doing the work that many people don’t want to do,” Jackson continued. “We are literally physically building this country, and then being treated the way we are in return.”Delia Ramirez, a Democratic representative of Illinois, addressed the crowd in Franklin Park as the “proud daughter of Guatemalan immigrants”.View image in fullscreen“Today on International Workers’ Day, we are united,” Ramirez said. “We’re united because we understand that this president wants to silence us. He wants to divide us, pit us against each other. But we are not going to be silenced.”The Trump administration knows that “the only thing that will stop fascism is mobilization”, she continued, acknowledging that there will be “really hard days” ahead. “But as long as you keep organizing, I can amplify that voice and continue to stand up to fascism.”Jorge Mújica, the strategic organizer for Arise Chicago and an organizer of the city’s May Day protest, said on Democracy Now that “the Trump administration miscalculated completely” by targeting so many constituencies in its first 100 days.“They are attacking everybody at the same time, and that [has] enabled us to gather a really broad coalition with labor unions, with federal workers, with students, with teachers at universities, and every other community and put together this event on May Day,” Mújica said. More

    • 213 Shares159 Views

      in US Politics

      Trump news at a glance: Rubio now holds four titles after Waltz out as national security chief

      by

      Secretary of state Marco Rubio – ridiculed as “Little Marco” by Donald Trump during the 2016 Republican primaries – has become one of the most powerful players in the president’s cabinet.Trump appointed Rubio interim national security adviser on Thursday after Mike Waltz was forced to leave the post, alongside his deputy, Alex Wong, as sources said officials had lost confidence in their leadership.Waltz has been under intense pressure since the Signal scandal, in which he inadvertently added a journalist to a chat that included real-time operational details on US strikes in Yemen.It’s an enormous rise for Rubio, the son of undocumented Cuban migrants, who now holds four titles in the Trump administration. Rubio is also the acting administrator for USAID and acting archivist for the National Archives and Records Administration.Trump picks Waltz for UN role after exitWaltz may be out of the picture for now, but he is on course to reemerge in the world of international diplomacy – Trump said he will nominate Waltz as the country’s ambassador to the UN. Trump briefly considered firing Waltz over the Signal episode, but decided he did not want the media to claim the ouster of a cabinet official weeks into his second term. Trump was also mollified by an internal review that found Waltz mistakenly saved the Atlantic editor’s number.Read the full storyTrump readies first sale of military equipment to UkraineThe Trump administration will approve its first sale of military equipment to Ukraine since Donald Trump took office, in an indication that the minerals deal signed by the two countries this week may open a path to renewed weapons shipments.Read the full storyJudge says alien act doesn’t allow Trump to deport alleged gang membersThe 18th-century Alien Enemies Act does not authorize Donald Trump to deport Venezuelan immigrants alleged to be members of the Tren de Aragua gang, a federal judge in Texas ruled on Thursday.The decision is significant because it is the first sweeping and permanent injunction directly addressing whether the government can use the 1798 Alien Enemies Act (AEA) to deport alleged members of Tren de Aragua. It applies only to migrants detained in Rodriguez’s judicial district, the southern district of Texas, which includes Brownsville, McAllen and Houston. Trump appointed Rodriguez to the federal bench in 2018.Read the full storyDoJ civil rights division loses 70% of lawyersMore than 250 attorneys in the justice department’s civil rights division have either left, been reassigned, or accepted a deferred resignation offer since January, according to an estimate provided to the Guardian by people familiar with the matter. The significant decrease in personnel underscores how Donald Trump is gutting the arm of the federal government responsible for enforcing federal civil rights laws.Read the full storyWhite House reveals new allegations against Ábrego GarcíaThe legal team behind Kilmar Ábrego García, the Maryland man unlawfully deported to El Salvador, is demanding that the Trump administration “bring him back and give him a full and fair trial” as the administration releases new domestic abuse allegations.Read the full storyTrump’s bid to host UK golf tournament could violate US constitutionThe British government’s attempts to curry favor with Donald Trump by nudging golf executives to host one of the world’s most prestigious golf tournaments at a Scottish venue owned by the US president could ultimately lead to a violation of the US constitution, ethics experts have warned.Read the full storyWhite House launches site to promote favorable coverageThe Trump administration has unveiled a news-style website that publishes exclusively positive coverage of the president on official White House servers, and is styled like the rightwing website the Drudge Report.Read the full storyRFK Jr falsely claims vaccine includes ‘aborted fetus debris’Health secretary Robert F Kennedy Jr and his department have made a series of misleading statements that alarmed vaccine experts and advocates in recent days – including that the measles, mumps and rubella (MMR) vaccine includes “aborted fetus debris”.Read the full storyWhat else happened today:

      Trump has launched an unprecedented environmental assault, pushing 145 rollbacks of clean air, water, and climate protections in his first 100 days, more than in his entire first term.

      The US approached China for talks on Trump’s tariffs, according to a state-linked Chinese account, suggesting Beijing may be open to negotiations.

      Trump officials have asked the supreme court to help strip temporary protected status from more than 300,000 Venezuelans, a move that would clear the way for their deportation.
      Catching up? Here’s what happened on 30 April 2025. More

    • 163 Shares199 Views

      in US Politics

      Rubio comes a long way to become most dominant US diplomat since Kissinger

      by

      Marco Rubio, you have come a long way.From being ridiculed as “Little Marco” by Donald Trump during the 2016 Republican primaries, the former Florida senator now stands – on paper, at least – as the US’s most powerful diplomat since Henry Kissinger half a century ago after his former nemesis appointed him acting national security adviser to replace the departing Mike Waltz.The appointment means Rubio, the child of undocumented Cuban immigrants, will be the first person since Kissinger to hold the national security adviser and secretary of state positions at the same time.Kissinger – who himself arrived on America’s shores as an immigrant – achieved that feat in September 1973 after being tapped to take over the state department following four tumultuous and high-profile years as Richard Nixon’s national security adviser, during which he helped pave a historic opening to communist China and was – contentiously – awarded the Nobel peace prize for ending US involvement in the Vietnam war.The backdrop then was Watergate, a scandal just gaining momentum at the time but which was ultimately destined to consume Nixon’s presidency. But it left Kissinger free to conduct American foreign policy virtually single-handed, at least until Nixon was forced from office.Today’s context is different, though hardly less turbulent.Trump has just completed perhaps the most extreme first 100 days of US presidential history, producing a sea of uncertainty, upending the country’s international alliances, shattering democratic and legal norms at home, and leaving even its future status as the world’s leading democracy unsure.This unpredictable landscape is what confronts Rubio in his new position.An orthodox Republican in foreign policy matters, Rubio, 53, has frequently appeared uncomfortable – occasionally miserable, even – during the first three months at the state department under Trump, never more so than during the disastrous clash with Volodymyr Zelenskyy in February, when the Ukrainian president subjected to a public browbeating by the president and JD Vance in the Oval Office.In the Senate, he had been one of Ukraine’s staunchest supporters against Russia’s invasion. He then saw that principled position so openly and brutally overturned and was forced to justify the volte face in public as Trump has conspicuously sympathised with Vladimir Putin.Equally galling has been Elon Musk’s gleeful gutting of USAID, America’s main foreign assistance agency – which Rubio has previously championed and which fell within his purview as secretary of state – under the auspices of the tech billionaire’s unofficial “department of government efficiency” project, also known as Doge.The tensions led to a shouting match between the two men in front of Trump, with Rubio reportedly responding aggressively to Musk’s accusation that he had failed in the mission of firing enough state department staff.Despite that unpromising background, Rubio – who was once tipped as a future president – now suddenly finds himself, in addition to being in charge of a still mighty department, having direct access to the inner workings of the White House and to the president himself.Even if it has come about thanks to the default of the less-than-surefooted Waltz – whose credibility never recovered from inadvertently inviting one of Trump’s least favourite journalists on to to a Signal chat about strikes on Yemeni Houthis – it is quite the turnaround.It puts Rubio in the same vantage point from which Kissinger, the renowned exponent of realpolitik and great power balances, carved out a role as arguably the US’s most influential – if highly controversial – foreign policy strategist of the 20th century.With Trump just as consumed with domestic political enemies as Nixon ever was, it raises the unexpected question of whether Rubio can achieve the same level of prominence.It seems unlikely. Yet even two months ago, who would have guessed that the once-derided “Little Marco” would hold the levers of power of two separate institutions in his hands? More