US politics

Subterms

    More stories

    • 213 Shares179 Views

      in US Politics

      The polls look bad for Trump – but tyrants don’t depend on approval ratings | Judith Levine

      by

      The fracas over the Jeffrey Epstein files – and declining poll numbers on every issue that won Donald Trump the 2024 election – indicate cracks in the Maga coalition and weakening support for the president’s self-proclaimed mandate.But reports of Maga’s death are probably exaggerated.Trump has cheated death, both physical and political, many times. And while every tyrant craves the adoration of the people – and claims to have it even when he doesn’t – no tyrant worth the title counts on public support to stay in power.Last week, when the administration pulled an about-face on releasing 100,000-odd documents related to Epstein – amid conspiracy theories of deep-state pedophile rings, which Trump promoted – it looked like Trump was on the ropes. “Trump can’t stop MAGA from obsessing about the Epstein files,” reported NBC. “Trump meets toughest opponent: his own base,” declared Axios. Trump was “on the defense”, NPR said. The Guardian reported on Maga hat burnings.Even after House Republicans blocked Democrats on a resolution to force a vote on releasing the files, even after the speaker, Mike Johnson, withheld from the floor a similar resolution, the far right would not be mollified. “Dangling bits of red meat no longer satisfies,” the Georgia congresswoman Marjorie Taylor Greene posted on X. “The People … want the whole steak dinner and will accept nothing less.”Now some of the commentariat are predicting that even if Trump survives, the damage to the GOP is done.In the Hill, Douglas Schoen and Carly Cooperman marshaled polls showing Trump’s sliding approval from before to after the Epstein affair and conjectured that it could sink the Republicans in the midterm elections.At the same time, the populace, including Republicans, is changing its mind on Trump’s master plans. Six in 10 respondents to a CNN poll oppose the federal budget bill; approval of Trump’s handling of the budget is down 11 points since March. On immigration, a Gallup poll showed a steep drop in respondents who favor more restricted admittance, from 55% in 2024 to 30% this June. The most striking change is among Republicans, from 88% who wanted fewer immigrants in 2024 to 48% in June 2025. Meanwhile, the percentage of Americans who think immigrants are good for America rose to a record 79%.The flood of TikToks showing masked men kidnapping people from the streets and manhandling elected officials has turned many people against Immigration and Customs Enforcement (Ice). Two YouGov polls showed the agency’s favorability plummeting from a net positive of 15 points in early February to a deficit of 13 in late June. During Trump’s first term, “Abolish Ice” was the chant at tiny demonstrations by fringe-left organizations. Now more than a third of respondents to a Civiqs survey want to see the agency gone, including an uptick of six points among Republicans since November, to 11% .And as David Gilbert pointed out in Wired, even before the Epstein flap, some of the president’s most prominent supporters were defying him. The former Fox News host Tucker Carlson condemned the bombing of Iran. Trump whisperer Laura Loomer dissed his acceptance of a $400m plane from Qatar. Elon Musk defected over the One Big Beautiful Bill Act. And Joe Rogan deemed Ice raids targeting ordinary working migrants too much to bear.But Trump is not backing down. In fact, he’s doubling down on every policy. The deportation campaign has grown more vicious by the day. Florida’s “Alligator Alcatraz” is being rightly condemned as a concentration camp. A recent Human Rights Watch investigation of three Miami area Ice facilities found detainees denied food and medicine, held in solitary confinement, and shackled at the wrists and forced to kneel to eat, as one man put it, “like animals”.The president muscled his budget and rescission package through Congress without regard to the disproportionate harm they augur for red-state residents, much less the deficit, the public health, or the planet’s future. His tariffs are barreling ahead, exasperating economists, hitting crucial US economic sectors and tanking entire economies overseas. General Motors reported second-quarter profits down by a third. In the tiny, impoverished nation of Lesotho, “denim capital of the world”, Trump’s threatened 50% duties have shut down the garment factories, leaving thousands out of work, hungry and desperate.Trump may feel insulted, which he does most of the time; he may temporarily lose his footing. But he’s not relinquishing power without a fight.Tyrants don’t need high approval ratings. They intimidate voters, rig elections, or stop holding them altogether; suppress protest and jail, deport or assassinate their critics. The Nazis achieved peak support in 1932, at 37.3%. Of the 1933 plebiscite that ceded all power to Hitler, the German Jewish diarist Victor Klemperer wrote: “No one will dare not to vote, and no one will respond No in the vote of confidence. Because (1) Nobody believes in the secrecy of the ballot, and (2) A No will be taken as a Yes anyway.”Daria Blinova, of the International Association for Political Science Students, argues that autocrats cultivate approval while consolidating their own power through the “illusion of substantial improvements”, which are actually insubstantial. In 2017, for instance, nine in 10 Saudi youth supported Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman because of such reforms as allowing cinemas to reopen.The Trump administration has begun deploying some similar tactics. The justice department is pressuring state election officials to turn over their voter rolls and give it illegal access to voting machines. The Republican National Committee is training volunteers to “ensure election integrity” – AKA harassing voters and poll workers. It is trying to banish the opposition press. Homeland security is trying to deport the widely followed Salvadorian journalist Mario Guevera, who has covered Ice raids and protests. Migrants sent home or to third countries can face persecution, torture or death.Still, none of this means that Trump is invincible, even when his administration uses violence to achieve its aims and terrify its critics. First – simplest and most difficult –the resistance must show up. Get bodies into the streets. The second nationwide anti-Trump rallies were bigger than the first; the third, fourth and 10th can be bigger still.Gather bodies at the sites of injustice. Volunteers are swarming to immigration courts, where migrants who show up for mandatory hearings are being released into the clutches of waiting Ice agents. The court-watchers – experienced organizers and first-timers, retirees, students, clergy, elected officials, artists – are distributing “know your rights” leaflets in many languages, writing down names and contact information to inform families of their loved ones’ arrests or to connect arrestees to lawyers later on. Immigrants’ rights groups are holding training sessions. Spanish speakers are giving immigration-specific language lessons.This nonviolent gumming-up of the government’s criminal machine draws press and social media attention, multiplying participation, amplifying anger and mobilizing greater organization. At every step, people are bearing witness, storing it up for future accountability.The Epstein affair shows that no loyalty is unbreakable. The polls show that discomfort with Trump’s policies is growing. Discomfort can mature to rejection of injustice, rejection to resistance, resistance to action. A tyrant does not need majority support to maintain power. But neither does the opposition movement need majority participation to take power back. No tyranny lasts forever.

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

    • 188 Shares109 Views

      in US Politics

      RFK Jr wants bright artificial dyes out of food. Are Americans ready to let go?

      by

      The Make America Healthy Again (Maha) movement celebrated this month after the US dairy industry voluntarily pledged to remove all artificial dyes from ice-cream by 2028. In April, US health secretary Robert F Kennedy Jr prevailed upon the food industry to stop using artificial dyes, and many of the nation’s largest food manufacturers, including Nestle, Kraft Heinz and PepsiCo, have already promised to comply. But the ice-cream pledge made Kennedy especially happy because, he said, ice-cream is his favorite food.Prepare to say goodbye to the brilliant pink (from red dye No 40) that signifies strawberry, the cool green (yellow 5 and blue 1) of mint chocolate chip, and the heroic combination of red 40, blue 1, and yellow 5 and 6 that makes up Superman.One of the goals of the Maha movement is to prevent childhood diseases, which Kennedy argues can be accomplished by, among other things, addressing the use of additives in ultra-processed foods. A recent study published in the Journal of the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics calculated that, in 2020, 19% of food products contained artificial dyes – “the most egregious” additive, according to Kennedy. Those dyes, he claims, are responsible for a host of health issues, including cancer, hyperactivity and possibly autism.“The American people have made it clear – they want real food, not chemicals,” Kennedy said in a statement.View image in fullscreenAside from jokes on social media about Donald Trump’s skin tone and Kennedy’s alleged use of methylene blue (an artificial dye that some claim boosts “mitochondrial efficiency” and longevity), the initiative has faced little political opposition. In January, when Joe Biden was still president, the FDA announced a ban on red dye No 3 scheduled to go into effect in 2027. Red 3, the FDA explained, was shown to cause cancer in rats, and while it does not show up in food in large enough quantities to affect humans, it still violates a law forbidding additives that contain carcinogens.Meanwhile, states as politically varied as West Virginia, Texas and California have already established their own bans or requirements that foods containing artificial dyes carry warning labels, citing the need to protect kids. (In the UK and the EU, restrictions on artificial dyes have been in place for years.)Why the fuss over food coloring? Are natural dyes really that much better for our health?“They’re better for some people’s health,” says Jamie Alan, a professor of pharmacology and toxicology at Michigan State University. “There is a very small percentage of children who are very sensitive to these dyes. And when they eat these dyes, they display behaviors that we sometimes associate with ADHD.”Alan stresses that there is no evidence that those kids actually develop ADHD. But research has found that after eating foods containing certain dyes, children, including those diagnosed with ADHD or autism, can show signs of hyperactivity, moodiness and inattentiveness. However many of these foods, particularly candy and soda, also contain sugar, which has also been connected to hyperactive behavior.Alan recommends that parents talk to a pediatrician and try an elimination diet to make sure the dye and not another ingredient is to blame. But she largely supports phasing out artificial dyes; most public health advocates think this is a good idea. “In my opinion,” Alan says, “because we’re talking about children and because they are a vulnerable population, I do think this is a great thing to do. But I will recognize that it is not going to impact the vast majority of the population.”One group that the change in dyes will certainly affect is the food manufacturers themselves. Switching from artificial to natural dyes is a complex process, says Travis Zissu, the co-founder and innovation lead of Scale Food Labs in Golden, Colorado, which offers a program to help manufacturers with the dye conversion.View image in fullscreenUnlike artificial dyes, which are derived from petroleum, natural dyes come mostly from plants: turmeric, for example, is used for yellows; algae and butterfly pea flower for blues; lycopene from carrots and tomatoes for reds. These dyes can be less stable, so Scale’s program begins with finding natural pigments that will not be affected by heat and other chemicals, followed by tests to determine which combination of dyes will produce the most reliable color. Next, Scale helps companies lock in contracts that will not force them to raise their prices too much and secure light-sensitive packaging to protect the colors. Finally, there are nine to 12 months of product testing to make sure production runs smoothly and that there are no adverse effects for consumers, such as red-dyed feces (something that has been known to happen with beet powder and extract; Alan says it’s harmless, but admits it can be unnerving).But Zissu’s biggest concern is that there won’t be enough to go around. Natural color demand is already up between 30-50% across the industry since food companies began announcing their intentions to stop using artificial color, he says, and the earliest deadline – 2027 – is still years away.“There is simply not enough supply to replace every single item in the market,” he says. “You’ll see the largest companies locking down colors soon, but there will not be enough until 2030.”There is also the worry that American consumers will reject the new colors altogether. While their counterparts in Europe, Canada and Japan have peacefully accepted the duller hues of natural dyes, Americans remain stubbornly attached to neon-bright candy and cereal.Case in point: in 2015, General Mills pledged to remove all artificial colors and flavorings from its products. The following year, it rolled out a natural version of Trix, the kid-friendly fruity breakfast cereal. But the muted Trix, colored by radishes, purple carrots and turmeric, was a flop. Customers missed the vibrant colors and complained that the new version didn’t taste right. By 2017, “classic Trix” had returned to grocery stores.On the other hand, when Kraft reformulated the powder for its macaroni and cheese and quietly began selling the all-natural version in December 2015, there was much less protest. As an Eater headline at the time put it: “Kraft Changed Its Mac and Cheese and Nobody Noticed.” Perhaps it was the marketing strategy – Kraft did not bother to make a big announcement until after it had sold 50m boxes – or maybe it was because the natural dyes were just as orange as the original. (Alan recalls that her young nieces and nephews were slightly worried about the change but accepted the new mac and cheese without much fuss.)As the adage goes, we eat with our eyes. The appearance of food should not change our perceptions of how it tastes, but, as anyone who has ever bought produce knows, it definitely does. In nature, brighter colors indicate that foods are ripe and will taste good. This principle also applies to human-made food.As far back as the middle ages, according to Ai Hisano, a professor of business history at the University of Tokyo and author of Visualizing Taste: How Business Changed the Look of What You Eat, dairy farmers would mix carrot juice and annatto from achiote trees into their butter to make it a more appetizing yellow. When scientists discovered petroleum-based dyes in the mid-19th century, the dairy industry was one of the earliest adopters: the artificial dyes were cheaper, and they helped create uniform yellows for butter and cheese that appealed to shoppers.Other food producers quickly followed suit. Meat would be red! Sandwich bread would be white! Oranges – which sometimes stayed green, even when they were ripe – would be orange! By the early 20th century, the US government had started regulating food coloring to make sure it didn’t kill anyone.This was also the beginning of the golden age of industrial food such as candy, breakfast cereal and, most notoriously, Jell-O, which came in colors never seen in nature. Food dye became vital for branding, Hisano writes. Even if brighter color didn’t really affect flavor because the food was entirely manufactured, people perceived that it did, and that was what mattered. Would a beige Flamin’ Hot Cheeto taste as spicy?View image in fullscreen“I assume many consumers in the early 20th century were frightened by those bright-red foods,” Hisano told the Atlantic in 2017. “But one reason consumers liked them is because they were excited about these colors they had never seen before.” And the knowledge that they were regulated by the FDA made them feel they were safe to eat.Because the identity of their products depends on color, the most resistance to Kennedy’s initiative has come from America’s candy manufacturers. A spokesman for the National Confectioners Association said that candy makers will not adopt natural dyes until federal regulations compel them to. Of all the biggest US food companies, only Mars, maker of M&Ms, Skittles and Starburst (incidentally, Trump’s favorite candy), has not yet pledged to give up artificial dye, except for the already banned red 3. However, FDA commissioner Marty Makary told Fox News that he thinks Mars will come around sooner than later.Zissu, the food dye consultant, foresees “an R&D sprint” to develop natural dyes before the 2027 deadline. And indeed, since May, the FDA has approved four new natural colors – three blues and one white – for a wide range of food, including juices, milk-based meal replacements, cereal, chips, sugar and ready-to-eat chicken products.But Zissu does not think that a transition to natural dyes means that the color of food will revert to a pre-industrial dullness. “I believe we will always see the bright colors in candy and other items that consumers come to expect,” he says. “There will just be a lot more research dedicated to getting those colors if artificial [dye] is banned.”It may also help if America’s food manufacturers act en masse, as they appear to be doing: the change will be so overwhelming that, as Zissu puts it, “neon synthetics will look as dated as trans fats.” Perhaps in a few years, we will look back at green mint chip ice-cream in wonder. (Some people already do: many ice-cream producers, including Ben & Jerry’s and Häagen-Dazs, don’t use green as the signifier for mint.)It seems Maha is poised to help shake America of its affair with artificial colors. But it celebrates this victory at the same time as the Trump administration guts public health infrastructure.The ice-cream industry’s pledge came just 11 days after Congress passed a spending bill that will cut Medicaid spending, and therefore healthcare for millions of children, and slash Snap food assistance for US families. It came the same day that the Department of Health laid off thousands of employees. Under Trump, the government has also cut research grants to scientists studying, among other things, disease prevention and vaccines (of which Kennedy is a notorious skeptic). Underlying issues such as food and housing insecurity and child poverty that devastate children’s wellbeing are likely to worsen.Alan thinks that if Kennedy is serious about improving the health of America’s kids, there are much more pressing issues than food dye to work on. “I just can’t believe that someone would be given a chance to make such an impact,” she says, “and this is what they choose to do.” More

    • 213 Shares149 Views

      in US Politics

      Sentence before verdict: Trump’s attack on Obama is straight out of Alice in Wonderland | Austin Sarat

      by

      Almost every American knows that in our legal system, people accused of crimes are presumed innocent. The burden is on the government to overcome that presumption and prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.Those simple but powerful maxims were once a source of national pride. They distinguished the United States from countries where government officials and political leaders branded the opponents guilty before they were charged with a crime or brought to trial.In Joseph Stalin’s Soviet Union, the Alice-in-Wonderland world of “sentence first-verdict afterwards” came to life in infamous show trials. Those trials lacked all the requisites of fairness. Evidence was manufactured to demonstrate the guilt of the regime’s enemies. Show trials told the story the government wanted told and were designed to signal that anyone, innocent or not, could be convicted of a crime against the state.So far, at least, this country has avoided Stalinesque show trials. But the logic of the show trial was very much on display this week in the Oval Office.In a now-familiar scene, during a meeting with the Philippines president, Ferdinand Marcos Jr, Donald Trump went off script. He turned a reporter’s question about the unfolding Jeffrey Epstein scandal into an occasion to say that former president Barack Obama had committed “treason” by interfering in the 2016 presidential election.“He’s guilty,” Trump asserted, “This was treason. This was every word you can think of.”Speaking after the director of national intelligence, Tulsi Gabbard, released a report on alleged Russian interference in the 2016 election, the president said: “Obama was trying to lead a coup. And it was with Hillary Clinton.”Republican congressmen and senators, including the secretary of state, Marco Rubio, who investigated allegations of Obama’s involvement five years ago, found nothing to support them. But none of that mattered to the president on Tuesday.As Trump put it: “Whether it’s right or wrong, it’s time to go after people. Obama’s been caught directly.” Not hiding his motives, Trump said: “It’s time to start after what they did to me.”Guilt first. Charges, trials and other legal niceties come later.This is American justice, Trump-style. He wants no part of the long and storied tradition in which presidents kept an arms-length relationship with the justice department and did not interfere with its decisions about whether and whom to prosecute for crimes.What Trump said about Obama is, the New York Times notes, “a stark example of his campaign of retribution against an ever-growing list of enemies that has little analogue in American history”. Putting one of his predecessors on trial also would take some of the sting out of Trump’s own dubious distinction of being the only former president to have been convicted of a felony.Some may be tempted to write off the president’s latest Oval Office pronouncements as an unhinged rant or only an effort to distract attention from Trump’s Epstein troubles. But that would be a mistake.A recent article by the neuroscientist Tali Sharot and the law professor Cass Sunstein helps explain why. That article is titled: “Will We Habituate to the Decline of Democracy?”Sharot and Sunstein argue that the US is on the cusp of a dangerous moment in its political history. They say that we can understand why by turning to neuroscience, not to political science.Neuroscience teaches us that “people are less likely to respond to or even notice gradual changes. That is largely due to habituation, which is the brain’s tendency to react less and less to things that are constant or that change slowly.”In politics, “when democratic norms are violated repeatedly, people begin to adjust. The first time a president refuses to concede an election, it’s a crisis. The second time, it’s a controversy. By the third time, it may be just another headline. Each new breach of democratic principles … politicizing the justice system … feels less outrageous than the last.”Americans must resist that tendency. To do so, Sharot and Sunstein argue, we need “to see things not in light of the deterioration of recent years but in light of our best historical practices, our highest ideals, and our highest aspirations”.In the realm of respect for the rule of law and the presumption of innocence, we can trace those practices, ideals and aspirations back to 1770, when John Adams, a patriot, practicing lawyer and later the second president of the United States, agreed to defend British soldiers involved in the Boston Massacre.Adams did so because he believed that everyone, no matter how reprehensible their act, was entitled to a defense. That principle meant that people needed to learn to withhold judgment, to respect evidence and to hear both sides of a story before making up their minds.That was a valuable lesson for those who would later want to lead our constitutional republic, as well as for its citizens. The trial of the British soldiers turned out, as the author Christopher Klein writes, to be “the first time reasonable doubt had ever been used as a standard”.Fast forward to 1940, and the memorable speech of the attorney general, Robert Jackson, to a gathering of United States attorneys. What he said about their role might also be said about the president’s assertions about Obama.Jackson observed that US attorneys had “more control over life, liberty, and reputation than any other person in America”. A prosecutor, he explained, “can have citizens investigated and, if he is that kind of person, he can have this done to the tune of public statements and veiled or unveiled intimations … The prosecutor can order arrests … and on the basis of his one-sided presentation of the facts, can cause the citizen to be indicted and held for trial.”Sound familiar?The president is not a prosecutor, but since he has returned to power, President Trump has behaved and encouraged those in the justice department to ignore Jackson’s warnings that a prosecutor should focus on “cases that need to be prosecuted” rather than “people that he thinks he should get”. Targeting people, not crimes, means that the people prosecuted will be those who are “unpopular with the predominant or governing group” or are “attached to the wrong political views, or [are] personally obnoxious to or in the way of the prosecutor himself”.Jackson restated a long-cherished American ideal, namely that those with the power to ruin lives and reputations should seek “truth and not victims” and serve “the law and not factional purposes”.Since then, presidents of both parties, in even the most controversial cases and those involving allies or opponents, have heeded Jackson’s warnings. They have said nothing about pending cases, let alone announcing that it’s time “to go after” people.But no more. The justice department seems ready and willing to do the president’s bidding, even though there is no evidence that Obama did anything wrong in regard to the 2016 election. In addition, he may have immunity from criminal prosecution for anything he did in his official capacity.Trump’s attack on the “traitorous” Obama may be predictable. But it should not be acceptable to any of us.Sharot and Sunstein get it right when they say, “To avoid habituating ourselves to the torrent of President Trump’s assaults on democracy and the rule of law, we need to keep our best practices, ideals, and aspirations firmly in view what we’ve done.” We need “to compare what is happening today not to what happened yesterday or the day before, but to what we hope will happen tomorrow”.To get to that world, it is important to recall the words of John Adams and Robert Jackson and work to give them life again.

      Austin Sarat, William Nelson Cromwell professor of jurisprudence and political science at Amherst College, is the author or editor of more than 100 books, including Gruesome Spectacles: Botched Executions and America’s Death Penalty More

    • 200 Shares139 Views

      in US Politics

      Trump news at a glance: Jerome Powell tackles inflation of White House figures on HQ upgrades

      by

      “It looks like it’s about $3.1bn – it went up a little bit or a lot,” said Donald Trump, handing Jerome Powell a piece of paper as they stood amid construction at the US Federal Reserve’s Washington HQ. The usually unflappable Fed chief looked irritated, closed his eyes and shook his head. “I am not aware of that,” said Powell.Powell scanned the paper and pointed out the figure wrongly included the cost of renovations for a different Fed building that was done five years ago. “It’s not new,” said Powell.Here’s more on this and the day’s other key Trump administration stories.Trump and Powell clash on camera over Fed renovation costDonald Trump sparred with the Federal Reserve chair, Jerome Powell, on Thursday during a rare presidential visit to the central bank’s headquarters.Trump was continuing his campaign to pressure the Fed to cut interest rates and was visiting its Washington headquarters to view costly renovations he has suggested are tantamount to fraud.Having called Powell a “numbskull” for the Fed’s recent decisions not to cut rates, Trump has turned up the pressure on Powell with criticism of the $2.5bn bill for renovating the Fed’s historical buildings.Read the full storyUS and Israel ditch ceasefire talks The US is withdrawing its negotiating team from Gaza ceasefire talks in Qatar after Donald Trump’s special envoy, Steve Witkoff, pointed the finger at Hamas for a “lack of desire to reach a ceasefire”.“While the mediators have made a great effort, Hamas does not appear to be coordinated or acting in good faith,” Witkoff said on Thursday. “We will now consider alternative options to bring the hostages home and try to create a more stable environment for the people of Gaza.”Read the full storyTrump DoJ officials meet with Ghislaine Maxwell The Jeffrey Epstein files scandal swirling around Donald Trump and his administration continued to escalate on Thursday as officials from the Department of Justice met with the late sex offender’s longtime associate Ghislaine Maxwell, whose lawyer said she “answered every question … honestly and to the best of her ability”.Read the full storyBill Clinton reportedly sent Jeffrey Epstein note for birthday albumFormer president Bill Clinton also sent a birthday letter to Jeffrey Epstein, the Wall Street Journal reported. Last week, the Journal reported that Trump had authored a “bawdy” letter to Epstein as part of a birthday album compiled by Ghislaine Maxwell.Read the full storyMixed reaction to Columbia University deal with TrumpColumbia University’s long anticipated deal with the Trump administration after months of negotiations has drawn both condemnation and praise from faculty, students, and alumni – a sign that the end of negotiations will hardly restore harmony on a campus profoundly divided since the beginning of Israel’s war in Gaza.David Pozen, a professor at Columbia Law School, slammed the deal as giving “legal form to an extortion scheme”, he wrote.Read the full storyTrump’s DoJ to investigate Obama over 2016 electionThe US justice department has formed a “strike force” to investigate claims that the Obama administration carried out a “treasonous conspiracy” by using false intelligence to suggest Russia interfered in the 2016 presidential election to help Donald Trump.Read the full storyVenezuelans deported by Trump to El Salvador describe ‘horror movie’ mega-prisonVenezuelan men who were deported by the US to a notorious prison in El Salvador without due process are speaking out about treatment they described as “hell” and like a “horror movie”, after arriving back home. A total of 252 Venezuelan nationals were repatriated in the last week in a deal between the US and Venezuelan governments, with many able to reunite with family after their ordeal in El Salvador.Read the full storyTrump cracks down on homelessnessThe federal government is seeking to crack down on homelessness in the US, with Donald Trump issuing an executive order to push local governments to remove unhoused people from the streets.Read the full storyTrump signs executive order to rein in ‘chaotic’ influence of money on college sportsDonald Trump on Thursday signed an executive order prohibiting “third-party, pay-for-play” payments to college athletes, a move the White House says is intended to curb the booster-funded bidding wars that have upended the landscape of college sports in recent years.Read the full storyWhat else happened today:

      South Park kicked off its 27th season with a blistering episode taking aim at Trump and its newly minted parent company, Paramount, just one day after signing a $1.5bn deal with the network.

      Thousands of employees at the US Department of Agriculture will be forced to take salary cutsand relocate out of the Washington DC area, as part of a major restructuring that experts warn will further weaken support for American farmers and complicate wildfire response.
      Catching up? Here’s what happened on 23 July 2025. More

    • 88 Shares99 Views

      in US Politics

      US justice department officials interview Ghislaine Maxwell

      by

      The Jeffrey Epstein files scandal swirling around Donald Trump and his administration continued to escalate on Thursday as officials from the Department of Justice met with the late sex offender’s longtime associate Ghislaine Maxwell, whose lawyer said she “answered every question … honestly and to the best of her ability”.Todd Blanche, the US deputy attorney general, arrived on Thursday morning at the office of the US attorney in Tallahassee, Florida, ABC News reported. The state prosecutor’s office is based in the federal courthouse in the Florida capital and Maxwell’s lawyers were also seen entering the building.Maxwell is serving a 20-year sentence for sex trafficking and other crimes at a federal prison in Florida, after being convicted in New York in late 2021.On Thursday afternoon, Maxwell’s attorney David Markus said his team had a “very productive day”with Blanche, who will meet with Maxwell again Friday, Reuters reported.“[Blanche] took a full day and asked a lot of questions,” Markus said. “Miss Maxwell answered every single question. She never stopped. She never invoked a privilege. She never declined to answer. She answered all the questions truthfully, honestly and to the best of her ability.”The meeting comes amid growing political and public pressure on the Trump administration to release more details about the Epstein investigation – something that Trump and members of his administration had promised.Mark Epstein, the brother of the disgraced financier, told the Guardian in an interview that if he had the opportunity he would ask Maxwell “what she and Jeffrey might have known what the dirt was on Donald Trump”.View image in fullscreen“Because Jeffrey said, he said he had dirt on Trump,” Mark Epstein said. “I don’t know what it was, but years ago he said he had dirt on Trump.”He added that he wasn’t “particularly worried” for Maxwell, adding: “There’s a lot of people on this planet.”Maxwell’s brother Ian Maxwell, meanwhile, told the New York Post that his sister had been preparing “new evidence” before her meeting with justice department officials.“She will be putting before [a] court material new evidence that was not available to the defense at her 2021 trial, which would have had a significant impact on its outcome,” her brother told the outlet in an email.Jeffrey Epstein was found dead in his prison cell in New York in 2019 while awaiting trial on federal sex-trafficking charges, which he denied, relating to accusations that he “sexually exploited and abused dozens of minor girls”. He had previously been officially declared a sex offender in Florida but re-emerged as a significant figure in US business and political circles in the years that followed, having struck a deal over the earlier criminal charges.The renewed focus on Trump’s past association with Epstein comes after the justice department announced earlier this month that it would not be releasing any more documents from the most recent Epstein investigation – despite earlier pledges by the US president and the US attorney general, Pam Bondi.The justice department’s announcement drew criticism and backlash from both sides of the party political aisle, including from some Trump supporters and conservative commentators, who accused the administration of engaging in a cover-up.For years, the Epstein case has been the subject of countless conspiracy theories, partly due to Epstein’s ties to high-profile figures. Epstein’s death, which was officially ruled a suicide, has also fueled many conspiracy theories.On Wednesday, the Wall Street Journal reported that Trump was informed by Bondi in May that his name appears multiple times in the justice department files related to Epstein.The report also said that Trump was told that many other high-profile individuals were named in the files, and that the department did not plan to release any additional documents related to the investigation.Trump’s spokesperson, Steven Cheung, denied the claims in the Journal report and dismissed the story.In an emailed statement this week, Cheung said that “the fact is that the President kicked him [Epstein] out of his club for being a creep”.Meanwhile, the House oversight committee voted 8-2 on Wednesday to subpoena the justice department for the Epstein files, with three Republicans joining all Democrats in the vote.The committee also subpoenaed Maxwell to testify before committee officials on 11 August.Mike Johnson, the Republican House speaker, questioned whether Maxwell could be trusted.And Dan Goldman, a Democratic New York representative, said in a post on X on Tuesday: “Ghislaine is looking for a pardon, and who would be better to give it to her than a co-conspirator now in the Oval Office.”Edward Helmore contributed reporting More

    • 138 Shares139 Views

      in US Politics

      Trump tussles with Jerome Powell on rare visit to Federal Reserve

      by

      Donald Trump sparred with the Federal Reserve chair, Jerome Powell, on Thursday during a rare presidential visit to the central bank’s headquarters.Trump was continuing his campaign to pressure the Fed to cut interest rates and was visiting its Washington headquarters to view costly renovations he has suggested are tantamount to fraud.Having branded Powell a “numbskull” for the Fed’s recent decisions not to cut rates, Trump has turned up the pressure on Powell with criticism of the $2.5bn bill for renovating the Fed’s historical buildings.Powell and Trump stood in hard hats inside the Fed’s construction site. Urging the Fed chair to stand closer to him, Trump alleged that the bill for the renovations would now cost $3.1bn.“It looks like it’s about $3.1bn – it went up a little bit or a lot,” said Trump. The usually unflappable Powell looked visibly irritated, closed his eyes and shook his head. “I am not aware of that,” said Powell.Handed a piece of paper by Trump, Powell scanned it and said the new figure included the cost of renovations for the Martin Building, a different Fed office that was renovated five years ago. “It’s not new,” said Powell.Asked by a reporter what he would do if a project manager went over budget, Trump said: “I’d fire him.“Look, I would love to see it completed,” Trump said. “I don’t want to put that in this category.”The president backed away from earlier statements in which he had suggested he would fire Powell, a suggestion that has rattled stock markets. Trump said: “To do that is a big move, and I just don’t think it’s necessary, and I believe he’s going to do the right thing.”The visit to the Fed comes less than a week before the central bank’s 19 policymakers gather for a two-day rate-setting meeting, where they are widely expected to leave the central bank’s benchmark interest rate in the 4.25%-4.50% range.Trump has demanded that the Fed lower rates by three percentage points. Trump has repeatedly demanded that Powell slash US interest rates and has frequently raised the possibility of firing him.Ahead of Trump’s visit, Fed staff escorted a small group of reporters around the construction sites. They wove around cement mixers and construction machines, and spoke over the sound of drills, banging and saws.Fed staff pointed out security features, including blast-resistant windows, that they said were a significant driver of costs, in addition to tariffs and escalations in material and labor costs.Reuters contributed to this story More

    • 188 Shares169 Views

      in US Politics

      Trump and Powell clash on camera over Federal Reserve renovation cost – US politics live

      by

      Donald Trump just attempted to ambush Jerome Powell, the Federal Reserve chair, during his site visit to inspect the renovation of the central bank’s historic headquarters in Washington.When Trump paused before reporters to make a statement, he beckoned Powell over to stand next to him on camera. The president then claimed that the total cost of the renovations to the Federal Reserve buildings was $3.1bn, a higher figure than had previously been reported.As Trump made this claim, Powell nodded his head no, to signal his disagreement.“I’m not aware of that,” Powell said. “I haven’t heard that from anybody at the Fed.”Trump insisted that this new figure “just came out” and removed papers from his coat, as apparent proof, and handed them to Powell.“This came from us?” Powell asked.After Trump said that the new figures had come from his people, Powell discovered why the figure for the renovation was suddenly much larger. “You included a third building,” he said.Trump insisted that the third building was part of the total cost of the renovation he has accused Powell of mismanaging in an effort to find some cause to remove the independent Fed chairman who has refused to lower interest rates at the president’s request.The third building Trump suddenly claimed is part of the renovation, Powell explained, “was built five years ago. It’s not new.”Trump was flanked by his staunch ally, Republican senator Tim Scott of South Carolina, who also suggested that the renovations had gone too far over budget.Powell, asked if they expected any further cost overruns, replied, “Don’t expect them” but said that the independent central bank was “ready for them” if necessary.Trump then called on a friendly reporter, who asked him what, as a builder, he “would do with a project manager who is over budget”.“Generally speaking, ”Trump said, “I’d fire him.”As Trump, Powell and Scott stepped away from the media to continue the tour, Trump said that there is something that Powell could do to assuage his concerns about the cost of the renovations. “I’d love him to lower interest rates,” he said.Powell has asserted, repeatedly, that the president does not have the power to fire him, as the head of an independent agency, and that decisions on interest rates must be immune to political pressure.The supreme court on Thursday blocked a lower-court ruling in a redistricting dispute in North Dakota that would gut a landmark federal civil rights law for millions of people.The justices indicated in an unsigned order that they are likely to take up a federal appeals court ruling that would eliminate the most common path people and civil rights groups use to sue under a key provision of the 60-year-old Voting Rights Act.The case could be argued as early as 2026 and decided by next summer.Three conservative justices, Samuel Alito, Neil Gorsuch and Clarence Thomas, would have rejected the appeal.The lawsuit was filed on behalf of the Turtle Mountain Band of Chippewa Indians, Spirit Lake Tribe and individual Native American voters challenging new North Dakota legislative districts drawn after the 2020 census.The complaint alleged that the redrawn districts would dilute the voting strength of Native Americans in the state in violation of section 2 of the Voting Rights Act, by giving them a chance to elect the candidate of their choice in just one district in northeastern North Dakota, instead of two.The Campaign Legal Center, which filed the suit with the Native American Rights Fund and other partners, welcomed the stay for “leaving in place fair maps for Native American voters while the cases progresses before the supreme court.”“To make this decision permanent, Campaign Legal Center will be filing a cert petition to formally request that the supreme court hear this case during their next term,” the nonpartisan, legal nonprofit wrote.Donald Trump, standing in a hard hat outside the headquarters of the Federal Reserve, just completed his tour of the renovations he has repeatedly claimed are too expensive, as he seeks an excuse to fire the head of the US central bank, Jerome Powell.Trump, accompanied by Tim Scott, a Republican senator from South Carolina, met assembled reporters by a podium set up for his remarks. Powell, who has repeatedly asserted his independence and resisted Trump’s demands to lower interest rates, was not present.During the tour, Powell took issue with Trump’s claim that the renovation cost $3.1bn, a higher figure than had previously been claimed, and pointed out that the president had added in the cost of another building that was not part of the renovation and had been completed five years ago.“I see a very luxurious situation taking place,” Trump said.“Too expensive,” Scott chimed in. The senator and the president then said that Powell’s refusal to lower interest rates was making it difficult for Americans to afford mortgages on their homes, and suggested that the central banker’s renovation of the bank’s headquarters at the same time was inappropriate.Pressed by a reporter on why Trump does not speed up the lowering of interest rates on mortgages by firing Powell, Trump said he was not inclined to take that unprecedented step. “Because to do that is a big move and I just don’t think it’s necessary,” Trump said.“And I believe that he’s going do the right thing. I believe that the chairman is going to do the right thing,” Trump said.He then repeated his apparently false claim that, on his recent visit to Saudi Arabia, “the king of Saudi Arabia” told him that the United States is now “the hottest country anywhere in the world, and I thought you were dead one year ago”. Trump met the crown prince of Saudi Arabia on his visit in May. There are no published accounts that he met with the 89-year-old king, Salman, who has withdrawn from public life since last year following health concerns.Donald Trump just attempted to ambush Jerome Powell, the Federal Reserve chair, during his site visit to inspect the renovation of the central bank’s historic headquarters in Washington.When Trump paused before reporters to make a statement, he beckoned Powell over to stand next to him on camera. The president then claimed that the total cost of the renovations to the Federal Reserve buildings was $3.1bn, a higher figure than had previously been reported.As Trump made this claim, Powell nodded his head no, to signal his disagreement.“I’m not aware of that,” Powell said. “I haven’t heard that from anybody at the Fed.”Trump insisted that this new figure “just came out” and removed papers from his coat, as apparent proof, and handed them to Powell.“This came from us?” Powell asked.After Trump said that the new figures had come from his people, Powell discovered why the figure for the renovation was suddenly much larger. “You included a third building,” he said.Trump insisted that the third building was part of the total cost of the renovation he has accused Powell of mismanaging in an effort to find some cause to remove the independent Fed chairman who has refused to lower interest rates at the president’s request.The third building Trump suddenly claimed is part of the renovation, Powell explained, “was built five years ago. It’s not new.”Trump was flanked by his staunch ally, Republican senator Tim Scott of South Carolina, who also suggested that the renovations had gone too far over budget.Powell, asked if they expected any further cost overruns, replied, “Don’t expect them” but said that the independent central bank was “ready for them” if necessary.Trump then called on a friendly reporter, who asked him what, as a builder, he “would do with a project manager who is over budget”.“Generally speaking, ”Trump said, “I’d fire him.”As Trump, Powell and Scott stepped away from the media to continue the tour, Trump said that there is something that Powell could do to assuage his concerns about the cost of the renovations. “I’d love him to lower interest rates,” he said.Powell has asserted, repeatedly, that the president does not have the power to fire him, as the head of an independent agency, and that decisions on interest rates must be immune to political pressure.Donald Trump has said that Federal Reserve chair Jerome Powell will be present when he and other officials tour the Fed’s headquarters in Washington this afternoon.“Getting ready to head over to the Fed to look at their, now, $3.1 Billion Dollar (PLUS!) construction project,” Trump wrote in a post on Truth Social.The US government has sued New York City, seeking to block enforcement of several local laws its says are designed to impede its ability to enforce federal immigration laws, Reuters reports.In a complaint filed in Brooklyn federal court, the Trump administration government said the city’s “sanctuary provisions” are unconstitutional, and preempted by laws giving it authority to regulate immigration.Donald Trump will today sign an executive order making it easier for cities and states to remove homeless people from the streets, USA Today reports.Under the executive order, the president will direct attorney general Pam Bondi to “reverse judicial precedents and end consent decrees” that limit local and state governments’ ability to move homeless people from streets and encampments into treatment centers, according to a White House summary of the order reviewed by USA Today.Trump’s order, dubbed “Ending Vagrancy and Restoring Order”, will redirect federal funds to ensure the homeless people impacted are transferred to rehabilitation, treatment and other facilities, the White House said, though it was not immediately clear how much money would be allocated.It will require Bondi to work with the secretaries of health and human services, housing and urban development and transportation to prioritize federal grants to states and cities that “enforce prohibitions on open illicit drug use, urban camping and loitering, and urban squatting, and track the location of sex offenders”.White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt in a statement that Trump is “delivering on his commitment to Make America Safe Again and end homelessness across America”.“By removing vagrant criminals from our streets and redirecting resources toward substance abuse programs, the Trump Administration will ensure that Americans feel safe in their own communities and that individuals suffering from addiction or mental health struggles are able to get the help they need,” she said.The White House does not support the request by Republican senators John Cornyn and Lindsey Graham for a special counsel to investigate what they call the “Russia collusion hoax,” NBC News is reporting, citing a source familiar with the matter.“While we appreciate the shared goal of transparency and accountability, the president is confident in the Department of Justice to handle the investigation,” the source told NBC.The Department of Justice announced last night that it was forming a “strike force” to to investigate (baseless) claims that the Obama administration carried out a “treasonous conspiracy” by using false intelligence to suggest Russia interfered in the 2016 presidential election to help Donald Trump.A special counsel appointed during Trump’s first term already investigated the origins of the Russia probe.US district judge James Boasberg has said he may initiate disciplinary proceedings against justice department lawyers for their conduct in a lawsuit brought by Venezuelans challenging their removal to a Salvadoran prison in March.Boasberg, a prominent Washington DC, judge who has drawn Donald Trump’s ire, said during a court hearing that a recent whistleblower complaint had strengthened the argument that Trump administration officials engaged in criminal contempt of court by failing to turn around deportation flights.Boasberg also raised the prospect of referring DOJ lawyers to state bar associations, which have the authority to discipline unethical conduct by attorneys. He said:
      I will certainly be assessing whether government counsel’s conduct and veracity to the court warrant a referral to state bars or our grievance committee, which determines lawyers’ fitness to practice in our court.
      A justice department spokesperson declined to comment.Boasberg has been hearing an American Civil Liberties Union lawsuit brought on behalf of alleged Venezuelan gang members removed from the US under the rarely invoked 18th-century Alien Enemies Act. The detainees in the case were returned to Venezuela last week as part of a prisoner exchange, after spending four months in El Salvador’s Cecot prison.The migrants’ lawyers have disputed the gang membership claims and said their clients were not given a chance to contest the government’s assertions.Boasberg said in April that the Trump administration appeared to have acted “in bad faith” when it hurriedly assembled three deportation flights on 15 March at the same time that he was conducting emergency court proceedings to assess the legality of the effort.In court filings, justice department lawyers have disputed that they disobeyed a court order, saying remarks Boasberg made from the bench were not legally binding.In a 2-1 order, a federal appeals court in April temporarily paused Boasberg’s effort to further investigate whether the Trump administration engaged in criminal contempt.Boasberg said during today’s hearing that the delay from the appeals court was frustrating for the plaintiffs, and that a whistleblower complaint from Erez Reuveni, a former DOJ attorney who was fired in April, strengthened the case for contempt.Reuveni described three separate incidents when justice department leaders defied court orders related to the deportation of immigrants living in the country illegally.Attorney general Pam Bondi, in a post on X, called Reuveni a “disgruntled employee” and a “leaker”.The United States will not attend an upcoming UN conference on an Israel-Palestine two-state solution, state department deputy spokesperson Tommy Pigott told reporters during a press briefing today.The conference, which has already been rescheduled once, is due to take place next week at the United Nations.The prospects for high-profile announcements on recognition of a Palestinian state had already been dealt a serious blow after it was reported that French president Emmanuel Macron was not expected to attend.Venezuelan men who were deported by the US to the notorious Cecot prison in El Salvador without due process are speaking out about treatment they described as “hell” and like a “horror movie”, after arriving back home.A total of 252 Venezuelan nationals were repatriated in the last week in a prisoner swap deal between the US and Venezuelan governments, with many able to reunite with family after their ordeal in El Salvador.Carlos Uzcátegui tightly hugged his sobbing wife and stepdaughter on Wednesday morning in western Venezuela after he had been away for a year.He was among the migrants being reunited with loved ones after spending four months imprisoned in El Salvador, where the US government had transferred them without due process, sparking uproar over Donald Trump’s harsh anti-immigration agenda. The US had accused all the men, on sometimes apparently flimsy evidence, of being members of a foreign gang living in the US illegally.“Every day, we asked God for the blessing of freeing us from there so that we could be here with family, with my loved ones,” Uzcátegui, 33, said. “Every day, I woke up looking at the bars, wishing I wasn’t there.“They beat us, they kicked us. I even have quite a few bruises on my stomach,” he added before later showing a bruised left abdomen.Arturo Suárez, whose reggaeton songs surfaced on social media after he was sent to El Salvador, arrived at his family’s home in the Venezuelan capital, Caracas, on Tuesday. His sister hugged him after he emerged from a vehicle belonging to the country’s intelligence service.“It is hell. We met a lot of innocent people,” Suárez told reporters, referring to the prison he was held in. “To all those who mistreated us, to all those who negotiated with our lives and our freedom, I have one thing to say, and scripture says it well: vengeance and justice is mine, and you are going to give an account to God [the] Father.”Former national security adviser (of Signalgate infamy) Mike Waltz’s nomination as US ambassador to the United Nations is back on track after a Democrat cut a deal to advance him out of committee, Politico reports, marking just the latest development in a rollercoaster day for Donald Trump’s nominee.Despite Republican senator Rand Paul voting no (derailing plans for a committee vote yesterday), ranking member Jeanne Shaheen sided with the other Republicans on the foreign relations committee to vote to advance Waltz, narrowly by 12-10. Having cleared that key hurdle, Waltz now goes to the Senate, where he will likely be confirmed.There was no immediate indication of when the full Senate might consider the nomination. A spokesperson for the chamber’s majority leader John Thune, said there were no scheduling updates.Thune has indicated he might delay the Senate’s annual August recess if Democrats do not allow Republicans to confirm Trump nominees more quickly. In a recent post on his Truth Social platform, Trump urged the Senate to stay in Washington for votes on his nominees.Politico notes: “The partisan swap reflected ideological divides around isolationism: Paul objected to Waltz’s vote to keep troops in Afghanistan, while Shaheen said in a statement that despite some concerns (including the aforementioned Signalgate, which in part cost him his job as national security adviser), she saw Waltz as a potential ‘moderating force’ against the likes of vice-president JD Vance, defense secretary Pete Hegseth and Elbridge Colby. Some Democrats also worried about who might replace Waltz if his nomination failed.”Shaheen said she had worked out a deal with committee Republicans and the state department to unlock $75m in lifesaving foreign aid for Haiti and Nigeria, Axios reports.However, Shaheen said she may not necessarily vote for Waltz’s confirmation. More