ReportWire

Tag: Democracy

  • Never Trump Republicans Are Still Issuing Dire Warnings. Is Anyone Listening?

    [ad_1]

    NATIONAL HARBOR, Md. (AP) — Over and over, the Republicans and former Republicans who gathered just outside Washington this weekend warned that President Donald Trump and his allies in Congress are tearing at the very fabric of American democracy.

    A former congressman described the president’s party as an “authoritarian-embracing cult.” A prominent conservative writer said Trumpism is an “existential threat.” And a retired Army general, his voice shaking with emotion, cited post-Nazi Germany as a roadmap for the nation’s post-Trump recovery.

    It’s unclear how many people are listening.

    The main convention hall at the sixth annual Principles First summit on Saturday and Sunday was half empty. About 750 chairs were set up in a room that could have fit thousands, and many were unfilled. Not a single current Republican elected official participated in the two-day program.

    This is what remains of the Grand Old Party’s Never Trump movement, a coalition of Republicans, former Republicans and independents who banded together as Trump consolidated power. They largely remain political exiles — not quite at home among Democrats yet disgusted by how the president has abandoned Republicans’ longstanding commitments to free trade and limited government.

    John McDowell, 69, who was a lifelong Republican before Trump’s emergence, acknowledged that the diminished group had virtually “zero” political clout within his former party.

    “It’s just a fact. We’re losing good people,” said McDowell, a former Capitol Hill staffer and county Republican official from San Carlos, California. “The party is becoming more and more MAGA-fied.”

    White House spokesperson Abigail Jackson dismissed all the criticism from what she called “a bunch of deranged has-been politicians.”

    “The only people who will pay attention to this event are the journalists who are forced to cover it,” she said.

    Virtually everyone who gathered at the hotel in National Harbor, Maryland, said they are rooting for Democratic victories in this fall’s midterm elections. One of the only Democrats there was Conor Lamb, a former congressman from Pennsylvania who lost his party’s primary to John Fetterman four years ago.

    Despite dire concerns, there was a slight sense of optimism among the half-empty convention hall and quiet hotel hallways.

    Several people cheered last week’s Supreme Court decision to strike down Trump’s tariffs, the economic tool he has wielded without congressional approval in his attempt to force friends and foes around the globe to bend to his will. Trump insisted he would implement a new round of tariffs despite the ruling.

    Former New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie, a former Trump adviser, highlighted recent AP-NORC polling showing that 1 in 4 Republicans nationwide do not approve of Trump’s job performance.

    “It’s like any show that’s on TV for a long time — the ratings start to go down. And the ratings are going down,” Christie said. “I am willing to bet you that by next February, this room is going to be twice the size of what it is now. After the midterms, you watch.”

    Ex-MAGA diehard Rich Logis, wearing a red “I left MAGA hat,” hopes to see “an electoral revolt against MAGA” in the midterms.

    “I think there’s a shift in our country right now,” he said. “It happens slowly.”

    Logis was promoting support groups for friends and family of Trump loyalists at a table outside the convention hall. Nearby, someone was selling books about how to escape cults.

    At the podium, former Republican Rep. Joe Walsh implored Trump’s critics not to downplay the seriousness of the threat the president poses to the nation.

    “He’s everything our founders feared. Say it. Believe it,” Walsh said. He said his former party is “an authoritarian-embracing cult” and “a threat to everything I love.”

    Retired Gen. Mark Hertling, who once commanded the U.S. Army’s European forces, said he’s “haunted” by allies who ask him “whether American institutions ever can be trusted again.”

    “Our nation’s institutions have been shaken. Our alliances have been strained. Our credibility has been damaged. And our nation’s values have been cast aside,” Hertling said. He suggested the U.S. should look to the reconstruction of Germany after the defeat of Nazism if it hoped to to restore the damage caused by Trump and his allies.

    The nation’s recovery, he said as his voiced cracked, would be something people have to earn over many years.

    Bill Kristol, who worked in previous Republican administrations and helped found the Weekly Standard magazine, described Trump and his Republican supporters in Congress as “an existential threat” to the nation. But he was also optimistic about the upcoming midterm elections.

    Kristol said Democrats are “almost certain to win the House,” “could possibly win the Senate,” and have “a good chance to win the presidency” in 2028.

    Brittany Martinez, executive director of the host organization Principles First, also tried to cast an optimistic tone, even after describing the many reasons why she couldn’t bear to continue her career as a Republican staffer on Capitol Hill.

    “I hope that Republicans continue to wake up,” she said. “I do think that those folks exist. And I hope that they exist in greater numbers.”

    Copyright 2026 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

    Photos You Should See – Feb. 2026

    [ad_2]

    Associated Press

    Source link

  • Salisbury Democrats to hold caucus

    [ad_1]

    SALISBURY — The Salisbury Democratic Town Committee will hold a caucus Feb. 28 at the Hilton Senior Center, 43 Lafayette Road, to elect delegates to attend as voting members of the Democratic State Convention.

    The snow date is March 7. Caucus registration takes place between 9:30 and 10 a.m. The caucus begins at 10 a.m. All are welcome to observe the proceedings.

    This page requires Javascript.

    Javascript is required for you to be able to read premium content. Please enable it in your browser settings.

    kAmp== C68:DE6C65 s6>@4C2ED =:G:?8 😕 $2=:D3FCJ 2C6 6=:8:3=6 E@ CF? 2D 2 56=682E6] $2=:D3FCJ H:== 6=64E 7@FC 56=682E6D 2?5 7@FC 2=E6C?2E6D 2E E96 42F4FD]k^Am

    kAmt=64E65 56=682E6D H:== 36 23=6 E@ 2EE6?5 E96 4@?G6?E:@? 😕 (@C46DE6C @? |2J ahb_] r@?G6?E:@? A2CE:4:A2?ED H:== 962C 7C@> s6>@4C2E:4 DE2E6 =6256CD 2?5 42? G@E6 @? H9:49 &]$] $6?2E6 42?5:52E6 E96J DFAA@CE]k^Am

    kAm%96 E9C66 564=2C65 s6>@4C2E:4 42?5:52E6D 2C6 :?4F>36?E $6?] t5 |2C<6J 2?5 492==6?86CD $6E9 |@F=E@? 2?5 p=6I #:<=66?] t249 42?5:52E6 H:== ?665 E@ 62C? E96 DFAA@CE @7 `dT @7 4@?G6?E:@? 56=682E6D]k^Am

    kAm!6@A=6 286D `e E@ bd[ E9@D6 H:E9 5:D23:=:E:6D[ A6@A=6 @7 4@=@C[ G6E6C2?D 2?5 >6>36CD @7 E96 {vq%”Z 4@>>F?:EJ ?@E 6=64E65 2D 56=682E6D @C 2=E6C?2E6D 5FC:?8 E96 42F4FD 42? 364@>6 2? 255@? 56=682E6 6:E96C 2E E96 42F4FD @C 27E6C]k^Am

    kAmu@C >@C6 23@FE E96 42F4FD[ 4@?E24E s6C6< s6!6EC:==@[ 492:C @7 E96 s6>@4C2E:4 %@H? r@>>:EE66[ 2E k2 9C67lQ>2:=E@i56C6<5_d`go8>2:=]4@>Qm56C6<5_d`go8>2:=]4@>k^2m @C |2C< (9:E>@C6[ $2=:D3FCJ 42F4FD 4@@C5:?2E@C[ 2E k2 9C67lQ>2:=E@iH9:E>@C6]>2C<`o8>2:=]4@>QmH9:E>@C6]>2C<`o8>2:=]4@>k^2m]k^Am

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Presidents’ Days: From Obama to Trump

    [ad_1]

    Obama had started out, like so many, thinking that Trump was little more than a comical, if malevolent, real-estate hawker. Trump’s early and bellowing deployment of the racist “birther” theory gave Obama every reason to hate him; he chose, instead, to laugh at him. In January, 2016, Matt Lauer, then at NBC, asked Obama, “So, when you stand and deliver that State of the Union address, in no part of your mind and brain can you imagine Donald Trump standing up one day and delivering the State of the Union address?”

    Obama laughed. “Well,” he said, “I can imagine it in a ‘Saturday Night’ skit.”

    Even in the last days before the election, as the Clinton team faltered, Obama’s campaign guru David Plouffe still insisted that Clinton was a “one-hundred-per-cent” lock and instructed worrywarts to stop “wetting the bed.”

    Like Plouffe, Obama proved to be a poor prognosticator. Not only did he (along with, in fairness, nearly everyone) fail to anticipate Trump’s victory, he failed to comprehend the degree to which Trump would, particularly in his second term, set out to demolish the principles and the institutions that Obama had defended in Athens. Obama met with Trump at the White House following the election, on November 10th. Not long afterward, Obama told me, in an interview in the Oval Office, “I don’t believe in apocalyptic—until the apocalypse comes. I think nothing is the end of the world until the end of the world.” In fact, he had told his staffers, who were stunned by Clinton’s loss, many of them weeping, that sometimes losing was the nature of democracy, that history does not move in straight lines.

    “People were mired in despondency, and he thought part of his goal was to keep people pointed in the right direction,” David Axelrod, Obama’s senior adviser and political consultant, told me recently. “Our norms and institutions have proven more vulnerable to Trump’s assaults than President Obama imagined then.”

    Obama told me at the time that he had accomplished “seventy or seventy-five per cent” of what he had set out to do, and that only fifteen or twenty per cent of what he had achieved would probably get “rolled back” by Trump. “But there’s still a lot of stuff that sticks.” This badly underestimated what was to come. Not only has Trump undermined government institutions and basic norms, he has, through his example, through his daily insults and his late-night social-media rants, normalized a level of racism, misogyny, and gratuitous division that cannot be calculated by percentages.

    Here and there in the oral-history archive, people in the Obama circle refer to Trump’s racism, particularly the birther rhetoric that propelled his first campaign. Nearly a decade later, as I was watching and reading these interviews, the background noise was, as usual, incessant: there was Trump showering contempt on female reporters and sharing a racist video that depicted Barack and Michelle Obama as apes. This is such routine behavior from Trump that, as news stories, they pass quickly and, of course, with no apology.

    Out of office, the Obamas have handled these grotesque insults differently. Michelle Obama harbors deep anger at Trump, according to knowledgeable sources, and has made it plain that she wants nothing to do with him. She believed that the birther rhetoric endangered her family, and things only got worse from there. As a matter of obligation, Obama is still capable of sitting next to Trump, as he did at Jimmy Carter’s funeral, last year, and exchanging pleasant banalities. When I raised this with two of Obama’s closest aides, Axelrod and Ben Rhodes, they both referred to the analogous predicament of Jackie Robinson, who was the first Black player in modern major-league baseball, and who made it a matter of principle to endure and absorb every slur with an almost superhuman dignity. The pathfinder’s predicament. In private, Obama usually does not lash out angrily about the Trumpism of the day—that is not his temperament—but he will routinely ask people to imagine the response if he had been the one to, say, rage-post hateful videos at 2 A.M. or use his office to enrich his family by billions of dollars.

    [ad_2]

    David Remnick

    Source link

  • Beacon Hill targets AI in political advertising

    [ad_1]

    BOSTON — Doctored photos and video footage coupled with ads twisting candidates’ words have been used for decades in political campaigns, but the rise of artificial intelligence has elevated such deceptive tactics to a new level.

    That has prompted a bipartisan push on Beacon Hill for restrictions on the misuse of the technology to sway voters and bash political opponents.

    This page requires Javascript.

    Javascript is required for you to be able to read premium content. Please enable it in your browser settings.

    kAmp A2:C @7 3:==D E92E 4=62C65 E96 s6>@4C2E:44@?EC@==65 w@FD6 (2JD 2?5 |62?D r@>>:EE66 @? %F6D52J H:E9 2 72G@C23=6 G@E6 H@F=5 C6BF:C6 42>A2:8?D E@ 5:D4=@D6 E96 FD6 @7 px 😕 A@=:E:42= 25G6CE:D6>6?ED 2?5 32? “5646AE:G6” 4@>>F?:42E:@?D 😕 42>A2:8? 25D h_ 52JD 367@C6 2? 6=64E:@?]k^Am

    kAmx? 2 ;@:?E DE2E6>6?E[ w@FD6 $A62<6C #@? |2C:2?@[ s”F:?4J[ 2?5 w@FD6 (2JD 2?5 |62?D r92:C>2? p2C@? |:49=6H:EK[ sq@DE@?[ D2:5 w@FD6 s6>@4C2ED A=2? E@ AFE 3@E9 3:==D FA 7@C 5632E6 2?5 2 G@E6 2E 2 7@C>2= D6DD:@? (65?6D52J]k^Am

    kAm“pD 2CE:7:4:2= :?E6==:86?46 4@?E:?F6D E@ C6D92A6 @FC 64@?@>J 2?5 >2?J 2DA64ED @7 @FC 52:=J =:G6D[ =2H>2<6CD 92G6 2 C6DA@?D:3:=:EJ E@ 6?DFC6 E92E px 5@6D ?@E 7FCE96C E96 DAC625 @7 >:D:?7@C>2E:@? 😕 @FC A@=:E:4D[” E96J D2:5]k^Am

    kAm“w@FD6 =6256CD9:A 4@?E:?F6D E@ 92G6 AC@5F4E:G6 4@?G6CD2E:@?D H:E9 E96 >6>36CD9:A @? E9:D :DDF6[ 2?5 H6 =@@< 7@CH2C5 E@ A2DD:?8 E9:D :>A@CE2?E =68:D=2E:@? @? (65?6D52J]”k^Am

    kAm~?6 3:==[ 7:=65 3J #6A] %C:4:2 u2C=6Jq@FG:6C[ s!:EED7:6=5[ H@F=5 AC@9:3:E 2?J@?6 CF??:?8 7@C 6=64E65 @77:46 7C@> 5:DEC:3FE:?8 5646AE:G6 @C 7C2F5F=6?E “DJ?E96E:4” 25D H:E9:? h_ 52JD @7 2? 6=64E:@? 😕 H9:49 E96 42?5:52E6 @C E96:C A@=:E:42= A2CEJ H:== 2AA62C @? DE2E6 @C =@42= 32==@ED] ‘:@=2E@CD H@F=5 7246 7:?6D @7 FA E@ S`[___ F?56C E96 AC@A@D2=]k^Am

    kAmp?@E96C 3:==[ 7:=65 3J w@FD6 |:?@C:EJ {6256C qC25 y@?6D[ #}@CE9 #625:?8[ H@F=5 C6BF:C6 A@=:E:42= 42>A2:8?D E@ 5:D4=@D6 E96 FD6 @7 2?J px E649?@=@8J E@ 86?6C2E6 %'[ 5:8:E2= @C AC:?E 25D E2C86E:?8 E96:C @AA@?6?ED]k^Am

    kAm!@=:E:42= @3D6CG6CD 2?E:4:A2E6 2? @?D=2F89E @7 D@A9:DE:42E65 px86?6C2E65 G:56@ @C 2F5:@ 4=:AD 😕 AC6D:56?E:2= 25D 7@C E6=6G:D:@? 2?5 D@4:2= >65:2 D:E6D 29625 @7 E96 A:G@E2= }@G6>36C >:5E6C> 6=64E:@? H96? 4@?EC@= @7 r@?8C6DD H:== 36 FA 7@C 8C23D]k^Am

    kAmp a_ac C6A@CE :DDF65 3J E96 r@?8C6DD:@?2= #6D62C49 $6CG:46[ 2 AF3=:4 A@=:4J C6D62C49 2C> @7 r@?8C6DD[ H2C?65 E92E 566A72<6D 4@F=5 2=D@ 36 86?6C2E65 3J C@8F6 4@F?EC:6D @C 7@C6:8? 25G6CD2C:6D E@ >655=6 😕 E96 FA4@>:?8 AC6D:56?E:2= 6=64E:@?D]k^Am

    kAm“$E2E6 25G6CD2C:6D @C A@=:E:42==J >@E:G2E65 :?5:G:5F2=D 4@F=5 C6=62D6 72=D:7:65 G:56@D @7 6=64E65 @77:4:2=D @C @E96C AF3=:4 7:8FC6D >2<:?8 :?46?5:2CJ 4@>>6?ED @C 3692G:?8 :?2AAC@AC:2E6=J[” E96 C6A@CE’D 2FE9@CD HC@E6] “s@:?8 D@ 4@F=5[ 😕 EFC?[ 6C@56 AF3=:4 ECFDE[ ?682E:G6=J 27764E AF3=:4 5:D4@FCD6[ @C 6G6? DH2J 2? 6=64E:@?]”k^Am

    kAmx? a_ac[ E96 u656C2= t=64E:@? r@>>:DD:@? G@E65 E@ 368:? E96 AC@46DD @7 C68F=2E:?8 px86?6C2E65 566A72<6D 😕 A@=:E:42= 25D 29625 @7 E96 a_ac 6=64E:@?] %96 A2?6= 96=5 2 e_52J AF3=:4 962C:?8 AC@46DD[ 3FE 92D J6E E@ E2<6 24E:@? @? 2?J ?6H C68F=2E:@?D] p =24< @7 utr 4@>>:DD:@?6CD >62?D E96 A2?6= 5@6D ?@E 92G6 2 BF@CF> E@ >66E @C G@E6 @? D2?4E:@?D]k^Am

    kAmp 8C@FA @7 4@?8C6DD:@?2= =2H>2<6CD[ :?4=F5:?8 |2DD249FD6EED #6AD] $6E9 |@F=E@? 2?5 y:> |4v@G6C?[ HC@E6 E@ E96 utr 😕 yF=J a_ac[ FC8:?8 E96 286?4J E@ 24E @? 2 A6E:E:@? 7C@> 8@@5 8@G6C?>6?E 8C@FAD E@ D6E C6DEC:4E:@?D @? 566A 72<6 A@=:E:42= 25G6CE:D:?8]k^Am

    kAm“”F:4<=J 6G@=G:?8 px E649?@=@8J >2<6D :E :?4C62D:?8=J 5:77:4F=E 7@C G@E6CD E@ 244FC2E6=J :56?E:7J 7C2F5F=6?E G:56@ 2?5 2F5:@ >2E6C:2=[ H9:49 😀 :?4C62D:?8=J EC@F3=:?8 😕 E96 4@?E6IE @7 42>A2:8? 25G6CE:D6>6?ED[” E96J HC@E6]k^Am

    kAmk6>mr9C:DE:2? |] (256 4@G6CD E96 |2DD249FD6EED $E2E69@FD6 7@C }@CE9 @7 q@DE@? |65:2 vC@FAUCDBF@jD ?6HDA2A6CD 2?5 H63D:E6D] t>2:= 9:> 2E k2 9C67lQ>2:=E@i4H256o4?9:?6HD]4@>Qm4H256o4?9:?6HD]4@>k^2m]k^6>mk^Am

    [ad_2]

    By Christian M. Wade | Statehouse Reporter

    Source link

  • Commentary: Yes, Trump’s video showing the Obamas as apes is racist. But it’s also about the election

    [ad_1]

    Welcome to Black History Month, 2026 style.

    President Trump posted a video Thursday to his social media site that contains animated images depicting former President Obama and First Lady Michelle Obama as apes.

    The White House took down the post Friday, and after first calling it nothing more than a meme, they dubbed it a mistake by a staffer. Sure.

    But while the justifiable outrage over this overt racism spins itself into a brief media circus (because we all know something else will come along in about three minutes), let’s look a bit deeper into why this video is more than an affront to everything America stands for, or should stand for, anyway.

    It’s no accident that the images of the Obamas are embedded deep inside a video about voter fraud conspiracies from the 2020 election (which are untrue, if I need to say it again). This video is an escalation in the assault that is likely to come on voting rights and voting access in the midterms.

    “Absolutely, there’s a connection to the vote,” Melina Abdullah told me Friday. She’s a professor at Cal State Los Angeles and co-founder of Black Lives Matter Los Angeles.

    “This is about more than just about the Obamas,” added Brian Levin, a professor emeritus at Cal State San Bernardino and founder of the Center for the Study of Hate and Extremism. “It’s about people that are [perceived as] undermining our elections and our democracy.”

    I caught Levin the day after he turned in a chapter about authoritarianism for a new book, which happens to look at how discrimination and the imposition of social hierarchies ties in with power.

    Let me summarize. Vulnerable groups are smashed down as dangerous and not fit to be full citizens, so a smaller group of elites can justify power by any means to protect society from these lowly and nasty influences.

    Let me make that messaging even simpler: Black and brown people are bad and shouldn’t be allowed to participate in democracy because they don’t deserve the right.

    How does that play out at the ballot box?

    All that talk about voter identification and election integrity is really about stopping people from voting — people who legally have the right to vote. Those who are least likely to be able to obtain proof of citizenship — which might require a passport or birth certificate, along with the money and know-how to get such documents — are often Black or brown people. They are often also poor, or poorer, and therefore have less time and money to put into obtaining documents, and also live in urban areas where they share polling places.

    Is it such a stretch to imagine some kind of federal oversight at those types of polling places, turning away — or simply intimidating away — legal voters who have long made up a strong block of the Democratic base?

    Let’s hope that never happens. But the current undermining of the legitimacy of Black and brown voters is, said both Levin and Abdullah, systemic and concerning.

    Trump’s latest video is “part of a floodgate of bigotry and conspiracy that relates to elections and immigrants and Black people and it’s important to condemn the manner in which these puzzle pieces are put together to label African Americans and immigrants as a threat to democracy with respect to the vote,” Levin said.

    The premise of the video in question is that Democrats have engaged in a complicated and decades-long scheme to steal elections. It’s presented as a documentary, and the images of the Obamas have been weirdly inserted as almost a subliminal flash near the end.

    If you’ve missed the white supremacist postings that have now become commonplace on official government communications such as those from the Departments of Labor and Homeland Security, let me assure you that Levin is right and this primate video is indeed part of a “firehose” of white nationalist rhetoric coming not just from Trump, but from the federal government as a whole.

    The Civil Rights Division of the U.S. Department of Justice, for example, has turned its focus toward punishing diversity, equity and inclusion. Just this week, another federal agency, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, began a probe against Nike for allegedly discriminating against white people in hiring.

    “It has been not even a dog-whistling, but a Xeroxing of the exact kind of terms that I’ve been looking at on white supremacists’ and neo-Nazi websites for decades,” Levin said.

    It’s not my place or intent to warn Black people about racism, because that would be ludicrous and insulting, but I’ll warn the rest of us because in the end, authoritarianism targets everyone. This video is a clear statement that Trump’s vision of America is one in which every non-white group, every vulnerable group really, is a second-class citizen.

    “He’s enabling an entire group of people who want to take this country back to a time when rampant violent white supremacy was enabled in the law,” Abdullah said. “What they mean is recapturing an old-school, oppressive racism that is pre-1965, pre-Voting Rights Act.”

    That message, Levin said, has “a resonance with a decent part of his base,” and when fed ceaselessly into the system, can have violent outcomes.

    Levin uses the example of when Trump tweeted during the 2020 protests over the killing of George Floyd: “When the looting starts, the shooting starts,” a phrase with a violent and racist history.

    Levin said Black people have always been the primary targets of hate crimes in the United States, but after that tweet, it was some of the “worst days” for violence aimed by race.

    “When a high transmitter, like a president, circulates imagery with regard to prejudice, it creates these stereotypes and conspiracy theories, which then are the groundwork for further conspiracy theories and aggression,” he added.

    Abdullah said she worries that even if the voter crackdown isn’t officially sanctioned, those empowered conspiracy theorists will take action anyway.

    “So the people who are so-called ‘monitoring,’ self-appointed monitors … this is who’s going to be pulling people out of voter lines, and so this is what he’s whipping up intentionally,” she said.

    Keep your eye on the ball, folks, because the far-right Republicans running the show are laser-focused on it. The midterm elections have to go their way for them to remain in power.

    The easiest way to ensure that outcome is to only allow voters who see things their way.

    [ad_2]

    Anita Chabria

    Source link

  • A Glimmer of Hope for Democracy in Venezuela as Opponents Test the Limits of Free Speech

    [ad_1]

    CARACAS, Venezuela (AP) — Andrés Velásquez didn’t stick around to become one more government critic jailed after Venezuela’s 2024 presidential election.

    A former governor who had crisscrossed Venezuela stumping for then-President Nicolás Maduro’s opponent in the disputed race, he grew a thick beard, sent his children into exile and avoided public events that could expose him to arrest.

    But in the aftermath of Maduro’s overthrow by the U.S., he mustered the courage to speak out. First, on Jan. 19, Velásquez, with his new look, appeared in a video in which he expressed support for Maduro’s removal while calling for new elections. Then, a few days later, he stuck his neck out even further, shooting a short video outside the infamous Helicoide prison in the capital, Caracas, to demand the release of all political prisoners.

    “We must dismantle the entire repressive apparatus in the hands of the state,” Velásquez said in the video. “Venezuela will be free!”

    Velásquez isn’t alone. Since Maduro’s ouster, a number of prominent critics have started to emerge from hiding to test the limits of political speech after years of self-imposed silence driven by fear. Regular Venezuelans are also throwing off restraint, with families of jailed activists protesting outside prisons and those freed defying gag orders normally imposed as a condition for release. Meanwhile, media outlets have begun re-opening their airwaves to critical voices banished in recent years.

    The political liberalization, while still incipient, was likened by Velásquez to glasnost, referring to the era of reforms and freer public debate that preceded the collapse of the Soviet Union. But unlike that and other democratic openings, this one is taking place almost entirely under the tutelage of the Trump administration, which has used a combination of financial incentives and threats of additional military strikes to carry out the president’s seemingly improbable pledge to “run” Venezuela from Washington.

    Last week, Rodríguez, a longtime Maduro ally, announced plans for a general amnesty that could lead to the release of hundreds of opposition leaders, journalists and human rights activists detained for political reasons. She also announced the shutdown of Helicoide, vowing to transform the spiral-shaped building — a futuristic architectural icon transfigured into a symbol of Maduro’s dungeons — into a sports and cultural complex for police and residents of surrounding hillside slums.

    “May this law serve to heal the wounds left by the political confrontation fueled by violence and extremism,” she said at an event surrounded by ruling-party stalwarts.

    Pedro Vaca, the top freedom of expression expert for the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights, the region’s most respected rights watchdog, said the few “breadcrumbs” offered by Rodríguez’s administration are no substitute for an independent judiciary and law enforcement.

    “Venezuela’s civic space is still a desert,” said Vaca, who has been trying for months to secure permission from Venezuelan officials to lead an on-the-ground assessment mission to the country. “The few critical voices emerging are seeds breaking through hardened ground, surviving not because freedom exists, but because repression has loosened while remaining ever-present. Let us be clear: this does not mark a democratic turning point.”


    Self-censorship deepens after 2024 election

    Political pluralism was severely eroded in Venezuela after Maduro took over the presidency from the late Hugo Chávez in 2013. Anti-government protests and episodes of civil unrest were regularly crushed by security forces whose loyalty to the self-proclaimed socialist leader proved unflinching if powerless against a far-superior U.S. military.

    The self-censorship deepened following the July 2024 elections, when Maduro launched a wave of repression marked by thousands of arbitrary detentions as he disavowed evidence showing he had lost the contested ballot to the opposition candidate, Edmundo González, by a more than two-to-one margin.

    Dissidents went into hiding, and the few remaining independent news outlets softened their already cautious coverage for fear of being unplugged.

    In an interview with the AP, Velásquez said he will continue to push the envelope of allowed political activity but remains wary because the state’s repressive apparatus continues to be entirely under the control of Rodríguez and her allies.

    “We must continue winning back lost terrain, challenging power. An opportunity has opened up and we can’t let it close again,” he said. “But the biggest obstacle we have to overcome is fear.”

    In the coming weeks, he’s looking to organize a public event with other government opponents who have recently come out of hiding. Among them is Delsa Solórzano, a former lawmaker who was also a fixture of the opposition’s 2024 presidential campaign. Solórzano last week resurfaced publicly at a rare press conference for her party, describing with tears how she had to take Vitamin D to compensate for the lack of sunlight while living clandestinely.

    “I didn’t hide because I committed any crime but because here fighting for freedom became an extremely high risk — to your life, your freedom and your safety,” Solórzano said.


    Rodriguez allies resist political liberalization

    Media outlets have also started flexing more muscle.

    Venevision, which like most private networks dropped coverage critical of the government in recent years, has reopened its airwaves to anti-government voices, covering opposition leader Maria Corina Machado’s every move in Washington since Maduro’s capture.

    Meanwhile, Globovision, the nation’s largest private broadcaster, whose owner is sanctioned by the U.S. for his ties to Maduro, invited back prominent commentator Vladimir Villegas for the first time in years.

    Villegas earned a reputation for deftly navigating Venezuela’s already restricted airwaves by keeping the government’s most hardened opponents off his influential political talk show. But the show was abruptly canceled in 2020 when Villegas criticized Maduro for forcing DirecTV to carry state TV in violation of U.S. sanctions, a move that forced the satellite TV provider — and its assortment of international news outlets — to abandon the country.

    Rodríguez herself hasn’t embraced meaningful public debate of the nation’s problems other than announcing the creation of an advisory commission on political co-existence to be headed by Villegas’ brother, Culture Minister Ernesto Villegas.

    But already some of her allies seem intent on shutting down any criticism. Meanwhile, authorities have yet to restore full access to the social media platform X, which Maduro blocked after its billionaire owner, Elon Musk, accused him of stealing the 2024 vote.

    In response to Venevision’s coverage of Machado’s meeting in Washington with Secretary of State Marco Rubio, Interior Minister Diosdado Cabello — a hardliner wanted by the U.S. on a drug warrant — accused the media of playing into a plot by the Nobel Prize winner to sow chaos in Venezuela.

    “Without media attention, her notoriety fades away. Without headlines, she simply disappears,” Cabello warned on state TV, singling out Venevision’s coverage.

    But even on state TV — long a bastion of pro-government propaganda and ideological control — cracks have started to appear.

    Case in point: Rodríguez’s recent tour of a university campus in Caracas in which she was confronted by a small group of student protesters. While state TV made no mention of the students’ demands, the scene itself — in which a Rodríguez was shown calmly separating from her security entourage to “exchange ideas” with what the broadcaster called activists from “extremist parities” — would have been unthinkable a few weeks ago.

    Under Maduro, even the mildest of criticism was buried on state TV and broadcasts of the president’s frequent rallies and outdoor events stopped airing live after a series of embarrassing disruptions, including a 2016 visit to Margarita Island in which he was driven away by a group of angry, pot-banging protesters.


    Drawing inspiration from jailed activists

    While the outlook for an eventual democratic transition in Venezuela remains unknown, government opponents hope Rodriguez is unleashing forces that are beyond her control. Meanwhile, they continue to draw inspiration from those who suffered repression firsthand.

    Journalist and political activist Carlos Julio Rojas spent 638 days in a Venezuelan prison where, like dozens of other prisoners, he said he was repeatedly handcuffed, denied sunlight and confined to a tiny cell with no bed — sometimes for weeks at a time.

    When he was released last month as part of a goodwill gesture announced by Rodríguez, he says he was instructed to never discuss the abuse.

    His mandated silence lasted barely 15 days.

    “For me, not speaking meant I still felt imprisoned. Not speaking was a form of torture,” said Rojas, who was accused without proof of participating in a 2024 assassination plot against Maduro. “So, today, I decided to remove the gag and speak.”

    Goodman reported from Washington

    This story is part of an ongoing collaboration between The Associated Press and FRONTLINE (PBS) that includes an upcoming documentary.

    Copyright 2026 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

    Photos You Should See – January 2026

    [ad_2]

    Associated Press

    Source link

  • Out-of-state group funds pot law repeal

    [ad_1]

    BOSTON — A Virginia-based group is leading an initiative to repeal Massachusetts’ 2016 recreational cannabis law and putting hundreds of thousands of dollars behind the effort, according to newly released campaign finance data.

    The anti-legalization group Smart Approaches to Marijuana has contributed more than $1.5 million to a proposed referendum that would effectively halt recreational cannabis sales by forcing the state’s $1.7 billion industry to convert to medical pot shops. It would also ban nonmedical home growing.

    This page requires Javascript.

    Javascript is required for you to be able to read premium content. Please enable it in your browser settings.

    kAmu:=:?8D H:E9 E96 DE2E6 ~77:46 @7 r2>A2:8?D 2?5 !F3=:4 u:?2?46 D9@H E96 pC=:?8E@?[ ‘:C8:?:232D65 8C@FA 4@?EC:3FE65 S`]dd >:==:@? 😕 $6AE6>36C E@ E96 r@2=:E:@? 7@C 2 w62=E9J |2DD249FD6EED x?4][ 2 4@>>:EE66 E92E 9:C65 A2:5 D:8?2EFC6 82E96C6CD E@ 4=62C 2 7:CDE 9FC5=6 E@ E96 32==@E]k^Am

    kAm“(6 2C6 DFAA@CE:?8 E9:D 677@CE 3642FD6 >@>6?EF> 😀 C:D:?8 24C@DD E96 4@F?ECJ E@ C6;64E =682= >2C:;F2?2[” E96 8C@FA’D 4@7@F?56C 2?5 rt~[ z6G:? $236E[ D2:5 😕 2 AC6A2C65 DE2E6>6?E] “p?5 ?@ H@?56Ci p>6C:42?D 😕 6G6CJ DE2E6 2C6 H2<:?8 FA E@ E96 >2DD:G6 92C>D E9:D ?6H q:8 %@3244@ :?5FDECJ 5@6D E@ 6G6CJE9:?8 7C@> >6?E2= 2?5 A9JD:42= 962=E9 E@ D@4:2= 4@96D:@? 2?5 @C56C]”k^Am

    kAm%96 8C@FA[ 4@7@F?565 3J 7@C>6C #9@56 xD=2?5 r@?8C6DD>2? !2EC:4< z6??65J[ 😀 32?:=2C C6A62= :?:E:2E:G6D 😕 @E96C DE2E6D H96C6 A@E 😀 =682=]k^Am

    kAm$236E 2C8F6D E92E E96 25G6?E @7 C64C62E:@?2= A@E 😕 |2DD249FD6EED 92D 4@?EC:3FE65 E@ :?4C62D65 5CF8 255:4E:@? 2?5 >6?E2= 962=E9 :DDF6D 2>@?8 J@FE9D H9:=6 6?C:49:?8 E96 42??23:D :?5FDECJ]k^Am

    kAmw6 4:E65 DEF5:6D 7C@> 4@?D6CG2E:G6 8C@FAD 4=2:>:?8 “G:@=6?E 4C:>6” 92D DA:<65 😕 E96 DE2E6 D:?46 A@E H2D =682=:K65]k^Am

    kAm“{682= H665 92D 366? 2 325 562= 7@C 6G6CJ@?6 6I46AE E96 :?5FDECJ[” $236E D2:5]k^Am

    kAm#J2? s@>:?8F6K 😀 E96 6I64FE:G6 5:C64E@C @7 E96 |2DD249FD6EED r2??23:D r@2=:E:@? 2?5 9625 @7 2 4@>>:EE66 @AA@D:?8 E96 C6A62= 677@CE]k^Am

    kAm“%9:D C62==J :D?’E 23@FE AF3=:4 962=E9 @C D276EJ[” 96 D2:5] “xE’D 2 ?2E:@?2= @C82?:K2E:@? ECJ:?8 E@ AFD9 :ED 286?52 @? E96 DE2E6 2?5 FD6 :ED @FE@7DE2E6 5@?@CD E@ DAC625 >:D:?7@C>2E:@? 😕 2? 677@CE E@ @G6CEFC? 2 56>@4C2E:4 @FE4@>6] %96 DE2E6’D G@E6CD >256 :E 4=62C 😕 a_`e E96J @G6CH96=>:?8=J DFAA@CE =682=:K2E:@?]”k^Am

    kAms@>:?8F6K D2:5 =682= H665 92D 366? 2 H:?572== 7@C E96 DE2E6 2?5 =@42= 8@G6C?>6?ED[ H9:49 92G6 4@==64E65 9F?5C65D @7 >:==:@?D @7 5@==2CD 😕 E2I6D D:?46 C64C62E:@?2= D2=6D H6C6 7:CDE 2FE9@C:K65] w6 5:DAFE65 4=2:>D 3J E96 8C@FA E92E E96 42??23:D :?5FDECJ 92D 4@?EC:3FE65 E@ 4C:>6]k^Am

    kAm$FAA@CE6CD @7 E96 C6A62= 677@CE 4=62C65 2 >2;@C 9FC5=6 E@ E96 32==@E 27E6C E96J DF3>:EE65 >@C6 E92? fg[___ G@E6C D:8?2EFC6D E@ $64C6E2CJ @7 $E2E6 q:== v2=G:?’D @77:46 7@C 46CE:7:42E:@? @7 E96 x?:E:2E:G6 !6E:E:@? 7@C 2 {2H #6=2E:G6 E@ #68F=2E:?8 |2C:;F2?2] v2=G:? 46CE:7:65 E96 D:8?2EFC6D]k^Am

    kAm%96 DE2E6 q2==@E {2H r@>>:DD:@? C6;64E65 2 4@>A=2:?E 2==68:?8 DFAA@CE6CD @7 E96 677@CE “7C2F5F=6?E=J” 4@==64E65 D:8?2EFC6D 7C@> G@E6CD 3J 9:C:?8 2 E9:C5A2CEJ 8C@FA E92E >256 5646AE:G6 4=2:>D 23@FE H92E E96 AC@A@D65 32==@E BF6DE:@? H@F=5 5@ :7 2AAC@G65]k^Am

    kAmq@E9 E96 $64C6E2CJ @7 $E2E6’D ~77:46 2?5 E96 |2DD249FD6EED ~77:46 @7 E96 pEE@C?6J v6?6C2= H6C6 C6A@CE65=J 4@?E24E65 3J G@E6CD 4@?46C?65 23@FE E96 E24E:4D 36:?8 FD65 3J E96 2?E:42??23:D 42>A2:8? E@ 4@==64E D:8?2EFC6D] }6:E96C H2D H:==:?8 E@ 4@>>6?E 23@FE 2?J 24E:G6 :?G6DE:82E:@?D]k^Am

    kAm|2DD249FD6EED G@E6CD =682=:K65 C64C62E:@?2= 42??23:D E9C@F89 2 32==@E C676C6?5F> 😕 a_`e[ H9:49 A2DD65 H:E9 dbT @7 E96 G@E6]k^Am

    kAm#646?E A@==D 92G6 D9@H? DEC@?8 DFAA@CE 7@C C64C62E:@?2= A@E 😕 E96 DE2E6 2?5 ?2E:@?2==J]k^Am

    kAmrC:E:4D 2=D@ D2J 2==@H:?8 42??23:D E@ C6>2:? =682= H9:=6 DE@AA:?8 E96 C6E2:= >2C<6E H@F=5 7665 3=24< >2C<6E D2=6D @7 E96 5CF8[ 4C62E:?8 AF3=:4 D276EJ :DDF6D]k^Am

    kAm&?56C E96 DE2E6 4@?DE:EFE:@?[ E96 {68:D=2EFC6 😀 C6BF:C65 E@ 4@?D:56C E96 :?:E:2E:G6 A6E:E:@?D 367@C6 324<6CD @7 E96 C676C6?5F>D >FDE 4@?5F4E 2?@E96C C@F?5 @7 D:8?2EFC6 82E96C:?8] {2H>2<6CD 92G6 F?E:= |2J d E@ G@E6 @? E96 AC@A@D2=D]k^Am

    kAmx7 =2H>2<6CD 5@?’E E2<6 FA E96 4FCC6?E >62DFC6D[ 324<6CD @7 E96 C676C6?5F>D >FDE 82E96C `a[cah D:8?2EFC6D E@ >2<6 E96 32==@E]k^Am

    kAmr9C:DE:2? |] (256 4@G6CD E96 |2DD249FD6EED $E2E69@FD6 7@C }@CE9 @7 q@DE@? |65:2 vC@FAUCDBF@jD ?6HDA2A6CD 2?5 H63D:E6D] t>2:= 9:> 2E k2 9C67lQ>2:=E@i4H256o4?9:?6HD]4@>Qm4H256o4?9:?6HD]4@>k^2m]k^Am

    [ad_2]

    By Christian M. Wade | Statehouse Reporter

    Source link

  • Some Republicans express concern over the tactics used in Minnesota and urge shooting investigation

    [ad_1]

    WASHINGTON — A handful of Republicans expressed growing concern Sunday about the tactics that federal immigration officials are using in Minnesota after a U.S. Border Patrol agent fatally shot a man in Minneapolis.

    Oklahoma Gov. Kevin Stitt said the killing Saturday of Alex Pretti, a 37-year-old intensive care unit nurse who protested President Donald Trump’s immigration crackdown, was a “real tragedy.” Pretti was a U.S. citizen, born in Illinois.

    “I think the death of Americans, what we’re seeing on TV, it’s causing deep concerns over federal tactics and accountability,” Stitt told CNN’s “State of the Union.” “Americans don’t like what they’re seeing right now.”

    When asked if he thought the president should pull immigration agents from Minnesota, Stitt said Trump has to answer that question.

    “He’s getting bad advice right now,” Stitt said.

    The governor said the Republican president needed to tell the American people what the solution and “endgame” are, and that there needed to be solutions instead of politicizing the situation. “Right now, tempers are just going crazy and we need to calm this down,” Stitt said.

    Other Republicans, including Sens. Thom Tillis of North Carolina and Bill Cassidy of Louisiana, also conveyed unease. In a social media post, Cassidy called the shooting “incredibly disturbing” and that the “credibility of ICE and DHS are at stake.” Tillis urged a “thorough and impartial investigation.”

    “Any administration official who rushes to judgment and tries to shut down an investigation before it begins are doing an incredible disservice to the nation and to President Trump’s legacy,” Tillis said in a post.

    Administration officials were firm in their defense of the hard-line immigration tactics.

    Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent said “it’s a tragedy when anyone dies” but he blamed Democratic leaders in Minnesota for “fomenting chaos.”

    “There are a lot of paid agitators who are ginning things up and the governor has not done a good job of tamping this down,” Bessent said on ABC’s “This Week.”

    __

    Associated Press writer Michelle L. Price contributed to this report

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Why Venezuelans support Trump’s capture of Maduro

    [ad_1]

    This week, guest host Zach Weissmueller is joined by Freddy Guevara, a Venezuelan opposition leader who was imprisoned by the regime of Nicolás Maduro and now lives in exile.

    Guevara first entered politics as a student activist opposing Hugo Chávez, later becoming the youngest elected city council member in Venezuelan history before winning a seat in the National Assembly. After the government stripped the assembly of power and escalated repression, Guevara spent three years as a political refugee in the Chilean Embassy in Caracas and was later imprisoned by the Maduro regime. He has lived in exile since 2021 and is now a visiting fellow at Harvard’s Kennedy School, where he studies democratic transitions and political repression.

    Weissmueller and Guevara discuss how authoritarianism operated under Nicolás Maduro, including political imprisonment, surveillance, and the foreign alliances that helped sustain his oppressive regime. They examine Maduro’s capture, why many Venezuelans support U.S. intervention, and what a democratic transition would require after decades of dictatorship. Guevara challenges common assumptions in the West about sovereignty and regime change and makes the case that Venezuelans themselves have driven the push to remove Maduro – while explaining how Venezuela’s collapse was not simply the result of corruption but a predictable consequence of socialism in practice.

    The Reason Interview With Nick Gillespie goes deep with the artists, entrepreneurs, and scholars who are making the world a more libertarian—or at least a more interesting—place by championing “free minds and free markets.”

     

    0:00—Introduction

    1:09—Guevara’s arrest in Venezuela

    8:34—The mechanics of oppression

    12:27—The capture of Maduro

    15:31—Delcy Rodríguez

    20:38—Venezuelan oil and national sovereignty

    27:19—The Trump administration’s transition strategy

    29:47—U.S. media coverage of Venezuelan politics

    32:22—María Corina Machado

    36:45—Marco Rubio’s three-phase strategy

    41:12—Maduro indictment

    47:20—The consequences of socialism

    50:45—What will progress look like for Venezuela?

     

    Upcoming Reason Events

    [ad_2]

    Zach Weissmueller

    Source link

  • New group to oppose repeal of recreational pot law

    [ad_1]

    BOSTON — Backers of recreational cannabis have formed a committee to oppose a referendum inching toward the November ballot that would repeal the state’s 2016 pot law.

    The group behind the ballot initiative, Coalition for a Healthy Massachusetts, wants to effectively halt recreational cannabis sales and prohibit non-medical home growing, among other changes.

    This page requires Javascript.

    Javascript is required for you to be able to read premium content. Please enable it in your browser settings.

    kAm%96 AC@A@D2=[ :7 2AAC@G65 3J G@E6CD[ H@F=5 7@C46 E96 DE2E6’D S`]f 3:==:@? C6E2:= 42??23:D :?5FDECJ E@ 4@?G6CE E@ >65:42= A@E D9@AD]k^Am

    kAm$FAA@CE6CD @7 E96 677@CE 4=62C65 2 >2;@C 9FC5=6 E@ E96 32==@E 27E6C E96J DF3>:EE65 >@C6 E92? fg[___ G@E6C D:8?2EFC6D E@ $64C6E2CJ @7 $E2E6 q:== v2G=:?’D @77:46 7@C 46CE:7:42E:@? @7 E96 x?:E:2E:G6 !6E:E:@? 7@C 2 {2H #6=2E:G6 E@ #68F=2E:?8 |2C:;F2?2] v2=G:? 46CE:7:65 E96 D:8?2EFC6D =2DE H66<]k^Am

    kAmqFE 4C:E:4D 2C8F6 E92E E96 8C@FA 369:?5 E96 677@CE “7C2F5F=6?E=J” 4@==64E65 D:8?2EFC6D 7C@> G@E6CD 3J 9:C:?8 2 E9:C5A2CEJ 8C@FA E92E >256 5646AE:G6 4=2:>D 23@FE H92E E96 AC@A@D65 32==@E BF6DE:@? H@F=5 5@ :7 2AAC@G65]k^Am

    kAm%96 ?6H=J 7@C>65 r@>>:EE66 E@ !C@E64E r2??23:D #68F=2E:@?[ H9:49 @AA@D6D E96 32==@E BF6DE:@? E@ C6A62= E96 =2H[ 92D 7:=65 2 4@>A=2:?E H:E9 E96 $E2E6 q2==@E {2H r@>>:DD:@? 492==6?8:?8 46CE:7:42E:@? @7 D:8?2EFC6D[ 4:E:?8 “>F=E:A=6” DH@C? 277:52G:ED 7C@> G@E6CD “2==68:?8 5646AE:G6 2?5 7C2F5F=6?E” D:8?2EFC682E96C:?8 E24E:4D]k^Am

    kAm“%96 6G:56?46 D9@HD 2 EC@F3=:?8 A2EE6C? @7 D:8?2EFC6 82E96C:?8 3F:=E @? >:DC6AC6D6?E2E:@? 2?5 5646AE:@?[” %@> z:=6J[ 2? 2EE@C?6J C6AC6D6?E:?8 E96 8C@FA[ D2:5 😕 2 DE2E6>6?E] “%9:D @3;64E:@? 😀 23@FE 6?DFC:?8 E92E @?=J =2H7F==J 2?5 9@?6DE=J @3E2:?65 D:8?2EFC6D 2C6 46CE:7:65]”k^Am

    [ad_2]

    By Christian M. Wade | Statehouse Reporter

    Source link

  • Red lines and increasing self-censorship reshape Hong Kong’s once freewheeling press scene

    [ad_1]

    HONG KONG — From 18th place to 140th. That’s how much Hong Kong’s ranking plunged in a global press freedom index over some 20 years.

    Behind the decline are the shutdown of pro-democracy newspaper Apple Daily, more red lines for journalists and increasing self-censorship across the territory. The erosion of press freedom parallels a broader curtailment of the city’s Western-style civil liberties since 2020, when Beijing imposed a national security law to eradicate challenges to its rule.

    Apple Daily founder Jimmy Lai was convicted in December under the security law, facing up to life in prison. Hearings will begin on Monday for Lai and other defendants in the case to argue for a shorter sentence.

    His trial has been watched closely by foreign governments and political observers as a barometer of media freedom in the former British colony, which returned to Chinese rule in 1997. The government insists that his case has nothing to do with press freedom.

    Hong Kong’s media environment was once freewheeling. Journalists often asked the government aggressive questions even as the owners of their outlets were pro-Beijing. News outlets regularly broke stories critical of politicians and officials.

    But the space for reporters has drastically narrowed after China imposed the security law, which it deemed necessary for stability after huge anti-government protests in 2019.

    In 2020, Lai became one of the first prominent figures charged under the law. Within a year, authorities used the same law to arrest senior executives of Apple Daily. They raided its office and froze $2.3 million of its assets, effectively forcing the newspaper to shut down in June 2021.

    Online news site Stand News met a similar fate in December of that year, with arrests, police raids and asset freezes forcing its shutdown. By 2022, Hong Kong had plunged 68 places to 148th in the press-freedom index compiled by media freedom organization Reporters Without Borders.

    In 2024, two Stand News editors became the first journalists since 1997 to be convicted of conspiracy to publish seditious articles under a separate, colonial-era law.

    In December, Lai was found guilty of conspiring with others to collude with foreign forces and conspiracy to publish seditious articles. Six Apple Daily executives charged in the same case had entered guilty pleas, admitting they conspired with Lai to request sanctions, blockades or engage in other hostile activities against Hong Kong or China.

    Francis Lee, a journalism and communication professor at the Chinese University of Hong Kong, said the Apple Daily and Stand News cases indicate that some common news practices of the past are no longer permitted. The Stand News case showed that some strongly critical commentaries with relatively intense expression might be considered seditious, he said. Lai’s case involved allegations of calling for foreign sanctions.

    “Maybe some advocacy journalism was at least permitted within the legal framework back then,” he said, referring to before the security law was introduced. “Today, it’s no longer allowed.”

    Self-censorship has become more prominent, but not only because of politics. Lee said mainstream news outlets face greater pressure not to upset their vital revenue streams, including advertisers and big companies, amid a difficult business environment.

    Many large companies in the city value the vast mainland Chinese market and ties with the government.

    Finding interviewees is not easy, either. “In Hong Kong nowadays, when some topics and perspectives cannot be reported, it’s not just because of media outlets practicing self-censorship,” Lee said. “No one is willing to speak. Self-censorship is a broad social phenomenon.”

    Many opposition politicians and leading activists were jailed under the security law. Dozens of civil society groups closed down. Facing potential risks, some residents also became more reluctant to talk to reporters.

    Hong Kong Journalists Association chairperson Selina Cheng said many stories perceived to be politically sensitive or potentially questioning the authorities are not always easily published. There is an outsized concern over including responses from the government and pro-China groups to create balance, she said.

    “To do journalism in Hong Kong means that people always have to worry at the back of their heads: What are the risks that they may get involved in?” said Cheng.

    A massive fire that killed at least 161 people in an apartment complex in late November revealed some of these shifts.

    After the fire broke out on Nov. 26, reporters, including those from newer online outlets, went out in force to cover Hong Kong’s deadliest blaze in decades. They interviewed affected residents, investigated scaffolding nettings that authorities said had contributed to the blaze’s rapid spread, and reported on concerns over the government’s oversight.

    Cheng was encouraged by the coverage of the aftermath. But warnings and arrests followed.

    Beijing’s national security arm in Hong Kong summoned representatives of several foreign news outlets, including The Associated Press, on Dec. 6. The Office for Safeguarding National Security said some foreign media had spread false information and smeared the government’s relief efforts after the fire and attacked the legislative election.

    After arrests of non-journalists who posted allegedly seditious content online or organized a petition, public voices grew quieter, leaving reporters with fewer interviewees, Lee said.

    A planned news conference related to the fire, organized by people including former pro-democracy district councilors, was canceled. Bruce Liu, an organizer, was summoned by police for a meeting the same day. An investigative report on the maintenance project by a pro-Beijing newspaper is no longer viewable on its website.

    Ellie Yuen, who wrote a social media post questioning regulators’ oversight that went viral, said she stopped posting about the fire for “obvious reasons” without elaborating.

    Cheng raised concerns over what she called the “more covert muscling of people speaking out.”

    “If this keeps happening, then it’s much harder for the public to know what they’re missing out on,” she said.

    In an emailed reply to the AP’s questions, the government strongly condemned attempts to use the fire as an excuse to smear the administration with baseless accusations.

    “Human rights and freedoms of Hong Kong residents have all along been firmly protected by the constitution and the Basic Law,” it said.

    Beyond reporting restrictions, Cheng’s trade union previously raised concerns about some journalists facing unwarranted tax audits and harassment through anonymous messages. The Inland Revenue Department has maintained that the background of a taxpayer has no bearing on its reviews.

    Cheng has launched a lawsuit against her former employer, The Wall Street Journal, for allegedly firing her over her union role.

    Both Cheng and Lee said journalists are still learning to survive in the narrowing space.

    In October, Cheng’s association showed journalists’ ratings of the city’s press-freedom index rebounded slightly.

    “Today’s situation is far from the previous state of freedom,” Lee said. “Self-censorship throughout society is severe. Yet some media outlets are still finding ways.”

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • What We Built Together and What Comes Next

    [ad_1]

    As we begin a new year, we wanted to take a moment to look back on what we’ve accomplished together in 2025, and to look forward to all that we will accomplish together in 2026.

    Thank you from the bottom of our hearts!

    Because of MoveOn members like you, we took action when it mattered. We pushed back against harmful fascist agendas, fought to protect democracy, elected progressive leaders up and down the ballot, and helped ensure millions of voices were heard. None of that happens without people willing to stay involved, even when progress feels slow.

    To capture just a snapshot of that work, we put together a short year in review highlighting some of the biggest wins moveOn members helped achieve in 2025.

    If we’re going to win back congressional power with progressive candidates, we’re going to need your help. 

    We also know that staying engaged in this fight requires rest and here at MoveOn, we thrive on creativity and care. To start the year, we are sharing a few tokens of our appreciation for all of the change you helped drive in 2025. Check out some of our favorite stress relievers: a fun coloring book and a calendar to keep up the fight all year long.

    As we move into the new year, the work ahead is clear: Defending democracy. Protecting fundamental rights. Holding those in power accountable.

    Thank you for being part of the MoveOn community. We are grateful to be in this work with you, and we are ready for what comes next.

    The post What We Built Together and What Comes Next appeared first on MoveOn: People-Powered Progress.

    [ad_2]

    MoveOn

    Source link

  • Methuen council shoots down increase in mayoral powers on contracts

    [ad_1]

    METHUEN — A bid by Mayor D.J Beauregard aimed at increasing government efficiency through cutting down on City Council oversight failed resoundingly.

    The council voted 7-2 on Monday against approving an ordinance, proposed by Beauregard, to raise the dollar limit from $25,000 to $50,000 on contracts not requiring council approval.

    This page requires Javascript.

    Javascript is required for you to be able to read premium content. Please enable it in your browser settings.

    kAmsFC:?8 E96 >66E:?8[ >2?J 6=64E65 @77:4:2=D D2:5 E96J H6C6 H2CJ @7 C@==:?8 324< H92E 925 366? 2? 2EE6>AE 3J 2? 62C=:6C 4@F?4:= E@ AFE 2 4964< @? >2J@C2= A@H6C E92E 925 366? 23FD65[ 244@C5:?8 E@ D@>6 @77:4:2=D]k^Am

    kAm“x 5@ DFAA@CE 677:4:6?E 8@G6C?>6?E[” r@F?4:=@C !2EC:4:2 ‘2==6J D2:5] “qFE x E9:?< E9:D @C5:?2?46 D9:7ED E@@ >F49 =:<6 2FE9@C:EJ 2H2J 7C@> E96 4:EJ 4@F?4:=]”k^Am

    kAmq62FC682C5 D2:5 =2DE J62C E96 4@F?4:= G@E65 @? hf G6?5@C 4@?EC24ED[ ac @7 H9:49 H6C6 F?56C Sd_[___]k^Am

    [ad_2]

    By Teddy Tauscher | ttauscher@eagletribune.com

    Source link

  • 5th anniversary of Jan. 6 attack brings fresh division to Capitol

    [ad_1]

    WASHINGTON — Five years ago outside the White House, outgoing President Donald Trump told a crowd of supporters to head to the Capitol — “and I’ll be there with you” — in protest as Congress was affirming the 2020 election victory for Democrat Joe Biden.

    A short time later, the world watched as the seat of U.S. power descended into chaos, and democracy hung in the balance.

    This page requires Javascript.

    Javascript is required for you to be able to read premium content. Please enable it in your browser settings.

    kAm~? E96 7:7E9 2??:G6CD2CJ @7 k2 9C67lQ9EEADi^^2A?6HD]4@>^9F3^42A:E@=D:686Qmy2?] e[ a_a`[k^2m E96C6 😀 ?@ @77:4:2= 6G6?E E@ >6>@C:2=:K6 H92E 92AA6?65 E92E 52J H96? E96 >@3 >256 :ED H2J 5@H? !6??DJ=G2?:2 pG6?F6[ 32EE=65 A@=:46 2E E96 r2A:E@= 32CC:4256D 2?5 DE@C>65 :?D:56 2D =2H>2<6CD 7=65]k^Am

    kAm%96 A@=:E:42= A2CE:6D C67FD6 E@ 28C66 E@ 2 D92C65 k2 9C67lQ9EEADi^^2A?6HD]4@>^AC@;64ED^;2?F2CJe42D6DQm9:DE@CJ @7 E96 6G6?EDk^2m[ H9:49 H6C6 3C@2542DE 2C@F?5 E96 8=@36] p?5 E96 k2 9C67lQ9EEADi^^2A?6HD]4@>^2CE:4=6^42A:E@=C:@E;2?e2??:G6CD2CJA@=:46A=2BF67e75bh3cbf4bbh72h77cffb`g2f5be6aQm@77:4:2= A=2BF6k^2m 9@?@C:?8 E96 A@=:46 H9@ 5676?565 E96 r2A:E@= 92D ?6G6C 366? 9F?8]k^Am

    kAmx?DE625[ E96 52J 5:DA=2J65 E96 5:G:D:@?D E92E DE:== 567:?6 (2D9:?8E@?[ 2?5 E96 4@F?ECJ[ 2?5 E96 (9:E6 w@FD6 :ED6=7 :DDF65 2 8=@DDJ ?6H C6A@CE H:E9 :ED @H? C6G:D65 9:DE@CJ @7 H92E 92AA6?65]k^Am

    kAm%CF>A[ 5FC:?8 k2 9C67lQ9EEADi^^2A?6HD]4@>^2CE:4=6^ECF>A9@FD6C6AF3=:42?D>66E:?8<6??65J46?E6C25gf_d62aag2g2cdh`def73d`7gf653bQm2 =6?8E9J >@C?:?8 DA6649k^2m E@ w@FD6 #6AF3=:42?D 4@?G6?:?8 2H2J 7C@> E96 r2A:E@= 2E E96 k2 9C67lQ9EEADi^^2A?6HD]4@>^2CE:4=6^ECF>A<6??65J46?E6C4@?8C6DDC6AF3=:42?Dbc4cggfa47b2d4766hhe242fb64f`c`7QmC63C2?565 z6??65J r6?E6Ck^2m ?@H 42CCJ:?8 9:D @H? ?2>6[ D9:7E65 3=2>6 7@C y2?] e @?E@ E96 C:@E6CD E96>D6=G6D]k^Am

    kAm%96 AC6D:56?E D2:5 96 925 :?E6?565 @?=J 7@C 9:D DFAA@CE6CD E@ 8@ “A62467F==J 2?5 A2EC:@E:42==J” E@ 4@?7C@?E r@?8C6DD 2D :E 46CE:7:65 q:56?’D H:?] w6 3=2>65 E96 >65:2 7@C 7@4FD:?8 @? @E96C A2CED @7 9:D DA6649 E92E 52J]k^Am

    kAmpE E96 D2>6 E:>6[ s6>@4C2ED 96=5 E96:C @H? >@C?:?8 >66E:?8 2E E96 r2A:E@=[ C64@?G6?:?8 >6>36CD @7 E96 k2 9C67lQ9EEADi^^2A?6HD]4@>^2CE:4=6^;2?F2CJe7:?2=962C:?8:?G6DE:82E:@?HC2AD_3463hdgae4`4gbe_ab5ag`_44364442Qmw@FD6 4@>>:EE66 E92E :?G6DE:82E65k^2m E96 y2?] e[ a_a`[ 2EE24< 7@C 2 A2?6= 5:D4FDD:@?] #642==:?8 E96 9:DE@CJ @7 E96 52J 😀 :>A@CE2?E[ E96J D2:5[ 😕 @C56C E@ AC6G6?E H92E #6A] y2>:6 #2D<:?[ s|5][ H2C?65 H2D E96 v~!’D “~CH6==:2? AC@;64E @7 7@C86EE:?8]”k^Am

    kAmp?5 E96 7@C>6C =6256C @7 E96 >:=:E2?E !C@F5 q@JD[ k2 9C67lQ9EEADi^^2A?6HD]4@>^2CE:4=6^6?C:BF6E2CC:@42A:E@=C:@ED65:E:@FD4@?DA:C24JD6?E6?4:?852e_aaa3b6`6dch_a53a3333a`h54b73Qmt?C:BF6 %2CC:@k^2m[ DF>>@?65 A6@A=6 7@C 2 >:552J >2C49 C6EC24:?8 E96 C:@E6CD’ DE6AD 7C@> E96 (9:E6 w@FD6 E@ E96 r2A:E@=[ E9:D E:>6 E@ 9@?@C %CF>A DFAA@CE6C k2 9C67lQ9EEADi^^2A?6HD]4@>^2CE:4=6^2D9=:3233:EEHC@?87F=562E9D6EE=6>6?E42A:E@=C:@Eh7a6e_7h546_`abf2`6fgaf`477ga7e2QmpD9=: q233:EEk^2m 2?5 @E96CD H9@ 5:65 😕 E96 y2?] e D:686 2?5 :ED 27E6C>2E9] |@C6 E92? `__ A6@A=6 82E96C65[ :?4=F5:?8 q233:EE’D >@E96C]k^Am

    kAm%2CC:@ 2?5 @E96CD 2C6 AFEE:?8 AC6DDFC6 @? E96 %CF>A 25>:?:DEC2E:@? E@ AF?:D9 @77:4:2=D H9@ :?G6DE:82E65 2?5 AC@D64FE65 E96 y2?] e C:@E6CD] w6 H2D k2 9C67lQ9EEADi^^2A?6HD]4@>^2CE:4=6^6?C:BF6E2CC:@42A:E@=C:@ED65:E:@FD4@?DA:C24JD6?E6?4:?852e_aaa3b6`6dch_a53a3333a`h54b73QmD6?E6?465 E@ aa J62CD 😕 AC:D@?k^2m 7@C D65:E:@FD 4@?DA:C24J 7@C @C496DEC2E:?8 E96 y2?] e 2EE24<[ 2?5 96 😀 2>@?8 >@C6 E92? `[d__ 5676?52?ED H9@ D2H E96:C 492C86D 5C@AA65 H96? %CF>A :DDF65 2 DH66A:?8 A2C5@? @? 9:D C6EFC? E@ E96 (9:E6 w@FD6 =2DE J62C]k^Am

    kAm“%96J D9@F=5 36 7:C65 2?5 AC@D64FE65[” %2CC:@ E@=5 E96 4C@H5 367@C6 E96J 2CC:G65 2E E96 r2A:E@=[ 4@?7C@?E65 2=@?8 E96 H2J 3J 4@F?E6CAC@E6DE6CD[ 2?5 D2?8 E96 }2E:@?2= p?E96>]k^Am

    kAm%96 (9:E6 w@FD6 😕 :ED ?6H C6A@CE 9:89=:89E65 E96 H@C< E96 AC6D:56?E 92D 2=C625J 5@?6 E@ 7C66 E9@D6 492C865 2?5 EFC?65 E96 3=2>6 @? s6>@4C2ED 7@C 46CE:7J:?8 q:56?’D 6=64E:@? G:4E@CJ]k^Am

    kAmt49@6D @7 d J62CD 28@k^Am

    kAm%9:D >:=6DE@?6 2??:G6CD2CJ 42CC:65 649@6D @7 E96 5:776C6?46D E92E 6CFAE65 E92E 52J]k^Am

    kAmqFE :E F?7@=5D H9:=6 2EE6?E:@? 😀 7@4FD65 6=D6H96C6[ A2CE:4F=2C=J 27E6C E96 &]$] >:=:E2CJ’D DEF??:?8 42AEFC6 @7 ‘6?6KF6=2’D AC6D:56?E[ k2 9C67lQ9EEADi^^2A?6HD]4@>^2CE:4=6^>25FC@G6?6KF6=2ECF>A4C:>:?2=42D6`b`7dh6d`f44gb`c2db4g5246ab_5bagQm}:4@=áD |25FC@k^2m[ 2?5 %CF>A’D A=2?D E@ k2 9C67lQ9EEADi^^2A?6HD]4@>^2CE:4=6^G6?6KF6=2>25FC@ECF>A>:=:E2CJ@A6C2E:@?gd_c`2`64_b3276gbh3fgd2hd`eh5ehcQmE2<6 @G6C E96 4@F?ECJk^2m 2?5 AC@A FA :ED G2DE @:= :?5FDECJ[ 2 DEC:<:?8 ?6H 6C2 @7 k2 9C67lQ9EEADi^^2A?6HD]4@>^2CE:4=6^>@?C@65@4EC:?6G6?6KF6=2ECF>AH6DE6C?96>:DA96C6>25FC@6ddg`5f`62`d7a73_ace`6fc24e3_g42Qmp>6C:42? 6IA2?D:@?:D>k^2m]k^Am

    kAm“%96D6 A6@A=6 😕 E96 25>:?:DEC2E:@?[ E96J H2?E E@ =64EFC6 E96 H@C=5 23@FE 56>@4C24J H96? E96J’C6 F?56C>:?:?8 E96 CF=6 @7 =2H 2E 9@>6[ 2D H6 2== H:== 36 A@H6C7F==J C6>:?565[” w@FD6 s6>@4C2E:4 =6256C w2<66> y677C:6D @7 }6H *@C< D2:5 @? E96 6G6 @7 E96 2??:G6CD2CJ]k^Am

    kAmw@FD6 $A62<6C |:<6 y@9?D@? @7 {@F:D:2?2[ C6DA@?5:?8 E@ C6BF6DED 7@C 4@>>6?E 23@FE k2 9C67lQ9EEADi^^2A?6HD]4@>^2CE:4=6^A@=:46>6>@C:2=42A:E@=C:@E=2HDF:Ea_e7fb7hdc5feh3_d76d`a54g_6`3_d_QmE96 56=2J 😕 92?8:?8k^2m E96 A=2BF6 9@?@C:?8 E96 A@=:46 2E E96 r2A:E@=[ 2D C6BF:C65 3J =2H[ D2:5 😕 2 DE2E6>6?E @? E96 6G6 @7 E96 2??:G6CD2CJ E92E E96 DE2EFE6 “:D ?@E :>A=6>6?E23=6[” 2?5 AC@A@D65 2=E6C?2E:G6D “2=D@ 5@ ?@E 4@>A=J H:E9 E96 DE2EFE6]”k^Am

    kAmpE E96 >@C?:?8 962C:?8 2E E96 r2A:E@=[ =2H>2<6CD 962C5 7C@> 2 C2?86 @7 H:E?6DD6D 2?5 @E96CD — :?4=F5:?8 7@C>6C &]$] r2A:E@= !@=:46 @77:46C (:?DE@? !:?86@?[ H9@ D2:5 2D 2 <:5 96 2=H2JD 5C62>65 @7 36:?8 2 4@A] qFE @? E92E 52J[ 96 E9@F89E 96 H2D 8@:?8 E@ 5:6 😕 E96 >2J96> @? E96 DE6AD @7 E96 r2A:E@=]k^Am

    kAm“x :>A=@C6 p>6C:42 E@ ?@E 7@C86E H92E 92AA6?65[” 96 D2:5[ “x 36=:6G6 E96 G2DE >2;@C:EJ @7 p>6C:42?D 92G6 D@ >F49 >@C6 😕 4@>>@? E92? H92E D6A2C2E6D FD]”k^Am

    kAmp=D@ E6DE:7J:?8 H2D !2>6=2 w6>A9:==[ 2 C:@E6C H9@ C67FD65 %CF>A’D A2C5@?[ 3=2>65 E96 AC6D:56?E 7@C E96 G:@=6?46 2?5 D:=6?465 E96 C@@> 2D D96 2A@=@8:K65 E@ E96 @77:46C D:EE:?8 2=@?8D:56 96C 2E E96 H:E?6DD E23=6[ DE:7=:?8 E62CD]k^Am

    kAm“x 42?’E 2==@H E96> ?@E 36 C64@8?:K65[ E@ 36 =:65 23@FE[” w6>A9:== D2:5 23@FE E96 A@=:46 H9@ D96 D2:5 2=D@ D2G65 96C =:76 2D D96 76== 2?5 H2D EC2>A=65 @? 3J E96 >@3] “&?E:= x 42? D66 E92E A=2BF6 86E FA E96C6[ x’> ?@E 5@?6]”k^Am

    kAmp>@?8 E9@D6 E6DE:7J:?8 H6C6 7@C>6C #6A] p52> z:?K:?86C @7 x==:?@:D[ H9@ 2=@?8 H:E9 7@C>6C #6A] {:K r96?6J @7 (J@>:?8 H6C6 E96 EH@ #6AF3=:42?D @? E96 A2?6= E92E :?G6DE:82E65 %CF>A’D 677@CED E@ @G6CEFC? q:56?’D H:?] r96?6J[ H9@ =@DE 96C @H? C66=64E:@? 3:5 E@ 2 %CF>A324<65 492==6?86C[ 5:5 ?@E 2AA62C] $A62<6C t>6C:E2 }2?4J !6=@D: FC865 E96 4@F?ECJ E@ EFC? 2H2J 7C@> 2 4F=EFC6 @7 =:6D 2?5 G:@=6?46 E92E D96 D2:5 D6?5D E96 HC@?8 >6DD286 23@FE 56>@4C24J]k^Am

    kAm#6AF3=:42? #6A] q2CCJ {@F56C>:=< @7 v6@C8:2[ H9@ 92D 366? E2AA65 3J y@9?D@? E@ =625 2 ?6H 4@>>:EE66 E@ AC@36 @E96C E96@C:6D 23@FE H92E 92AA6?65 @? y2?] e[ C6;64E65 %F6D52J’D D6DD:@? 2D 2 “A2CE:D2? 6I6C4:D6” 56D:8?65 E@ 9FCE %CF>A 2?5 9:D 2==:6D]k^Am

    kAm|2?J #6AF3=:42?D k2 9C67lQ9EEADi^^2A?6HD]4@>^2CE:4=6^ECF>A496?6J42A:E@=2EE24<AC@D64FE:@?_2232f2g5_““dc`_4dccbfc55_5df7QmC6;64E E96 ?2CC2E:G6k^2m E92E %CF>A DA2C<65 E96 y2?] e 2EE24<[ 2?5 y@9?D@?[ 367@C6 96 3642>6 E96 w@FD6 DA62<6C[ 925 =65 492==6?86D E@ E96 a_a_ 6=64E:@?] w6 H2D 2>@?8 D@>6 `b_ v~! =2H>2<6CD G@E:?8 E92E 52J E@ C6;64E E96 AC6D:56?E:2= C6DF=ED 7C@> D@>6 DE2E6D]k^Am

    kAmx?DE625[ E96J 92G6 7@4FD65 @? D64FC:EJ =2AD6D 2E E96 r2A:E@= — 7C@> E96 E:>6 :E E@@< 7@C E96 }2E:@?2= vF2C5 E@ 2CC:G6 @? E96 D46?6 E@ E96 72:=FC6 @7 E96 A@=:46 42?:?6 F?:ED E@ 5:D4@G6C E96 A:A6 3@>3D 7@F?5 E92E 52J @FED:56 #6AF3=:42? 2?5 s6>@4C2E:4 A2CEJ 9625BF2CE6CD] %96 uqx 2CC6DE65 2 ‘:C8:?:2 >2? DFDA64E65 @7 A=24:?8 E96 A:A6 3@>3D[ 2?5 96 k2 9C67lQ9EEADi^^2A?6HD]4@>^2CE:4=6^A:A63@>3;2?e73:`dfgdc5253g`4c5feebddbc`a75`hbgbQmE@=5 :?G6DE:82E@CD =2DE >@?E9k^2m 96 36=:6G65 D@>6@?6 ?66565 E@ DA62< FA 7@C E9@D6 H9@ 36=:6G65 E96 a_a_ 6=64E:@? H2D DE@=6?[ 2FE9@C:E:6D D2J]k^Am

    kAm“%96 r2A:E@= r@>A=6I 😀 ?@ >@C6 D64FC6 E@52J E92? :E H2D @? y2?F2CJ e[” {@F56C>:=< D2:5 😕 2 D@4:2= >65:2 A@DE] “|J $6=64E $F34@>>:EE66 C6>2:?D 4@>>:EE65 E@ EC2?DA2C6?4J 2?5 244@F?E23:=:EJ 2?5 6?DFC:?8 E96 D64FC:EJ 72:=FC6D E92E @44FCC65 @? y2?F2CJ e 2?5 E96 A2CE:D2? :?G6DE:82E:@? E92E 7@==@H65 ?6G6C 92AA6?D 282:?]”k^Am

    kAmpE =62DE 7:G6 A6@A=6 5:65 😕 E96 r2A:E@= D:686 2?5 :ED 27E6C>2E9[ :?4=F5:?8 q233:EE[ H9@ H2D D9@E 2?5 <:==65 3J A@=:46 H9:=6 ECJ:?8 E@ 4=:>3 E9C@F89 E96 H:?5@H @7 2 5@@C ?62C E96 w@FD6 492>36C[ 2?5 r2A:E@= !@=:46 ~77:46C k2 9C67lQ9EEADi^^2A?6HD]4@>^2CE:4=6^A@=:E:4D8@G6C?>6?E2?5A@=:E:4D3chfg__g_d26526cg3fa34cgbf3h__caQmqC:2? $:4@3] $6G6C2= =2H 6?7@C46>6?E A6CD@??6= 5:65 =2E6C[ D@>6 3J DF:4:56]k^Am

    kAm%96 yFDE:46 s6A2CE>6?E k2 9C67lQ9EEADi^^2A?6HD]4@>^ECF>A6=64E:@?a_a_:?5:4E>6?EQm:?5:4E65 %CF>Ak^2m @? 7@FC 4@F?ED 😕 2 4@?DA:C24J E@ 567C2F5 G@E6CD H:E9 9:D 4=2:>D @7 2 C:8865 6=64E:@? 😕 E96 CF?FA E@ E96 y2?] e 2EE24<]k^Am

    kAmu@C>6C yFDE:46 s6A2CE>6?E DA64:2= 4@F?D6= y24< $>:E9 k2 9C67lQ9EEADi^^2A?6HD]4@>^2CE:4=6^ECF>A;24<D>:E9;2?e4@?8C6DDdbf743gefb6bgda_a4bdc2b6gbghf`hcQmE@=5 =2H>2<6CD =2DE >@?E9k^2m E92E E96 C:@E 2E E96 r2A:E@= “5@6D ?@E 92AA6?” H:E9@FE %CF>A] w6 6?565 FA k2 9C67lQ9EEADi^^2A?6HD]4@>^2CE:4=6^ECF>A42A:E@=C:@E;FDE:4656A2CE>6?E;24<D>:E95e`fa47hg5g6_b6_hhdf`4h_gaefcde4Qm232?5@?:?8 E96 42D6k^2m @?46 %CF>A H2D C66=64E65 AC6D:56?E[ 2596C:?8 E@ 56A2CE>6?E 8F:56=:?6D 282:?DE AC@D64FE:?8 2 D:EE:?8 AC6D:56?E]k^Am

    kAm%CF>A[ H9@ ?6G6C >256 :E E@ E96 r2A:E@= E92E 52J 2D 96 9F?<6C65 5@H? 2E E96 (9:E6 w@FD6[ H2D :>A624965 3J E96 w@FD6 @? E96 D@=6 492C86 @7 92G:?8 :?4:E65 E96 :?DFCC64E:@?] %96 $6?2E6 24BF:EE65 9:> 27E6C E@A v~! D6?2E@CD D2:5 E96J 36=:6G65 E96 >2EE6C H2D 36DE =67E E@ E96 4@FCED]k^Am

    kAmp9625 @7 E96 a_ac 6=64E:@?[ E96 $FAC6>6 r@FCE CF=65 k2 9C67lQ9EEADi^^HHH]2A]@C8^?6HD9:89=:89ED^6=64E:@?D^a_ac^DFAC6>64@FCECF=6D6IAC6D:56?ED92G63C@25:>>F?:EJ5:>>:?8492?46@72AC66=64E:@?ECF>AEC:2=Qm6IAC6D:56?ED 92G6 3C@25 :>>F?:EJk^2m 7C@> AC@D64FE:@?]k^Am

    kAmpDD@4:2E65 !C6DD HC:E6CD (:== (6:DD6CE[ y@6J r2AA6==6EE: 2?5 v2CJ u:6=5D 4@?EC:3FE65 E@ E9:D C6A@CE]k^Am

    [ad_2]

    By LISA MASCARO – AP Congressional Correspondent

    Source link

  • Michigan Teachers Weaving Lessons on Jan. 6 Uprising Into History Classes

    [ad_1]

    Ask any history teacher in Michigan how their lessons could be better and they will tell you that they need to incorporate more current events into the curriculum, East Kentwood High School history teacher Matt Vreisman insists.

    State standards require social studies teachers to cover pre-Columbian history to the present, and incorporating modern historical events — such as the Jan. 6, 2021 insurrection — is a challenge, adds Whitehall High School history teacher Brian Milliron.

    Though Tuesday is the five-year anniversary of the event, Vriesman, Milliron and other teachers found a way to weave the insurrection into their advanced placement history classes months ago when they taught about the American Revolution, the establishment of the Constitution and the contentious presidential election in 1800.

    John Adams, the nation’s second president and a Federalist, was the incumbent candidate but lost to Thomas Jefferson, the nation’s third president and the Democratic-Republican Party candidate. It was the nation’s first exchange of presidential power between rival political parties, and it was peaceful, and that established a precedent for a peaceful change of power every election since.

    It’s during that lesson that Vreisman and Milliron teach their students about the anomaly after the 2020 election, when then-incumbent Republican President Donald Trump lost to Democrat Joe Biden and violence erupted at the U.S. Capitol building on Jan. 6, 2021, as members of Congress met to certify the election results.

    Milliron asks junior and senior students in his class what they remember and then fills in the blanks about what they don’t know.

    “By connecting the present day event that kids literally saw to the stuff in their curriculum it helps them understand why we have a peaceful transfer of power and the negative effects when we don’t,” said Milliron.

    Vriesman, who was the 2023 National History Teacher of the Year, also asks his students what they know about Jan. 6, shows them a PBS documentary about the day, talks about democracies that have failed throughout history and asks them to write a reflection about why a peaceful transition is important to a democracy.

    “Connecting historical content to current events gives students authentic practice evaluating evidence, recognizing different viewpoints, and disagreeing respectfully about the most relevant issues of today,” said Vriesman.

    He regularly weaves in major events that occurred during his students’ lifetimes that connect to different parts of American history.

    “Our goal as social studies is to create informed citizens who are ready to engage in matters of substance. And current events hook students so much more.”

    Michigan’s most recent curriculum standards, issued in 2019-20, became less prescriptive on the topics teachers are expected to teach so it’s likely many history and government teachers are weaving Jan. 6 into their lessons, said Nick Orlowski, executive director of the Michigan Council for History Education. At the same time, standards require teachers to cover wide time frames of history, so there is a lot to cover.

    The American History Association recently issued a report that touched on how politics affects history instruction, Orlowski said.

    “It showed that teachers are teaching from a neutral stance,” said Orlowski, adding that many teachers build inquiry into lessons — where students are presented with a historical question and do the work of historians. “They gather sources on the topic to reach their own conclusion. That seems to be how teachers are teaching. They are not bringing their own politics into the classroom.”

    Vriesman is working to help other teachers have tools to incorporate contemporary history into their lesson plans. In November, he launched a nonprofit, Empowering Histories, which provides free, inquiry-based history lessons to teachers across the country.

    This is important, Vriesman said, because scholarship settled long ago about how race, racism and slavery shaped American institutions is now being framed as “opinions” or “one side of the story.” He noted that 20 states have recently passed laws restricting classroom discussions of race or history and most teachers said in a poll that political pressures lead them to modify lessons.

    “Historians and the public are not having the same conversation,” said Vriesman. “Within the academic field, certain truths about the past are not up for debate. But in many communities, those same truths are framed as controversial. That disconnect has real consequences in classrooms. It leaves teachers without support, and students without the tools they need to analyze evidence, evaluate claims, and make informed contributions to our democracy.”

    This story was originally published by Bridge Michigan and distributed through a partnership with The Associated Press.

    Copyright 2026 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

    Photos You Should See – December 2025

    [ad_2]

    Associated Press

    Source link

  • Jan. 6 plaque made to honor law enforcement. It’s nowhere to be found at the Capitol

    [ad_1]

    WASHINGTON — Approaching the fifth anniversary of the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the Capitol, the official plaque honoring the police who defended democracy that day is nowhere to be found.

    It’s not on display at the Capitol, as is required by law. Its whereabouts aren’t publicly known, though it’s believed to be in storage.

    House Speaker Mike Johnson, a Louisiana Republican, has yet to formally unveil the plaque. And the Trump administration’s Department of Justice is seeking to dismiss a police officers’ lawsuit asking that it be displayed as intended. The Architect of the Capitol, which was responsible for obtaining and displaying the plaque, said in light of the federal litigation, it cannot comment.

    Determined to preserve the nation’s history, some 100 members of Congress, mostly Democrats, have taken it upon themselves to memorialize the moment. For months, they’ve mounted poster board-style replicas of the Jan. 6 plaque outside their office doors, resulting in a Capitol complex awash with makeshift remembrances.

    “On behalf of a grateful Congress, this plaque honors the extraordinary individuals who bravely protected and defended this symbol of democracy on Jan. 6, 2021,” reads the faux bronze stand-in for the real thing. “Their heroism will never be forgotten.”

    In Washington, a capital city lined with monuments to the nation’s history, the plaque was intended to become a simple but permanent marker, situated near the Capitol’s west front, where some of the most violent fighting took place as rioters breached the building.

    But in its absence, the missing plaque makes way for something else entirely — a culture of forgetting.

    Visitors can pass through the Capitol without any formal reminder of what happened that day, when a mob of President Donald Trump’s supporters stormed the building trying to overturn the Republican’s 2020 reelection defeat to Democrat Joe Biden. With memory left unchecked, it allows new narratives to swirl and revised histories to take hold.

    Five years ago, the jarring scene watched the world over was declared an “insurrection” by the then-GOP leader of the Senate, while the House GOP leader at the time called it his “saddest day” in Congress. But those condemnations have faded.

    Trump calls it a “day of love.” And Johnson, who was among those lawmakers challenging the 2020 election results, is now the House speaker.

    “The question of January 6 remains – democracy was on the guillotine — how important is that event in the overall sweep of 21st century U.S. history,” said Douglas Brinkley, a professor of history at Rice University and noted scholar.

    “Will January 6 be seen as the seminal moment when democracy was in peril?” he asked. Or will it be remembered as “kind of a weird one-off?”

    “There’s not as much consensus on that as one would have thought on the fifth anniversary,” he said.

    At least five people died in the riot and its aftermath, including Trump supporter Ashli Babbitt, who was fatally shot by police while trying to climb through a window toward the House chamber. More than 140 law enforcement officers were wounded, some gravely, and several died later, some by suicide.

    All told, some 1,500 people were charged in the Capitol attack, among the largest federal prosecutions in the nation’s history. When Trump returned to power in January 2025, he pardoned all of them within hours of taking office.

    Unlike the twin light beams that commemorated the Sept. 11, 2001, attack or the stand-alone chairs at the Oklahoma City bombing site memorial, the failure to recognize Jan. 6 has left a gap not only in memory but in helping to stitch the country back together.

    “That’s why you put up a plaque,” said Rep. Mary Gay Scanlon, D-Pa. “You respect the memory and the service of the people involved.”

    The speaker’s office over the years has suggested it was working on installing the plaque, but it declined to respond to a request for further comment.

    Lawmakers approved the plaque in March 2022 as part of a broader government funding package. The resolution said the U.S. “owes its deepest gratitude to those officers,” and it set out instructions for an honorific plaque listing the names of officers “who responded to the violence that occurred.” It gave a one-year deadline for installation at the Capitol.

    This summer, two officers who fought the mob that day sued over the delay.

    “By refusing to follow the law and honor officers as it is required to do, Congress encourages this rewriting of history,” said the claim by officers Harry Dunn and Daniel Hodges. “It suggests that the officers are not worthy of being recognized, because Congress refuses to recognize them.”

    The Justice Department is seeking to have the case dismissed. U.S. Attorney Jeanine Pirro and others argued Congress “already has publicly recognized the service of law enforcement personnel” by approving the plaque and displaying it wouldn’t alleviate the problems they claim to face from their work.

    “It is implausible,” the Justice Department attorneys wrote, to suggest installation of the plaque “would stop the alleged death threats they claim to have been receiving.”

    The department also said the plaque is required to include the names of “all law enforcement officers” involved in the response that day — some 3,600 people.

    Lawmakers who’ve installed replicas of the plaque outside their offices said it’s important for the public to know what happened.

    “There are new generations of people who are just growing up now who don’t understand how close we came to losing our democracy on Jan 6, 2021,” said Rep. Jamie Raskin, D-Md., a member of the Jan. 6 committee, which was opposed by GOP leadership but nevertheless issued a nearly 1,000-page report investigating the run-up to the attack and the attempt to overturn the 2020 election.

    Raskin envisions the Capitol one day holding tours around what happened. “People need to study that as an essential part of American history,” he said.

    “Think about the dates in American history that we know only by the dates: There’s the 4th of July. There’s December 7th. There’s 9/11. And there’s January 6th,” said Rep. Zoe Lofgren, D-calif., who also served on the committee and has a plaque outside her office.

    “They really saved my life, and they saved the democracy and they deserve to be thanked for it,” she said.

    But as time passes, there are no longer bipartisan memorial services for Jan. 6. On Tuesday, the Democrats will reconvene members from the Jan. 6 committee for a hearing to “examine ongoing threats to free and fair elections,” House Democratic Leader Hakeem Jeffries of New York announced. It’s unlikely Republicans will participate.

    The Republicans under Johnson have tapped Rep. Barry Loudermilk of Georgia to stand up their own special committee to uncover what the speaker calls the “full truth” of what happened. They’re planning a hearing this month.

    “We should stop this silliness of trying to whitewash history — it’s not going to happen,” said Rep. Joe Morelle, D-N.Y., who helped lead the effort to display the replica plaques.

    “I was here that day so I’ll never forget,” he said. “I think that Americans will not forget what happened.”

    The number of makeshift plaques that fill the halls is a testimony to that remembrance, he said.

    Instead of one plaque, he said, they’ve “now got 100.”

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Guinea’s junta leader is confirmed president-elect after first vote since a 2021 coup

    [ad_1]

    CONAKRY, Guinea — The Supreme Court in Guinea on Sunday upheld the election victory of Gen. Mamadi Doumbouya, cementing the junta leader’s transition to a democratically elected president four years after staging a coup in the West African nation.

    Doumbouya won the country’s first election since the 2021 coup after polling 86.7% of the votes, according to the General Directorate of Elections. His victory, which had been predicted by analysts, was confirmed by the Supreme Court in the capital Conakry.

    “Today, there are neither winners nor losers. There is only one Guinea, united and indivisible,” Doumbouya said in a broadcast late Sunday, calling on citizens to “build a new Guinea, a Guinea of ​​peace, justice, shared prosperity, and fully assumed political and economic sovereignty.”

    Yero Baldé, the runner-up who won 6.59% of the vote, had filed a petition accusing the electoral body of manipulating the results in Doumbouya’s favor. But authorities said he withdrew the petition a day before the Supreme Court verdict.

    The Dec. 28 election was held under a new constitution that revoked a ban on military leaders running for office and extended the presidential mandate from five years to seven years.

    Critics say Doumbouya has clamped down on political opponents and dissent since the 2021 coup, leaving him with no major opposition among the eight other candidates in the race.

    The weakened opposition “focused attention on Mamadi Doumbouya as the only key figure capable of ensuring the continuity of the state,” said N’Faly Guilavogui, a Guinean political analyst. “Guineans are waiting to see what efforts he will make to ensure political stability and reconciliation,” Guilavogui added.

    Despite the country’s rich mineral resources including the world’s biggest exporter of bauxite, which is used to make aluminum, more than half of its 15 million people are experiencing record levels of poverty and food insecurity, according to the World Food Program.

    The junta’s most important initiative has been a mega-mining project at Simandou, the world’s largest iron ore deposit. The 75% Chinese-owned project began production in December after decades of delays.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • In U.S. plans for Venezuela, restoration of democracy takes a backseat, at least for now

    [ad_1]

    Secretary of State Marco Rubio, pictured during a Saturday press conference at Mar-a-Lago, said on discussing an election in Venezuela is premature because more pressing priorities in the country need to be addressed first. Photo by Nicole Combeau/UPI

    Secretary of State Marco Rubio, pictured during a Saturday press conference at Mar-a-Lago, said on discussing an election in Venezuela is premature because more pressing priorities in the country need to be addressed first. Photo by Nicole Combeau/UPI

    In a press conference Saturday detailing the operation to capture Venezuelan strongman Nicolás Maduro and U.S. plans to “run” the country and rebuild its oil industry, there was one word President Donald Trump never used: Democracy.

    Trump’s comments, detailing negotiations with a hardcore regime figure, Delcy Rodríguez, and dismissing opposition leader and Nobel laureate Maria Corina Machado as a “nice woman” who does not have her country’s “respect,” shocked Venezuelans and others who wanted to see a restoration of democracy in the South American nation.

    Trump also did not mention the prospects of elections or a role for Edmundo Gonzalez, the opposition candidate widely believed to have won last year’s Venezuelan presidential election, whom the U.S. government officially recognized as president-elect.

    The president did mention the U.S. would “run” Venezuela until a “judicious” transition takes place, but provided little clarity on what that would look like.

    On Sunday, Secretary of State Marco Rubio, a Miami native and longtime champion of the Venezuelan opposition’s efforts to overthrow Maduro, made it clear that in negotiations with Venezuelan regime figures, U.S. officials are prioritizing stability in the South American country and U.S. national security objectives, at least in the short term.

    “We all wish to see a bright future for Venezuela, a transition to democracy. These are things I still care about. We still care about. But what we’re talking about is what happens over the next two, three weeks, two, three months, and how that ties to the national interests of the United States,” he said on NBC’s Meet the Press.

    “I would argue that democracy in Venezuela is a U.S. national interest,” said Eric Farnsworth, a former State Department official who is a senior associate with the Americas Program at the Center for Strategic and International Studies. “What gives me optimism is that Rubio actually is now in charge of the effort, and so he gets it. From his days in the Senate, he has been a fierce advocate for democracy in Venezuela, and a friend of Maria Corina.”

    Still, the transactional tone of Trump’s remarks and what some see as his dismissing Machado have raised fears in South Florida, the home of the largest Venezuelan community, that the goal of a democratic transition might get lost along the way – if it was ever an administration goal.

    “It was incredibly disturbing that President Trump doesn’t apparently plan to help a transition to the democratically elected Edmundo González and María Corina Machado’s opposition party, and seems to have only gone through this process to exploit Venezuela’s oil — which would be incredibly disappointing to the people I represent,” said Democratic U.S. Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz of Broward County.

    The congresswoman said Venezuelans would feel more confident about the road ahead had Trump suggested the need for another election or talks with Machado. “He didn’t even mention the word democracy in his press conference,” she said.

    U.S. priorities

    In interviews on morning television news shows, Rubio spoke of Machado and Gonzalez with admiration, but dismissed talks of future elections in Venezuela as “premature” and hinted that it was a problem that both opposition leaders are apparently out of the country.

    “María Corina Machado’s fantastic,” he said on NBC’s Meet the Press, “but unfortunately the vast majority of the opposition is no longer present inside of Venezuela.” Machado’s whereabouts are unknown, and she is likely outside the country after receiving the Nobel Peace Prize in Norway in October. González is exiled in Spain.

    “Ultimately, Rubio insisted, “we care about elections, we care about democracy. We care about all of that. But the number one thing we care about is the safety, security, well-being and prosperity of the United States.”

    Rubio also attempted to clarify that “running” Venezuela did not mean U.S. boots on the ground or an intervention, but “running” U.S. policy to pressure the remaining elements of the Maduro government, who are still in control of the country, to address several administration priorities.

    “We want drug trafficking to stop,” he said on CBS’s Face the Nation. “We want no more gang members to come our way. We don’t want to see the Iranian and, by the way, Cuban presence…. We want the oil industry in that country not to go to the benefit of pirates and adversaries of the United States, but for the benefit of the people.”

    He also seemed to walk back other comments from President Trump suggesting the U.S. was going to take control of Venezuela’s oil facilities.

    “Ultimately, this is not about securing the oilfields,” Rubio told ABC’s This Week. “This is about ensuring that no sanctioned oil can come in and out until they make changes to the governance of that entire industry.”

    Rubio said the administration would continue to use the significant military presence off the coast of Venezuela as leverage to get U.S. priorities addressed, and expected “more compliance and cooperation than we were previously receiving.”

    “Let’s be realistic here,” he told NBC. “What we are focused on right now is all the problems we had when Maduro was there. We are going to give people an opportunity to address those challenges and those problems.”

    Many of those problems were the result of a corrupt regime that remains largely intact. But by choosing to work with Rodriguez, political analysts say, the administration is taking a more pragmatic approach to avoid the kind of power vacuum and lack of security that had haunted past attempts at regime change in other nations.

    Perilous path ahead

    Trying to stabilize Venezuela without the opposition’s direct participation, however, will backfire, experts warn.

    “Any attempt to stabilize Venezuela while sidelining the 2024 [presidential] mandate would immediately face three problems: domestic rejection, international fragmentation and internal regime sabotage,” Benigno Alarcón Deza, an analyst and former director of the Center of Government and Political Studies at Universidad Católica Andrés Bello in Caracas, wrote in Americas Quarterly. “Whatever her administrative role, Rodriguez cannot serve as the foundation of a political transition because she inherits the regime’s original sin: the absence of democratic legitimacy.”

    There is also a chance that Rodriguez, a cunning politician who has presented herself as a technocrat who has revived the Venezuelan oil industry, would not play along or that her grip on power does not hold. For starters, Maduro’s inner circle is intact, and that includes powerful figures like Interior Minister Diosdado Cabello and Defense Minister Vladimir Padrino Lopez, both indicted in the U.S., along with Maduro, on charges of drug trafficking.

    “The question is going to be, how long does Delcy function in this capacity?” said Farnsworth. “ “You still have Padrino Lopez, certainly Diosdado Cabello, they haven’t left. Don’t forget, Diosdado has a $25 million bounty on his head. So you could also see another operation like this against him. I’m not saying it’s going to happen, but all these guys now have to be thinking they could be next.”

    But negotiations with figures close to Maduro — and Trump’s views on Machado — are a hard pill to swallow for many Venezuelan exiles and could create political headaches for the administration in South Florida, where the local Republican congressional delegation has vocally opposed negotiations with the Maduro regime in the past.

    U.S. Rep. María Elvira Salazar of Miami told the Miami Herald she did not believe the administration should be working with Rodríguez, who is under U.S. sanctions.

    “Delcy has been sanctioned by the United States and she said that Maduro is the legitimate president of the country,” Salazar told the Herald. “We cannot work with her.”

    Tensions flared during a press conference on Saturday evening in Doral, home to a large Venezuelan community. Visibly angry at the suggestion by a reporter that he had not supported Machado, U.S. Rep. Mario Díaz-Balart replied: “When have we ever not supported her? Do not put words in my mouth. I am convinced there is going to be a transition and…whether there are new elections or there is a decision to take the old elections, the next democratically elected president of Venezuela is going to be Maria Corina Machado.”

    Salazar also said she was confident the Venezuelan opposition would eventually rise to power.

    “Marco, he said it today, that this is just a transition we’re talking about the next two weeks, the next few months,” she said. “We need to leave the country stabilized for the opposition and for the civil society to take over. We’re doing them a favor. We’re doing them a favor by cleaning up the house.”

    “The good thing,” she added, “is that we have a Miami boy leading this charge.”

    This story was originally published January 4, 2026 at 4:46 PM.

    Nora Gámez Torres

    el Nuevo Herald

    Nora Gámez Torres is the Cuba/U.S.-Latin American policy reporter for el Nuevo Herald and the Miami Herald. She studied journalism and media and communications in Havana and London. She holds a Ph.D. in sociology from City, University of London. Her work has won awards by the Florida Society of News Editors and the Society for Professional Journalists.//Nora Gámez Torres estudió periodismo y comunicación en La Habana y Londres. Tiene un doctorado en sociología y desde el 2014 cubre temas cubanos para el Nuevo Herald y el Miami Herald. También reporta sobre la política de Estados Unidos hacia América Latina. Su trabajo ha sido reconocido con premios de Florida Society of News Editors y Society for Profesional Journalists.

    [ad_2]

    Nora Gámez Torres,Claire Heddles

    Source link

  • In U.S. plans for Venezuela, restoration of democracy takes a backseat, at least for now

    [ad_1]

    Secretary of State Marco Rubio, pictured during a Saturday press conference at Mar-a-Lago, said on discussing an election in Venezuela is premature because more pressing priorities in the country need to be addressed first. Photo by Nicole Combeau/UPI

    Secretary of State Marco Rubio, pictured during a Saturday press conference at Mar-a-Lago, said on discussing an election in Venezuela is premature because more pressing priorities in the country need to be addressed first. Photo by Nicole Combeau/UPI

    In a press conference Saturday detailing the operation to capture Venezuelan strongman Nicolás Maduro and U.S. plans to “run” the country and rebuild its oil industry, there was one word President Donald Trump never used: Democracy.

    Trump’s comments, detailing negotiations with a hardcore regime figure, Delcy Rodríguez, and dismissing opposition leader and Nobel laureate Maria Corina Machado as a “nice woman” who does not have her country’s “respect,” shocked Venezuelans and others who wanted to see a restoration of democracy in the South American nation.

    Trump also did not mention the prospects of elections or a role for Edmundo Gonzalez, the opposition candidate widely believed to have won last year’s Venezuelan presidential election, whom the U.S. government officially recognized as president-elect.

    The president did mention the U.S. would “run” Venezuela until a “judicious” transition takes place, but provided little clarity on what that would look like.

    On Sunday, Secretary of State Marco Rubio, a Miami native and longtime champion of the Venezuelan opposition’s efforts to overthrow Maduro, made it clear that in negotiations with Venezuelan regime figures, U.S. officials are prioritizing stability in the South American country and U.S. national security objectives, at least in the short term.

    “We all wish to see a bright future for Venezuela, a transition to democracy. These are things I still care about. We still care about. But what we’re talking about is what happens over the next two, three weeks, two, three months, and how that ties to the national interests of the United States,” he said on NBC’s Meet the Press.

    “I would argue that democracy in Venezuela is a U.S. national interest,” said Eric Farnsworth, a former State Department official who is a senior associate with the Americas Program at the Center for Strategic and International Studies. “What gives me optimism is that Rubio actually is now in charge of the effort, and so he gets it. From his days in the Senate, he has been a fierce advocate for democracy in Venezuela, and a friend of Maria Corina.”

    Still, the transactional tone of Trump’s remarks and what some see as his dismissing Machado have raised fears in South Florida, the home of the largest Venezuelan community, that the goal of a democratic transition might get lost along the way – if it was ever an administration goal.

    “It was incredibly disturbing that President Trump doesn’t apparently plan to help a transition to the democratically elected Edmundo González and María Corina Machado’s opposition party, and seems to have only gone through this process to exploit Venezuela’s oil — which would be incredibly disappointing to the people I represent,” said Democratic U.S. Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz of Broward County.

    The congresswoman said Venezuelans would feel more confident about the road ahead had Trump suggested the need for another election or talks with Machado. “He didn’t even mention the word democracy in his press conference,” she said.

    U.S. priorities

    In interviews on morning television news shows, Rubio spoke of Machado and Gonzalez with admiration, but dismissed talks of future elections in Venezuela as “premature” and hinted that it was a problem that both opposition leaders are apparently out of the country.

    “María Corina Machado’s fantastic,” he said on NBC’s Meet the Press, “but unfortunately the vast majority of the opposition is no longer present inside of Venezuela.” Machado’s whereabouts are unknown, and she is likely outside the country after receiving the Nobel Peace Prize in Norway in October. González is exiled in Spain.

    “Ultimately, Rubio insisted, “we care about elections, we care about democracy. We care about all of that. But the number one thing we care about is the safety, security, well-being and prosperity of the United States.”

    Rubio also attempted to clarify that “running” Venezuela did not mean U.S. boots on the ground or an intervention, but “running” U.S. policy to pressure the remaining elements of the Maduro government, who are still in control of the country, to address several administration priorities.

    “We want drug trafficking to stop,” he said on CBS’s Face the Nation. “We want no more gang members to come our way. We don’t want to see the Iranian and, by the way, Cuban presence…. We want the oil industry in that country not to go to the benefit of pirates and adversaries of the United States, but for the benefit of the people.”

    He also seemed to walk back other comments from President Trump suggesting the U.S. was going to take control of Venezuela’s oil facilities.

    “Ultimately, this is not about securing the oilfields,” Rubio told ABC’s This Week. “This is about ensuring that no sanctioned oil can come in and out until they make changes to the governance of that entire industry.”

    Rubio said the administration would continue to use the significant military presence off the coast of Venezuela as leverage to get U.S. priorities addressed, and expected “more compliance and cooperation than we were previously receiving.”

    “Let’s be realistic here,” he told NBC. “What we are focused on right now is all the problems we had when Maduro was there. We are going to give people an opportunity to address those challenges and those problems.”

    Many of those problems were the result of a corrupt regime that remains largely intact. But by choosing to work with Rodriguez, political analysts say, the administration is taking a more pragmatic approach to avoid the kind of power vacuum and lack of security that had haunted past attempts at regime change in other nations.

    Perilous path ahead

    Trying to stabilize Venezuela without the opposition’s direct participation, however, will backfire, experts warn.

    “Any attempt to stabilize Venezuela while sidelining the 2024 [presidential] mandate would immediately face three problems: domestic rejection, international fragmentation and internal regime sabotage,” Benigno Alarcón Deza, an analyst and former director of the Center of Government and Political Studies at Universidad Católica Andrés Bello in Caracas, wrote in Americas Quarterly. “Whatever her administrative role, Rodriguez cannot serve as the foundation of a political transition because she inherits the regime’s original sin: the absence of democratic legitimacy.”

    There is also a chance that Rodriguez, a cunning politician who has presented herself as a technocrat who has revived the Venezuelan oil industry, would not play along or that her grip on power does not hold. For starters, Maduro’s inner circle is intact, and that includes powerful figures like Interior Minister Diosdado Cabello and Defense Minister Vladimir Padrino Lopez, both indicted in the U.S., along with Maduro, on charges of drug trafficking.

    “The question is going to be, how long does Delcy function in this capacity?” said Farnsworth. “ “You still have Padrino Lopez, certainly Diosdado Cabello, they haven’t left. Don’t forget, Diosdado has a $25 million bounty on his head. So you could also see another operation like this against him. I’m not saying it’s going to happen, but all these guys now have to be thinking they could be next.”

    But negotiations with figures close to Maduro — and Trump’s views on Machado — are a hard pill to swallow for many Venezuelan exiles and could create political headaches for the administration in South Florida, where the local Republican congressional delegation has vocally opposed negotiations with the Maduro regime in the past.

    U.S. Rep. María Elvira Salazar of Miami told the Miami Herald she did not believe the administration should be working with Rodríguez, who is under U.S. sanctions.

    “Delcy has been sanctioned by the United States and she said that Maduro is the legitimate president of the country,” Salazar told the Herald. “We cannot work with her.”

    Tensions flared during a press conference on Saturday evening in Doral, home to a large Venezuelan community. Visibly angry at the suggestion by a reporter that he had not supported Machado, U.S. Rep. Mario Díaz-Balart replied: “When have we ever not supported her? Do not put words in my mouth. I am convinced there is going to be a transition and…whether there are new elections or there is a decision to take the old elections, the next democratically elected president of Venezuela is going to be Maria Corina Machado.”

    Salazar also said she was confident the Venezuelan opposition would eventually rise to power.

    “Marco, he said it today, that this is just a transition we’re talking about the next two weeks, the next few months,” she said. “We need to leave the country stabilized for the opposition and for the civil society to take over. We’re doing them a favor. We’re doing them a favor by cleaning up the house.”

    “The good thing,” she added, “is that we have a Miami boy leading this charge.”

    This story was originally published January 4, 2026 at 5:46 PM.

    Nora Gámez Torres

    el Nuevo Herald

    Nora Gámez Torres is the Cuba/U.S.-Latin American policy reporter for el Nuevo Herald and the Miami Herald. She studied journalism and media and communications in Havana and London. She holds a Ph.D. in sociology from City, University of London. Her work has won awards by the Florida Society of News Editors and the Society for Professional Journalists.//Nora Gámez Torres estudió periodismo y comunicación en La Habana y Londres. Tiene un doctorado en sociología y desde el 2014 cubre temas cubanos para el Nuevo Herald y el Miami Herald. También reporta sobre la política de Estados Unidos hacia América Latina. Su trabajo ha sido reconocido con premios de Florida Society of News Editors y Society for Profesional Journalists.

    [ad_2]

    Nora Gámez Torres,Claire Heddles

    Source link

  • The real reason golden ages collapse—and how the U.S. can avoid it

    [ad_1]

    While campaigning, President Donald Trump said, “We’re a nation in decline.”

    Now that he’s president, the left agrees.

    “We are witnessing the collapse and implosion of the American empire,” says Cornell West.

    Are the predictors of doom correct? Will America collapse like so many civilizations before us?

    If we don’t learn from history, says historian Johan Norberg, that might happen.

    “It’s a clash within every civilization on whether they should keep going, be open to innovation and progress, or whether they should retreat and decline,” he says in my new video.

    His book, Peak Human: What We Can Learn from History’s Greatest Civilizations, looks at the “golden ages” of Ancient Athens, Ancient Rome, Song China, the Abbasid Dynasty in Baghdad, Renaissance Italy, the Dutch Republic, and the Anglosphere.

    Norberg argues that once people acquire a certain amount of comfort, they say, “‘We want stability, protection, we want someone to take care of us.’…That’s what leads to stagnation.”

    People in power are generally comfortable with that.

    “They’ve built their power on a particular system of production, certain ideas, a particular mentality….Whereas trade, innovation, growth, it’s all about change….What sets these golden ages apart is that, for a period of time, they managed to lift themselves above that and give more people more freedoms. That also allowed them to experiment more and come up with better technologies and raise living standards.”

    Greece once led the world. Rome, too. Not anymore. Why?

    Because people want “safety, stability, protection,” says Norberg. “They slow things down, get that stability, but they also get stagnation and poverty.”

    China experienced a golden age during the Song Dynasty.

    “They had more freedom than other Chinese dynasties….More openness to new ideas from strange places….[Farmers] were allowed to experiment with new grain, new forms of rice from Vietnam, and to trade with others. They came up with constant innovations. It became a very urbanized society that ushered in incredible experiments with iron, steel, textile, machines.”

    The government scrapped laws that had limited what could and couldn’t be sold. They allowed markets to stay open all night (something not allowed before).

    “In traditional Chinese society, people had fixed areas where they were allowed to live and where they had to return after having done a day’s work. People did not mingle and meet people from other classes, other professions….Under the Song Dynasty, the walls were torn down….They began to mingle with one another….They could do more business, listen to concerts, go to religious ceremonies. Eventually, Chinese society realized that this is how you make progress. This is how we become wealthier. When more people meet, when more people exchange goods and services and ideas, they prosper.”

    But after the Mongols invaded, the Chinese banned ocean voyages and foreign trade. They stifled the experimentation that had made them rich.

    “They wanted stability after all this uncertainty and chaos. ‘How do we do that?’…By regulating everything, telling people to stay in their places….They got stability. They also got 500 years of stagnation, 500 years that turned the richest and greatest civilization on the planet to a desperately poor country.”

    If any country is in a golden age today, I would think it’s America, and Norberg agrees.

    “I wouldn’t want to live anywhere else in human history. We have made such remarkable progress when it comes to expanding freedoms, reducing poverty, increasing life expectancy.”

    But the American experiment is now 250 years old. Few golden ages last that long. Once affluent, people want stability, and a government that resists change.

    “That then undermines the innovation that we need to keep golden ages going,” warns Norberg. “If we want a golden age to keep going, we have to fight for it.”

    How?

    “Double down on the institutions of liberal democracy, free markets, and unleash new waves of innovation and of progress. There is still time. We can still save this golden age.”

    COPYRIGHT 2025 BY JFS PRODUCTIONS INC.

    [ad_2]

    John Stossel

    Source link