Trump administration

Subterms

    More stories

    • 175 Shares159 Views

      in US Politics

      The courts are a crucial bastion against Trump. What if he ignores their orders?

      by

      Years before he became the US vice-president and openly advocated defiance of the courts over the Trump administration’s blitz through the federal bureaucracy and constitution, JD Vance revealed his contempt for legal constraints.In 2021, Vance predicted that Donald Trump would again be elected president and advised him to “fire every single midlevel bureaucrat, every civil servant in the administrative state, replace them with our people”.“Then when the courts stop you, stand before the country like Andrew Jackson did and say: ‘The chief justice has made his ruling. Now let him enforce it,’” he told the Jack Murphy Live podcast.Whether the seventh American president actually said that remains disputed, but the sentiment is alive and well as the Trump administration defies federal court orders to at least pause its subversion of the constitution and destructive rampage through the federal bureaucracy led by Elon Musk.In the absence of action by Congress to defend its powers, it has been government workers, state attorneys general and unions who have counterattacked, with a flurry of lawsuits – challenging presidential orders to limit the constitutional right of anyone born in the US to be a citizen, a federal funding freeze, and the dismissal of corruption watchdogs, among other measures. Nearly 50 legal challenges have been filed in the last three weeks, an unprecedented pushback in the courts against a new administration.The lawsuits have resulted in a string of court rulings. They have put a hold on some of Trump’s executive orders freezing some spending. They have also restricted Musk, head of the so-called “department of government efficiency”, from sending his staff to rifle through the financial records of federal agencies such as the US Agency for International Development (USAid) and the education department as a means to restrict their work or even close them down.But it quickly became apparent that the administration was defying some of the court orders, while its supporters attacked what they called “rogue judges” for ruling against Trump – and Vance portrayed the courts as just another bureaucratic obstacle to the president implementing the people’s will.That has prompted warnings from legal scholars, including Erwin Chemerinsky, dean of the University of California Berkeley law school, of a constitutional crisis in the making.“It’s very frightening to think that they will disobey court orders. If they don’t, it will be a constitutional crisis unlike anything this country has seen, because if the president can violate constitutional laws and disobey court orders then the name for that is a dictatorship,” he said.“This isn’t the realm of normal. What we’ve seen in the first three weeks is unprecedented in American history.”The judge John McConnell has accused the Trump administration of deliberately disobeying an order obliging the government to reinstate billions of dollars in grants. Another judge, Loren AliKhan, accused the administration of defying its legal obligations after she ordered the office for budget and management (OMB) to halt a spending freeze.Vance pushed back against the rulings on X.“If a judge tried to tell a general how to conduct a military operation, that would be illegal,” he wrote.“Judges aren’t allowed to control the executive’s legitimate power.”Musk called for one of the judges involved to be impeached.Trump won a victory on Thursday when a judge ruled in favour of Musk’s offer to almost all of the 2 million-strong federal workforce of eight months of pay for not working if they resign now. The email’s subject line, “Fork in the Road”, was the same as one he used in a message to employees when he bought Twitter in 2022 and got rid of about 80% of its staff. Shortly after the deadline set by the email for voluntary redundancy, which was accepted by about 65,000 federal workers, unions said involuntary dismissals had begun.Karoline Leavitt, the White House press secretary, praised the rare court victory.“This goes to show that lawfare will not ultimately prevail over the will of 77 million Americans who supported President Trump and his priorities,” she said.But mostly the courts have so far ruled against the Trump administration as it pursues a power grab.The American Bar Association, which represents hundreds of thousands of lawyers in the US, has condemned what it called the Trump administration’s “wide-scale affronts to the rule of law itself”.“We have seen attempts at wholesale dismantling of departments and entities created by Congress without seeking the required congressional approval to change the law,” it said.The ABA also condemned “efforts to dismiss employees with little regard for the law and protections they merit” and social media posts intended “to inflame”.“This is chaotic. It may appeal to a few. But it is wrong. And most Americans recognize it is wrong. It is also contrary to the rule of law,” it said.It’s likely that at least some of the flood of lawsuits will end up before the supreme court. The administration may in fact want to see some cases reach the highest court, which has a solid conservative majority after Trump appointed three of its nine justices during his first term, as it seeks to consolidate even more power in the presidency over issues such as who has final control over spending allocated by Congress.But the process of moving through district and appeals courts before making it to the supreme court is unlikely to be swift, by which time Musk may already have achieved much of what he aims to do in wrecking the work of USAid, the education department and other federal agencies.Then there is the unpredictability of a supreme court that has already overturned precedent in striking down the right to abortion.Chemerinsky believes the Trump administration is all but certain to lose cases on birthright citizenship, the freeze on spending and the dismissals of commissioners that oversee labour rights, consumer protection and equal employment opportunities, because they are in breach of federal law. He said the court was also likely to order the administration to back down from attempts to eliminate individual agencies created by Congress.But what if the administration follows Vance’s call to openly defy the courts? Chemerinsky said that would set up “a constitutional confrontation unlike any we’ve seen”.“The courts have limited ability to enforce their orders. They could hold individuals other than the president in contempt of court. They could figure out who’s responsible for carrying out the court order and hold that person in contempt with fines or jail for civil contempt. But the idea of the courts holding a cabinet secretary, an attorney general, a secretary of defence in contempt is just unheard of in the United States,” he said.“It’s so hard to imagine where we’ll be in four years. When you think about what’s going on in just three weeks, it’s certain Donald Trump is claiming expansive executive power beyond what any president has ever asserted. How much will the courts allow that? There’s no way to know.” More

    • 238 Shares179 Views

      in US Politics

      Cruelty and staggering financial costs: why expanding Guantánamo is a grave mistake | Karen J Greenberg and Mike Lehnert

      by

      Nine days into the country’s 47th presidency, Donald Trump issued an executive memorandum that contained his latest mass deportation plan. The three-paragraph, 148-word order called for a migrant facility located at the US Naval Base in Guantánamo Bay, Cuba, to be expanded “to full capacity”. The US president later said the camp would house 30,000 migrants.Troop deployments quickly followed and on 4 February, the first planes carrying a few dozen migrants arrived at Guantánamo, with officials sending more each day.If the past is any guide, rather than accelerating Trump’s drive for unprecedented mass deportations, the Guantánamo migrant detention plan is destined to repeat the cruelty, confusion, protracted legal battles and staggering financial costs that have defined US detentions at Guantánamo since the September 11 attacks.Today we know Guantánamo mainly as the detention facility that held a total of 780 war on terror detainees over the past 23 years. The cruelty of Guantánamo has been exhaustively documented, notably in the 2023 UN special rapporteur’s report on the detention facility which described “the depth, severity, and evident nature of many detainees’ current physical and psychological harms”, both those still in Guantánamo and those who had been released as constituting human rights violations.Instead of acting as an effective deterrent, Guantánamo has become a worldwide symbol of US hypocrisy.View image in fullscreenThe US has also found it impossible to bring to trial those who are charged with conspiring in the attacks of September 11. In sum, once detention in Gitmo was set up, it has seemed doomed to perpetual limbo, all too easy to fill up and nearly impossible to empty.And the prison complex, which currently holds 15 prisoners, has served taxpayers poorly as well. It now operates at an astounding estimated cost of $44m – per prisoner per year – up from $13m in 2019 when the prison held 40 detainees. Every ounce of water used on the base must be created by a single desalinization plant. Food, construction material and all other supplies must be brought in by barge. Troops for security and logistics support must be deployed. Medical personnel as well.The war on terror’s prison is not the only warning sign from the past. For decades before September 11, Guantánamo served as a warehouse for migrants, a zone where laws were conveniently pushed aside, and legal resolution remained elusive.Originally established as a coaling station in 1903, the island military base took on a new role in the 1990s when Cubans, and then Haitians fleeing the overthrow of the democratically elected president, Jean-Bertrand Aristide, were apprehended at sea while seeking asylum in the United States.Culminating in Operation Sea Signal, 50,000 migrants were detained over time, with 24,000 in place at the peak, housed in vast expanses of tent cities where conditions were dangerously unsanitary, legal processes slow to nonexistent, and treatment of the migrants reportedly harsh. Despite the Clinton administration’s promises of processing their cases for asylum, most of the Haitians were summarily returned to Haiti. Cubans as well often remained in legal limbo in one “sad camp” or another.Since then, the Migrant Operations Center (MOC) has continued to serve as a holding facility for migrants apprehended at sea. In 2020-2021, the MOC held an average of 14 detainees at a time. By 2024, 37 migrants were housed there, reportedly living in legal limbo, under unsanitary conditions and reported mistreatment and abuse.View image in fullscreenThe sense of deja vu is unsettling. Tom Homan has referred to those who will be sent to Guantánamo as “the worst of the worst”, the same words used by the secretary of defense, Donald Rumsfeld, when he first set up the post-9/11 prison camp. Tellingly, the first troops sent last week to facilitate the new operations were marines from Camp LeJeune, just as they had been after September 11. And the essential policy parallel holds as well: an administration has given up trying to tackle complex policy problems and has instead embraced viral images of shackled prisoners and tough-talking soundbites that energize its political base.Guantánamo makes a mockery of our claim that we are a nation of laws, prudence and common sense. It has become a global symbol of the US inability to address complex challenges, in this case the unprecedented level of mass migration under way worldwide, with an eye towards a realistic, long-term solution. Nor is there a compelling argument that the threat of detention at Guantánamo will deter those seeking asylum from fears of persecution in their home countries and are willing to risk the dangers of the migration routes.In a 1996 after-action manual based on interviews with military personnel who had served at Guantánamo during the detention operation of the 1990s, the authors made a series of recommendations. The manual highlighted the need to clarify the “legal basis for the operation” and “for understanding the nature and scope of the mission at the outset”.Such clarity, Gen Joseph Hoar, the head of USCentcom at the time wrote, was “paramount”.The general’s warning was ignored after September 11. It is absent today as well in the rapid, indiscriminate, legally vague and underprepared operation currently under way.It’s time to finally take a lesson from the past. The throughline of Guantánamo represents one thing and one thing only: it exists outside the law. It is ineffective, exorbitantly expensive, and will not solve complex, insufficiently addressed policy messes. Using it to tackle migration will lead predictably not to solving a problem but to creating new ones.

      Karen J Greenberg is the director of the Center on National Security at Fordham Law and author of The Least Worst Place: Guantanamo’s First 100 Days

      Mike Lehnert (MajGen USMC ret) served as the joint task group commander of the Cuban and Haitian migrant camps during Operation Sea Signal (1995) and the first joint task force commander of JTF GITMO (2002) More

    • 150 Shares159 Views

      in US Politics

      Elon Musk’s ‘efficiency’ agency team at the Pentagon to meet defense staff

      by

      Members of Elon Musk’s “department of government efficiency” arrived at the Pentagon Friday, in what appeared to be their first meeting with defense department staff, a US official told Reuters. The official spoke on condition of anonymity.Donald Trump has said the Pentagon would be an early target of Musk’s government budget and personnel slashing team and that he expects the tech billionaire to find hundreds of billions of dollars in fraud and abuse in the department.Last week, Trump confirmed that he had asked Musk to review spending in the sprawling defense department. “I’ve instructed him to go check out education, to check out the Pentagon, which is the military. And you know, sadly, you’ll find some things that are pretty bad.”Defense department spending has long been the subject of debate across the political spectrum, with its budget approaching $1tn per year. In December, then president Joe Biden signed a bill authorizing $895bn in defense spending for the fiscal year. But Democrats have questioned whether Musk – an unelected official with lucrative contracts at the department through his company SpaceX – is the best poised to negotiate reforms.In recent months, Trump has formed a close relationship with Musk as the world’s richest man spent $250m on the president’s re-election campaign. When he took office, Trump appointed Musk to lead the newly formed, so-called “department of government efficiency”.Since then, the agency has called for mass layoffs across many government agencies, including the US Agency for International Development, the Department of Education, the Small Business Administration, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau and the General Services Administration. More layoffs are expected to follow at the Internal Revenue Service, the Department of Agriculture, Veterans Affairs and Health and Human Services.On Tuesday, Musk took questions from reporters alongside the president in an Oval Office ceremony regarding the closure of government offices. Next week, the pair are expected to appear together on Fox News in their first televised joint appearance.Musk’s team’s meeting at the Pentagon came the same day it published classified information on its website, according to the Huffington Post. The leak included statistics from the National Reconnaissance Office, which operates spy satellites – including hundreds built by Musk’s SpaceX company. The office’s budgets and head counts are classified.Also Friday, a federal judge extended a temporary order blocking Doge from accessing treasury records that contain sensitive personal data such as social security and bank account numbers for millions of Americans. The case alleges the Trump administration allowed Musk’s team access to the treasury department’s central payment system in violation of federal law.A government watchdog is expected to launch an inquiry into security over the US treasury’s payments system.Pete Hegseth, the defense secretary, another close Trump ally, has downplayed concerns about Musk’s agenda for the agency. Hegseth said he had already been in touch with Musk but on Tuesday added: “We’re not going to do things that are to the detriment of American operational or tactical capabilities.” Hegseth has said he wants to increase overall US defense spending. More

    • 138 Shares169 Views

      in US Politics

      Under-pressure prosecutors ask to drop Eric Adams charges after seven resign

      by

      Under immense pressure from Donald Trump’s justice department leadership, prosecutors in Washington have asked a federal judge to dismiss the criminal corruption case against Eric Adams, the New York mayor, rather than see the entire public integrity office be fired.The prosecutors, Edward Sullivan and Antoinette Bacon, filed the request on Friday night to withdraw the charges against Adams that included bribery, fraud and soliciting illegal foreign campaign contributions.The move capped a week of turmoil at the department where seven prosecutors – including the acting US attorney in southern district of New York, the head of the criminal division and the head of the public integrity section – resigned in protest rather than dismiss the case for political reasons.And it followed an extraordinary showdown after the acting deputy attorney general Bove, facing opposition from prosecutors in New York and pushing to bring the justice department to heel, forced the public integrity section to find someone to put their name on the dismissal or be fired themselves.The roughly hour-long meeting, where the public integrity section weighed whether to resign en masse after agreeing that the dismissal of the Adams case was improper, culminated with Sullivan, a veteran career prosecutor, agreeing to take the fall for his colleagues, according to two people familiar with the matter.The decision gave the justice department what it needed to seek the end of the Adams case. The attorney general, Pam Bondi, said in an appearance on Fox News afterwards that the mayor’s case “is being dismissed today”, although that power rests with the presiding US district judge, Dale Ho, in New York.Ho has limited ability to deny the request but could still order an evidentiary hearing into why the department was ordering the end of the corruption case against Adams, which threatens to unearth deeper revelations into the fraught background behind a decision castigated by the lead prosecutor as a quid pro quo deal.The department’s rationale to dismiss the case was necessarily political: Bove had argued that it was impeding Adams from fully cooperating with Trump’s immigration crackdown – and was notably not making the decision based on the strength of the evidence or legal theory underpinning the case.The saga started on Monday. After Bove ordered the charges against Adams to be withdrawn, Danielle Sassoon, the acting US attorney for the southern district of New York, sent a remarkable letter to the attorney general that said Bove’s directive was “inconsistent with my ability and duty to prosecute federal crimes without fear or favor”.Sassoon also made a startling accusation in her letter, writing that the mayor’s lawyers had “repeatedly urged what amounted to a quid pro quo, indicating that Adams would be in a position to assist with the department’s enforcement priorities only if the indictment were dismissed”.A lawyer for Adams, Alex Spiro, denied the accusation, saying: “The idea that there was a quid pro quo is a total lie. We offered nothing and the department asked nothing of us. We were asked if the case had any bearing on national security and immigration enforcement and we truthfully answered it did.”On Friday, Adams himself said in a statement: “I never offered – nor did anyone offer on my behalf – any trade of my authority as your mayor for an end to my case. Never.”Sassoon, a conservative career prosecutor, also revealed in her letter that her team had intended in recent weeks to add a further obstruction of justice charge against Adams. For good measure, she castigated Bove for scolding a member of her team for taking notes at the meeting and ordering that the notes be confiscated.Apparently realizing that Sassoon would not agree to drop the case, two people familiar with the matter said, Bove attempted to end-run the situation by having the public integrity section at justice department headquarters in Washington take over the case and request its dismissal.The move prompted a wave of resignations from career prosecutors. On Thursday, Bove wrote back to Sassoon criticizing her for insubordination and placing her two lieutenants, Hagan Scotten and Derek Wikstrom, on administrative leave.Meanwhile, in Washington, Kevin Driscoll, the acting head of the criminal division which oversees public integrity, tendered his resignation with John Keller, the acting head of the integrity section itself, rather than go along with the dismissal.After Keller’s departure,Marco Palmieri became the third of four deputy chiefs of the public integrity section to resign, leaving the team without a clear leadership aside from three senior litigation counsels who served under the deputy chiefs.By Friday, Scotten resigned while on administrative leave. In a scathing rebuke of Bove, he wrote: “If no lawyer within earshot of the President is willing to give him that advice, then I expect you will eventually find someone who is enough of a fool, or enough of a coward, to file your motion. But it was never going to be me.” More

    • 163 Shares159 Views

      in US Politics

      Trump and Vance are courting Europe’s far right to spread their political gospel

      by

      The Trump administration is making a big bet on Europe’s hard right.Speaking at a conference of Europe’s leaders in Munich on Friday, the US vice-president JD Vance stunned the room by delivering what amounted to a campaign speech against Germany’s sitting government just one week before an election in which the anti-immigrant, anti-Muslim AfD is set to take second place.As Vance accused foreign leaders of suppressing free speech, failing to halt illegal migration and running in fear from voters’ true beliefs, a whisper of “Jesus Christ” and the squirming in chairs could be heard in an overflow room.Hours later he met with Alice Weidel, the leader of the AfD, breaking a taboo in German politics called the “firewall against the far-right”, meant to kept the anti-immigrant party with ties to extremists out of the mainstream and of any ruling coalition.“It’s an incredibly controversial thing for him to do,” said Kristine Berzina, the managing director of the German Marshall Fund’s Geostrategy North, who was at the Munich Security Conference.The backing of Vance – or Elon Musk, who recently gave a video address at an AfD party summit – is unlikely to tilt the result of Germany’s elections, said Berzina. And it’s unlikely to browbeat the ruling Christian Democratic Union, which should win next week’s vote, into allowing AfD to enter any coalition.But the US right under Trump does have its eyes set on a broader transformation in Europe: the rise of populist parties that share an anti-immigration and isolationist worldview and will join the US in its assault on globalism and liberal values. They see those leaders in Viktor Orbán in Hungary, Giorgia Meloni in Italy, as well as the UK’s Reform party and Marine Le Pen in France.“It is personal and it is political in terms of far-right political alignment,” she said. “It also opens the door to what other unprecedented things are we going to see in terms of the US hand in European politics.”Could the US president even threaten serious policy shifts like tariffs based on an unsatisfactory German coalition? “That would be normally unthinkable,” she said in response to that question. “But in 2025, very little is unthinkable.”Trump has claimed a broad mandate despite winning the popular vote by a smaller margin than any US leader since the early 2000s. And he seeks to remake politics at home and redefine the US relationship with its allies abroad, many of whom attacked him personally in the wake of the January 6 insurrection and his second presidential campaign.Vance also wanted to antagonise Europe’s leaders on Friday. He refused to meet with Olaf Scholz, the German chancellor who should be among the US’ key partners in negotiations with Russia over the future of the war in Ukraine. “We don’t need to see him, he won’t be chancellor long,” one former US official told Politico of the Vance team’s approach.That speaks to a trend in the Trump administration’s thinking: that voters abroad will handle what his negotiations and alliances cannot. As Vance stunned the European elite on Friday, he told them that “if you’re running in fear of your own voters, there is nothing America can do for you”.“You need democratic mandates to accomplish anything of value in the coming years,” he said.This is something that Vladimir Putin, who waited years for the return of a Trump administration, knows well regarding his war in Ukraine: sometimes you have to bide your time until conditions are right.And it’s something that Trump intimated about Ukraine’s Volodymyr Zelenskyy as he riffed on his plan to end the war through negotiations that would cede Ukrainian territory and give up Kyiv’s designs on Nato membership.“He’s going to have to do what he has to do,” Trump said of Zelenskyy agreeing to a deal. “But, you know, his poll numbers aren’t particularly great.” More

    • 213 Shares149 Views

      in US Politics

      Trump to cut off funding for schools and universities with Covid vaccine mandates – US politics live

      by

      Donald Trump has convened the press in the Oval Office to sign an executive order cutting off federal funding for schools and universities that require students be vaccinated against Covid-19 to attend classes.In addition to that order, the White House press secretary, Karoline Leavitt, said the president had signed another order establishing an “Energy Dominance Council” led by the interior secretary, Doug Burgum, and energy secretary, Chris Wright. Leavitt made a point to note that the Associated Press was not in attendance.More news of federal layoffs continues to roll in, this time from the department of health and human services – which Trump ally Robert F. Kennedy Jr. was confirmed to lead in a controversial vote yesterday. According to an internal memo obtained by The Washington Post, the department is in the process of firing about 5,200 health workers.The news comes just hours after the Associated Press reported that the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention – which is housed within HHS – will lose about 10% of its employees, following a Trump administration order to fire all hires still in their probationary period. That amounts to about 1,300 employees.Amid Donald Trump’s rampant efforts to downsize the civilian federal workforce, the president’s new veterans affairs secretary Doug Collins has announced plans to lay off at least 1,000 employees. He promised the layoffs (and subsequent $98 million cut in the department’s budget) will not affect veteran care or benefits. “I take Secretary Collins at his word when he says there will be no impact to the delivery of care, benefits, and services for veterans with this plan,” said Rep. Mike Bost, the Republican chairman of the House Committee on Veterans’ Affairs.The ranking Democrat, Rep. Mark Takano, said the firings show a shocking disregard. The terminated include disabled veterans, military spouses and medical researchers.A second federal judge has paused Donald Trump’s order restricting healthcare for transgender youth.The temporary restraining order came from the US district court judge Lauren King in Seattle just a day after a federal judge in Baltimore also temporarily blocked the president’s executive order.Democratic attorneys general from Washington state, Oregon and Minnesota filed the Seattle lawsuit, arguing that the order discriminates against transgender people.The presidential order halted federal support for gender-affirming care for trans youth under 19, including by ending funding to institutions that offer such care and excluding the care from government-run insurance coverage.Gender-affirming healthcare includes a range of therapies – from emotional support to vocal coaching, puberty blockers and sometimes hormones and surgery. The treatments are considered the standard of care and are endorsed by all US medical associations.Since Trump returned to office last month, he has signed a series of executive orders targeting trans Americans, including by banning trans athletes from women’s sports, declaring the government will only recognize the male and female sexes and transferring incarcerated trans women to men’s facilities; a US judge temporarily blocked federal prisons from implementing the order to move trans people. Many of the orders have been framed as “defending women”.Donald Trump and Elon Musk will jointly appear on Fox News next week with host Sean Hannity. It will be the pair’s first televised interview together.In recent months, Trump has formed a close relationship with Musk, resulting in his appointment to lead the newly formed, so-called “department of government efficiency”. On Tuesday, Musk took questions from reporters alongside the president in an Oval Office ceremony regarding the closure of government offices. Musk spent $250m on the president’s re-election campaign.The Internal Revenue Service will lay off thousands of probationary employees, beginning potentially next week, the New York Times reports.The firings are in line with orders from the Office of Personnel Management, which acts as the federal government’s human resources department, to let go of employees new in their positions, who have fewer job protections.The layoffs come amid the annual tax season, as Americans file returns ahead of the 15 April deadline. The Times notes the layoffs seem to contradict comments to Bloomberg News from Treasury secretary Scott Bessent last week, who said any layoffs at the IRS would come after that deadline.At his speech today to a high-profile security conference in Germany, JD Vance made a number of claims that offer a window into how he views the United States’s relationship with the world.The problem is, several of them stretch the truth, as the Guardian’s Daniel Boffey and Alexandra Topping report:Donald Trump has green-lit the first new export of liquified natural gas since Joe Biden paused approvals early last year amid concerns over their impact on climate change, Reuters reports.The decision allows Louisiana’s Commonwealth LNG to export gas to markets in Asia and Europe. Speaking to reporters in the Oval Office, Trump also said 600m acres (243m hectares) of offshore waters controlled by the federal government will reopen to oil and gas drilling, reversing a ban imposed by Biden.Here’s more about Biden’s steps against natural gas:Donald Trump revealed to reporters that he had spoken to Keir Starmer, and that they may meet in the next few weeks, Reuters reports.We first heard about the call, which came as something of a surprise to the British prime minister and his aides, earlier today:Donald Trump has convened the press in the Oval Office to sign an executive order cutting off federal funding for schools and universities that require students be vaccinated against Covid-19 to attend classes.In addition to that order, the White House press secretary, Karoline Leavitt, said the president had signed another order establishing an “Energy Dominance Council” led by the interior secretary, Doug Burgum, and energy secretary, Chris Wright. Leavitt made a point to note that the Associated Press was not in attendance.JD Vance had no time to meet with Germany’s chancellor Olaf Scholz during his travel to the country, but did find an opportunity to sit down with the leader of the far-right AfD party, according to media reports.It was German broadcaster ZDF that broke news of the vice-president’s encounter with the AfD chief Alice Weidel, which lasted for about 30 minutes and saw them discuss the war in Ukraine and politics in Berlin. As for Scholz, Politico reports that Vance’s spokesperson cited a “scheduling conflict” the prevented them from meeting. But a former US official, referring to team Vance’s thinking, put it this way:
      We don’t need to see him, he won’t be chancellor long.
      Vance’s speech to the Munich security forum earlier in the day included a line seen as indicating his support for the AfD, which is expected to make gains in elections later this month. Follow our live blog for more: More

    • 150 Shares169 Views

      in US Politics

      White House bans AP journalists from Oval Office amid continued Gulf dispute

      by

      The White House has announced that it is indefinitely blocking Associated Press journalists from accessing the Oval Office and Air Force One amid a growing standoff between Donald Trump’s administration and the news agency over the Gulf of Mexico’s name.White House deputy chief of staff Taylor Budowich made the announcement on X, saying: “The Associated Press continues to ignore the lawful geographic name change of the Gulf of America. This decision is not just divisive, but it also exposes the Associated Press’s commitment to misinformation.”Budowich went on to accuse the 175-year-old news wire agency – whose style guidance is used by thousands of journalists and writers globally – of “irresponsible and dishonest reporting”.Budowich said he recognized that the Associated Press’s reporting is covered by the US constitution’s first amendment, which provides for the freedoms of speech and press. But he maintained that “does not ensure their privilege of unfettered access to limited spaces, like the Oval Office and Air Force One”.He added that Associated Press journalists and photographers would retain their credentials to the White House complex.According to the Hill, an Associated Press journalist was barred from attending an executive order signing ceremony in the Oval Office on Friday afternoon following the White House’s announcement.The outlet reports that a White House official told the Associated Press journalist, “No, sorry,” when the reporter tried to join the event.Friday’s announcement from the White House marks an escalation in the growing feud between the Trump administration and the Associated Press over the organization’s refusal to abide by Trump’s preference for Gulf of America and change its style on that body of water to Gulf of America.On Tuesday, the Associated Press said another one of its journalists was refused entry into an executive order signing ceremony at the Oval Office – a move described by the news agency’s executive editor Julie Pace as an attempt by the White House to “punish” the organization for its independent journalism.“Limiting our access to the Oval Office based on the content of AP’s speech not only severely impedes the public’s access to independent news, it plainly violates the first amendment,” Pace said.After Tuesday’s episode, Pace sent a letter to the White House, calling the White House’s decision an “alarming precedent”.A separate statement from the New York Times said it stood by the Associated Press while “condemning repeated acts of retribution by this administration for editorial decisions it disagrees with”.“Any move to limit access or impede reporters doing their jobs is at odds with the press freedoms enshrined in the constitution,” said the statement, which was reported by chief CNN media analyst Brian Stelter.According to a 23 January style memo, the Associated Press said that it would not be changing its style on the Gulf of Mexico to Gulf of America after Trump’s decision to change the body of water’s name – a move which holds authority only within the US’s federal government.“The Gulf of Mexico has carried that name for more than 400 years. The Associated Press will refer to it by its original name while acknowledging the new name Trump has chosen. As a global news agency that disseminates news around the world, the AP must ensure that place names and geography are easily recognizable to all audiences,” the Associated Press said.Blocking the Associated Press’s access around Trump could substantially affect news consumption in certain markets.The Associated Press provides reporting to a numerous publications across the US that do not have their own reporters covering the White House.Supporters of Trump could also use the White House’s decision to limit access for Associated Press journalists as evidence for bad-faith arguments that the organization is unpatriotic or untrustworthy. More

    • 150 Shares169 Views

      in US Politics

      JD Vance breaks taboo by meeting with leader of Germany’s far-right party

      by

      JD Vance has met with the leader of Germany’s far-right Alternative für Deutschland party, breaking a taboo in German politics as the Trump administration continues to court and promote far-right populist parties across Europe.At the meeting in Munich on Friday, the US vice-president and AfD leader Alice Weidel reportedly discussed the war in Ukraine, German domestic politics and the so-called brandmauer, or “firewall against the right”, that prevents ultra-nationalist parties like AfD from joining ruling coalitions in Germany.Vance met with Weidel just weeks before a German election in which the anti-immigrant, anti-Muslim party appears poised to take second place on a wave of growing anti-establishment sentiment.The meeting was the latest in a string of contacts between the party and figures close to Donald Trump. Elon Musk, the billionaire now leading a purge of the US federal government, has repeatedly claimed that “only the AfD can save Germany” and last month hosted Wiedel in a 75-minute live conversation on his social media platform, X.Addressing the Munich security conference earlier on Friday, Vance admonished Europe’s leaders for refusing to work with their far-right parties.“If you’re running in fear of your own voters, there is nothing America can do for you,” said Vance. “You need democratic mandates to accomplish anything of value in the coming years.”The move sent shockwaves through German political circles as the Trump administration appeared to be making a large bet on some of the continent’s most toxic parties in opposition to the sitting governments in the UK, Germany and other major allies.“I expressly reject what US Vice President Vance said at the Munich Security Conference,” said Olaf Scholz, the German chancellor, in a post on X. “From the experience of National Socialism, the democratic parties in Germany have a common consensus: this is the firewall against extreme right-wing parties.”skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotionGerman courts have ruled that the AfD can be classified as a suspected threat to democracy, paving the way for the country’s domestic intelligence agency to spy on the opposition party.In May, the AfD was expelled from a pan-European parliamentary group of populist far-right parties after a string of controversies, including a comment by the senior AfD figure that the Nazi SS had been “not all criminals”.In a speech likely to further drive a wedge between the US and Europe as they struggle to find a single policy on the war in Ukraine, Vance also accused the European leaders of “hiding behind ugly Soviet-era words like ‘misinformation’ and ‘disinformation’”.“Listening to that speech, they try to pick a fight with us and we don’t want to pick a fight with our friends,” said Kaja Kallas, the EU’s foreign policy chief, at the Munich event.Boris Pistorius, the German defense minister, said he couldn’t let the speech go without comment.“If I understood him correctly, he is comparing conditions in parts of Europe with those in authoritarian regimes. That is unacceptable, and it is not the Europe and not the democracy in which I live and am currently campaigning,” he said. More