Donald Trump

Subterms

    More stories

    • 175 Shares71 Views

      in US Politics

      Trump is turning the media into a mouthpiece of the regime | Lawrence Douglas

      by

      You know we’re in trouble when Fox News emerges as the great defender of freedom of the press. But such was the case when Jacqui Heinrich, a senior political correspondent at Fox, responded to the news that Trump’s White House would now handpick the reporters who get to cover the president in small settings, with the post: “This move does not give the power back to the people – it gives power to the White House.” Heinrich was specifically responding to press secretary Karoline Leavitt’s Orwellian claim that letting Donald Trump choose who would cover him was designed to restore power “back to the American people”.The fruits of the new policy were richly on display during the sickening scene that unfolded in the Oval Office last week. If the president and JD Vance’s disgraceful treatment of Volodymyr Zelenskyy wasn’t bad enough, there was the unprecedented role that the “press” played in the unseemly drama.Here I’m not simply referring to Brian Glenn’s pugnacious demand that the leader of a war-torn nation justify his sartorial decisions – less a question than a provocation that served as a prelude to the pile-on that followed. Trump appeared to wink at Glenn, a correspondent for Real America’s Voice, a far-right cable channel freshly included in the press pool, leading to speculation that Glenn’s question had been scripted in advance, a speculation that is both plausible – I mean, why not? – and irrelevant.For whether scripted or not, these are the kinds of questions we should expect when serious journalists are replaced with mouthpieces of the regime, puppets who perform the role of state propagandists in the guise of reportage. Glenn, who dates Majorie Taylor Greene and describes himself as “100% behind President Trump”, claims not to truck in far-right conspiracy theories – while insisting that January 6t was an antifa-instigated inside job and that a vast mechanism of fraud cost Trump the 2020 election.But before Glenn turned on the Ukrainian president, he had directed an earlier question to Trump: “Mr President, [do] you think ultimately your legacy will be the peacemaker and not the president that led this country into another war … ?” This puffball in the guise of a query gave Trump the opportunity to wax poetic: “I hope I’m going to be remembered as a peacemaker … I’m doing this to save lives more than anything else … Thank you, Brian, for that question. It was a nice question.”But we weren’t done with paeans to the great peacemaker. No sooner had Zelenskyy tersely assured Glenn that he would wear a suit once the war had ended, we were greeted with this question: “Keir Starmer … praised your courage and conviction to lead … What gave you the moral courage and conviction to step forward and lead?”In a properly functioning press corps, we might have expected that the question was directed to Zelenskyy, who, with exceptional fortitude and resolve, has led his countryin a war against a ruthless aggressor. But no. The question was directed to Trump, who responded: “Boy, I love this guy. Who are you with?” The answer was One America News, another network that operates to the far right of Fox, trafficking in conspiracy theories and committed to an unwavering support of Maga politics – and also a beneficiary of the White House’s commandeering of its own press pool.Once again, Trump grew almost wistful – “I like the question … it’s a very good question” – before blaming Russia’s invasion of Ukraine and Hamas’s attack on Israel on Joe Biden. From there, as we witnessed, things grew more acrimonious, but lost in the belligerent and belittling treatment of Zelenskyy, particularly at the hands of Vance (“Have you said thank you once, this entire meeting?”) was the Pyongyang-esque quality of Trump’s hand-picked pool reporters using their questions not to challenge or examine, but to burnish and bolster the Great Leader with ever fluffier valentines of adoration.Meanwhile, the Associated Press remained barred from the historic meeting, because it continues to call a body of water that lies almost entirely outside of US jurisdiction by the name it has carried since the 16th century.

      Lawrence Douglas is a professor of law at Amherst College in Massachusetts More

    • 188 Shares79 Views

      in US Politics

      Elephants and rhinos at increased risk of poaching due to Trump funding cuts, groups say

      by

      Environmentalists have urged the Trump administration to reverse its decision to cut off funding for key conservation work aimed at saving iconic at-risk species, including anti-poaching patrols for vulnerable rhinos and elephants.International conservation grants administered by the US Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) have been frozen by Trump, throwing conservation non-profits around the world into disarray. These grants, amounting to tens of millions of dollars, help protect imperiled species in countries that lack the US’s financial muscle to combat threats such as poaching.An environmental group, the Center for Biological Diversity, said it would sue the FWS if the funding isn’t restored. It said the money is vital for patrols safeguarding rhinos in Africa, which have suffered a 94% population decline over the past century, as well as efforts to reduce human-elephant conflict and help conserve species such as freshwater turtles and monarch butterflies.“The Trump administration’s funding freeze for anti-poaching patrols and other international conservation work is maddening, heartbreaking and very illegal,” said Sarah Uhlemann, international program director at the center.“These Fish and Wildlife Service funds help protect elephants, rhinos and other animals across the globe that Americans love. No one voted to sacrifice the world’s most iconic wildlife to satisfy some unelected billionaire’s reckless power trip.”In a letter to the FWS, the center said that the funding halt violated the US Endangered Species Act, which requires the government to consider at-risk species in its decisions, and flouted proper agency procedure in rescinding funding. “This insanity has to stop or some of the world’s most endangered animals will die,” said Uhlemann.The freeze on grants is part of a broader crackdown on US foreign aid by Trump and his billionaire backer Elon Musk. A judge has ordered the freeze to be reversed, although the administration has yet to comply with the directive.In his previous term in office, Trump sought to weaken the Endangered Species Act and has set about trying to bypass the conservation law during his latest term. The president has demanded that a little-known committee, nicknamed “the God squad” due to its ability to decide if a species becomes extinct, help push through fossil fuel and logging projects in the US even if they doom a species.Experts have said that the use of the committee in this way is likely illegal. A court case may now unfold over the stymying of FWS grants for international conservation, too.skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotionAlongside illegal poaching, legal hunting tours in Africa are popular with some Americans, including Donald Trump Jr, who was pictured holding a severed elephant’s tail more than a decade ago.The FWS was contacted for comment on the potential lawsuit. More

    • 163 Shares67 Views

      in US Politics

      Democrats are acting sedate and silent during Trump’s worst excesses | Moira Donegan

      by

      What was the point of Donald Trump’s address to Congress on Tuesday night? The annual speech – called the “State of the Union” address in every year except the one just after the president’s ascent to office – has long been a somewhat outdated bit of political theater, an event light on policy specifics and heavy on messaging in an era in which political messaging’s most effective venues have long since moved online.It’s perhaps even less clear what a speech to Congress is supposed to mean for this president, who has proven himself so indifferent to constitutional limits on his power – or for this Congress, which has shown itself so willing to abdicate its own constitutional responsibilities. It seems, like so many of the formalities of American politics do now, a bit like a phantom limb: something that Americans keep feeling for long after it has been excised. How long will it be, one wonders, until everyone stops bothering to go through the motions?But Trump, for one, seems to delight in any opportunity to make a spectacle of himself. On Tuesday, with a captive audience of all of Congress, many military leaders, about half of the US supreme court, and large swaths of the American public, he set about indulging all of his worst whims and lowest impulses. He repeatedly and extensively insulted his predecessor, the former president Joe Biden, by name and in strong terms. He relitigated old grievances, from his many prosecutions to his annoyance that not everyone likes him. He threatened the sovereignty of Panama and Greenland, went into extended discussions of the careers of various transgender athletes, boasted of ending “the tyranny of diversity, equity and inclusion” and removing “the poison of critical race theory”, and reminded his audience that he had renamed the Gulf of Mexico the “Gulf of America”. Occasionally, the gathered Republicans in the crowd would burst into grunting chants of “USA! USA!” It was worse than merely vulgar. It was stupid.Trump boasted of the rapid pursuit of his agenda in the weeks since he returned to power, declaring that the US was entering its “greatest, most successful era” and that “our country is on the verge of a comeback the likes of which the world has never seen, perhaps never will see”. In fact, the country is on the verge of an economic recession. Thousands of federal workers have been laid off, and Trump’s hefty tariffs on the US’s largest trading partners – namely Canada, Mexico and China – sent the stock market into a freefall earlier that day. In the past, Trump has got cold feet, and backed off his tariff threats. On stage in the House chamber, he doubled down on them, declaring that he would pursue his trade wars, and acknowledging: “There will be a little disturbance.”Trump spoke intensely and at length about his culture war grievances, touting his executive orders declaring English to be the United States’ official language and that the federal government would recognize “only two genders”. “Our country will be woke no longer,” he said.He also touted his record on immigration, boasting of his administration’s mass deportation plans and the decreased number of migrants and asylum seekers at the southern border. He dwelt at length on stories of violence by undocumented immigrants, pointing to the families of murdered Americans in the crowd and describing undocumented people as “savages”. Alluding to a fringe legal theory that could be deployed to support his unconstitutional effort to end birthright citizenship, he referred to the immigrant population as an “occupation”, and cast his own mass deportation effort as something like the expulsion of an invading army – which sounds a lot more noble than the chaotic and brutal humiliations and human rights abuses that have actually taken place as a part of Trump’s deportation effort.In a section on economic issues, he blamed Biden, specifically, for the price of eggs, which have soared in some places to nearly $20 a dozen. (According to reporting from NPR, some of Trump’s advisers have asked him to talk more about egg prices, which were a repeated talking point during his campaign but which he has mentioned rarely since taking office, though prices continue to climb.) He also repeated false claims by Elon Musk’s extra-constitutional government-slashing group, the “department of government efficiency”, that Musk’s band of sycophantic teenagers who are leading the decimation of government services have found “hundreds of billions of dollars in fraud and waste” in Musk-targeted programs, such as social security. They have not.In fact, he talked about Biden a lot. At times, when he seemed to get distracted or lose his place in the speech, Trump appeared to insert insults towards Biden almost as filler. “And think of where we were with Joe Biden,” he said, in one such non-sequitur. “Biden took us very low, the lowest we have ever been.” Other digressions included complaints about his own various grievances and mistreatment. “Nobody gets treated worse than I do online, nobody,” he said once, after a brief discussion of a bill to combat revenge porn.Where were the Democrats during all this? Mostly, they were quiet. A few high-profile Democratic leaders, like Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and the senator Patty Murray, skipped the speech. Others stayed and sat, sedate. Reportedly, word had gone out from Democratic leadership that party members should have a “dignified” presence at the speech, neither seizing the spotlight nor protesting against Trump out loud. The result was underwhelming.Democrats, who have told their voters that Trump represents a threat to democracy, sat silently, holding up ping-pong paddles printed with the word “false”. In an apparent nod to women’s eroded rights, some of them wore pink. Trump, for his part, used their silent presence to his advantage, turning them into props. Even if he cured a terrible disease, he jeered at the Democrats: “They will not stand, they will not jeer, they will not clap.” In fact, Trump has frozen virtually all federal funding of research into those terrible diseases, like cancer and Alzheimer’s, that American scientists were once working to cure. An opposition worth the name could have pointed that out; the one we have raised their ping-pong paddles a little higher.Trump is not the figure he used to be. He no longer seems to be quite in control of his own administration: he has delegated most spending policy to Musk, and has busied himself instead merely with turning the federal law enforcement agencies, such as the FBI and the broader justice department, into instruments of his petty revenge. He’s not funny any more. But he is also more comfortable in power: even less deferential to formality, even less reverent towards his office, even more inclined to turn the presidency into what was always his greatest passion, a TV show.In Trump’s hands, an old State of the Union convention – pointing out citizens who had been brought to Congress as special guests – was given a new twist: Trump set the people up for surprises. One child, a 13-year-old aspiring police officer with cancer, was gifted with an honorary membership in the Secret Service; the cameras on him, his sunken eyes widened with surprise. A teenager who aspired to go to West Point stood up to wave to the crowd, and was told by Trump himself that he’d gotten in; his jaw momentarily hung open. The genre was the gameshow, the carnivalesque kind where nobodies see if they can catch some luck amid the random dispensation of gifts by the glamorous and benevolent host. Think of Oprah, in her decadent generosity, yelling: “You get a car!” In these moments, Trump seemed to be having fun. At least somebody is.

      Moira Donegan is a Guardian US columnist More

    • 175 Shares75 Views

      in US Politics

      White House to overhaul $42.5bn Biden-era internet plan – probably to Elon Musk’s advantage

      by

      The Trump administration is preparing to overhaul a $42.5bn Biden-era program designed to connect tens of millions of rural Americans to reliable and affordable high-speed internet, in a move that is expected to benefit billionaire Elon Musk.Howard Lutnick, the commerce department secretary who has oversight of the federal program, recently told senior officials inside the department that he wants to make significant changes to the federal program, sources with knowledge of the matter told the Guardian.Instead of promoting an expensive buildout of fiber optic networks – as the Biden administration sought to do – Lutnick has said he wants states to choose the internet technology that would be low cost for taxpayers.That, experts agree, would favor satellite companies like Musk’s Starlink. Musk, whose company owns about 62% of all operating satellites, has not hidden his disdain for Biden-era program, telling voters last year that he believed it should be brought down to “zero”.Sources spoke on the condition of anonymity because of the sensitivity of the matter.Experts generally agree that using satellite services costs less to connect difficult-to-reach homes than fiber. But fiber also provides a more reliable, faster and less expensive option for consumers.Any change to the program could face substantial pushback from states and Congress, including Republican senators who have previously sought assurances from administration officials that the federal program, which is expected to generate billions of dollars in long-term economic growth across some of the poorest states in the US, would largely be left alone.The so-called Bead program (which stands for “Broadband Equity Access and Deployment”) was passed with bipartisan support in 2021 and aimed to connect 25 million Americans to high-speed internet. Under the Biden plan, states were left to make their own plans, request federal funding and hold competitive bids for internet service providers that would build the network. Given different choices of how to connect homes to high-speed internet, the Biden administration said it wanted states to build fiber optic networks, which are expensive to set up but are considered reliable and can offer affordable rates to consumers. In cases where fiber optic networks were too expensive to build, states could opt for cheaper options, like using satellite.“I don’t think there is doubt that Bead will continue,” said Blair Levin, policy advisor to New Street Research, a telecommunications and technology analysis firm. “What is in doubt is whether people get a long-term solution or something that is definitely good for Elon Musk.”Lutnick has told commerce officials that he wants Bead to be “tech neutral”, which means not favoring one technology over another. It is unclear whether Lutnick would try to force states to choose satellite service over others.Such changes – which would probably be challenged by individual states – would radically alter a program that has faced some criticism but has generally been embraced by both Republican and Democratic governors across the US, who have been expecting to receive billions of dollars in federal funding. The funds would provide an economic lifeline that would connect an estimated 56m household in mostly rural communities who are unserved or underserved to high-speed internet. It is estimated that the program, as it stands now, would generate at least 380,000 new jobs and fuel more than $3tn in economic growth.The commerce department did not respond to a request for comment.“The driving force behind Bead was parity. Can you get internet service in rural Wyoming what you can get in suburban Denver?” said one analyst who requested anonymity because they are providing advice to some states on the issue. “Fiber is utterly critical. If the internet is the most important infrastructure asset a state has, and you are using satellite, then it means you are not building something in your state. It can be turned on and off by the satellite provider.”Any dramatic change to the federal program also raises legal questions. States have spent years planning for Bead, including holding competitive bids for companies to build fiber networks. It is unclear whether the commerce department can force these states to restart their planning from scratch. The overriding criticism of the Biden program is that the bureaucracy took too long, and that not a single household has yet been connected to high-speed internet yet. The Trump administration might argue that states may as well start again to benefit taxpayers.skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotionFor states like Louisiana, which was poised to receive $1.355bn under the Biden program and was the first state to get full approval for its plan, any change could upend estimates that the fiber optic build-out would drive $2bn to $3bn in economic growth for the state and between 8,000 and 10,000 new jobs. Planned investments, like a $10bn AI center that is poised to be built by Meta in Richland parish, a poor farming region in the north-east corner of the state, would depend on fiber optic connections. In a recent letter to Lutnick, the Louisiana governor, Jeff Landry, said the state would be ready to break ground on its fiber optic network within the first 100 days of the administration.The top Louisiana official working on the program, Veneeth Iyengar, has said about 95% of the state’s funds will be used to build fiber, and the remaining 5% will be used for cable, fixed wireless and satellite.Trump administration officials have balked at the program’s price tag.Musk made his views about the program clear at a town hall meeting in Pittsburgh last October, before the election. When he was asked about what he would do to help make the government more efficient, Musk immediately raised Bead as an example of a program he would cut.“I would say that program should be zero,” he quipped at the time, while also suggesting that his own satellite company, Starlink, could provide internet connectivity to rural homes at a fraction of the connectivity cost.Starlink did not immediately respond to a request for comment.Some Republican senators asked Lutnick about his views on Bead during his confirmation hearing, but he offered no promises. When Republican senator Dan Sullivan of Alaska asked Lutnick whether he could assure him that commerce would not rely on Starlink “as a solution to all of our problems”, Lutnick declined to answer, saying only that he would work to pursue the “most efficient and effective solutions for Alaskans”.Do you have a tip on this story? Please message us on Signal at +1 646 886 8761 More

    • 113 Shares50 Views

      in US Politics

      ‘The relationship is broken’: Canadians respond to Trump’s tariffs

      by

      “Since Donald Trump began his tariff threats against Canada and his ‘jokes’ about making Canada the 51st US state, I have not bought a single product originating in the US,” said Lynne Allardice, 78, a retired business owner from New Brunswick, Canada.“Not a single lettuce leaf or piece of fruit. I have become an avid reader of labels and have adopted an ‘anywhere but the US’ policy when shopping. I will not visit the States while Trump remains in office, and most of the people I know have adopted the same policy.”Acquaintances, Allardice added, were selling US holiday properties they had owned for many years.View image in fullscreenMany Canadians have responded to Trump’s economic tariffs and political messaging with a consumer boycott of US products and services – no more California wines or American Bourbon; local shopping instead of Amazon Prime; analogue entertainment and cable TV instead of Netflix; holidays in the Kootenays instead of Disney World.Hundreds of people from across Canada shared with the Guardian their reactions to Washington’s political and economic gear change, and how they may be affected personally.Many expressed defiance and anger over what they saw as a hostile new US administration that was no longer an ally and, voicing economic fears and a sense of permanent loss, said they would no longer buy US goods nor cross the border again – at least while Trump was in office.Pam, a 64-year-old retired woman from British Columbia, said she and her husband had cancelled a five-week trip to Palm Springs, losing their $5,000 (£3,900) deposit. They were planning, she said, to buy a Honda truck now instead of a Ford.Many said their local supermarkets had displayed labels marking Canadian products and that they were happy to pay significantly more for non-US goods, for example 50% more for Mexican lemons; others said they hoped Canadian companies would expand offerings and services after cancelling Amazon Prime and streaming platform subscriptions.One woman from British Columbia who lives a 10-minute drive from the US border and is participating in the boycott pointed to the irony of having joined several Facebook groups promoting Buy Canadian campaigns – one of which had now ballooned to 1.2 million members.View image in fullscreenAmid fiery pledges to stand up to the US government, hundreds of Canadians shared grave concerns about the impact of the trade tariffs on their personal finances.Many said they were anxious about their retirement savings amid the market turmoil and economic uncertainty that have followed what they referred to as Trump’s “economic warfare”.Scores said hiring and budget freezes were already happening in the companies they worked for, while a number of business owners highlighted a loss of sales since Trump’s election that was likely to worsen.People working in sectors including hospitality, tourism, retail, entertainment, the wider service industry, manufacturing, the auto industry, aviation, property and construction, agriculture, marketing and financial services, among others, shared concerns about their business or line of work being negatively affected by the tariffs and resulting economic uncertainty.Ian Hallett, the owner of an architectural bureau, from Seaforth, Ontario, said: “With steel, wood and aluminum tariffs, the construction industry will be hit hard and fast, which means a slowdown in building. We will likely have to lay off staff.”The owner of a landscaping business in Calgary, Alberta, said his sector would be “highly impacted” by the tariffs. “People won’t spend money to maintain or redesign their lawn. I may have to reduce my workforce and potentially shut down the season early. This will have a domino effect,” he said.View image in fullscreenAdrian, a business owner from Northern Ontario, said: “The tariffs have created chaos, anxiety and depression, a loss of hope. My US sales have dropped and if the tariffs [stay in place], I will have to close my business, as American customers are half my sales.”A 65-year-old support worker at an elementary school from Toronto said: “I’m worried my husband may lose his manufacturing job because the company he works for has a lot of American customers. Tariffs may make the building materials products his company makes too expensive.”Various business owners who were expecting a collapse in North American sales predicted that it would be impossible to make up the difference by increased exports to Europe or other parts of the world, where the markets were either saturated or shipping was too expensive.“I’m stressed about my investments and the financial markets, and I’m concerned about prices going up,” said Susan, an accountant from Toronto, mirroring the fears of many.While most of those who got in touch were outraged by Trump’s America First protectionism, scores of Canadians signalled an appetite for an isolationist approach for Canada, too.“I think that we should take a tip from Trump and build our own wall to keep the USA out,” said a 56-year-old single mother from Montreal. Scores of Canadians said they felt Canada needed to strengthen its military.Sarah from Nova Scotia said the Trump administration’s tactics and “threats against sovereignty, water, resources and territory” had “fired people up to be less dependent and integrated economically”.Antoine Delorme, a 43-year-old self-employed heavy machinery mechanic from Montreal, who has to order parts and material from the US every week, appeared to blame globalisation for Canada’s perceived vulnerability.skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotion“With free trade, we lost a lot of economic independence. Many distributors are centralised south of the border [and] no longer need to keep Canadian facilities,” he said. Like many others, he felt Canada was now exposed, economically and militarily. “If the USA turns into a hostile neighbour, no one will be in a position to meaningfully help us,” he said.View image in fullscreenJean Whieldon, a retired journalist from Ontario, said: “We have become too dependent upon America – Trump is right about that. Who can we turn to for help and protection? Nato? The UK? Don’t make me laugh, it hurts too much.”Hundreds of people expressed fury over a perceived lack of solidarity from allied nations and were particularly critical of the British prime minister, Sir Keir Starmer, and King Charles.“Canada’s relationship with the rest of the world has changed for ever,” said Katy, a finance professional from Toronto. “We just came to the stark realisation that allies are an illusion. As we endure the Maga onslaught, our supposed ‘allies’, including Britain, remain silent. Our ‘head of state’, King Charles, remains silent. Nato countries remain silent. We will weather the economic storm, but [I am] not so sure about our relationships with other nations.”Canada, Katy added, could leave international partnerships as it was “blessed with innumerable natural resources”. “If things don’t change, then Canada needs to extricate itself and consider becoming a neutral country. Dismantling the constitutional monarchy is now a must. The Commonwealth is dead.”Hundreds of Canadians reported a palpable, freshly ignited rise of patriotism, as well as a kind of nationalism usually frowned upon in Canada.“Canadians have become much more nationalistic,” said a woman from Ontario. “Some of us have been booing at the US national anthem at hockey games, which is not typical Canadian behaviour. We are furious about the tariffs that will deeply hurt Canadian businesses and quite likely see other companies move their operations south of our border.”View image in fullscreenDonna, a retired woman living in a small city in British Columbia, said: “We have lost our trust in the USA as a friendly country. Patriotism was never something that Canadians celebrated enthusiastically. Today I see more Canadian flags than I have ever seen – in front yards, hanging from porches and hedges, and adorning cars. Both sides of the political spectrum and a majority of citizens are much more united than before.”A woman in her 40s from British Columbia who works in tech agreed: “There’s a huge sense of national unity around the country, and a lot of focused action to build our nation up.” She said she had “quit the US cold turkey”.“This is a shift unlike any I have seen in my lifetime, and unlike anything my parents have seen either. Canada is turning away from the US – if not forever, at least for a long time. Goodbye America, we’ll miss what we had, but not what you have become.”While some people said they were differentiating between the Trump administration and their American neighbours, others shared feelings of personal hostility towards the American population, saying they wanted to “stick it to” their “poorly educated neighbours to the south”, as one woman from British Columbia put it, echoing the remarks of many.Scores of Canadians said they had fallen out with American friends and even family members over the political tensions between the two countries and ideological disagreements over American and Canadian democracy, freedoms and Trump himself.View image in fullscreenA silver lining to the economic upheaval, various people pointed out, were renewed efforts to improve intra-Canadian trade between provinces.Matt, 41, a university employee from Vancouver Island, said: “Having a common opponent in the USA is drawing many people of my vast country together in ways that were seemingly impossible just a year ago. The work being done to dismantle inter-provincial trade barriers, with the potential to add tens to hundreds of billions of dollars to our economy, would never have had the political backing without Canada facing a significant external threat.”Most Canadians who got in touch felt that ties between Canada and the US had been permanently damaged.“The relationship is broken,” said Allardice, the pensioner from New Brunswick. “A great many Canadians hate the USA now. How can you remain on good terms with a neighbour who threatens your economy and jokes about bringing you to your knees?” More

    • 150 Shares71 Views

      in US Politics

      ‘We’re going backwards’: the Black student unions being defunded on US campuses

      by

      For Nevaeh Parker, the president of the Black student union (BSU) at the University of Utah, Black History Month is usually a buzzing time on campus.The school’s BSU hosts several events – kickback parties and movie screenings – throughout the month. The Black cultural center, where students would usually congregate and attend activities, would be full. And the month’s crown jewel would typically be a conference at the college for Black high schoolers in the area.But in July 2024, the center was shut down and turned into offices. The BSU budget, previously a guaranteed $11,000 a year to fund various gatherings to support the school’s marginal Black population, has been slashed. And the group has been forced to officially disassociate from the university in order to keep Black students at the center of their programming, all thanks to a new anti-DEI (diversity, equity and inclusion) law passed in Utah last year.“It really hurts my soul to feel like we’re going backwards,” Parker, 19, told the Guardian. “We aren’t able to be as strong of a resource as we could be to Black students here.”View image in fullscreenBlack student unions at US colleges are fighting to stay in operation as state laws targeting DEI initiatives threaten their existence. Founded largely in the 1960s and 1970s, the campus groups support Black students at predominantly white universities by securing additional educational and financial resources, demanding more Black faculty, and building spaces for Black students to socialize. Activism by Black student unions helped spur the creation of African American studies programs across the US.BSUs are often the first line of response to racial discrimination on campus, organizing protests and holding universities accountable. Dozens of the groups held demonstrations after George Floyd’s murder in 2020.But anti-DEI bills are restricting what BSUs can do on campus, and how universities are legally allowed to support them. Since 2023, at least 11 states have passed laws targeting DEI initiatives in higher education. And conservative lawmakers in more than 30 states have also introduced such bills. At the federal level, Donald Trump ordered US universities and schools to eliminate DEI measures, threatening to withhold federal funding from those that do not comply.DEI programming at the collegiate level was initially conceived to support marginalized students, who are disproportionately affected by discrimination, financial hardship and feelings of alienation. But Republican legislators have argued that such initiatives are unfair and discriminate against white students. The flurry of anti-DEI bills, which have sharply increased since 2022, comes after the US supreme court struck down affirmative action, or the practice of race-conscious student admissions, in June 2023.Anti-DEI legislation and culture as a whole has had a chilling effect on colleges. Several universities have cancelled scholarships specifically aimed at students of color. Multicultural and LGBTQ+ student centers have been shuttered. And staff overseeing DEI initiatives have been terminated or reassigned.In January 2024, the Utah legislature passed House bill 261, known as the Equal Opportunity Initiatives. The law prohibits state schools and public offices from engaging in “differential treatment”, essentially banning DEI efforts centered around a particular identity.In response to the new legislation, the University of Utah closed its Black cultural center, a major loss for Black students on campus looking for a physical location to socialize, especially as only 3% of Utah students are Black. “It was a home away from home for a lot of students, especially those who lived out of state,” said Parker. “[The state of] Utah is less than 2% Black, [so] obviously, you are going to need spaces that are safe.”View image in fullscreenUtah’s BSU lost its adviser, as administrators either were reassigned to different parts of the university or resigned altogether. Notably, the words “diversity, equity and inclusion” cannot be used on any events sponsored by the university. “It basically took away our voice and took away what things that we wanted to talk about,” said Parker of the new limitations.In a comment to the Guardian, university officials said that identity-centered student groups are still able to gather as “affiliated” or “registered” organizations. “The University of Utah preserves and defends the rights of all registered student organizations – including the Black Student Union – to organize, gather and sponsor events on campus. Universities are marketplaces of diverse viewpoints and ideas, and that includes within our student clubs. Changing their status from ‘sponsored’ to ‘registered’ preserves their independence to continue working with a community of students, faculty and staff without limitation on their communication and activities.”The school said it has since opened the Center for Community and Cultural Engagement (CCE) and the Center for Student Access and Resources, which are “open to all students, whose dedicated staff still provide the same level of support – in advising, scholarship preparation, resource referrals and mentorship”. It has “redistributed the funds that were originally dedicated to BSU to efforts that work toward supporting all students”.Parker noted that the missions of these centers are broad and “not centered on student organization and affinity groups. It’s felt like their ability to support us in the ways that we need have not been met.”In October, the BSU publicly announced that it would forgo official sponsorship in order to fight censorship attempts. Some events at Utah have had to be cancelled, Parker said, as students try and preserve funds they crowdsource across school years. The group has had to meet less as well, especially without a designated space. Club meetings are now held in various campus classrooms.Black students at the University of Alabama have also found themselves in a similar position. Their BSU had its funding revoked and was forced to relocate after a state bill restricting DEI went into effect in October 2024. “It’s been hard for freshmen especially to find their community and find like-minded people that look like them,” said Jordan Stokes, the BSU president.If the BSU wants university support, particularly funding for student events, the groups would be forced to “partner with another organization”, Stokes, 20, said, so the event is not solely focused on Black students and is in compliance with state law. The BSU has since successfully reached out to outside sponsors and alumni to finance Black History Month events, including its annual BSU week which features a number of celebratory gatherings. But that fundraising is finite compared to the university’s resources.The BSU office, which is now sitting empty, also held a significant amount of civil rights artifacts from past events at the university, said Stokes, and students are working to preserve its archives amid the closing. Posters highlighting important Black figures used to hang around the office. Yearbooks past were available for perusal.Now, much of that history is sitting in storage, Stokes said. “We had writing on our wall and on the window where you could read about our history and everything,” she said. “It’s pretty sad for folks who [aren’t Black] to not see this history and learn and explore different cultures.” The University of Alabama did not reply to the Guardian’s request for comment.Both Parker and Stokes said that they are extremely frustrated with lawmakers who are going after their communities and other students of color. Watching the university comply with state demands has been hard, Parker added, especially amid concerns that directly protesting from the anti-DEI policies could have their organizations punished or removed from campus altogether.But both BSUs have continued hosting events to make sure that Black students feel supported. Attendance at BSU events has remained steady, said Stokes, with students becoming more interested in voting and learning more about these policies.Parker said that she and other BSU leaders are focusing on individuals, students who need the organization in whatever way it can exist. That means continuing to celebrate and gather, even under the threat of erasure. “It’s really sad,” she said, “that we as students, who are not politicians, have to take the responsibility to continuously fight every single day for our existence on campus.” More

    • 163 Shares92 Views

      in US Politics

      Trump turns Congress speech into a sordid campaign rally, igniting a Democrat fightback

      by

      Well, at least he didn’t give a Nazi salute, declare war on Canada or pull the plug on Nato. You never know these days. But this was the night that Donald Trump finally turned the once reverential occasion of a speech to Congress into just another sordid campaign rally.Deigning to address the branch of government he has so comprehensively sidelined in his first six weeks in office, Trump went off script and went long (a record 100 minutes). He lied, he weaved, demonised immigrants, he sold his economy as the greatest ever, he played the victim, he praised Elon Musk, he lambasted Joe Biden, he repeated himself and he lied some more.And how Republican senators and representatives lapped it all up. They leaped to their feet countless times, clapping and cheering, shouting, “Yes!” and “Thank you!”, chanting, “USA! USA! USA!” and “Trump! Trump! Trump!” and “Fight! Fight! Fight!”Among them was congresswoman Marjorie Taylor Greene, sporting a red “Trump was right about everything” cap and clutching a mini-Stars and Stripes as if listening to him in a sports arena on the campaign trail.But this was a Trump rally with a difference, putting all the tensions and faultlines and sickness of the American body politic on full display. Half the chamber was made up of Democrats, forced to sit and have their noses rubbed in the dirt like Ukrainian president Volodymyr Zelenskyy at last week’s Oval Office shakedown.They looked grim, they looked glum, they looked as if they were reliving the 5 November election nightmare all over again. More than a dozen Democratic women wore pink in protest. When Trump entered, Democrat Melanie Stansbury held up a sign that said, “This is NOT Normal,” until Republican Lance Gooden across the aisle, grabbed sign out of her hand and tossed it in the air.Once Trump got going, several Democrats held up round black signs that said, “Protect veterans”, “Save Medicaid” and “Musk steals”, and when flipped around, the signs said “False” on the back, so they could factcheck Trump instantly (those arms must have got tired).Congresswoman Rashida Tlaib began with a piece of paper on which “That’s a lie” was handwritten but later upgraded to a mini-white board that said at various points: “That’s a lie!”, “You cut cancer research”, “What about the immigrants that worked for you?”, and “Cut Elon, NOT Social Security.”Most spectacularly, when Trump began his speech by declaring that the presidential election of 5 November “was a mandate like has not been seen in many decades,”Republicans quickly jumped to their feet with chants of “USA! USA!”, while congressman Al Green rose, cane aloft, and shouted, “You have no mandate to cut Medicaid!”, prompting House Speaker Mike Johnson to order the House serjeant at arms to escort him from the chamber. Republicans cheered and shouted “Get out!” and “Na na na na … goodbye!”‘It’s a lie!’ shout DemocratsRarely has the divide across the aisle been so bitter and glaring. It was hard to believe that, when Trump first stood on this spot eight years ago, he repeatedly called for unity, proclaiming: “We all bleed the same blood. We all salute the same great American flag. And we all are made by the same God.”There was none of that in 2025. These are the days of miracles and thunder, of owning the libs and perhaps owning chunks of the world too. Trump described his own presidency as the most successful in history, beating George Washington into second, and Biden’s as the worst ever.Then he whined: “I look at the Democrats in front of me and I realise there is absolutely nothing I can say to make them happy or to make them stand or smile or applaud – nothing I can do.“I could find a cure to the most devastating disease, a disease that would wipe out entire nations or announce the answers to the greatest economy in history, or the stoppage of crime to the lowest levels ever recorded, and these people sitting right here will not clap, will not stand and certainly will not cheer for these astronomical achievements.”Poor unloved, unappreciated Donald. But Speaker Johnson and vice-president JD Vance giggled like mischievous schoolboys. Republicans again stood to applaud and Democrats remain riveted to their seats in silence.The president went on to trumpet his “department of government efficiency” and all heads turned to look at Elon Musk, wearing a suit, in the public gallery. Republicans again hollered in praise as Musk, nodding and saluting, milked it for all it was worth.But later, when Trump declared that “the days of being ruled by unelected bureaucrats is over”, some Democrats laughed, stood up and pointed at the tech oligarch who is taking a chainsaw to the federal government.Just as at a rally, Trump did the weave, talking at length about illegal immigration and transgender children, then circling back later to do it all again. Congressman Jamie Raskin could be seen making a looping gesture as if to say: this is getting repetitive.An exultant, ego-driven Trump boasted: “The media and our friends in the Democrat Party kept saying we needed new legislation, we must have legislation to secure the border. But it turned that all we really needed was a new president.”Among the senators, Chuck Schumer stared down at his phone. Dick Durbin looked bewildered. Amy Klobuchar grimaced. Cory Booker seemed crestfallen – his belief in the better angels of our nature had been mugged by reality.As the night wore on, several Democrats walked out in protest, some revealing shirts that read “Resist” on the back. One shirt said, “No kings live here”; another said, “President Musk”.The clashes continued. When Trump repeated a false claim that millions of dead people over 100 years old are receiving social security payments, Democrats shouted, “It’s a lie!”When Trump admitted “there will be a little disturbance” from tariffs but “we’re OK with that”, a Democrat objected: “No, we’re not!” A Republican retorted loudly: “We’re good, we’re good.”When Trump declared “we are also once again giving our police officers the support, protection and respect they so dearly deserve”, several Democrats yelled back, “January 6!”When Trump said the US needs Greenland for national security, adding that “One way or the other, we’re gonna get it,” a Democrat shouted, “Not a king!”But when, with British ambassador Peter Mandelson looking on, the president remarked on how the US had sent billions of military aid to Ukraine, it was Democrats who started clapping, while the party of cold war warrior Ronald Reagan sat on its hands.Trump asked sarcastically: “You want to keep it going another five years?” Then he spotted Senator Elizabeth Warren and said mockingly, “Yeah, Pocahontas says yes.” Warren fought hard to retain a cold smile as she continued to applaud.Yet still Trump kept going, delivering a speech that somehow managed to be both menacing and boring at the same time, spending less than two minutes on inflation and prices, the issue that was arguably central to his election. At one point there was even a yawn on the Republican side from congresswoman Nancy Mace. People have been primaried for less.When it was over, however, Mace went up to him and gushed: “Best speech ever!” Greene was not far behind with: “Mr President, that was a great speech!” Other voices chimed in: “Home run!”, “Slam dunk!”, “You rocked it, Mr President.”By then the Democrats had bolted for the door, having metaphorically done what Nancy Pelosi did five years ago when she tore up Trump speech’s in this chamber. They had given hope to the resistance and shown the world what they are against. Now can they show the world what they are for? More