ReportWire

Tag: Trump

  • Trump’s Pick for Fed Chair Points to Growing Bitcoin-Dollar Synthesis

    [ad_1]

    On Friday, it was revealed that President Trump’s pick to replace Federal Reserve Chairman Jerome Powell in May will be Kevin Warsh, who previously served as a member of the Federal Reserve Board of Governors during the Bush and Obama administrations. The pick has garnered strong attention in the crypto industry, as Warsh has made mixed statements on bitcoin, central bank digital currencies (CBDCs), stablecoins, and blockchain technology over the years.

    While Warsh previously espoused the benefits of CBDCs over stablecoins, he was also an investor in stablecoin startup Basis, which developed a specific type of stablecoin, known as an algorithmic stablecoin, similar to the one involved in the crypto collapse of 2022. Additionally, Warsh was involved in the early days of Bitwise Asset Management, which now operates publicly-traded exchange-traded funds (ETFs) for bitcoin and other crypto assets.

    In terms of bitcoin specifically, Warsh has made remarks that range from neutral to positive. He once told CNBC that bitcoin is effectively gold for anyone under the age of 40. More recently, he defended bitcoin in an interview on Uncommon Knowledge with Peter Robinson, stating, “Bitcoin doesn’t trouble me. I think of it as an important asset that can help inform policy makers when they’re doing things right and wrong. It is not a substitute to the dollar. I think it can often be a very good policeman for policy.”

     

    When you put together Warsh’s comments on bitcoin and stablecoins, it gels with the Trump administration’s policies on crypto, which include the use of stablecoins to reinforce U.S. monetary hegemony and the establishment of a national bitcoin reserve. Warsh’s remarks on bitcoin acting as a method of keeping policymakers in check will also jive with research from Jal Toorey, who has long-argued bitcoin is the ideal basis for mathematician John Nash’s (yes, the one from A Beautiful Mind fame) Ideal Money concept.

    All of this may sound generally positive for bitcoin; however, the reality is the price of the crypto asset initially fell on the news of Warsh’s impending nomination. According to a report in CoinDesk, this was likely due to Warsh’s past remarks that point to a generally more hawkish stance on Fed policy than what was expected from Trump, who has constantly derided Powell for not lowering interest rates. That said, it’s important that the Fed chairman does not have unilateral power over central bank policy.

    Although bitcoin is often touted as a safe haven asset similar to gold, it has more often than not moved as a risk-on asset in times of economic uncertainty, as illustrated by the recent tension around Greenland. Of course, gold itself has also been acting much more like bitcoin when it comes to price volatility lately.

    At the end of the day, it’s still extremely early in terms of central bank interest in bitcoin, with Governor of the Bank of France François Villeroy de Galhau recently revealing that he didn’t know bitcoin has no central issuer during a discussion with Coinbase CEO Brian Armstrong at The World Economic Forum. That said, the Czech National Bank did acquire some bitcoin as part of a pilot program last year, not long after European Central Bank President Christine Lagarde said such activity would never happen.

    It’s difficult to know what Warsh’s exact policy preferences will be once he’s back at the Fed, but his nomination does further the discussion around a potential synergistic relationship between bitcoin and the U.S. dollar. With U.S. debt having reached unsustainable levels and foreign central banks holding more gold than U.S. treasuries for the first time since 1996, one has to wonder if an economic adviser to Russian President Vladimir Putin was right to call out the United States for their alleged crypto-focused plan to maintain monetary dominance in an increasingly digital and seemingly multi-polar world. That said, as the use of Tether stablecoin USDT by the Maduro regime in Venezuela and the Central Bank of Iran has shown, crypto can also be a double-edged sword for the U.S.

    Of course, there’s also the matter of the Trump family fortune now being tied to the success of the crypto industry in the U.S. to consider, with $1.4 billion in crypto profits enjoyed last year amid allegations of unprecedented corruption and pay-to-play schemes. This sort of profiteering could eventually lead to political backlash, as Senate Democrats have repeatedly stated these conflicts of interest need to be addressed in the CLARITY Act.

    [ad_2]

    Kyle Torpey

    Source link

  • Trump’s Cuba oil tariff threat creates new diplomatic challenge for Mexico’s Sheinbaum

    [ad_1]

    MEXICO CITY — President Trump’s plan to slap tariffs on nations that provide oil to Cuba has created a formidable new challenge for Mexican President Claudia Sheinbaum in her efforts to balance Mexico’s interests with White House demands.

    On Friday, Sheinbaum said Mexico would seek a clarification from Washington in a bid to avoid a difficult choice: Halt oil shipments to Cuba, potentially triggering a humanitarian crisis on the island, or face new tariffs on Mexican products exported to the United States.

    Ceasing oil deliveries to Cuba, she warned, could result in a catastrophic scenario — a cutoff in electrical power to hospitals and homes, threatening medical care, food supplies and other essential services across the island, home to 11 million people.

    However, the leftist president signaled that she would not risk the imposition of additional U.S. levies on imports from Mexico, a nation heavily dependent on cross-border trade. “We cannot put our country at risk in terms of tariffs,” Sheinbaum told reporters at her regular morning news conference.

    For a year, Sheinbaum has been fending off Washington’s plans to impose punishing new tariffs on Mexico. Her efforts have mostly succeeded — and she has won warm praise from Trump — but a White House decree targeting oil supplies to Cuba presents a difficult new test.

    On Thursday, Trump issued an executive order establishing potential tariffs on goods from countries “that sell or otherwise provide oil to Cuba,” a step that, Trump said, was intended to protect “U.S. national security and foreign policy from the Cuban regime’s malign actions and policies.”

    Cuban President Miguel Díaz-Canel denounced Trump’s move on social media as a “fascist, criminal and genocidal” plan to “asphyxiate” the Cuban economy, which is already struggling with blackouts and a lack of gasoline, among other shortages.

    Sheinbaum has also been engaged in strenuous efforts to dissuade Trump from following through on his threats to deploy U.S. military assets against cartels in Mexico. She has called any prospective U.S. strike on Mexican territory a violation of Mexican sovereignty.

    Mexican crude has taken on a new urgency for Cuba since the U.S. ouster this month of Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro, whose socialist government was long the major supplier of oil to Cuba. (Havana said 32 Cuban officers, members of Maduro’s security detail, were killed in the operation.)

    Maduro’s fall and the Venezuelan government’s subsequent submission to Washington has resulted in a cut-off of Venezuelan oil to Cuba. U.S. imports of Venezuelan oil, meanwhile, have soared.

    Mexico supplied Cuba with about 20,000 barrels a day of oil for much of 2025, said Jorge R. Piñon, an energy expert at the University of Texas. But shipments have declined drastically this year, apparently because of U.S. pressure.

    “The faucets are being shut off,” said Piñon. “Sheinbaum is walking a tightrope.”

    Without imports, he said, Cuba faces a daily oil shortfall of about 60,000 barrels to meet its energy needs. Other potential sources for Cuba include the oil-exporting nations of Russia, Angola, Algeria and Brazil, Piñon said, but it was unclear if any of those countries would be inclined to defy the White House and help bail out Cuba.

    Mexico’s support for the Cuban government has long been a point of pride here, a sign of a foreign policy independence from the United States, especially during the Cold War. Mexican leaders, including Sheinbaum, have repeatedly decried Washington’s more than half-century embargo of the island as an illegal blockade that punishes ordinary Cubans, not the country’s communist elite.

    It was from the Mexican coast that, in 1956, Fidel Castro sailed to Cuba along with Ernesto “Che” Guevara and other revolutionaries in the yacht Granma, launching an improbable but ultimately successful armed rebellion to overthrow U.S.-backed dictator Fulgencio Batista.

    Former Mexican President Andrés Manuel López Obrador — Sheinbaum’s predecessor and political mentor — labeled Castro a “giant” and called Havana a “progressive” model for resistance to U.S. pressure.

    But the U.S. push to block Mexican oil exports to Cuba is also exposing divisions in the ruling Morena political bloc, which was founded by López Obrador.

    Leftists in Morena have assailed Washington’s attempt to halt Mexican oil exports to Cuba. But more conservative members of the ruling party have urged caution.

    Ricardo Sheffield, a prominent Morena senator who was previously a member of the center-right National Action Party, has called for a review of oil pacts with Cuba. In a recent speech, he acknowledged “the relationship and the history that unites” Mexico and Cuba, but warned: “If we continue giving away oil to Cuba, we will have more problems with our neighbors in the U.S.”

    Special correspondent Cecilia Sánchez Vidal contributed to this report.

    [ad_2]

    Patrick J. McDonnell, Kate Linthicum

    Source link

  • Fact-check: Do Minneapolis and MN cooperate with ICE?

    [ad_1]

    President Donald Trump and his top officials have repeatedly complained that Minnesota state and local leaders will not cooperate with his administration’s immigration enforcement.

    On Jan. 25, the day after federal immigration agents fatally shot Alex Pretti in Minneapolis, Trump called on Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz, Minneapolis Mayor Jacob Frey and other Democrats “to formally cooperate with the Trump Administration to enforce our Nation’s Laws, rather than resist and stoke the flames of Division, Chaos, and Violence.”

    Administration officials say that Minnesota won’t turn over immigrants in detention to federal law enforcement.

    Pretti was one of two U.S. citizens killed by immigration officials in Minneapolis in the span of about two weeks. Renee Good was shot and killed by an Immigration and Customs Enforcement officer on Jan. 7.

    White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt said Walz “refuses” to allow law enforcement to cooperate. Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem said “we’ve never had a cooperative arrangement with law enforcement here.” And U.S. Attorney General Pam Bondi told Walz, “The results of your state’s policies and politicians’ anti-law enforcement rhetoric are a national tragedy,” in a Jan. 24 letter describing Minneapolis and neighboring St. Paul as sanctuary cities.

    The facts are more complicated than these leaders allege. Although Minneapolis’ has a policy that city officials won’t cooperate with immigration enforcement, that policy does not apply to state prisons. State correctional system officials have repeatedly said they cooperate with ICE and Walz made that point in a recent Wall Street Journal op-ed.

    “Corrections honors all federal and local detainers by notifying Immigration and Customs Enforcement when a person committed to its custody isn’t a U.S. citizen,” Walz wrote. “There is not a single documented case of the department’s releasing someone from state prison without offering to ensure a smooth transfer of custody.”

    After Trump dispatched White House border czar Tom Homan to Minnesota following outcry over Pretti’s killing, Homan acknowledged that the Minnesota Department of Corrections has “been honoring ICE detainers.”

    Here, we fact-checked some of the federal officials’ statements.

    Trump: Frey’s statement that Minneapolis does not enforce federal immigration law “is a very serious violation of the law.” (Jan. 28 Truth Social post)

    Trump’s take conflicts with previous court rulings.

    During Trump’s first term, his administration sought to withhold federal funding for sanctuary cities with policies against cooperating with federal immigration enforcement. Courts nationwide blocked Trump.

    In 2020, the U.S. Supreme Court refused the Trump administration’s request to review a case challenging a California law that restricts police cooperation with federal immigration authorities. 

    In December, the city of Minneapolis passed an ordinance that says police will not arrest or detain people to enforce federal immigration laws and that the city will not enforce civil federal immigration laws. 

    Immigration law professors, citing previous rulings, said that such policies are settled constitutional law.

    The ordinance adopted by Minneapolis is typical among similar policies, said University of Minnesota law professor R. Linus Chan.

    The Constitution’s 10th Amendment that addresses the balance of power between states and the federal government “means that the federal government cannot coerce states to enforce immigration law which is exclusively a federal government concern,” Chan said.

    Syracuse University law professor Jenny Breen said sanctuary city laws, including in Minneapolis, recognize the right of states and cities to refuse to do the work of the federal government. 

    “States may not refuse to permit the federal government itself from doing that work, but they are not obligated to enforce federal laws themselves,” Breen said in an email to PolitiFact, using italics for emphasis.

    Trump has threatened to cut off federal funding to sanctuary cities and states starting Feb. 1.

    Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz, right, and Attorney General Keith Ellison discuss the shooting of Alex Pretti during a news conference in Blaine, Minn., Jan. 25, 2026.

    Leavitt: “Walz refuses to allow local and state law enforcement to cooperate with ICE in arresting and removing dangerous criminal illegal aliens from Minnesota communities.” (Jan. 25 X post)

    That’s inaccurate.

    Cities and counties set their own policies on whether to cooperate with federal immigration enforcement. And state officials said they cooperate with federal immigration enforcement.

    The Minnesota Department of Corrections, which oversees state prisons, launched a website, “Combatting DHS Misinformation,” and held a Jan. 22 press conference to explain the state policies. 

    State Corrections Commissioner Paul Schnell said his agency notifies ICE weeks before a person’s prison term ends. ICE has the discretion to place a detainer on the person, and corrections staff coordinate with ICE to facilitate custody transfer when requested. 

    Schnell said his office reviewed the cases of people who Homeland Security publicly named and found many were never in state custody. Others had short stays in county jails or were in custody in other states. Many had been released directly to ICE. 

    Minneapolis Mayor Jacob Frey is seen Jan. 16, 2026, in Minneapolis. (AP)

    Department of Homeland Security: “DHS has called on Governor Walz and Mayor Frey this week to put the safety of Minnesotans and the American public first and honor the ICE arrest detainers of the more than 1,360 aliens, including violent criminals, in the state’s custody.” (Jan. 15 press release)

    DHS’s number contradicts state data on how many noncitizens are held in state custody. It also mischaracterizes the role officials such as Walz and Frey have in setting detention policies.

    A state survey found Minnesota prisons hold 207 noncitizens out of 8,000 total prison detainees. There were another 94 noncitizens held in county jails with ICE detainers. That adds up to 301 people — about four and a half times less than DHS claimed.

    Schnell, the state prisons commissioner, said Jan. 22 that the state received no answer when it asked federal officials for their data about the 1,360 figure. Although DHS did not provide PolitiFact with evidence for its figure, additional public statements by Homeland Security officials showed that the administration referred to people held in county jails. We found no source for that data.

    Hundreds of people in Minnesota’s county jails have been transferred to federal immigration officers, which shows that some counties are cooperative. But The New York Times found those cases represented a lower share than arrests made in 39 other states. 

    Each sheriff’s office sets its own policy. The sheriff’s website for Hennepin County, which includes Minneapolis, said it complies with immigration warrants signed by a judge, but not civil immigration requests from ICE. 

    According to ICE, seven counties and one city in Minnesota have signed agreements to perform specified immigration duties under ICE’s oversight. None of those are in the Minneapolis area.

    County jails may be reluctant to hold immigrants for ICE because of a 2025 state attorney general advisory opinion that Minnesota officials can’t hold someone on an ICE detainer alone if that person would otherwise be released from custody.

    Courts have found in recent years that holding immigrants for ICE was unconstitutional. 

    RELATED: Fact-check: Trump officials’ statements about Alex Pretti’s fatal shooting by Border Patrol agents

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Weed Pardons Spark Gen Z Dispensary Boom

    [ad_1]

    The weed pardons sparks Gen Z dispensary boom with 40% licensing surge, fueling a youth-led green rush explosion.

    In a seismic shift for the cannabis industry, the current president’s 2026 clemency initiative is handing Gen Z and Millennials the keys to a booming green economy. The administration’s pardons for nonviolent cannabis offenses have erased criminal records for millions, dismantling longstanding barriers to entry. The weed pardons spark Gen Z dispensary boom. This policy pivot is fueling a “Second Green Rush” where young hustlers are launching dispensaries, delivery apps, and pop-up weed vans at a record pace. With Gen Z and Millennials already accounting for roughly 60% percent of U.S. cannabis consumers, they’re perfectly positioned to capitalize on this moment, turning side gigs into seven-figure empires.

    RELATED: What The Polymarket Says About Cannabis Rescheduling And More

    The numbers tell a compelling story. Federal data shows licensing applications from under-35 entrepreneurs have surged 40 percent since the pardons took effect in early 2026. In states like Washington and California, where recreational markets are mature, Gen Z founders are flipping the script on traditional dispensaries. Take 24-year-old Seattle native Mia Chen, who transformed her college dropout dreams into a thriving THC delivery service called “BlazeExpress.” Starting with a $5,000 loan and a retrofitted van, Chen now pulls in six figures monthly, delivering curated strain kits to gig workers craving quick, discreet highs after shifts. Stories like hers are going viral on TikTok, where #WeedHustle videos rack up millions of views, blending entrepreneurial flex with cannabis culture.

    Photo by smodj/Getty Images

    This boom ties directly into broader economic tailwinds. Wall Street analysts predict cannabis market growth hitting 30 percent by year’s end, accelerated by whispers of full federal rescheduling. For debt-saddled Millennials eyeing financial freedom, and risk-loving Gen Zers raised on hustle culture, the pardons offer a rare clean slate. No more background check rejections for jobs or loans—now it’s straight to business plans featuring NFT-backed strain drops and AI-powered budtender apps. In Lynnwood, Washington, local 27-year-old Alex Rivera just opened “Evergreen Pods,” a drive-thru dispensary with low-dose edibles tailored for wellness-focused young professionals. “Trump’s move leveled the playing field,” Rivera says. “We’re not waiting for boomers to retire; this is our lane.”

    Critics argue the rush could oversaturate markets, but optimists see innovation. Expect more mobile “weed cafes” parked at music festivals, subscription boxes with celebrity collabs, and VR strain simulators for virtual shopping.

    RELATED: Is CBD Next On The Fed’s Hit List

    For Gen Z, who prioritize purpose-driven brands, these ventures align with values like sustainability—think hemp-based packaging and regenerative farms. Millennials, meanwhile, bring battle-tested marketing savvy, launching Instagram Live grow sessions doubling as masterclasses.

    As January 2026 unfolds, this youth-led explosion isn’t just reshaping cannabis—it’s redefining ambition. With pardons unlocking talent long sidelined by outdated laws, the Second Green Rush proves timing, policy, and grit can turn a plant into prosperity. Will you join the wave? Share your startup dreams in the comments.

    [ad_2]

    Sarah Johns

    Source link

  • Minnesota And Cannabis

    [ad_1]

    How Minnesota and cannabis evolved, from early decriminalization to legalization, with notable quirks and cautious next steps.

    The whole country has been fixed on what is going on there, but what about Minnesota and cannabis? The state has always had a complicated relationship with substances which alter the mood. From beer halls built by German immigrants to the slow, careful legalization of cannabis, the state’s approach has tended to mix cultural enthusiasm with regulatory caution.

    RELATED: What The Polymarket Says About Cannabis Rescheduling And More

    Cannabis in Minnesota has a longer history than many assume. Hemp was grown in the Upper Midwest as early as World War II, encouraged by the federal government for rope and fiber production. Recreational cannabis use followed national trends in the 1960s and 1970s, but enforcement remained strict for decades. In 1976, Minnesota became one of the first states to decriminalize possession of small amounts, replacing jail time with a fine—an early sign of the state’s pragmatic streak.

    Medical cannabis arrived much later. Minnesota legalized medical marijuana in 2014, but with one of the most restrictive programs in the country. Smoking flower was prohibited, qualifying conditions were limited, and access was tightly controlled. That conservative framework shaped public expectations: cannabis was tolerated, but not embraced.

    Everything shifted in 2023, when Minnesota legalized adult-use cannabis. The law emphasized public health, equity, and regulation over speed. Tribal nations moved first, opening legal dispensaries on sovereign land, while the state built a licensing system from scratch. The deliberate pace frustrated some consumers, but it also reflected Minnesota’s preference for methodical governance over fast commercialization.

    Today, cannabis in Minnesota exists in a transitional phase. Medical programs are expanding, adult-use sales are rolling out gradually, and THC beverages—derived from hemp and legal earlier than marijuana flower—have become a uniquely Minnesotan phenomenon. It is not unusual to find cannabis-infused seltzers sold alongside craft beer in liquor stores, a quirk few states share.

    Alcohol, of course, has long been woven into Minnesota’s identity. Waves of German and Scandinavian immigrants brought brewing traditions which still shape the state’s drinking culture. Beer became dominant, from legacy brands like Grain Belt to modern craft standouts such as Summit and Surly. For decades, Minnesota’s “3.2 beer” laws defined how and where alcohol could be sold, reinforcing the idea regulation mattered as much as consumption.

    Minnesotans drink at rates roughly in line with the Upper Midwest, with binge drinking historically higher than the national average, particularly in rural areas. Beer remains the favorite, especially light lagers and locally brewed IPAs, though spirits and cocktails have gained popularity in the Twin Cities. Seasonal drinking traditions—from ice-fishing beers to summer lake weekends—remain deeply ingrained.

    RELATED: Is CBD Next On The Fed’s Hit List

    The contrast between alcohol and cannabis is striking. Alcohol was normalized early and regulated slowly. Cannabis is being legalized carefully, with rules in place before widespread retail access. The reversal reflects changing attitudes, especially among younger adults who increasingly view cannabis as an alternative rather than a supplement to drinking.

    Looking ahead, Minnesota’s next steps include expanding retail cannabis access, approving social consumption spaces, and continuing automatic expungement for past cannabis offenses. Policymakers are also watching how cannabis affects alcohol sales, public health, and impaired driving.

    In typical Minnesota fashion, the goal is balance. Not prohibition. Not a free-for-all. Just a steady, regulated approach to substances have always played a role in how Minnesotans relax, socialize, and unwind—whether at a lake cabin, a neighborhood bar, or somewhere new entirely.

    [ad_2]

    Anthony Washington

    Source link

  • Melania Trump Says Her Documentary Is Not a Documentary

    [ad_1]

    The Trumps.
    Photo: Craig Hudson/Variety via Getty Images

    Like an art-school student talking about their first animated short, First Lady of the United States Melania Trump is promising to defy genre conventions. At the premiere of her new nonfiction film Melania at the (Trump-)Kennedy Center, FLOTUS tried to explain that the film, which she executive-produced, was not what it appeared to be. “Some have called this a documentary,” Trump said onstage while presenting the film, per the New York Times. “It is not.” Okay, then what is this thing? “It is a creative experience that offers perspectives, insights, and moments,” Trump said.

    The “creative experience” was directed by Brett Ratner, who was accused of sexual harassment and misconduct by six women in 2017, and goes into wide release this weekend. It is Ratner’s first project since being dropped from his Warner Bros. partnership after the allegations surfaced, and his next will be Rush Hour 4, which President Trump reportedly pushed Paramount to make. Melania is currently aiming to make $3 to $5 million in box-office returns on opening weekend, per Variety. That’s frankly a disastrous amount for Amazon after it spent $75 million on the project. Trump herself is not worried. “I’m very proud of the film, so people may like it, may don’t like it, and that’s their choice,” she told CNN on the red carpet. She added, “We achieved what we want to achieve. For myself, it’s already successful. I’m very proud of what we did.” Just two opening-day screenings in the country, one in Florida and one in Missouri, were entirely sold-out, per Wired. That’s 1/25 a Charli XCX.

    [ad_2]

    Jason P. Frank

    Source link

  • Firmness, flattery and phone calls: How Mexico’s president won over Trump

    [ad_1]

    MEXICO CITY — He has called Colombian President Gustavo Petro “a sick man” and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky a “dictator.” He once slammed French President Emmanuel Macron as “publicity-seeking,” and former Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau as “dishonest and weak.”

    President Trump is known for hurling scathing insults at world leaders.

    Then there’s Mexican President Claudia Sheinbaum. The U.S. president has described her, at turns, as “fantastic,” “terrific” and “elegant.”

    In a social media post Thursday, he offered his most glowing compliments yet, extolling Sheinbaum as “wonderful and highly intelligent” and saying Mexicans “should be very happy” to have her as their leader.

    Trump’s emphatic praise for Sheinbaum is surprising, given their marked differences in temperament and politics.

    Sheinbaum, a leftist known for her patience and pragmatism, labeled Israel’s U.S.-backed war in Gaza a “genocide” and condemned the recent U.S. capture of Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro.

    She disagrees with Trump on three of his firmly held beliefs: that the U.S. should raise tariffs on Mexican imports, expel migrants en masse, and attack drug traffickers inside Mexico.

    But Sheinbaum is keenly aware of how Trump’s actions on trade, immigration and security could plunge Mexico into turmoil, potentially threatening her own popularity and the legacy of the ruling party founded by her populist predecessor, Andrés Manuel López Obrador.

    So she has tread strategically, requesting frequent phone calls with Trump, making concessions on issues such as security and heaping praise right back at him. She described her conversation with Trump on Thursday as “productive and cordial” and added: “I had the pleasure of greeting his wife, Melania.”

    So far, her tactics have worked. Trump’s repeated threats of sweeping tariffs on Mexican goods and drone attacks on cartel targets have not yet come to pass.

    Managing Trump has been one of the biggest — and perhaps most consequential — focal points of Sheinbaum’s presidency. “It’s not something that just happened today,” she said recently of her relationship with Trump. “Communication, coordination, and defending the people of Mexico … are constants.”

    Sheinbaum has been quelling nerves in Mexico since Trump’s election in late 2024, just weeks after she assumed the presidency. She promised to forge strong bonds with the incoming U.S. leader, who is widely disliked here for his diatribes against immigrants. Sheinbaum vowed to emulate Kalimán, a beloved Mexican comic-book superhero known for defeating villains with “serenity and patience.”

    She has sought to command Trump’s respect in other ways, holding massive public rallies that demonstrate widespread support for her government. “We will always hold our heads high,” she said at one event shortly before Trump took office. “Mexico is a free, independent, and sovereign country. We coordinate, we collaborate, but we do not submit.”

    In some ways, Trump has actually galvanized support for Sheinbaum by sparking a surge in nationalism. Polls show most Mexicans approve of her handling of the bilateral relationship. According to a poll conducted by El País newspaper, her approval rating soared to 83% in May after she persuaded Trump to postpone the implementation of heavy tariffs. It now stands around 74%.

    Still, some political analysts point out that Trump may like Sheinbaum because, despite her talk of defending Mexico’s sovereignty, she has actually acquiesced to him many times, particularly on issues of security.

    “The list of concessions to Trump accumulated in a single year far surpasses in scope and depth those made by supposedly more ‘subservient’ governments,” wrote columnist Jorge Lomonaco in El Universal newspaper.

    Sheinbaum has deployed Mexican troops to stop migrants from reaching the U.S. border. She has sent dozens of accused drug criminals to the U.S. to face trial there, sidestepping the standard extradition process to do so. She imposed tariffs on some imports from China and other countries, and her government reportedly paused shipments of oil to Cuba, signaling a possible end to what Sheinbaum had lauded as a “humanitarian” effort to aid the embattled island nation — another possible target of Trump.

    “In public, Sheinbaum’s government has maintained a sovereign and patriotic rhetoric, but it is evident that, in private, it has been very docile with the U.S.,” Lomonaco wrote.

    Trump’s discourse with Mexico continues to be infused with threats. While he calls Sheinbaum a “good woman,” he also said in May that she is “so afraid of the cartels she can’t even think straight.”

    Many believe Trump’s decision to send U.S. special forces to arrest Maduro and his wife in Caracas could embolden him to launch a U.S. military attack on cartels in Mexico — a move that Sheinbaum would clearly see as crossing a red line, and could probably ignite a political crisis here.

    “I do think there’s a real risk of a strike on Mexican soil against cartels, especially after what happened in Venezuela,” said Gustavo Flores-Macías, dean of the School of Public Policy at the University of Maryland.

    Mexico, he said, is attempting “a delicate balance of keeping U.S. authorities happy without falling into this perennial game of trying to appease the White House and do everything that Trump wants.”

    Trump has also threatened to pull out of a trilateral trade deal with Canada, which was negotiated during his first term. The U.S., Mexico and Canada must launch a joint review of the free trade pact by July 1, its sixth anniversary, to determine whether the nations intend to renew it for 16 more years or make modifications. Trump has called the deal “irrelevant,” but the pact is fundamental to a Mexican economy heavily dependent on cross-border trade.

    Meantime, a controversy arose last week surrounding the mysterious capture in Mexico of Ryan Wedding, the former Canadian Olympic snowboarder who faces federal charges in California of running a billion-dollar drug-trafficking ring.

    Sheinbaum dismissed reports that FBI agents on the ground in Mexico participated in the the arrest of Wedding, who, according to U.S. authorities, had been hiding for years in Mexico.

    Sheinbaum insisted that Wedding turned himself in at the U.S. Embassy in Mexico City and, at a news briefing, displayed a photograph that she said depicted Wedding outside the embassy.

    But Canadian media said the image was probably fake, a creation of artificial intelligence. Sheinbaum dodged questions about the image’s authenticity. Wedding’s lawyer, Anthony Colombo, disputed Sheinbaum’s account that Wedding turned himself in. “He was arrested,” Colombo told reporters outside the federal courthouse in Santa Ana, where Wedding entered a not guilty plea. “He did not surrender.”

    Sheinbaum was able to weather the dispute, but the episode again raised questions about how far the Mexican president is willing to go to keep Trump happy.

    “It would be very very concerning — and certainly illegal under Mexican law — if the FBI operated and arrested an individual on Mexican soil,” said Flores-Macías, who added: “I think there are some clear signs that this took place without the involvement of Mexican authorities.”

    Special correspondent Cecilia Sánchez Vidal contributed to this report.

    [ad_2]

    Kate Linthicum, Patrick J. McDonnell

    Source link

  • Trump rails against low-income housing in Pacific Palisades. But officials say no projects are planned

    [ad_1]

    President Trump’s foray this week into the fire rebuilding process in Pacific Palisades has been met with confusion and rolled eyes from local officials who say he’s now railing against projects that have never even been proposed.

    Trump said Thursday he planned to stop a low-income housing project from being developed in Pacific Palisades. His promise, made during a Cabinet meeting, marked the second time this week he has weighed in on local housing issues in the fire-scarred Palisades.

    “They want to build a low-income housing project right in the middle of everything in the Palisades, and I’m not going to allow it to happen,” Trump said. “I’m not going to let these people destroy the value of their houses.”

    The comments left politicians around Los Angeles and California scratching their heads: what low-income housing project was the president referring to?

    Both Councilmember Traci Park and Mayor Karen Bass said they did not know of a major, low-income housing project coming to the Palisades.

    “There are no plans to bring low-income housing to the Palisades,” Bass said in a phone interview with The Times on Thursday from Washington, D.C. “It’s not true. There couldn’t possibly be a project that neither the councilmember nor the mayor would have any knowledge of.”

    Trump also took aim at Bass and Gov. Gavin Newsom on Tuesday as he announced an executive order to “preempt” the city’s permitting process to make it easier for fire victims to rebuild.

    The order, if implemented, would allow residents to self-certify to federal authorities instead of going through city bureaucracy for permits.

    Bass said Thursday that she would welcome an executive order that would bring the insurance and banking industries together to help Angelenos whose houses burned down get more significant insurance payouts and longer-term mortgages.

    The Governor’s Office also said they had no idea what low-income housing project Trump was referring to on Thursday.

    “The president of the United States is a bumbling idiot and has no idea what he’s talking about,” said Izzy Gardon, a spokesperson for Newsom. “This narrative that Gavin Newsom is trying to build high-density, low-income housing in the Palisades and turn them into ‘Newsomvilles’ is absurd.”

    Gardon said the state is providing resources for developers to rebuild below-market-rate housing that was destroyed in the Palisades fire, which tore through the beach-side enclave in January 2025, killing 12 and destroying thousands of homes and structures.

    In July, the governor committed $101 million to help rebuilding efforts of “affordable multifamily rental housing in the fire-devastated Los Angeles region.”

    The financing was for areas affected by both the Palisades and Eaton fires.

    The program allows affordable housing developers to apply for financing and prioritizes projects that are near wildfire burn areas, ready for immediate construction.

    The program required the developments to remain affordable for more than a half-century to receive the funding.

    Trump did not specify Thursday whether he was speaking about the July announcement or about a specific project.

    “That was money that went to the L.A. area for the four communities impacted by the fires to help developers to rebuild low-income mixed-use housing that was destroyed by the fires,” Gardon said.

    Maryam Zar, a Palisades resident, said that many in the Palisades feared a new project on the site of a Shell gas station that developer Justin Kohanoff said he wanted to build into an eight-story, 100-unit, low-income building.

    Kohanoff’s father, Saeed Kohanoff, declined to comment beyond saying the family has no immediate plans to develop the property.

    The Trump administration did not immediately specify what low-income housing project, if any in particular, the president was speaking about.

    [ad_2]

    Noah Goldberg, Ana Ceballos

    Source link

  • Donald Trump Reacts to Senate Deal on DHS To Avoid Looming Shutdown

    [ad_1]

    President Donald Trump has welcomed a new Senate deal on the Department of Homeland Security funding which will avoid another government shutdown.

    “Republicans and Democrats in Congress have come together to get the vast majority of the Government funded until September, while at the same time providing an extension to the Department of Homeland Security (including the very important Coast Guard, which we are expanding and rebuilding like never before,” Trump said on Truth Social.

    The deal will separate the DHS funds from the main government funding package, which includes five bipartisan bills and a two-week temporary spending bill for DHS. The deal was made Thursday after Democrats and eight Republicans, including Senate Majority Leader John Thune, blocked the original bill in the Senate.

    This is a breaking news story. Updates to follow. 

    In a polarized era, the center is dismissed as bland. At Newsweek, ours is different: The Courageous Center—it’s not “both sides,” it’s sharp, challenging and alive with ideas. We follow facts, not factions. If that sounds like the kind of journalism you want to see thrive, we need you.

    When you become a Newsweek Member, you support a mission to keep the center strong and vibrant. Members enjoy: Ad-free browsing, exclusive content and editor conversations. Help keep the center courageous. Join today.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Trump announces reopening of Venezuelan airspace for commercial travel

    [ad_1]

    President Donald Trump gives a speech at the World Economic Forum on Jan. 21, 2026 in Davos, Switzerland.

    President Donald Trump gives a speech at the World Economic Forum on Jan. 21, 2026 in Davos, Switzerland.


    Chip Somodevilla

    Getty Images

    President Donald Trump said on Thursday that he will reopen Venezuela’s airspace to commercial flights, clearing the way for airlines to resume service to the South American country following the apprehension earlier this month of former strongman Nicolás Maduro by U.S. forces in a predawn raid in Caracas.

    Speaking at the White House, Trump said he had spoken directly with Maduro’s successor, interim president Delcy Rodríguez, to inform her that all commercial airspace over Venezuela would be reopened.

    “I just spoke to the President of Venezuela and informed her that there will be opening up all commercial airspace over Venezuela,” Trump said. “American citizens will be very shortly able to go to Venezuela and they’ll be safe there. It’s under very strong control.”

    Trump said the move would allow Venezuelans living abroad to return home, either permanently or for visits, restoring travel links that have been largely frozen for nearly seven years.

    He said he had instructed Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy and other agencies, including the military, to complete the reopening by the end of the day.

    “I’ve instructed Sean Duffy and everybody else concerned, including the military, that by the end of today I’d like to have the airspace over Venezuela opened up so planes can go to Venezuela,” Trump said, stressing the urgency of the directive.

    Last November, ahead of the military operation that captured Maduro, Trump issued a message warning that the South American country’s airspace would “remain completely closed.”

    One day after the arrest of Maduro and his wife, Cilia Flores, on Jan. 4, the Federal Aviation Administration issued a new notice about the “potentially dangerous” situation in the Maiquetía region near Caracas “at all altitudes due to military activity in or around Venezuela.

    “The threats could pose a potential risk to aircraft at all altitudes, including overflight, arrival, and departure,” the notice said. It remains in effect through Feb. 2, according to the FAA’s website.

    While making the announcement, Trump said his decision was good news for the Venezuelan community in Doral — home to the largest concentration of the Venezuelan diaspora in the United States.

    “U.S. citizens will be able to travel to Venezuela very soon, and they will be safe there, because it will be under very strict control. And people who used to live in Venezuela—some want to return, and others want to visit—and they will be able to do so,” the president said.

    The White House did not immediately provide details on how the reopening would be implemented or whether additional security or regulatory reviews would be required before flights resume.

    Diplomatic relations between Washington and Caracas collapsed in 2019, when the U.S. State Department raised its travel advisory for Venezuela to its highest level and warned Americans not to travel to the country.

    As of Thursday, the State Department continued to list Venezuela under a “Do Not Travel” advisory, citing risks including wrongful detention, torture, kidnapping and violent crime.

    The announcement comes as Venezuelan carrier Línea Aérea de Servicio Ejecutivo Regional, C.A., known as Laser Airlines, has renewed its request for authorization from the U.S. Department of Transportation to operate flights between Miami and Venezuela.

    Laser submitted an amendment to an application originally filed in October 2011, seeking a foreign air carrier permit and a two-year exemption to operate scheduled and charter passenger, cargo and mail flights between Miami and the Venezuelan cities of Caracas, Valencia and Maracaibo.

    If approved, Laser said it could begin nonstop service within 90 to 180 days, offering up to two daily flights using Boeing 737, MD-80 or MD-90 aircraft configured with about 150 seats. The airline said it could later deploy higher-capacity Boeing 767 aircraft.

    Laser estimated it would transport approximately 172,800 passengers in its first year of direct service, while noting that demand forecasts remain uncertain.

    The last U.S. carrier to operate routes between the United States and Venezuela was American Airlines, which suspended all its commercial air links in 2019, when the two countries finally severed their already fragile diplomatic relations.

    This article was complemented with el Nuevo Herald’s wire services.

    Antonio Maria Delgado

    el Nuevo Herald

    Galardonado periodista con más de 30 años de experiencia, especializado en la cobertura de temas sobre Venezuela. Amante de la historia y la literatura.

    [ad_2]

    Antonio María Delgado

    Source link

  • Top Trump officials’ reversal on Minneapolis shooting: Policy change or damage control?

    [ad_1]

    Minneapolis — Key Republicans in the Trump administration are retreating from their blanket defense of Border Patrol agents who fatally shot a U.S. citizen Saturday on a Minneapolis street, part of a larger effort by the White House to turn down the temperature after the killing provoked widespread outrage.

    But it remains unclear whether the tamping down of Republican rhetoric is just damage control after the shooting, or whether it will usher in a more fundamental scaling back of President Trump’s hard-line immigration crackdown in American cities from Los Angeles to Chicago.

    In Minneapolis, there were few signs of a reduction in force on the streets, where tensions have been high since the shooting.

    On Wednesday morning, protesters gathered outside the federal Whipple Building, the epicenter of immigration activity in the city, as a steady stream of federal agents entered and exited.

    “Traitor!” one woman yelled out to a car driven by masked agents.

    “Murderers!” a man said.

    As Richi Mead, dressed in a neon vest that labeled him as a peaceful observer (“DON’T SHOOT”), tracked federal vehicles coming in and out, he said he did not believe there had been a reduction in the number of federal immigration agents in his city. The rate of cars he saw Wednesday, he said, was “business as usual.”

    “They’ve entrenched themselves here,” he said of federal agents. “There’s no end to this — and there’s no end to Minnesotans showing up.”

    As a growing number of Republicans have joined Democrats to protest Alex Pretti’s killing and Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem faces increasing criticism, Trump has expressed a desire to “de-escalate a little bit.”

    Senior officials — such as Stephen Miller, the White House deputy chief of staff for policy and Homeland Security advisor — have backtracked on their initial defense of the federal agents who fired the fatal shots.

    Just a few hours after Border Patrol agents shot the 37-year-old intensive care unit nurse Saturday in Minneapolis, Miller said on X: “An assassin tried to murder federal agents.”

    But that statement, along with others made by Noem, were contradicted by cellphone videos showing Pretti was holding a phone, not a gun, when federal agents shoved him to the ground and shot him.

    On Tuesday, Miller issued a statement to CNN acknowledging that U.S. Customs and Border Protection agents may have deviated from protocol before the fatal shooting. The White House had provided “clear guidance” to the Department of Homeland Security on how to handle protesters, or “disruptors,” Miller said.

    “We are evaluating why the CBP team may not have been following that protocol,” Miller said.

    A White House spokesperson said that Miller was referring to general guidance given to Immigration and Customs Enforcement that extra personnel sent to Minnesota for force protection “should be used … to create a physical barrier between the arrest teams and the disruptors.”

    Officials will examine why additional force-protection assets may not have been present to support the operation, the spokesperson said.

    On Wednesday, a Customs and Border Protection spokesperson disclosed that two Border Patrol agents involved in the shooting had been placed on administrative leave Saturday.

    But top Republicans in the White House have yet to announce any major rollback of their aggressive immigration enforcement tactics.

    Kevin R. Johnson, a professor who specializes in immigration law at UC Davis, said it was too early to determine whether senior Trump officials are rethinking federal tactics or whether the shooting of Pretti will lead the president to scale back his immigration agenda.

    “We have seen a de-escalation in the last 24 hours, at least,” Johnson said. “But whether it’s going to stay with us, or be gone in 24 hours, it’s hard to say. I think it’ll stay around at least till the midterms.”

    After hearing Trump and Miller use harsh language for so long to refer to undocumented immigrants, Johnson said, it was impossible to predict how long a de-escalation of rhetoric would last.

    “They shift gears like they’re first-time drivers,” Johnson said of Trump’s senior officials. “They’re all over the place.”

    On Wednesday morning, Atty. Gen. Pam Bondi, who was visiting Minnesota, announced that 16 people whom she dubbed “rioters” were arrested and charged with assaulting, resisting or impeding law enforcement officers.

    “We expect more arrests to come,” Bondi said on X. “I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again: NOTHING will stop President Trump and this Department of Justice from enforcing the law.”

    Outside the Whipple Building in Minneapolis, it was hard to tell what, if anything, had changed. Hennepin County sheriff’s deputies continued to provide security in the area. Demonstrators still showed up across the street. Encrypted neighborhood group chats continued to circulate information about possible sightings of immigration agents.

    Before noon, one chat advised that observers were needed at an address where Homeland Security agents “have person trapped in home who went back to house for documentation.”

    Lucas Guttentag, a professor of law at Stanford University who specializes in immigration, said senior Trump administration officials appeared to be admitting things have gone too far and “killing people in the street is unacceptable.”

    “But that’s a low bar; the fundamental policy hasn’t changed,” he said, noting that the administration did not appear to be changing its policy on illegal detention, terminating people’s status or racial profiling. “This is a tactical retreat, but not a change of policy.”

    Still, even as arrests continued, Johnson said it was a positive sign that Miller and Noem had turned down their rhetoric on Pretti’s killing, and that border policy advisor Tom Homan had met with the Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz and Minneapolis Mayor Jacob Frey.

    “That’s what we need here: some communication and some discussion in an effort to bring down the temperature,” Johnson said. “Because it’s not surprising to me that when you have people at the highest levels, including the Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security, talking in harsh terms, then you have ICE officers on the ground engaging in very aggressive, maybe illegal tactics.”

    Johnson said he would like to see the Trump administration withdraw some ICE officers from Minneapolis. Beyond that, he said the administration should ramp up its training of federal immigration agents and rethink roving patrols that targeted people, regardless of their legal status, based on their skin color.

    “That tactic has terrorized communities,” he said.

    Johnson was skeptical that the move to apparently oust Border Patrol commander Gregory Bovino and bring in Homan to lead the Minnesota operation would change much.

    “He’s a relatively aggressive immigration enforcement type as well,” Johnson said of Homan. “If he’s your peacemaker, it’s unclear to me whether he’s really going to make peace.”

    As Christine Hebl, 45, dropped off a handwritten note at a memorial erected at the site in south Minneapolis where Pretti was killed, she said she doubted that bringing Homan to Minnesota would lead to a reduction in immigration enforcement.

    The only change she had noticed so far had been an expansion outward toward the suburbs north of Minneapolis.

    “It’s a PR stunt in my mind,” she said. “I think that it’s going to continue or even potentially worsen. You cannot believe a single word that comes out of this regime’s mouths. It’s going to continue and I’m scared — I’m really scared.”

    [ad_2]

    Jenny Jarvie, Andrea Castillo

    Source link

  • Is There Now a Crack in the Wall Between Cannabis Use and Gun Rights

    [ad_1]

    Has Minneapolis upended politics and is there now a crack in the wall between cannabis sue and gun rights? There is pressure on the administration.

    For decades, the relationship between cannabis use and gun ownership in the United States has been shaped by conflicting legal frameworks and cultural trends. Since the Gun Control Act of 1968, federal law has prohibited individuals who are “unlawful users” of controlled substances from possessing or purchasing firearms, a rule that historically included cannabis because it remained classified as a Schedule I drug. As more states have moved to legalize medical and recreational marijuana use, this federal prohibition has produced a legal disconnect: people who legally use cannabis under state law can be barred from firearm rights under federal law, while gun ownership, protected by the Second Amendment and upheld in key Supreme Court decisions like District of Columbia v. Heller, has remained a deeply entrenched individual right.

    RELATED: What The Polymarket Says About Cannabis Rescheduling And More

    Recent events in Minnesota have intensified national conversations about gun use, public safety, and federal regulation. The fatal shooting of 37-year-old Renee Good in Minneapolis by a U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agent sparked widespread protest and media attention, thrusting discussions about when and how guns should be carried into the spotlight. The current administration’s response — including comments from national leaders suggesting that certain forms of gun carry at protests may be inappropriate — has prompted debate and scrutiny from both sides of the political aisle, especially in a state with permissive carry laws. The President’s remarks Good “should not have been carrying a gun,” despite Minnesota’s legal provisions for open and concealed carry, have underscored a broader willingness among federal officials to reconsider how guns are used in public spaces and under what circumstances.

    Official White House Photo by Andrea Hanks

    Cannabis use and gun rights have intersected not just legally but culturally. While states such as Minnesota grapple with questions of public safety following high-profile shootings, federal courts are taking up cases that challenge the application of firearm prohibitions to marijuana users. Several appellate courts have ruled barring state-sanctioned cannabis consumers from owning guns could violate the Second Amendment, creating legal pressure that may culminate in a decisive Supreme Court ruling. Advocates argue these challenges underscore the outdated nature of federal cannabis policy in a nation where a majority of states have embraced some form of legalization.

    That uncertainty has also been visible inside the administration itself. In recent press briefings, the White House press secretary struggled to clearly articulate a definitive position on gun control, particularly when pressed on how new restrictions might apply to lawful gun owners versus criminal misuse. Repeated attempts to clarify whether the administration favors broader limits on public carry, enforcement changes, or legislative reform yielded cautious, and at times contradictory, responses. The moment underscored the administration’s difficulty in balancing public safety concerns with constitutional protections, revealing a lack of consensus on how far any restructuring of gun policy should go.

    Amid these legal and political tensions, leaders in the current administration have repeatedly appeared on national news outlets discussing the need to rethink how guns are carried and used by average citizens. Some administration figures have indicated that the nation should consider stricter guidelines for public gun carry, citing recent violence and demanding a reevaluation of existing policies. This shift has sparked sharp disagreements with traditional gun rights advocates.

    RELATED: Is CBD Next On The Fed’s Hit List

    The National Rifle Association, for example, publicly criticized comments from federal officials seemed to question the rights of lawful gun owners, calling such statements “dangerous and wrong” and stressing law-abiding citizens deserve their full Second Amendment protections.

    At the same time, the broader national dialogue remains unsettled. With public opinion sharply divided, legal challenges pending in the courts, and political leaders offering competing visions for the future of gun policy, it is far from clear where the balance will ultimately fall. As lawmakers, judges, and citizens continue to hash out these issues, the evolving conversation about cannabis use, gun ownership, and public safety highlights lingering tensions in American law and society.

    [ad_2]

    Terry Hacienda

    Source link

  • After a bombshell tax records leak, Donald Trump moves fast to bury his secrets, blacklisting Booz Allen Hamilton | The Mary Sue

    [ad_1]

    By

    Jan 28th, 2026, 2:38 pm

    The Trump administration is severing ties with the management consulting company Booz Allen Hamilton over a data breach, as revealed by Scott Bessent, the U.S. Secretary of the Treasury, through a statement on January 26, 2026. Bessent additionally provided an estimate of the losses the firm would incur following their departure, highlighting that the Treasury Department currently has 31 separate contracts with them totaling $4.8 million in annual spending and $21 million in total obligations.

    Trump is wasting no time covering up his trails. As mentioned previously, his administration is distancing itself from Booz Allen Hamilton, as per a statement by Scott Bessent. For those who don’t know the context of the incident, between 2018 and 2020, an employee of Booz Allen Hamilton named Charles Edward Littlejohn had stolen and leaked the confidential tax returns and return information of thousands of taxpayers. As per the statistics determined by the IRS, the number of people affected by the data breach was believed to be approximately 406,000 taxpayers. Following the occurrence, Littlejohn had pleaded guilty to his crimes. Coming back to what we were initially discussing, besides letting people know about the Trump administration parting ways with Booz Allen Hamilton, Bessent’s declaration also contained the reason behind this drastic step, which is President Trump’s trust in his cabinet to “root out waste, fraud, and abuse, and canceling these contracts is an essential step to increasing Americans’ trust in government.” He additionally noted:

    Booz Allen failed to implement adequate safeguards to protect sensitive data, including the confidential taxpayer information it had access to through its contracts with the Internal Revenue Service.”

    The news regarding the Trump administration’s estrangement from Booz Allen Hamilton has had a major impact on the firm, causing its stock price to fall by 10 points, which prompted them to share their perspective. On social media, including X (formerly Twitter), Booz Allen Hamilton’s official page highlighted that they “have consistently condemned in the strongest possible terms the actions of Charles Littlejohn, who was involved with the company years ago.” The post also emphasised the firm’s ethical standards, which include a “zero tolerance for violations of the law.” The statement also clarified that Littlejohn’s criminal actions took place on government systems, not the firm’s systems, as they do not store any taxpayer data on their systems and cannot monitor activity on government networks. It also mentioned that the firm played a key role in Littlejohn’s prosecution following investigations, thereby expressing eagerness to discuss the issue with the Treasury.

    Have a tip we should know? [email protected]

    Image of Sanchari Ghosh

    Sanchari Ghosh

    Sanchari Ghosh is a political writer for The Mary Sue who enjoys keeping up with what’s going on in the world and sometimes reminding everyone what they should be talking about. She’s been around for a few years, but still gets excited whenever she disentangles a complicated story. When she’s not writing, she’s likely sleeping, eating, daydreaming, or just hanging out with friends. Politics is her passion, but so is an amazing nap.

    [ad_2]

    Sanchari Ghosh

    Source link

  • Tim Cook Wants ‘Deescalation’ in Minneapolis

    [ad_1]

    Last year, Apple CEO Tim Cook gifted President Donald Trump a plaque with a base made of 24-karat gold, and attended a White House dinner at which he addressed the room for two minutes, and in that time he repeated the words “thank you” to Trump nine times.

    This past Saturday night, he again met with Trump, this time at a screening of a flattering documentary about First Lady Melania Trump. No, Apple didn’t make or even license the movie. Its competitor did, but Cook attended the screening anyway.

    This might lead one to worry that Cook doesn’t recognize the gravity of what federal agents are doing in Minneapolis right now. No matter one’s politics, the horrifying deaths of Renee Good and Alex Pretti at the hands of federal troops are pretty easy to speak about in at least somewhat human terms. Even Ted Cruz managed to talk about Good at one point without sounding like a total monster. 

    Tim Cook’s oddly timed movie attendance, might, if I didn’t know better, be a hint that he’s not reading the room super well, and that me may lack the insight into political events of, say, the increasing number of his fellow Trump-friendly figures willing to speak frankly about the obvious violent overreach happening amid the ICE crackdown in Minneapolis. 

    But fortunately, Cook has issued a statement to Apple employees in which he says “This is a time for deescalation.” Don’t you feel better already?

    Oddly enough, Trump used similar language earlier today, saying “We’re gonna deescalate a little bit.”

    Cook’s statement doesn’t mention ICE, or other federal agencies, or the names of anyone who has died, or specify anything beyond the word “Minneapolis.” But that doesn’t mean it’s pure fluff meant to pat his employees on their heads and nothing more. After all, Cook says he had “a good conversation with the president this week where I shared my views.” So we can all rest easy that Trump is finally chastened.

    Here’s the full statement (originally leaked to Bloomberg’s Mark Gurman on Tuesday night):

    Team,

    I’m heartbroken by the events in Minneapolis, and my prayers and deepest sympathies are with the families, with the communities, and with everyone that’s been affected.

    This is a time for deescalation. I believe America is strongest when we live up to our highest ideals, when we treat everyone with dignity and respect no matter who they are or where they’re from, and when we embrace our shared humanity. This is something Apple has always advocated for. I had a good conversation with the president this week where I shared my views, and I appreciate his openness to engaging on issues that matter to us all.

    I know this is very emotional and challenging for so many. I am proud of how deeply our teams care about the world beyond our walls. That empathy is one of Apple’s greatest strengths and it is something I believe we all cherish.

    Thank you for all that you do.
    Tim

    [ad_2]

    Mike Pearl

    Source link

  • Is CBD Next On The Fed’s Hit List

    [ad_1]

    Is CBD next on the fed’s hit list amid slow cannabis reform, hemp restrictions, and rising regulatory pressure?

    For more than a decade, cannabis policy in the United States has moved at a glacial pace. Despite widespread public support, state-level legalization, and the emergence of a multibillion-dollar industry, federal reform has remained slow, fragmented, and often contradictory. That pattern has now raised a new and uncomfortable question across the wellness, agriculture, and retail sectors: Is CBD next on the fed’s hit list?

    RELATED: Cannabis Can Help PTSD

    The story begins with cannabis itself. While a majority of states have legalized medical or adult-use marijuana, federal law continues to classify cannabis as a Schedule I substance. Efforts to reschedule or deschedule cannabis have been announced, delayed, studied, and revisited, creating regulatory uncertainty touching everything from banking and research to interstate commerce. This slow walking of cannabis reform from both the current and past president has rippled outward, ensnaring industries once thought to be safely separated from marijuana.

    Hemp was supposed to be different. Federally legalized in the 2018 Farm Bill, hemp was championed as an agricultural and economic opportunity, particularly for struggling rural communities. No one played a more visible role in hemp’s return than Senator Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, who made the crop a centerpiece of his push to revive farm economies in deeply red regions of the state. For Kentucky farmers, hemp was not a culture-war issue but a pragmatic replacement for declining tobacco revenues and shrinking commodity margins.

    Kentucky quickly became one of the nation’s leading hemp producers, investing in processing facilities, research partnerships, and pilot programs tied to CBD extraction. The political history makes the current regulatory climate especially fraught. As lawmakers debate tightening hemp definitions and closing cannabinoid “loopholes,” the consequences would land not just on coastal wellness brands, but on farmers in conservative states that were encouraged to plant hemp under federal guidance.

    CBD now sits at the center of this tension. Initially promoted as a non-intoxicating compound with potential wellness applications, CBD products flooded the market in everything from oils and capsules to beverages and pet treats. Yet the Food and Drug Administration has repeatedly declined to recognize CBD as a lawful dietary supplement, while also failing to propose a clear alternative regulatory pathway. The result has been a gray market defined by warning letters, uneven enforcement, and growing risk for compliant businesses.

    At the same time, proposed revisions to the Farm Bill have raised alarms across the hemp industry. Efforts to restrict intoxicating hemp-derived products may be politically popular, but critics warn that overly broad language could effectively ban or severely limit CBD itself. For farmers, processors, and retailers, this would represent a dramatic reversal of federal policy—one that undermines years of investment encouraged by Washington.

    RELATED: Is Cannabis Now The #1 Sleep Aid

    What makes this moment particularly striking is the broader landscape of U.S. health policy. Regulators increasingly emphasize harm reduction and data-driven decision-making. Cannabis is widely acknowledged to be less harmful than many legal substances, and CBD has been studied for potential therapeutic uses. Yet instead of clarity, the industry faces contraction and prohibition by attrition.

    And throughout these shifts, one category remains largely untouched. Despite well-documented links between alcohol and chronic disease, addiction, and public safety risks, alcohol continues to enjoy stable federal treatment and powerful political insulation. While cannabis is slow-walked, hemp is narrowed, and CBD faces mounting pressure, alcohol remains fully normalized and aggressively marketed.

    As federal health policies evolve and cannabis reform continues to stall, the question is no longer whether CBD will be regulated, but whether it will be regulated out of existence—leaving behind farmers, including those in Kentucky’s heartland, who answered the call to grow a crop Washington once promised was safe.

    [ad_2]

    Terry Hacienda

    Source link

  • One Democrat who helped pump $10 billion into ICE now regrets it — because siding with Donald Trump comes with a price | The Mary Sue

    [ad_1]

    Last week, seven Democrats defied their party and voted with the Republicans to help them pass a $ 64.4 billion bill that will fund the Department of Homeland Security. The same also allocates about $10 billion for the U.S.Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE). The individuals who voted for this include Representatives Henry Cuellar (Texas), Marie Gluesenkamp Perez (Washington), Jared Golden (Maine), Laura Gillen (New York), Don Davis (North Carolina), Tom Suozzi (New York) and Vicente Gonzalez (Texas).

    Since the aforementioned individuals decided to vote for funding the DHS and ICE, many of them have come forward with their own justifications for their decision, with a majority of them highlighting that other provisions mentioned in the bill were important for the people of the United States. For context, the same bill is also designed to fund the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), the Transportation Security Administration (TSA), the U.S. Secret Service, and the Disaster Relief Fund, among others. However, ever since the recent shooting and killing of Alex Pretti, an intensive care nurse in Minneapolis, by ICE agents, one of the seven Democrats has seemingly distanced himself from his decision on the DHS and ICE funding bill. Representative Tom Suozzi from New York, on January 26, 2026, shared on his Facebook account via a post update that he had “failed to view the DHS funding vote as a referendum on the illegal and immoral conduct of ICE in Minneapolis.” He also said:

    I hear the anger from my constituents, and I take responsibility for that. I have long been critical of ICE’s unlawful behavior and I must do a better job demonstrating that.”

    Additionally, he condoned the killing of Alex Pretty and urged Trump to end “Operation Metro Surge” and ICE’s occupation of Minneapolis. He said:

    The senseless and tragic murder of Alex Pretti underscores what happens when untrained federal agents operate without accountability. President Trump must immediately end “Operation Metro Surge” and ICE’s occupation of Minneapolis that has sown chaos, led to tragedy, and undermined experienced local law enforcement.”

    Suozzi received a massive response to his post, with most criticising his behaviour. Many made scathing remarks against him, suggesting that his apologies over the matter were too late. Others vowed not to vote for Suozzi in the upcoming elections as a sign of revolt. A few of them, predominantly MAGA and Republican, extended their support to Suozzi and thanked him for his commitment “to doing better” for his constituents.

    Have a tip we should know? [email protected]

    Image of Sanchari Ghosh

    Sanchari Ghosh

    Sanchari Ghosh is a political writer for The Mary Sue who enjoys keeping up with what’s going on in the world and sometimes reminding everyone what they should be talking about. She’s been around for a few years, but still gets excited whenever she disentangles a complicated story. When she’s not writing, she’s likely sleeping, eating, daydreaming, or just hanging out with friends. Politics is her passion, but so is an amazing nap.

    [ad_2]

    Sanchari Ghosh

    Source link

  • U.S. official: Cuba resold much of the oil it received from Venezuela

    [ad_1]

    A man watches two crude oil tankers remaining anchored on Lake Maracaibo, near Maracaibo, Zulia state, Venezuela on December 17, 2025. US President Donald Trump ordered on December 16, 2025, a "total and complete blockade" of sanctioned oil tankers Venezuela has been using to bypass a six-year-old US oil embargo. (Photo by Alejandro Paredes / AFP via Getty Images)

    A man watches two crude oil tankers remaining anchored on Lake Maracaibo, near Maracaibo, Zulia state, Venezuela on December 17, 2025. US President Donald Trump ordered on December 16, 2025, a “total and complete blockade” of sanctioned oil tankers Venezuela has been using to bypass a six-year-old US oil embargo. (Photo by Alejandro Paredes / AFP via Getty Images)


    ALEJANDRO PAREDES

    AFP via Getty Images

    Despite the daily hour-long blackouts and gasoline rationing in Cuba, the island’s government sold most the subsidized oil it received from Venezuela last year, a senior U.S. government official told the Miami Herald.

    Venezuela provided Cuba with about 70,000 barrels per day of crude oil and refined products worth as much as $1.3 billion from approximately late 2024 through late 2025, the official said, citing information from a previously undisclosed analysis by the U.S. government.

    Cuba then sent about 40,000 barrels each day — about 60% — to Asia for resale, the official said.

    Mexico’s president Claudia Sheinbaum is under increasing pressure over oil shipments to Cuba, which she said involve both paid contracts and humanitarian donations.

    The reselling of the oil while the Cuban population endures daily electricity cuts is “further proof that the illegitimate Cuban regime only prioritizes enriching itself all while the Cuban people suffer the consequences of their corrupt nature and incompetence,” a State Department official told the Miami Herald.

    “Everyday Cubans deserve the truth as to why the regime hides billions in overseas bank accounts instead of investing in electricity, infrastructure, health, and the daily needs of its people,” the State Department official said.

    Previously, a Herald investigation based on leaked secret accounting documents revealed that GAESA, a Cuban military conglomerate, reported about $18 billion in current assets, of which $14.5 billion were deposited in unknown bank accounts as of March 2024.

    Experts long suspected that Cuba was reselling some of the oil from Venezuela for hard currency. In December, U.S. forces off the Venezuelan coast seized a shadow fleet tanker, the Skipper, that had transferred a portion of oil cargo to a smaller tanker bound for Cuba and continued its route to Asia, likely to China.

    The 70,000 barrels figure is more than double what Reuters and other experts estimated the Venezuelan government was sending to Cuba.

    Based on public tanker tracking data, Jorge Piñón, a senior research fellow at the Energy Center at the University of Texas who closely tracks oil shipments to Cuba, estimated that Venezuela exported an average of 30,000 barrels of oil per day to the island during 2025, filling about 50% of Cuba’s oil deficit. Reuters also reported a similar figure, 27,000 barrels per day, based on PDVSA data.

    Much of the sanctioned vessels transporting oil from Venezuela to Cuba are part of the so-called “dark fleet” that turn off transponders and spoof location signals to avoid being detected. It is also possible that some of the oil destined to Cuba was not recorded on PDVSA records.

    Since the 2000s, Cuba has received subsidized oil from Venezuela thanks to an agreement between Hugo Chavez and Fidel Castro, and continued under Nicolás Maduro, the Venezuelan strongman who was captured in a U.S. military raid earlier this month.

    In exchange for the oil, Cuba provided Venezuela with doctors. It also helped Chavez and Maduro hold on to power by infiltrating several Cuban advisers into the Venezuelan army and security agencies and providing software and telecommunications services to the Venezuelan police and several other government agencies and companies, including the state oil company PDVSA. Albet, a Cuban company linked to Cuba’s University of Information Sciences, was involved in the creation of the system that issues the IDs Venezuelans need to vote, Venezuelan investigative outlet Armando Info reported at the time.

    The Cuban government confirmed that Cuban officers were providing personal security to Maduro on the day the U.S. special operations Delta Forces raided Fort Tiuna in Caracas and apprehended the couple. Thirty-two died, according to Cuban authorities. Cuban state media also reported the return of additional officers who were injured during the raid but did not say how many.

    The relationship amounted to colonization, Secretary of State Marco Rubio said soon after the military operation to capture Maduro and his wife Cilia Flores.

    That alliance seems to have been upended after President Donald Trump said Cuba won’t be receiving more oil from the South American nation. The Trump administration has also pressed the Venezuelan interim government led by Maduro’s former vice president, Delcy Rodriguez, to cut ties with U.S. adversaries, including Cuba.

    The administration is also looking at how to exert further pressure on Cuba, which is going through its worst economic crisis in many decades, to hasten regime change. Among the options being considered is a complete naval blockade to stop oil shipments to Cuba, Politico reported.

    Cuban leader Miguel Díaz-Canel said on X that in a phone call last week with Rodriguez — the first publicly disclosed since Maduro’s ouster — he “expressed our support and solidarity with the homeland of Bolívar and Chávez, its people, and the Bolivarian government; as well as our decision to continue strengthening our historical relations of brotherhood and cooperation.”

    He did not mention the oil shipments nor the fate of the thousands of doctors and Cuban “collaborators” in the South American country, two issues likely high on the call’s agenda.

    Rodriguez did not provide details of what was discussed other than thanking Díaz-Canel for a call that she said “strengthens our self-esteem as Venezuelans, and it encourages us to continue together in this process, which is unavoidable and inevitable: the unity of our peoples.”

    The halt of oil shipments from Venezuela has already caused an islandwide gasoline shortage and daily blackouts that in places like Perico, Matanzas have lasted up to 32 hours, Cubans in a WhatsApp group sharing their hours without electricity said.

    Cuba’s electricity company said that nine units inside the island’s power plants are out of service or receiving maintenance and that the country’s distributed generation of power, through small-scale units connected to the grid, was null due to the lack of diesel. Cubans reported widespread blackouts lasting several hours during the weekend, including in Havana. On Monday, over 60% of the island was expected to be in the dark at peak demand at night.

    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

    Source link

  • ‘It’s time to investigate’: Newsom slams alleged suppression of anti-Trump TikTok content

    [ad_1]

    Newsom announced he is investigating reports that TikTok is suppressing anti-Trump content days after the platform averted a nationwide ban by finalizing a U.S. ownership deal backed by Trump.

    “Following TikTok’s sale to a Trump-aligned business group, our office has received reports — and independently confirmed instances — of suppressed content critical of President Trump,” the governor’s press office said in a Monday evening statement on X.

    The announcement comes after a flurry of online complaints that videos criticizing Trump, such as those condemning ICE actions in Minnesota or speaking out against the killing of Alex Pretti by federal agents, are either getting zero views or far lower view counts than normal.

    The new U.S.-based company TikTok USDS Joint Venture LLC has not publicly responded to the allegations of censorship. However, the company said in a Monday statement that it was grappling with a power outage at a U.S. data center that was causing a “cascading systems failure.”

    Among the issues the platform advised creators to look out for were zero views or likes on videos, slower load times and timed-out requests. Thousands of user issues were being reported throughout the day Monday, according to outage tracker Downdetector.

    Newsom’s press office said the governor was calling on the California Department of Justice to review whether the application violates state law by censoring content that is unfavorable to Trump. The Department of Justice did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

    “It’s time to investigate,” Newsom wrote on X while reposting a screenshot showing a TikTok user being prevented from sending a message saying “epstein.” The screenshot says, “This message may be in violation of our Community Guidelines, and has not been sent to protect our community.”

    The White House did not immediately respond to a request for comment. A spokesperson told the Washington Post that the White House “is not involved in, nor has it made requests related to, TikTok’s content moderation.”

    Internet personality Preston Stewart, who makes informational videos about war and national security topics, said that two videos he posted Monday simply disappeared while another video received zero views despite him having 1.3 million followers.

    “I’ve seen folks suggest this is targeted but from what I’m seeing it’s across platform affecting everyone,” Stewart wrote on X.

    Nonetheless, frustration continued to spread online among creators, celebrities and elected officials who did feel like the view suppression was deliberate.

    State Sen. Scott Wiener (D-San Francisco) stated that TikTok is “now state controlled media” in a Monday morning statement on X. He shared a screenshot showing that a video he posted about his legislative proposal to allow people to sue ICE agents received zero views compared to thousands of views on his regular content.

    “TikTok is dead. Killed by the regime & the corrupt kleptocrats suckling at its teat,” he wrote in a Monday evening X post, reposting another screenshot, this time showing extremely low view counts on CNN’s recently shared videos.

    TikTok finalized a deal Thursday to spin off its U.S. operations into a new majority-American joint venture with investors including Oracle, Silver Lake, and MGX. The $14-billion deal puts Larry Ellison, a co-founder of Oracle and a longtime Trump supporter and donor, in a powerful position over the app’s operations in America.

    [ad_2]

    Clara Harter

    Source link

  • Gold Hits Record $5K While Bitcoin Struggles To Keep Pace

    [ad_1]

    Gold shone brightly today, racing to a new high while crypto took the back seat, and the gap between the two assets opened wide.

    Related Reading

    On Monday, the precious metal moved past the $5,000 mark, registering a price point market sentinels had not witnessed before. Bitcoin, by contrast, failed to keep pace and traded well below its recent highs.

    Gold Hits Record Levels

    Safe-haven demand pushed gold sharply higher. Prices were up above $5k an ounce and inked roughly $5,110 at the peak. Silver, for its part, did not go unnoticed, jumping to fresh peaks near $107/ounce.

    Source: Gold Price

    Traders pointed to simmering geopolitical friction and talk of tougher trade moves led by US President Donald Trump as fuel for the rally.

    A weaker greenback made metals more attractive to customers overseas, and central bank buying provided steady backing. Liquidity in some corners were thin as investors rushed to shift cash into things that feel stable when risk elevates.

    Bitcoin Falls Behind

    Market numbers show Bitcoin hovering in the mid-$80,000s range, retreating from peaks seen late last year. Reports note the alpha crypto is roughly 30% below the highest level it hit reached in October 2025, leaving some holders quite jittery.

    Volatility was another factor. Where bullion is being sought for safety, Bitcoin is viewed more as a growth or speculative play, and that difference in investor application becomes clear when markets tighten. Some funds slashed their crypto exposure, signaling a short reroute away from high-risk gambits.

    BTCUSD currently trading at $87,832. Chart: TradingView

    Why Investors Are Shifting

    Analysts and traders described a simple choice: shelter or swing for gains. When headlines push worry, money flows into assets that are widely trusted across markets and governments.

    Metals fit that ticket. Based on market chatter, fears of a US government funding clash and fresh tariff announcements stacked pressure on stocks and added a sense of urgency to safe-haven acquisition.

    Options and futures trading hinted at a more cautious perpective, with volatility indexes rising and bond yields behaving in ways that made the yellow metal look more appealing by comparison.

    Related Reading

    What Traders Are Watching

    Market watchers said eyes will be glued on a few key metrics: The dollar’s path, moves by major central banks, and any sign that US politics escalates could keep metals elevated.

    For Bitcoin, network activity, large wallet flows, and regulatory headlines will likely set the tone. Some traders expect swings both ways. Others caution that when risk appetite is back, crypto may bounce hard, but that outcome is not a sure thing and will be dependent on a string of policy and macro moves.

    Featured image from Unsplash, chart from TradingView

    [ad_2]

    Christian Encila

    Source link

  • Karoline Leavitt’s attempt to smooth over Trump’s ‘Iceland/Greenland’ blunder backfires spectacularly | The Mary Sue

    [ad_1]

    During the World Economic Forum held in Davos, Switzerland, this week, Donald Trump went completely whack, making one untruthful claim after another. Rightfully, parts of his speech from the event made their way to social media platforms such as X (formerly Twitter). One such moment that has gained significant attention online is of Trump repeatedly referring to Greenland as Iceland.

    White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt is clarifying a comment made by Trump during his visit to the World Economic Forum. As mentioned previously, during his speech, Trump referred to Greenland as Iceland multiple times, inviting scrutiny from a significant number of people. One of the individuals to call out this mistake, or rather mention it, was NewsNation White House Correspondent Libbey Dean, who on her X account wrote on January 21, 2026, “During his @wef (World Economic Forum) remarks, President Trump appeared to mix up Greenland and Iceland around three times.” It did not take long for Karoline Leavitt to refute these claims, who, while sharing Dean’s post, wrote, “No he didn’t, Libby. His written remarks referred to Greenland as a “piece of ice” because that’s what it is. You’re the only one mixing anything up here.” In addition to her remarks, Leavitt also attached a screenshot of a Google-searched image of Greenland that featured mountains and water covered with ice, in an effort to substantiate Trump’s “ice-land” comment. People were not buying into Leavitt’s desperate attempts at cleaning up Trump’s mess, and they flooded the comments section of her post with videos of the orange overlord making the “Iceland” remarks repeatedly at the Davos event, while directly and indirectly calling out Leavitt’s lies. Even The Late Show host, Stephen Colbert, a well-known Trump critic, got on the bandwagon and called out Leavitt’s lies. Referring to the incident of Leavitt calling out Dean for misjudging Trump’s Greenland/Iceland, Colbert called the former’s attempts a “grade A big brother propaganda.” He continued dissing on Leaviit and the situation, saying:

    As George Orwell wrote in 1984, ‘War is peace. Freedom is slavery. Karoline Leavitt is a dumbass.”

    Colbert’s comments about Leavitt were appreciated by a significant number of people online. On X, a page called Democratic Wins Media, which posted this video, amassed hundreds of comments, mostly in support of Colbert. They appreciated his bravery in confronting Leavitt and Trump, as well as his dedication to shedding light on the truth. Consequently, they concluded that Trump supporters probably didn’t care about Trump’s gaffe as they themselves weren’t aware of the truth.

    Have a tip we should know? [email protected]

    Image of Sanchari Ghosh

    Sanchari Ghosh

    Sanchari Ghosh is a political writer for The Mary Sue who enjoys keeping up with what’s going on in the world and sometimes reminding everyone what they should be talking about. She’s been around for a few years, but still gets excited whenever she disentangles a complicated story. When she’s not writing, she’s likely sleeping, eating, daydreaming, or just hanging out with friends. Politics is her passion, but so is an amazing nap.

    [ad_2]

    Sanchari Ghosh

    Source link