US news

Subterms

    More stories

    • 188 Shares129 Views

      in US Politics

      Republicans wanted fewer abortions and more births. They are getting the opposite | Judith Levine

      by

      Dobbs v Jackson Women’s Health Organization, the US supreme court case that rescinded the constitutional right to abortion, is failing on its own terms. Since the ruling, in June 2022, the number of abortions in the US has risen. Support for reproductive rights is on the upswing. And the rate of voluntary sterilization among young women – a repudiation of Trumpian pronatalism, if a desperate one – jumped abruptly after Dobbs, and there’s no reason to believe it will drop off.Also rising at an alarming clip are preventable maternal deaths and criminal prosecutions of pregnant people.Yet the 21 state legislatures that have imposed total or near-total bans are doing little or nothing to give doctors legal leeway to save the health and lives of pregnant women in medical distress, even if that means inducing abortion. In fact, rather than trying to save lives, they are prosecuting pregnant people who handle those emergencies on their own.The first three – more abortions, more pro-abortion sentiment, more contraception –have frustrated the anti-abortion crowd no end. They know they need stronger disincentives to abortion.Which brings us to the latter two: more punishment and more death. Was punishment the aim all along? And has the anti-abortion movement accepted pregnant people’s deaths as an unfortunate consequence of saving the pre-born?According to the Guttmacher Institute, abortions rose 1.5% in 2024 from 2023, on top of a 11.1% leap in the first year after Dobbs, compared with 2020, before the near-bans enacted in several states that presaged the ruling.It’s also probably an undercount. The statistics include only “clinician-provided abortions”, either surgical or medical (using abortion pills), performed in healthcare facilities or via telemedicine. Guttmacher does not estimate how many abortions are happening outside the formal healthcare system, with drugs obtained directly from suppliers or through feminist underground networks.Indeed, Plan C, the country’s biggest clearinghouse for pill access, reports 2m visits to its website and 500,000 click-throughs to resources and care in 2024, a 25% increase from the year before. How many of those people ended their pregnancies at home, with only a friend or lover in attendance? Anecdotal evidence gleaned from activists suggests they number in the tens of thousands.At the same time, rather than making abortion “unthinkable”, as the anti-abortion activists pledge, the bans may be having the opposite effect. An analysis of two restrictive states, Arizona and Wisconsin, and one with broad access, New Jersey, found that negative attitudes toward abortion are down and positive ones up, in both red and blue states.And if the goal of banning abortion is to produce more children, that’s not working either. Public health researchers saw “an abrupt increase in permanent contraception procedures” – sterilization – following Dobbs among adults in their prime reproductive years, ages 18 to 30. Unsurprisingly, the increase in procedures for women (tubal ligations) was twice that for men (vasectomies).The Trump administration is cheerleading for procreation. “I want more babies in the United States of America,” declared JD Vance in his first public appearance as vice-president, at the March for Life in Washington. He blamed the declining birth rate on “a culture of abortion on demand” and the failure “to help young parents achieve the ingredients they need to lead a happy and meaningful life”. The federal budget extends some of that help. It raises the annual child tax credit (CTC) from $2,000 to $2,200. It also creates “Trump accounts”, $1,000 per child, which parents or employers can add to.But only those with social security numbers are eligible for either program; the tax credit is available only to people who earn enough to pay taxes; and as with any investment, those able to sow more in the savings accounts reap more. It’s clear what sort of baby the administration wishes to be born: white babies with “American” parents, and not the poorest.The carrots are not appetizing enough. The stick is not effective enough. So red-state legislators and prosecutors are ramping up the punitive approach.This year, Republican lawmakers in at least 10 states introduced bills defining abortion as homicide, and, for the first time, criminalizing both the provider and the patient.No such bill has passed – yet – and anti-abortion organizations are usually quick to renounce them publicly, nervous about widespread opposition. But their passage might not be far off. The bills are based on fetal personhood – the concept of conferring full legal rights to a fetus from conception forward. The idea was introduced in 1884 and finally written into one state’s law in 1986. By 2024, 39 states had fetal homicide laws. Last year, there were three bills criminalizing the person who has an abortion; now there are 10. And though the federal courts rejected fetal personhood for a century, it is the bedrock of anti-abortion politics, and this US supreme court is looking much more friendly toward it.While they work toward straightforward criminalization of ending one’s own pregnancy, anti-abortion lawmakers and prosecutors are making creative use of existing law to punish miscarriage, an event indistinguishable from elective abortion, just in case the pregnant person induced the miscarriage. The most ghoulish is the prohibition on abusing corpses.For instance: last week a 31-year-old South Carolina woman who miscarried and disposed of the tissue in the trash was arrested for “desecration of human remains”, a crime carrying a 10-year sentence. In March, a woman found bleeding outside her Georgia apartment after a miscarriage was jailed for “concealing the death of another person” and “abandonment of a dead body” for placing the remains in the bin. A week before that, a Pennsylvania teenager was under investigation for corpse abuse after a self-managed pill abortion and burial of the fetus in her yard.In a grim sense, these are the lucky ones: they survived. Because Dobbs has indisputably been deadly.“Mothers living in states that banned abortion were nearly twice as likely to die during pregnancy, childbirth, or soon after giving birth” as mothers living in states where abortion was legal and accessible, reports the Gender Equity Policy Institute. Maternal mortality rose 56% in Texas after it enacted a six-week ban; a Texan’s risk was one and a half times that of a Californian’s.The future isn’t sunny. A study of 14 total-ban states predicts that in the four years beginning a year after Dobbs, up to 42 mothers will die and as many as 2,700 will be afflicted with “severe maternal morbidity”, defined by the CDC as “unexpected outcomes of labor and delivery that result in significant short-term or long-term [health] consequences”. In one analysis Black women represented 63% of the deaths.The anti-abortion movement is indefatigable. “We abolishioners will not rest until we have effected the abolishment of human abortion,” one leader told Oklahoma Voice. But this is an unattainable grail. Where abortion is illegal, people still have abortions. They just take more risks. Globally, more than 39,000 women die yearly from unsafe abortions.As they run out of options, red-state lawmakers will harden criminal penalties against people who refuse to give up their reproductive self-determination. It may grow less outré to endorse Trump’s opinion, expressed in an unguarded moment, that women who get illegal abortions “deserve some form of punishment”. Whether intentional or not, the sentence for some of those women will be death.

      Judith Levine is Brooklyn-based journalist, essayist and author of five books. Her Substack is Today in Fascism More

    • 163 Shares169 Views

      in US Politics

      A risky bet? Texas Republicans poised to redraw congressional map on Trump’s orders

      by

      At the behest of Donald Trump, Texas Republicans are poised to redraw their state’s congressional map to try and gain as many as five congressional seats, a move that is likely to further weaken the influence of the state’s fast-growing non-white population and could wind up backfiring on the party.The effort to redraw the map represents a blunt and undemocratic effort by Republican lawmakers to pick the voters who elect them, and comes at a time when many of the party’s positions are unpopular. The US president and national Republicans are making the push because the GOP holds a 220-212 advantage in the US House (there are three Democratic vacancies) and Trump’s party typically loses seats in the midterm elections, which will happen next year.But it’s a risky bet. Twenty-five of Texas’s 38 congressional districts are currently represented by Republicans, a result that was carefully engineered when lawmakers redrew the state’s congressional map in 2021. During that process, mapmakers focused on shoring up Republican seats instead of trying to pick up Democratic ones.In order to pick up new seats, Republicans will have to spread their voters from safe Republican ones into Democratic districts. It could allow them to pick up more seats, but also makes the Republican districts more competitive and potentially winnable by Democrats in a strong year.The number of seats Republicans are able to pick up “depends on how much risk Republicans want to take,” said David Wasserman, an analyst at the Cook Political Report who closely follows US House races. “Republicans could probably target three Democratic seats very easily, but once it gets to four or five, that could put additional Republican seats at risk.”When Republicans drew the existing map, they blunted the political influence of non-white voters in the state, who accounted for 95% of the state’s population growth over the last decade. The new maps could further weaken their ability to elect their preferred candidates.“The current maps are already blatantly racist and discriminate against voters of color, communities of color, all over the state,” said Anthony Gutierrez, the executive director of the Texas chapter of Common Cause, a watchdog group. “There would be absolutely no way you get to five more Republican districts without just completely trampling on minority voting rights.”Two Democratic seats likely to be targeted are the ones in south Texas currently held by representatives Henry Cuellar and Vicente Gonzalez, Wasserman said. Trump won both districts in 2024 and Republicans could easily tweak their boundaries to make them winnable. Democrats also represent four districts in the Houston area, and Republicans could shift the boundaries to try and pick up one or two districts depending on how aggressive they want to be.The Republican push to redraw the map comes as the state is still reeling from deadly floods that left at least 134 people dead with more than 100 people still missing. Democrats in the Texas legislature are reportedly considering walking out of the special session in order to deny Republicans a quorum needed to pass the maps. Ken Paxton, the Texas attorney general, has said he will assist in “hunting down” members who walk out and compel them back to the capitol.skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotionTo justify redrawing the maps, Texas governor Greg Abbott pointed to a 7 July letter from the justice department claiming lawmakers had impermissibly sorted voters based on their race. Both the letter’s argument, and Abbott’s quick acceptance of it, raised eyebrows because Texas officials have said for years they did not consider race at all when they drew the maps.“My jaw dropped when I saw that letter,” said Mark Gaber, an attorney at the Campaign Legal Center, who is representing some of the plaintiffs suing Texas over the maps already in place. “Either the witnesses were not telling the truth or the entire premise of this special session and the mid-decade redistricting is false.”In its letter, the justice department pointed to four districts where it claimed voters had been unconstitutionally sorted by race. In two of those districts, two different groups of minority voters constitute a majority that can elect their preferred candidates. Another district is majority Hispanic. The final district it raised issue with was drawn after judges found intentional discrimination in a previous district.Several legal experts said those claims were highly questionable.“The DoJ letter is completely concocted and it reflects a complete misunderstanding of the law, but that’s not what they’re interested in,” said Thomas Saenz, president and general counsel of the Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund, which is representing some of the plaintiffs challenging the current congressional map.“If I were them, I would be consulting legal counsel about the possibility of being found guilty of perjury in what they testified to under oath,” he added.Mapmakers may want to keep communities who share common interests together for reasons that have nothing to do with their race, said Michael Li, a redistricting expert at the Brennan Center for Justice.Justin Levitt, a professor at Loyola Law School who worked on voting rights issues at both the justice department and White House said the letter was “nonsense”.“What they appear to articulate in the letters is the notion that any time there happens to be multiple minorities in a district, that’s a constitutional violation. And that’s like seven different versions of wrong,” he said. More

    • 213 Shares149 Views

      in US Politics

      Senate approves cuts to global aid-funding and public broadcasting in win for Trump – US politics live

      by

      Donald Trump said on Wednesday the transportation department is rescinding $4bn in US government funding for California’s high-speed rail project.The department said there was no viable path forward for California’s high-speed rail project and it was considering potentially clawing back additional funding related to the project.The Federal Railroad Administration issued a 315-page report last month citing missed deadlines, budget shortfalls and questionable ridership projections.One key issue cited is that California had not identified $7bn in additional funding needed to build an initial 171-mile segment between Merced and Bakersfield, California.The California high-speed rail system is a planned two-phase 800-mile (1,287km) system with speeds of up to 220mph that aims to connect San Francisco to Los Angeles/Anaheim, and in the second phase, extend north to Sacramento and south to San Diego.The California High-Speed Rail Authority said previously it strongly disagrees with the administration’s conclusions “which are misguided and do not reflect the substantial progress made to deliver high-speed rail in California”.It noted California governor Gavin Newsom’s budget proposal before the legislature extends at least $1bn per year in funding for the next 20 years “providing the necessary resources to complete the project’s initial operating segment”.The authority noted in May there is active civil construction along 119 miles in the state’s Central Valley.A new US assessment has found that American strikes in June destroyed only one of three Iranian nuclear sites, NBC News reported on Thursday, citing current and former US officials familiar with the matter.President Donald Trump rejected a military plan for further comprehensive strikes on Iran’s nuclear program, which would have lasted several weeks, the report added.Reuters could not immediately verify the report.Hello and welcome to the US politics live blog. I’m Tom Ambrose and I will be bringing you all the latest news lines over the next few hours.We start with the news that the US Senate has approved Donald Trump’s plan for billions of dollars in cuts to funding for foreign aid and public broadcasting, handing the Republican president another victory as he exerts control over Congress with little opposition.The Senate voted 51 to 48 in favour of Trump’s request to cut $9bn in spending already approved by Congress.Most of the cuts are to programmes to assist foreign countries stricken by disease, war and natural disasters, but the plan also eliminates the $1.1bn the Corporation for Public Broadcasting was due to receive over the next two years.Trump and many of his fellow Republicans argue that spending on public broadcasting is an unnecessary expense and reject its news coverage as blighted by “anti-right bias”.Standalone rescissions packages have not passed in decades, with lawmakers reluctant to cede their constitutionally mandated control of spending. But the Republicans, who hold narrow majorities in the Senate and House, have shown little appetite for resisting Trump’s policies since he began his second term in January.Read the full story here:In other news:

      In an interview with Real America’s Voice, the far-right network created to host Steve Bannon’s podcast, Donald Trump said that the FBI should investigate what he called “the Jeffrey Epstein hoax” as part of a criminal conspiracy against him.

      In a series of posts on his social media platform X, Elon Musk mocked Trump’s wild claim that files related to the federal investigation of Epstein, the late sex offender and longtime Trump friend, are “a hoax”.

      Trump told reporters that he was “surprised” when Jerome Powell, the chairperson of the Federal Reserve, was appointed by Joe Biden. But Powell was appointed by Trump himself in 2017, before being reappointed by Biden in 2022.

      Trump claimed that Epstein had “died three or four years ago”. But Epstein died in federal custody in 2019, when Trump was president, not during the Biden administration.

      The Daily Show’s Jordan Klepper explained that Trump’s claims of a conspiracy makes no sense. “According to Trump, all the top Democrats got together and said: ‘Let’s create some fake files that destroy Trump’s political career’. They don’t ever use them,” Klepper said. “They let Trump get elected. Don’t use them. Let Trump get elected again. Still don’t use them. And then, once he’s the president, hope he releases the files without ever looking at them.”

      In a lengthy Truth Social post Trump dismissed the backlash over the Epstein files as a “scam” perpetuated by Democrats and accused supporters who have called for more transparency of “doing the Democrats’ work” by buying into the “hoax”. More

    • 150 Shares99 Views

      in US Politics

      US Senate passes aid and public broadcasting cuts in victory for Trump

      by

      The US Senate has approved Donald Trump’s plan for billions of dollars in cuts to funding for foreign aid and public broadcasting, handing the Republican president another victory as he exerts control over Congress with little opposition.The Senate voted 51 to 48 in favour of Trump’s request to cut $9bn in spending already approved by Congress.Most of the cuts are to programmes to assist foreign countries stricken by disease, war and natural disasters, but the plan also eliminates the $1.1bn the Corporation for Public Broadcasting was due to receive over the next two years.Trump and many of his fellow Republicans argue that spending on public broadcasting is an unnecessary expense and reject its news coverage as blighted by “anti-right bias”.Standalone rescissions packages have not passed in decades, with lawmakers reluctant to cede their constitutionally mandated control of spending. But the Republicans, who hold narrow majorities in the Senate and House, have shown little appetite for resisting Trump’s policies since he began his second term in January.The $9bn at stake is small in the context of the $6.8tn federal budget, and represents a tiny portion of all the funds approved by Congress that the Trump administration has held up while it has pursued sweeping cuts, many ordered by Elon Musk’s Department of Government Efficiency (Dog)e.By mid-June, Trump was blocking $425bn in funding that had been appropriated and approved by Congress, according to Democratic lawmakers tracking frozen funding.However, the president and his supporters have promised more of the “rescission” requests to eliminate previously approved spending in what they say is an effort to pare back the federal government.The House of Representatives passed the rescissions legislation, without altering Trump’s request, by 214-212 last month. Four Republicans joined 208 Democrats in voting no.But after a handful of Republican senators balked at the extent of the cuts to global health programmes, Russell Vought, the director of the Office of Management and Budget, said on Tuesday that Pepfar, a global programme to fight HIV/Aids launched in 2003 by President George W Bush, was being exempted.The change brought the size of the package of cuts to $9bn from $9.4bn, requiring another House vote before the measure could be sent to the White House for Trump to sign into law.The rescissions must pass by Friday. Otherwise, the request would expire and the White House required to adhere to spending plans passed by Congress.Two of the Senate’s 53 Republicans , Lisa Murkowski of Alaska and Susan Collins of Maine, joined Democrats in voting against the legislation. “You don’t need to gut the entire Corporation for Public Broadcasting,” Murkowski said told the Senateskip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotionShe said the Trump administration had not provided assurances that battles against diseases such as malaria and polio worldwide would be maintained. Murkowski called for Congress to assert its role in deciding how federal funds were spent.The Republican Senate majority leader, John Thune of South Dakota, called Trump’s request a “small, but important step toward fiscal sanity”.Democrats scoffed at that, noting that congressional Republicans had this month passed a massive package of tax and spending cuts that nonpartisan analysts estimated would add more than $3tn to the country’s $36.2tn debt.Democrats accused Republicans of giving up Congress’s constitutionally mandated control of federal spending.“Today, Senate Republicans turn this chamber into a subservient rubber stamp for the executive, at the behest of Donald Trump,” Chuck Schumer, the Senate Democratic leader, representing New York, said. “Republicans embrace the credo of cut, cut, cut now, and ask questions later.”The cuts would overturn bipartisan spending agreements most recently passed in a full-year stopgap funding bill in March. Democrats warn a partisan cut could make it more difficult to negotiate government funding bills that must pass with bipartisan agreement by 30 September to avoid a shutdown.Appropriations bills require 60 votes to move ahead in the Senate but the rescissions package needs just 51, meaning Republicans can pass it without Democratic support. More

    • 113 Shares199 Views

      in US Politics

      TV tonight: inside Donald Trump’s relationship with Vladimir Putin

      by

      Dispatches: Trump – Moscow’s Man in the White House9pm, Channel 4This film promises to be an explosive behind-the-scenes investigation into the biggest political story of the decade – and Dispatches always delivers on its word. Former US intelligence officials and White House insiders speak out about Donald Trump’s relationship with Vladimir Putin to help answer the questions: what is really underpinning it? And what will happen next? Hollie RichardsonSupercruising: Life at Sea8pm, Channel 4This behind-the-scenes peek at life aboard two luxury cruise ships heads to very different locations this week. In one, the navigation crew stress about getting their craft through the locks of the Panama Canal while passengers whip out phones for pics. Over in Tenerife, it’s whale-watching time. Alexi DugginsThe Great Fire of London With Rob Rinder & Ruth Goodman9pm, Channel 5Rob and Ruth continue to be captivating history teachers as they ask what living during the Great Fire of London was like on both sides of the wealth line. Rob steps into the shoes of diarist Samuel Pepys and the city’s Lord Mayor, while Ruth explores the reality of being a widowed innkeeper with five mouths to feed. HRThe Walking Dead: Dead City9pm, Sky MaxNow that his baseball bat has been upgraded with an electroshock function, surely the listless Negan (Jeffrey Dean Morgan) is ready to be a hammy villain again? A cowboy faction attempting to invade zombified New York by boat seems like a perfect opportunity for the leather-clad baddie to get back into the swing of things. Graeme VirtueOutrageous9pm, U&DramaView image in fullscreenBessie Carter is best known as Prudence Featherington in Bridgerton, but she’s great here as Nancy Mitford narrating the turbulent lives of her family. While Nancy deals with inferior-husband problems, her sister Diana makes plans to marry Oswald Mosley while Unity defends her friendship with Adolf Hitler. HRSuch Brave Girls10pm, BBC ThreeThere are at least two feckless men hanging around the house and an unwanted boat in the front garden – could motherhood be the answer? Kat Sadler’s comedy concludes with babies – stolen, borrowed and imagined – in the mix as the girls hit the casino. It’s resolutely rude, ridiculous and very funny. Jack Seale More

    • 138 Shares119 Views

      in US Politics

      Trump rescinds $4bn in US funding for California high-speed rail project

      by

      Donald Trump said on Wednesday the transportation department is rescinding $4bn in US government funding for California’s high-speed rail project.The department said there was no viable path forward for California’s high-speed rail project and it was considering potentially clawing back additional funding related to the project.The Federal Railroad Administration issued a 315-page report last month citing missed deadlines, budget shortfalls and questionable ridership projections.One key issue cited is that California had not identified $7bn in additional funding needed to build an initial 171-mile segment between Merced and Bakersfield, California.The California high-speed rail system is a planned two-phase 800-mile (1,287km) system with speeds of up to 220mph that aims to connect San Francisco to Los Angeles/Anaheim, and in the second phase, extend north to Sacramento and south to San Diego.The California High-Speed Rail Authority said previously it strongly disagrees with the administration’s conclusions “which are misguided and do not reflect the substantial progress made to deliver high-speed rail in California”.It noted California governor Gavin Newsom’s budget proposal before the legislature extends at least $1bn per year in funding for the next 20 years “providing the necessary resources to complete the project’s initial operating segment”.The authority noted in May there is active civil construction along 119 miles in the state’s Central Valley.Transportation secretary, Sean Duffy, said: “Newsom and California’s high-speed rail boondoggle are the definition of government incompetence and possibly corruption.”Newsom responded on social media: “Won’t be taking advice from the guy who can’t keep planes in the sky.”Voters approved $10bn for the project in 2008, but the costs have risen sharply. The transportation department under former president Joe Biden awarded the project about $4bn.The entire San Francisco-to-Los Angeles project was initially supposed to be completed by 2020 for $33bn, but has now jumped from $89bn to $128bn.In 2021, Biden restored a $929m grant for California’s high-speed rail that Trump had revoked in 2019 after the Republican president called the project a “disaster”. More

    • 200 Shares99 Views

      in US Politics

      Trump lambasts Republicans pursuing what he calls the ‘Epstein hoax’ as ‘stupid people’ – live updates

      by

      The president then was asked what evidence he might have seen to change his stance on the Epstein case, which this morning he called a “hoax”.Trump doubled down on his claim that it’s a “big hoax,” but did not provide evidence to support this claim. He also claimed the Epstein case was “started by the Democrats,” but again cited no evidence (though he did mention the Steele Dossier, a report on Trump’s 2016 campaign that alleged cooperation with Russia?).“Some stupid Republicans and foolish Republicans fall into the net and try to do the Democrats’s work,” Trump said.“They’re stupid people,” he continued to say about Republicans who believe there is more to be revealed about the Epstein case.A federal judge in Tennessee said on Wednesday that he would not rule this week on the legal status of Kilmar Ábrego, the migrant returned to the US after being wrongly deported to El Salvador, according to Adam Klasfeld, a legal reporter who was in the Nashville courtroom.Federal prosecutors sought to convince US district judge Waverly Crenshaw to reverse a magistrate judge’s ruling allowing Ábrego – who faces human smuggling charges that were only developed after his wrongful deportation to a Salvadorian prison became a source of embarrassment for the Trump administration – to be released on bail to await a trial.The Trump administration claimed Ábrego was in the MS-13 gang, although he was not charged with being a member and has repeatedly denied the allegation. Facing mounting pressure and a US supreme court order, the administration returned Ábrego to the US last month to face the smuggling charges, which his attorneys have called “preposterous”.A department of homeland security investigator, Peter Joseph, testified about the investigation on Wednesday, detailing information authorities learned from alleged co-conspirators with Ábrego in a migrant smuggling ring.Ábrego’s lawyers have suggested that the testimony of his alleged co-conspirators is unreliable, since all of them have either criminal or immigration cases of their own, with their deportations being deferred in exchange for their cooperation with the government.Even if the judge in orders him released from criminal custody, the Trump administration has said Ábrego will immediately be detained by immigration authorities and face a second deportation.Ábrego’s lawyers have asked US district judge Paula Xinis in Maryland to order the government to send him to Maryland if he is released in Tennessee, a request that aims to prevent his expulsion before trial.Donald Trump, who reportedly consumes a dozen Diet Cokes every day, just announced that he has convinced Coca-Cola to return to using sugar in its drinks.“I have been speaking to Coca-Cola about using REAL Cane Sugar in Coke in the United States, and they have agreed to do so”, Trump posted on his social media network. “I’d like to thank all of those in authority at Coca-Cola. This will be a very good move by them — You’ll see. It’s just better!”Coca-Cola currently sweetens its drinks with high-fructose corn syrup, in large part because a previous Republican president, Ronald Reagan, imposed tariffs on imported sugar in 1981, dramatically raising prices.Those tariffs and quotas had the effect of incentivizing domestic corn syrup production and consumption in the United States. Trump’s initiative could have the unintended effect of lowering the demand for corn, the domestic production of which is heavily subsidized by the federal government.If enough Americans agree with the president that Coca-Cola sweetened with sugar is better tasting, that could also cut against the efforts of his health secretary, Robert F Kennedy Jr, to make Americans healthier by getting them to consume less sweet, carbonated beverages.Kennedy has supported efforts to prevent Americans from spending food-aid benefits on sugary, carbonated beverages.High-fructose corn syrup isn’t necessarily worse for us than table sugar, Frank Hu of the Harvard School of Public Health told the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette in 2012, but it is also healthier to avoid both.Hu, professor of nutrition and epidemiology, told the daly that the two sweeteners are chemically quite similar. High-fructose corn syrup, made from corn, is about 55% fructose and 40% glucose. Table sugar, or sucrose, is made from sugar cane or beets and is 50% glucose and 50% fructose. While high-fructose corn syrup often gets blamed for the nation’s obesity epidemic, Hu said, “we should worry about sugar in general”.In 2020, the NBC News affiliate in Seattle spoke to experts who confirmed that Coca-Cola made in Mexico, where it is sweetened with sugar, is not healthier than Coca-Cola produced with corn syrup.In keeping with the frantic pace of posting maintained by their boss, Donald Trump, the White House press office has a hyperactive social media feed on X, @RapidResponse47, that is very frequently updated with clips of the president’s statements, hour after hour.The account has posted 49 times already on Wednesday, and featured seven video clips of Trump’s comments on a range of issues during his meeting with Bahrain’s prime minister Salman bin Hamad Al Khalifa. But the aides who run the account seem to be studiously avoiding one subject: Trump’s claim that the uproar over his administration’s decision not to release files from the federal investigation into Jeffrey Epstein, the late sex offender he knew well, is ‘a hoax’.None of what Trump said about Epstein on Wednesday appeared on this official White House feed. Similarly, when Trump spoke to reporters on Tuesday, the account clipped and boosted his remarks on several other subjects, but ignored his claim that the subject of Epstein’s crimes was “sordid, but boring”.That marks a change from February, when the president’s press team shared a clip of Trump’s attorney general, Pam Bondi, telling Fox host Jesse Watters, that she had the Epstein files on her desk. With a siren emoji, the account showed video of Bondi saying: “I think tomorrow, Jesse, breaking news right now, you’re going to see some Epstein information being released by my office”.“What’s you’re going to see, hopefully tomorrow, is a lot of flight logs, a lot of names, a lot of information”, Bondi added. That information however has still not been released.Donald Trump has said that he thinks China will begin sentencing people to death for fentanyl manufacturing and distribution.Speaking at an event for the signing of the Halt Fentanyl Act, attended by family members of people who had died from overdoes, Trump said he imposed a tariff on China “because of fentanyl”.“I think we’re going to work it out so that China is going to end up going from that to giving the death penalty to the people that create this fentanyl and send it into our country,” Trump said. “I believe that’s going to happen soon.”Columbia University has agreed to adopt a controversial definition of antisemitism as it pursues an agreement with the administration aimed at restoring $400m in federal government grants frozen over its alleged failure to protect Jewish students.In a letter to students and staff, the university’s acting president, Claire Shipman, said it would incorporate the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance’s definition of antisemitism into its anti-discrimination policies as part of a broad overhaul.It is the latest in a string of concessions Columbia has made following criticisms – mainly from pro-Israel groups and Republican members of Congress – that university authorities had tolerated the expression of antisemitic attitudes in pro-Palestinian campus protests following the start of Israel’s assault on Gaza in 2023.“Columbia is committed to taking all possible steps to combat antisemitism and the University remains dedicated to ensuring that complaints of discrimination and harassment of all types, including complaints based on Jewish and Israeli identity, are treated in the same manner,” wrote Shipman.“Formally adding the consideration of the IHRA definition into our existing anti-discrimination policies strengthens our approach to combating antisemitism.”The definition, which describes antisemitism as “a certain perception of Jews, which may be expressed as hatred toward Jews”, has been adopted by the US state department and several European government and EU groups.However, critics have say it is designed to shield Israel by punishing legitimate criticism of the country. They also complain that it conflates antisemitism with anti-Zionism.Among the examples of criticisms accompanying the definition are “claiming that the existence of a State of Israel is a racist endeavor”, “applying double standards by requiring of [Israel] a behavior not expected or demanded of any other democratic nations” and “accusing Jewish citizens of being more loyal to Israel … than to the interests of their own nations”.Vice-president JD Vance earlier made the administration’s first big pitch to sell the public on Donald Trump’s sweeping budget-and-policy package in the swing political turf of northeastern Pennsylvania.Vance, whose tie-breaking vote got the bill through the Senate, touted the legislation’s tax breaks and cast Democrats as opponents of the cutting taxes because of their unanimous opposition to the legislation.Democrats, who’ve decried the bill’s deep cuts to Medicaid and food stamps, along with other provisions, are expected to try to use it against Republicans in closely contested congressional campaigns next year that will determine control of Congress.The GOP plans to use it to make their case as well, something the vice-president asked the crowd in working-class West Pittston to help with.“Go and talk to your neighbors, go and talk to your friends, about what this bill does for America’s citizens. Because we don’t want to wake up in a year and a half and give the Democrats power back,” he said.Speaking at at an industrial machine shop, the Vance was also quick to highlight the bill’s new tax deductions on overtime.“You earned that money,” Vance said. “You ought to keep it in your pocket.”He also promoted the legislation’s creation of a new children’s savings program, called Trump Accounts, with a potential $1,000 deposit from the treasury department.Recognizing the significance of the coal and gas industry in Pennsylvania, he also talked up the ways the law seeks to promote energy extraction, such as allowing increased leasing for drilling, mining and logging on public lands, speeding up government approvals and cutting royalty rates paid by extraction companies.“We are finally going to drill, baby drill and invest in American energy,” Vance said. “And I know you all love that.”The historic legislation, which Trump signed into law earlier this month with near unanimous Republican support, includes key campaign pledges like no tax on tips but also cuts Medicaid and food stamps by a staggering $1.2tn.Democrats recently held a town hall in House speaker Mike Johnson’s home state of Louisiana to denounce the legislation as a “reverse Robin Hood — stealing from the poor to give to the rich”.Vance’s office declined to elaborate to the Associated Press on plans for other public events around the US to promote the bill. After his remarks, he visited a nearby diner where he picked up food and spoke to some of the patrons.Here’s my colleague Oliver Holmes’s report on Trump lashing out against his own supporters for questioning the transparency of a secretive government inquiry into the late high-profile socialite and sex offender Jeffrey Epstein:

      Donald Trump backed away from suggestions he was moving to fire Federal Reserve chair Jerome Powell, following media reports that he had privately indicated to a meeting of GOP lawmakers last night that he would do so. After the bombshell reports rocked Wall Street this morning, the president pulled back, saying it was “highly unlikely” that he’ll fire Powell. “We’re not planning on doing anything,” Trump told reporters, unless Powell “has to leave” because of “fraud”, referring to the controversy over renovations to the Fed’s historic headquarters in Washington.

      Democratic senator Elizabeth Warren wrote on X: “Nobody is fooled by President Trump and Republicans’ sudden interest in building renovations — it’s clear pretext to fire Fed Chair Powell.” Trump indicated that he’d probably wait to replace Powell until his term ends next year. The president does not have the power to fire the Fed chair without cause.

      It has failed to distract from the growing furore from Trump’s usually ardently loyal Maga base over his administration’s handling of the Jeffrey Epstein case. His base is in uproar over the justice department’s recent decision to halt further disclosures related to Epstein, including the alleged client list, as well as its finding that he died by suicide. That reached new altitudes today when Trump branded the case a hoax and lashed out at his supporters-turned-critics, calling them “weaklings” and “stupid people” for buying into the conspiracy theories, which he blamed on (checks notes) Democrats. He is conveniently forgetting that both he himself and members of his administration have long stoked those same theories. He is also conveniently not acknowledging that prominent allies of his have joined the calls for the files to be released, including House speaker Mike Johnson, and influential Maga figures like far-right activist Laura Loomer.

      Trump also once again back Pam Bondi’s handling of the Epstein case and said: “Whatever’s credible she can release. If a document’s there that is credible, she can release [it], I think it’s good.”

      Secretary of state Marco Rubio, asked about Israeli strikes on Syria on Wednesday, said the United States was “very concerned”, adding that he had just spoken to the relevant parties over the phone. “We’re going to be working on that issue as we speak. I just got off the phone with the relevant parties. We’re very concerned about it, and hopefully we’ll have some updates later today. But we’re very concerned about it,” Rubio said. He added that the US wants fighting to stop as clashes between Syrian government troops and local Druze fighters broke out hours after a ceasefire agreement.

      Zohran Mamdani told New York business leaders yesterday he will not use the phrase “globalize the intifada” and discourage others from doing so. The mayoral frontrunner explained at the meeting that many use “globalize the intifada” as an expression of support for the Palestinian people and, for him, the phrase means protest against the Israeli occupation of Gaza, according to the Wall Street Journal. Mamdani also said he is willing to discourage the specific language, but not the idea behind it.

      A flight carrying immigrants deported from the US landed in Eswatini, the homeland security department announced, in a move that follows the supreme court lifting limits on deporting migrants to third countries.

      A group of 20 mostly Democrat-led US states filed a lawsuit seeking to block the Trump administration from terminating a multibillion-dollar grant program that funds infrastructure upgrades to protect against natural disasters.

      Robert F Kennedy Jr abruptly fired two of his top aides – chief of staff Heather Flick Melanson and deputy chief of staff for policy Hannah Anderson – CNN reported, citing two people familiar with the matter.
      “Many Republicans I’ve been talking to over the past few days have predicted that Trump would do something dramatic to distract from Epstein,” a Puck reporter wrote on X regarding today’s will he, won’t regarding sacking Jerome Powell.And as Politico notes, “though Trump appears to be holding off on Powell, a groundswell of backlash from both base and swing voters – over the Epstein files and the GOP megabill – continues to dominate headlines”.House speaker Mike Johnson has said he believes it would be beneficial to have new leadership at the Federal Reserve, although he added that he’s not sure the president has the authority to fire chair Jerome Powell, according to media reports.“I do I believe new leadership would be helpful at the Fed,” a Wall Street Journal reporter on X has quoted Johnson as saying.Punchbowl News, in a separate X post, reported Johnson said he’s “really not sure” if the president can fire Powell.US senator Elizabeth Warren has said that Donald Trump’s interest in renovations of Federal Reserve’s headquarters is “clear pretext” to fire chairman Jerome Powell.Last week, the White House intensified its criticism of how the Fed is being run when the director of the Office of Management and Budget, Russell Vought, sent Powell a letter saying Trump was “extremely troubled” by cost overruns in the $2.5bn renovation of its historic headquarters in Washington.Earlier today, following bombshell news reports that Trump was planning to fire Powell which rattled financial markets, the president pulled back in the Oval Office. Though he confirmed that the conversation with GOP lawmakers about whether he should fire the central bank leader took place, the president said it’s “highly unlikely” that he’ll fire Powell.“We’re not planning on doing anything,” Trump told reporters, unless Powell “has to leave” because of “fraud”, referring to the controversy over the renovations. The president indicated that he’d probably wait to replace Powell until his term ends next year.“Nobody is fooled by President Trump and Republicans’ sudden interest in building renovations — it’s clear pretext to fire Fed Chair Powell,” Warren, the ranking Democrat on the Senate banking committee, which oversees the Fed, said in a post on X.As we’ve fact-checked, the president doesn’t have the power to fire Powell over a monetary dispute and today he backed away from the idea, saying instead that “we get to make a change in eight months” (when Powell’s tenure expires).US senator Thom Tillis of North Carolina has said that firing the Federal Reserve chair because “political people” don’t agree with his economic decision-making would undermine US credibility, adding that it would be a “huge mistake” to end the Fed’s independence.“You’re going to see a pretty immediate response and we’ve got to avoid that,” Tillis, a Republican member of the Senate banking committee, said on the floor of the chamber earlier.Trump has today backed away from the idea of firing Jerome Powell, saying instead that “we get to make a change in eight months” (when Powell’s tenure expires).The president does not have the power to fire the Federal Reserve chair. But reports today said that Trump had asked Republican lawmakers if he should fire Powell, and several people in the room indicated he will do it.Well, that more or less captures everything Donald Trump said in the oval office just now alongside Bahrain crown prince Salman bin Hamad Al Khalifa.Trump again supported his attorney general, Pam Bondi, who has been under fire for her handling of the Epstein case.“I think she’s doing a great job.”The president was asked whether he would allow US attorney general Pam Bondi to release more information on the Jeffrey Epstein case.“Whatever’s credible she can release,” Trump said. “If a document’s there that is credible, she can release [it], I think it’s good.”But then he goes after Republicans again: “All it is is that certain Republicans got duped by the Democrats and they’re following the Democrat playbook. It’s no different than ‘Russia, Russia, Russia’ and all the other hoaxes.”Trump tries to pivot to the Biden-autopen investigation that Republicans are leading against his predecessor. It has been widely seen as a partisan move to discredit the former Democratic president.“That’s the scandal they should be talking about, not Jeffrey Epstein,” he said. “I think it’s the biggest scandal – one of them – in American history.” More

    • 125 Shares189 Views

      in US Politics

      Columbia adopts controversial definition of antisemitism amid federal grants freeze

      by

      Columbia University has agreed to adopt a controversial definition of antisemitism as it pursues an agreement with the Trump aimed at restoring $400m in federal government grants frozen over its alleged failure to protect Jewish students.In a letter to students and staff, the university’s acting president, Claire Shipman, said it would incorporate the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance’s definition of antisemitism into its anti-discrimination policies as part of a broad overhaul.It is the latest in a string of concessions Columbia has made following criticisms – mainly from pro-Israel groups and Republican members of Congress – that university authorities had tolerated the expression of antisemitic attitudes in pro-Palestinian campus protests following the outbreak of war between Israel and Hamas in Gaza in 2023.“Columbia is committed to taking all possible steps to combat antisemitism and the University remains dedicated to ensuring that complaints of discrimination and harassment of all types, including complaints based on Jewish and Israeli identity, are treated in the same manner,” wrote Shipman.“Formally adding the consideration of the IHRA definition into our existing anti-discrimination policies strengthens our approach to combating antisemitism.”The definition, which describes antisemitism as “a certain perception of Jews, which may be expressed as hatred toward Jews”, has been adopted by the US state department and several European government and EU groups.However, critics have say it is designed to shield Israel by punishing legitimate criticism of the country. They also complain that it conflates antisemitism with anti-Zionism.Among the examples of criticisms accompanying the definition are “claiming that the existence of a State of Israel is a racist endeavor”, “applying double standards by requiring of [Israel] a behavior not expected or demanded of any other democratic nations” and “accusing Jewish citizens of being more loyal to Israel … than to the interests of their own nations”.Donald Trump gave the IHRA definition a significant boost during his presidency by issuing an executive order in 2018 requiring all federal government agencies to take account of it when handling civil rights complaints.In adopting it now, Columbia is following Harvard, which agreed to embrace the definition last January as part of a court settlement reached with Jewish students, who had accused the university of failing to protect them under Title VI of the 1964 Civil Rights Act. The act prohibits discrimination on the grounds of race, religion or ethnic origin in programs or institutions receiving federal funding.While Harvard remains in dispute with the White House after refusing to bow to its demands in return for the unfreezing of federal funding, Columbia has been accused of surrendering vital academic freedoms in an initial agreement with the administration reached last March that will see it reform its protest and security policies, while restricting the autonomy of its Middle Eastern studies department.Shipman has insisted that the university is “following the law” and denied that it is guilty of “capitulation”.skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotionColumbia’s previous president, Minouche Shafik, resigned last August following sustained criticism, including in Congress, over her failure to end months of campus protests, despite calling in New York police to dismantle an encampment.In her letter, Shipman said last March’s agreement was “only a starting point for change”.“The fact that we’ve faced pressure from the government does not make the problems on our campuses any less real; a significant part of our community has been deeply affected in negative ways,” she wrote. “Committing to reform on our own is a more powerful path. It will better enable us to recognize our shortcomings and create lasting change.”However, the New York Times recently reported that the university was nearing an agreement to pay Jewish complainants more than $200m in compensation for civil rights violations that would be part of the deal to have its funding restored.The deal is likely to require further reforms in return for restored funding but stops short of requiring a judge-approved consent decree, which had been in an initial draft and would have given the Trump administration significant control over the university. More