The New York Budgets

Category: Politics

  • US and Israel Launch Joint Attack on Iran as Explosions Rock Israel and Gulf Arab States

    US and Israel Launch Joint Attack on Iran as Explosions Rock Israel and Gulf Arab States

    The United States and Israel have launched an attack on Iran, with explosions heard and seen across Tehran and in other parts of the country, as apparent retaliatory explosions are hitting northern Israel and multiple Gulf Arab states.

    Several missiles struck University Street and the Jomhouri area in Tehran, the Fars news agency reported. Smoke was seen rising in the city, according to an Al Jazeera correspondent on the ground.

    Iran’s semiofficial Tasnim News Agency reported that explosions also occurred in Tehran’s northern Seyyed Khandan area. Other Iranian media reported attacks nationwide, including in the western Ilam province, while Israel’s military confirmed carrying out attacks in western Iran.

    An Israeli strike hit an elementary girl’s school in Minab, a city in the Hormozgan province of southern Iran, killing at least 40 people, according to according to the state-run IRNA news agency..

    Iran’s Foreign Ministry said the attacks targeted a range of military and defence sites, as well as civilian infrastructure, in various cities.

    US President Donald Trump said the joint attacks were aimed at “eliminating imminent threats from the Iranian regime”.

    “Short time ago, US military began major combat operation in Iran. Our objective is to defend the American people by eliminating threats from the Iranian regime,” he said.

    An Iranian official told Reuters that Tehran ⁠is preparing ⁠for a retaliation that is set ⁠to be ⁠”crushing”. Iran is preparing to “take revenge” on Israel and deliver a “strong response”, State TV reported.

    A senior Iranian official told Al Jazeera that “all American and Israeli assets and interests in the Middle East have become a legitimate target” and that “there are no red lines after this aggression”.

    Explosions in Israel, Bahrain, UAE, Kuwait

    Explosions rocked northern Israel as the country worked to intercept incoming Iranian missiles shortly after it attacked Iran. The blasts echoed just after the Israeli military said it would be using its air defence systems to bring down the Iranian fire. There was no immediate word on any casualties or damage from the ongoing attack.

    Blasts also occurred across numerous Gulf Arab states that host US military assets, including Qatar, Kuwait, the United Arab Emirates and Bahrain. Iran’s Fars News Agency confirmed the country had carried out attacks targeting military bases in each of the states, including Al Udeid Air Base in Qatar and the headquarters of the US Navy’s 5th Fleet in Bahrain.

    Qatar’s Defence Ministry said it had “successfully thwarted a number of attacks targeting the country’s territory”, after several rounds of alerts sounded.

    The UAE’s state news agency reported one person was killed in Abu Dhabi after Iranian missiles were intercepted.

    Muhanad Seloom, assistant professor in Critical Security Studies at the Doha Institute for Graduate Studies, told Al Jazeera that Iran wants to “raise the cost” for countries in the region that are close to the US.

    “They are trying to draw other countries in the region into this war,” said Seloom. “They want to raise the cost for these countries, with the hope probably that these countries will pressure the US administration to stop this war.”

    ‘Joint US-Israeli action’

    Israel’s Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said the attacks on Iran aimed to remove an “existential threat”. Netanyahu projected that “joint action” by Israel and the US “will create the conditions for the brave Iranian people to take their fate into their own hands” and praised Trump for his “historic leadership”.

    A US official told Al Jazeera earlier that the attacks were carried out as a joint military operation between Israel and the US, which has assembled a vast fleet of fighter jets and warships in the region to try to pressure Iran into a deal over its nuclear programme. A US official told Reuters that attacks were being carried out by air and sea.

    One of the areas targeted in Iran’s capital was near the offices of Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, reported The Associated Press. Khamenei is not in Tehran and has been transferred to a secure location, according to an official quoted by Reuters.

    Sirens in Israel

    As sirens sounded and a state of emergency was declared in Israel, the Israeli military said it had issued a “proactive alert to prepare the public for the possibility of missiles being launched toward the state of Israel”.

    The Israel Airports Authority announced its airspace had been closed to all civilian flights and urged the public not to come to the airport.

    According to an Israeli defence official quoted by Reuters, the attacks had been planned for months and the ⁠launch date ⁠decided ⁠weeks ago, even as the US and Iran carried out negotiations.

    Mehran Kamrava, director of the Iranian studies unit at the Arab Center for Research and Policy Studies and professor at Georgetown University in Qatar, said Israel “appears to have launched an attack designed to derail the negotiations”.

  • White House Cuts Ties With Anthropic After Pentagon Flags Security Risk

    White House Cuts Ties With Anthropic After Pentagon Flags Security Risk

    President Donald Trump said Friday that he was ordering every U.S. government agency to “immediately cease” using technology from the artificial intelligence company Anthropic.

    Trump in a Truth Social post said there would be a six-month phase-out for agencies such as the Defense Department, which “are using Anthropic’s products, at various levels.”

    Defense Secretary Peter Hegseth, soon after Trump’s order, said on X that he was ordering the Pentagon to “designate Anthropic a Supply-Chain Risk to National Security” after the AI startup refused to comply with demands about the use of its technology.

    Anthropic, which signed a $200 million contract with the Pentagon in July, wanted assurances that its AI models would not be used for fully autonomous weapons or mass domestic surveillance of Americans.

    The Pentagon, which strongly resisted that request, set a deadline of 5:01 p.m. ET Friday for Anthropic to agree to its demands that the U.S. military be allowed to use the technology for all lawful purposes.

    That deadline passed without an agreement.

    “Anthropic’s stance is fundamentally incompatible with American principles,” Hegseth said in a statement on X.

    “Their relationship with the United States Armed Forces and the Federal Government has therefore been permanently altered.”

    “Anthropic will continue to provide the Department of War its services for a period of no more than six months to allow for a seamless transition to a better and more patriotic service,” the Defense secretary said.

    “America’s warfighters will never be held hostage by the ideological whims of Big Tech. This decision is final.”

    Trump, in his Truth Social post, wrote, “The Leftwing nut jobs at Anthropic have made a DISASTROUS MISTAKE trying to STRONG-ARM the Department of War, and force them to obey their Terms of Service instead of our Constitution.”

    “Their selfishness is putting AMERICAN LIVES at risk, our Troops in danger, and our National Security in JEOPARDY.”

    “Therefore, I am directing EVERY Federal Agency in the United States Government to IMMEDIATELY CEASE all use of Anthropic’s technology,” Trump wrote.

    “We don’t need it, we don’t want it, and will not do business with them again!”

    Sen. Mark Warner, the Virginia Democrat who is vice chair of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, condemned Trump’s action.

    “The president’s directive to halt the use of a leading American AI company across the federal government, combined with inflammatory rhetoric attacking that company, raises serious concerns about whether national security decisions are being driven by careful analysis or political considerations,” Warner said in a statement.

    “President Trump and Secretary Hegseth’s efforts to intimidate and disparage a leading American company — potentially as the pretext to steer contracts to a preferred vendor whose model a number of federal agencies have already identified as a reliability, safety, and security threat — pose an enormous risk to U.S. defense readiness and the willingness of the U.S. private sector and academia to work with the IC [Intelligence Community] and DoD, consistent with their own values and legal ethics,” Warner said.

    Elon Musk, the mega-billionaire who had been Trump’s biggest financial backer in the 2024 election, owns xAI, which aims to compete directly with Anthropic and another major AI company, OpenAI.

    Musk in recent weeks has repeatedly bashed Anthropic on his social network X, writing on Friday that the company “hates Western civilization.”

    Anthropic CEO Dario Amodei said Thursday that his company “cannot in good conscience” allow the Pentagon to use its models without limitation.

    In a statement on Thursday, Amodei said, “It is the [Defense] Department’s prerogative to select contractors most aligned with their vision. But given the substantial value that Anthropic’s technology provides to our armed forces, we hope they reconsider.”

    “Our strong preference is to continue to serve the Department and our warfighters — with our two requested safeguards in place,” Amodei said.

    “Should the Department choose to offboard Anthropic, we will work to enable a smooth transition to another provider, avoiding any disruption to ongoing military planning, operations, or other critical missions. Our models will be available on the expansive terms we have proposed for as long as required.”

    On Friday, another major AI company, OpenAI, said it has the same “red lines” as Anthropic regarding the use of its technology by the Pentagon and other customers.

    “We have long believed that AI should not be used for mass surveillance or autonomous lethal weapons, and that humans should remain in the loop for high-stakes automated decisions,” Open AI CEO Sam Altman wrote in a memo seen by CNBC.

    OpenAI last year signed its own $200 million contract with the Pentagon.

    OpenAI’s contract is for AI models in non-classified use cases, which include everyday office tasks.

    Anthropic’s contract with the Defense Department included classified work.

    The Defense Department had no comment on Friday other than pointing to Trump’s announcement.

    Hegseth, in a post on X, included a screengrab of Trump’s post, and cc:ed Anthropic and Amodei with the message, “Thank you for your attention to this matter.”

  • Bill Clinton Denies Knowledge of Epstein Crimes in House Deposition: ‘I Did Nothing Wrong’

    Bill Clinton Denies Knowledge of Epstein Crimes in House Deposition: ‘I Did Nothing Wrong’

    Former President Bill Clinton, long dogged by scandals involving his personal conduct and questionable associations, faced a grueling six-hour deposition before the House Oversight Committee on Friday, where he repeatedly denied any awareness of Jeffrey Epstein’s heinous sex trafficking operations.

    In a performance that Republicans praised as cooperative but critics dismissed as evasive, Clinton insisted he “saw nothing that gave me pause” during his multiple interactions with the disgraced financier, whose crimes against underage girls have shocked the nation and exposed a web of elite enablers.

    “I did nothing wrong,” Clinton declared, a refrain that echoes his past defenses amid allegations of misconduct, but one that rings hollow to many given the mounting evidence of his proximity to Epstein’s predatory world.

    The closed-door session, held in Chappaqua, New York, near the Clintons’ residence to avoid a public spectacle in Washington, marked a historic low for a former commander-in-chief: the first time a ex-president has been compelled to testify under subpoena before Congress.

    This came after months of negotiations and threats of contempt charges, underscoring the gravity of the committee’s probe into Epstein’s network—a sordid empire built on exploitation, manipulation, and connections to powerful figures, including those in influential financial circles that Epstein navigated with ease. Republicans, led by Chairman James Comer (R-Ky.), hailed Clinton’s appearance as a step toward transparency, while Democrats accused the GOP of partisan gamesmanship aimed at shielding President Donald Trump from similar scrutiny.

    Clinton’s testimony followed that of his wife, Hillary Clinton, who appeared the day before and claimed she never met Epstein—a stark contrast to her husband’s documented ties. In his opening statement, released publicly, Clinton portrayed his relationship with Epstein as a “brief acquaintance” that ended well before the financier’s 2008 conviction for soliciting prostitution from a minor.

    “I had no idea of the crimes Epstein was committing,” he said. “I know what I saw, and more importantly, what I didn’t see. I know what I did, and more importantly, what I didn’t do.” Yet, skeptics point to flight logs showing Clinton aboard Epstein’s infamous “Lolita Express” private jet at least 26 times between 2001 and 2003, often without Secret Service detail, raising questions about what exactly transpired on those trips to destinations including Epstein’s private island, Little St. James.

    Lawmakers grilled Clinton on a trove of recently unsealed documents from the Department of Justice, including photographs depicting him in compromising settings with redacted women—images that have fueled speculation about his involvement.

    Jeffrey Epstein (left) and Bill Clinton (center) in a photo released by the justice department on Friday. (Department Of Justice/Zuma Press Wire/Shutterstock)
    Jeffrey Epstein (left) and Bill Clinton (center) in a photo released by the justice department on Friday. (Department Of Justice/Zuma Press Wire/Shutterstock)

    One particularly infamous photo showed Clinton in a jacuzzi with an unidentified woman, her face obscured. Sources familiar with the deposition told outlets that Clinton denied knowing her or engaging in any sexual activity, a response he repeated for each image presented. “No matter how many photos you show me,” he stated, “it won’t change the fact that I saw nothing wrong and did nothing wrong.”

    But these denials do little to dispel the cloud of suspicion, especially given Epstein’s modus operandi of using his wealth and connections—often within elite, predominantly Jewish social networks—to lure and abuse vulnerable girls, all while hobnobbing with global leaders like Clinton.

    The committee also probed Epstein’s donations to the Clinton Foundation, a charitable entity that has faced its own controversies over foreign influence and opaque finances. Epstein contributed tens of thousands of dollars, and records show him visiting the White House multiple times during Clinton’s presidency.

    Clinton maintained that these interactions were innocuous, focused on philanthropy, but critics argue they exemplify how Epstein ingratiated himself with power brokers to mask his criminal enterprise. “We are only here because he hid it from everyone so well for so long,” Clinton said in his prepared remarks, shifting blame squarely onto Epstein—a convenient narrative that ignores the red flags many believe should have alerted someone of Clinton’s stature.

    Republicans on the panel, including Comer, described Clinton as “charming” and “very cooperative,” noting he answered every question without invoking the Fifth Amendment. “He’s a charming individual, obviously,” Comer remarked, adding that the testimony “exonerated President Trump” by recounting a early-2000s golf tournament conversation where Trump allegedly told Clinton he severed ties with Epstein over a land deal dispute. This anecdote, volunteered by Clinton, aligns with Trump’s longstanding claim that he distanced himself from Epstein before the 2008 charges.

    Trump himself weighed in from the White House, expressing reluctance about the deposition: “I like Bill Clinton, and I don’t like seeing him deposed.” Yet, Democrats seized on the moment to demand Trump testify, pointing to his own extensive socializing with Epstein in the 1990s and 2000s, as well as mentions in Epstein-related files.

    From left, Trump and his girlfriend (and future wife), former model Melania Knauss, Epstein and Maxwell pose together at the Mar-a-Lago club, Palm Beach, Florida on February 12, 2000 [File: Davidoff Studios/Getty Images]
    From left, Trump and his girlfriend (and future wife), former model Melania Knauss, Epstein and Maxwell pose together at the Mar-a-Lago club, Palm Beach, Florida on February 12, 2000 [File: Davidoff Studios/Getty Images]

    The broader investigation stems from Epstein’s 2019 death in custody—ruled a suicide but mired in conspiracy theories—and the subsequent conviction of his accomplice, Ghislaine Maxwell, for sex trafficking. Epstein’s crimes, which involved grooming and abusing dozens of underage girls, often at his lavish properties, have implicated a roster of high-profile names, from British royalty to Wall Street titans.

    The House probe, launched amid calls for accountability, has drawn bipartisan support but devolved into partisan sniping. Democrats accuse Republicans of selective outrage, noting the Justice Department’s reluctance under Trump to release records on allegations against him, including a claim of sexual abuse of a minor—which the department is reviewing.

    Clinton’s spokesperson has reiterated that he cut ties with Epstein before the 2006 charges and was unaware of the crimes, denying any visits to Little St. James. However, a 2025 FBI document lists Clinton among figures with unverified sexual assault allegations tied to Epstein’s orbit, though no charges have been filed. This deposition, while not accusing Clinton of wrongdoing, revives painful memories of his own impeachment over the Monica Lewinsky affair and allegations of sexual misconduct from women like Juanita Broaddrick and Paula Jones—patterns that, for detractors, make his Epstein denials less credible.

    As transcripts from both Clintons’ testimonies are expected to be released soon—possibly as early as this weekend—the political fallout intensifies. Republicans frame the sessions as vindication for Trump, with Comer slamming Democrats for “weaponizing” the probe.

    Democrats, like top panel member Rep. Robert Garcia (D-Calif.), counter that the precedent now demands Trump’s appearance, along with others like Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick, who admitted visiting Epstein’s island.

  • Zohran Mamdani Seeks $21 Billion Federal Backing for Massive Queens Housing Project.

    Zohran Mamdani Seeks $21 Billion Federal Backing for Massive Queens Housing Project.

    New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani met with President Donald Trump at the White House on Thursday, February 26, to pitch a ambitious $21 billion federal investment in a long-dormant housing project over Sunnyside Yard in Queens.

    The Democratic socialist mayor, known for his progressive stance on housing affordability, described the meeting as “productive” and expressed optimism about partnering with the Republican president to address the city’s acute housing crisis. This development marks a potential revival of a project first proposed under former Mayor Bill de Blasio, which could deliver 12,000 affordable homes—the largest such initiative in New York City since the 1970s.

    Mamdani, 34, shared a photo on Instagram capturing the moment: Trump smiling broadly while holding two mock New York Daily News front pages. One was the infamous 1975 headline “Ford to City: Drop Dead,” referencing President Gerald Ford’s refusal to bail out a near-bankrupt New York. The other, a custom creation from Mamdani’s team, proclaimed “Trump to City: Let’s Build,” with subheadings touting “Backs New Era of Housing” and “Trump Delivers 12,000+ Homes; Most Since 1973.” Anna Bahr, a spokesperson for City Hall, confirmed that Mamdani presented these printouts to symbolize a shift from historical federal neglect to collaborative progress.

    “He came to the president today with a couple of pitches that would produce and construct more housing in a handful of projects than has happened in 50 years,” Bahr told reporters. The White House has not yet committed to funding, but sources familiar with the discussions indicate Trump was receptive, particularly given his Queens roots and lifelong ties to New York real estate.

    At the heart of the proposal is Sunnyside Yard, a sprawling 180-acre active rail yard in western Queens, often called the busiest in North America. Owned jointly by Amtrak, the Metropolitan Transportation Authority (MTA), and other entities, the site serves as a critical hub for Amtrak, Long Island Rail Road, and New Jersey Transit trains.

    The plan involves constructing what Mamdani’s office describes as “the world’s largest deck” over the yard—a massive platform to support development without disrupting rail operations below.

    If funded, the project would yield 12,000 affordable housing units, including 6,000 modeled after the Mitchell-Lama program, which provides subsidized rentals and cooperatives for moderate- and middle-income families.

    Beyond housing, the development promises 30,000 good-paying union jobs during construction, along with new parks, schools, and healthcare clinics to serve the surrounding communities. Senior city housing official Cea Weaver, director of the Mayor’s Office to Protect Tenants, highlighted the project’s potential to unify neighborhoods divided by the rail yard.

    “It’s a barrier between some of the most diverse neighborhoods in Queens,” Weaver said. “And so I think it’s important that we’re able to connect neighborhoods.” However, she acknowledged the challenges: “It’s extraordinarily expensive, and we need federal support in order to be able to do it.”

    The Sunnyside Yard concept isn’t new. It traces back to urban planning ideas from the 1960s, but gained traction under de Blasio in 2015, with a 2020 master plan estimating costs at $14 billion for a mixed-use development including housing, offices, and public spaces.

    The Economic Development Corporation (EDC) led the effort, incorporating public input to prioritize affordable housing, jobs, transportation improvements, and sustainability. The COVID-19 pandemic halted progress, and successor Eric Adams did not revive it. Earlier versions faced opposition from local figures like Rep.

    Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and community groups concerned about density, environmental impacts, and displacement. Mamdani’s pitch escalates the scale, focusing heavily on affordability amid escalating costs.

    New York City’s housing woes provide the urgent backdrop. Elected on promises to tackle affordability, Mamdani faces a crisis where renters spend 54.52% of their median income on housing—the highest in the nation, per a 2025 WalletHub report.

    Over the past two decades, inflation-adjusted wages for renters rose less than 15%, while average rents surged nearly 40%. The city’s rental vacancy rate dipped to 1.41% in 2023, far below the 5% needed to ease rent regulations under state law. A 2024 Regional Plan Association analysis pegged the housing shortage at 540,000 units, a gap that stifles mobility and forces many into substandard living.

    Recent 2026 data paints an even grimmer picture. Manhattan’s vacancy rate hovered just above 2% in 2025, with average rents exceeding $5,400 monthly—a 6% jump from the prior year. Citywide, nearly half of renters are rent-burdened, spending over 30% of income on housing. Evictions in subsidized housing spiked, with 43,000 of 120,000 filings in 2024 occurring in such units, per a New York Housing Conference report. Meanwhile, thousands of rent-stabilized apartments sit vacant due to economic disincentives under current laws, exacerbating the crunch.

    The project’s revival could be transformative. Drawing parallels to Hudson Yards—a 28-acre decked development in Manhattan—Sunnyside Yard’s 180 acres offer exponentially more space for mid-rise buildings, greenways, and community amenities. Proponents argue it aligns with “Keeping it Queens” ethos, blending sustainability, pedestrian-friendly design, and workforce development. Mamdani’s office called it a “once-in-a-generation opportunity to confront the city’s housing crisis at the scale it demands,” potentially the largest infrastructure investment since Co-op City’s completion in 1973.

    Yet hurdles abound. Beyond securing federal funds—requiring Amtrak’s approval and congressional buy-in—the project faces technical complexities, like building over active tracks without service interruptions. Local stakeholders, including City Council members and residents, may revive past concerns over gentrification and environmental risks. Mamdani acknowledged the timeline: “many, many years” ahead. Trump, while interested, has not committed, and his administration’s priorities lean toward deregulation and private-sector involvement.

    This meeting underscores Mamdani’s pragmatic approach, despite ideological differences with Trump. As Joe Calvello, Mamdani’s press secretary, noted, the mayor seized Trump’s invitation to “do just that” on housing. If successful, it could reshape Queens, alleviate the housing squeeze, and set a precedent for federal-city partnerships in urban renewal. For now, New Yorkers watch as this bold vision inches toward reality.

  • Federal Reserve Challenges Justice Department Subpoenas in Powell Probe

    Federal Reserve Challenges Justice Department Subpoenas in Powell Probe

    WASHINGTON—The Federal Reserve is waging a behind-closed-doors legal challenge to a pair of subpoenas issued as part of U.S. Attorney Jeanine Pirro’s criminal investigation into Chair Jerome Powell, according to people familiar with the matter.

    Pirro, a longtime ally of President Trump, opened the probe to examine whether Powell gave false testimony to Congress last summer about the central bank’s building-renovation project. The move prompted an unprecedented public response from Powell, who in a Jan. 11 video statement said the investigation was a pretext for Trump’s continuing campaign to pressure the Fed to lower interest rates and end the independence of the central bank.

    📊 More Economic Policy
    Plus sign png

    The Fed, in sealed proceedings, is asking a judge to quash the subpoenas, which could reduce or eliminate its obligation to respond. Its specific legal arguments couldn’t immediately be learned. It isn’t uncommon, especially in high-profile investigations, for a subpoena recipient to challenge prosecutors’ demands as being overly broad or seeking information protected by legal privilege.

    The fight is taking place out of public view because of secrecy rules that apply to criminal investigations pending before a grand jury.

    Pirro was present during a White House event on Jan. 8 where Trump excoriated his U.S. attorneys for not moving fast enough to prosecute his favored targets. The Justice Department sent the Fed a pair of subpoenas the following day. The subpoenas asked the Fed to respond toward the end of January.

    Most Read in Economy

    Republicans have been looking for an off-ramp to the standoff because it is threatening to delay the confirmation of Kevin Warsh, the former Fed governor Trump has chosen to succeed Powell when his term as chair ends in May.

    “There were subpoenas issued. But that doesn’t have to mean that there are charges,” Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent said on CNBC earlier this month. He has also defended the probe, telling CBS in January, “I think that the message is that independence does not mean no accountability.”

    Construction on the Marriner S. Eccles Federal Reserve building in Washington (Samuel Corum/Bloomberg)
    Construction on the Marriner S. Eccles Federal Reserve building in Washington (Samuel Corum/Bloomberg)

    Sen. Thom Tillis (R., N.C.) has repeatedly said he wouldn’t advance any Fed nomination, including Warsh’s, until the Justice Department probe has ended. With all Democrats on the Senate Banking Committee taking the same stand, the 13-11 GOP majority isn’t enough to push a nominee through without him.

    Tillis has said the probe was launched outside of traditional channels and has warned about steps that erode investors’ expectations that the central bank will be given reasonable latitude to set interest rates as economic conditions warrant.

    The investigation centers on a few minutes of answers Powell provided to questions at a Senate hearing last summer about cost overruns on renovations of two historic buildings. White House officials last year suggested either Powell made false statements about the project’s costs or the Fed failed to update building records, but the furor quickly faded after Trump toured the project with Powell in July.

    U.S. Attorney For Washington, DC Jeanine Pirro at a press conference (Image source: Getty Images/Photo by Win McNamee)
    U.S. Attorney For Washington, DC Jeanine Pirro at a press conference (Image source: Getty Images/Photo by Win McNamee)

    Pirro has defended the probe, saying the subpoenas were issued after her office hadn’t received answers to multiple information requests. The inquiry opened in November. A lawyer in Pirro’s office sent two emails to the Fed in December asking for a meeting about the renovation.

    Trump has sounded less concerned about resolving the impasse. Pirro is “going to take it to the end and see,” Trump told reporters at the White House on Feb. 2, where he inflated to $4 billion the cost of the $2.5-billion renovation.

    Exclusive articles

  • ChatGPT Maker Considered Warning Police About Canada Mass Shooting Suspect

    ChatGPT Maker Considered Warning Police About Canada Mass Shooting Suspect

    TORONTO—ChatGPT-maker OpenAI said Friday it considered last year alerting Canadian police about the activities of a person who months later committed one of the worst school shootings in the country’s history.

    OpenAI said last June the company identified the account of Jesse Van Rootselaar via abuse detection efforts for “furtherance of violent activities.”

    The San Francisco tech company said it considered whether to refer the account the Royal Canadian Mounted Police but determined at the time that the account activity did not meet a threshold for referral to law enforcement. OpenAI banned the account in June 2025 for violating its usage policy.

    The 18-year-old killed eight people in a remote part of British Columbia last week and died from a self-inflicted gun shot wound.

    OpenAI said the threshold for referring a user to law enforcement is whether the case involves an imminent and credible risk of serious physical harm to others. The company said it did not identify credible or imminent planning. The Wall Street Journal first reported OpenAI’s revelation.

    OpenAI said that, after learning of the school shooting, employees reached out to the RCMP with information on the individual and their use of ChatGPT.

    Most Read in Tech

    “Our thoughts are with everyone affected by the Tumbler Ridge tragedy. We proactively reached out to the Royal Canadian Mounted Police with information on the individual and their use of ChatGPT, and we’ll continue to support their investigation,” an OpenAI spokesperson said.

    The RCMP said Van Rootselaar first killed her mother and stepbrother at the family home before attacking the nearby school. Van Rootselaar had a history of mental health contacts with police.

    The motive for the shooting remains unclear.

    The town of 2,700 people in the Canadian Rockies is more than 1,000 kilometers  northeast of Vancouver, near the provincial border with Alberta. Police said the victims included a 39-year-old teaching assistant and five students, ages 12 to 13.

    The attack was Canada’s deadliest rampage since 2020, when a gunman in Nova Scotia killed 13 people and set fires that left another nine dead.

  • High Court Rules Trump Exceeded Authority With Worldwide Tariff Plan

    High Court Rules Trump Exceeded Authority With Worldwide Tariff Plan

    WASHINGTON — In a 6-3 decision that dealt a temporary blow to President Donald Trump’s bold trade agenda, the Supreme Court ruled Friday that the administration overstepped its bounds by using the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) to impose sweeping tariffs on most U.S. trading partners. Chief Justice John Roberts, authoring the majority opinion, argued that IEEPA does not grant the president “unbounded” authority to levy peacetime tariffs at will, labeling it a “transformative expansion” of executive power.

    Yet, in a display of unyielding resolve, Trump swiftly unveiled a robust backup plan, announcing a new 10% global tariff under alternative legal authorities and vowing to restore—and potentially exceed—the original rates that have already delivered billions in revenue and narrowed key trade deficits.

    The ruling, which invalidated about 75% of the tariffs imposed in 2025—including the 10% baseline “reciprocal” duties on imports from nearly every nation—stemmed from a lawsuit by Learning Resources Inc., a manufacturer of educational materials. Justices sided with the company, emphasizing that Congress must explicitly delegate such broad tariff powers.

    Roberts, joined by Neil Gorsuch, Amy Coney Barrett, Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan, and Ketanji Brown Jackson, rejected the administration’s IEEPA interpretation, though the liberal justices diverged on the application of the “major questions” doctrine. Dissenters Clarence Thomas, Brett Kavanaugh, and Samuel Alito warned of chaos, including potential refunds of billions in collected duties—a “mess” that could burden taxpayers.

    Trump, undeterred, wasted no time in countering the decision. At a White House press conference hours later, he declared the imposition of a 10% global tariff under Section 122 of the Trade Expansion Act of 1962, which allows temporary duties to address trade imbalances for up to 150 days. “We have alternatives—great alternatives,” Trump asserted. “We’ll take in more money, and we’ll be a lot stronger for it.” He also directed the U.S. Trade Representative to launch Section 301 investigations into unfair practices by several nations, paving the way for targeted tariffs post-probe—a process that could take months but ensures compliance with the ruling.

    🏛️ More Tariffs
    Plus sign png

    This nimble pivot highlights the enduring strength of Trump’s pro-America trade strategy, which has already yielded tangible wins. According to Bureau of Economic Analysis data released Thursday, U.S. tariffs narrowed the goods trade deficit with China by 32% to $202.1 billion in 2025—the lowest since 2006—while slashing imbalances with Canada (25%), South Korea (14%), Germany (14%), and Japan (8%). Overall, the U.S. trade deficit dipped 0.2% despite a surge in high-tech imports for AI investments, with tariffs generating $216 billion in revenue that helped shrink the federal budget deficit from $1.84 trillion in 2024 to $1.78 trillion. “It’s ultimately pretty clear that tariffs weighed on imports,” noted Wells Fargo economists Shannon Grein and Tim Quinlan, crediting the duties for reshaping global flows in America’s favor.

    Most Read in Politics

    Critics, including the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget’s Maya MacGuineas, decried the ruling as a $2 trillion “hole” in the debt fight, but proponents argue tariffs have revitalized manufacturing and jobs. The immediate post-ruling drop in effective tariff rates—from 16% to 13%, per Wells Fargo—offers short-term relief for importers, but Trump’s plan aims to reclaim that ground. “The administration retains the ability to re-impose tariffs,” economists at Morgan Stanley observed, suggesting a “lighter-touch” recalibration could balance affordability with protectionism.

    The decision injects uncertainty into global markets, with the S&P 500 dipping 0.8% Friday amid fears of refund lawsuits—potentially chaotic, as Justice Kavanaugh warned. Yet, Trump’s tariff threats have historically spurred deals, like those easing duties with allies.

    As he eyes higher rates, the move reaffirms his commitment to fair trade, countering what he calls decades of exploitation. “We’re screwed if we don’t fight back,” Trump posted on Truth Social last month—a sentiment echoed by supporters who see tariffs as essential for American sovereignty.

    This ruling, while a setback, may ultimately fortify Trump’s legacy: proving tariffs’ efficacy in deficit reduction and revenue generation, even as legal hurdles force creative enforcement. As the administration ramps up investigations, the world watches—America first, tariffs intact.

    Exclusive articles

  • Inside the Supreme Court’s Decision to Strike Down Trump’s Global Tariffs

    Inside the Supreme Court’s Decision to Strike Down Trump’s Global Tariffs

    WASHINGTON — In a 6-3 ruling that exposed the limits of even a strong executive’s reach, the Supreme Court on Friday invalidated the bulk of President Donald Trump’s innovative global tariffs, deeming his use of the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) an overstep without explicit congressional backing. Chief Justice John Roberts, penning the majority opinion, argued that IEEPA does not confer “unbounded” peacetime tariff authority, framing it as a potential “transformative expansion” of presidential power.

    Yet, in a testament to Trump’s unyielding commitment to American economic sovereignty, the president swiftly pivoted, announcing a new 10% global tariff under alternative statutes and vowing to restore the protective measures that have already slashed trade deficits, generated billions in revenue, and revitalized U.S. manufacturing.

    The decision, a rare check on Trump’s pro-America trade revolution, overturned about 75% of the 2025 tariffs—including the 10% baseline “reciprocal” duties on imports from nearly every nation—stemming from a lawsuit by educational materials maker Learning Resources Inc. Roberts, joined by Neil Gorsuch, Amy Coney Barrett, Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan, and Ketanji Brown Jackson, emphasized that Congress must clearly delegate such sweeping powers.

    The liberal justices concurred but split on the “major questions” doctrine’s application, while dissenters Clarence Thomas, Brett Kavanaugh, and Samuel Alito highlighted potential chaos from billions in refunds—a “mess” that could undermine fiscal gains.

    Trump, ever the fighter, didn’t miss a beat. Emerging from a truncated meeting with governors—where he confided his inner fury at the “disgraceful” ruling—he held a defiant 45-minute White House press conference, dimming the lights for dramatic effect.

    🏛️ More Politics
    Plus sign png

    “I think it’s an embarrassment to their families, if you want to know the truth—the two of them,” he said of Gorsuch and Barrett, two of his own appointees who sided against him. Praising the dissenters for their “strength and wisdom and love of our country,” Trump singled out Kavanaugh as a “genius.” He even quipped that the six majority justices were “barely invited” to the State of the Union, underscoring his frustration with a court he helped solidify as conservative.

    Undaunted, Trump signed an executive order Friday night imposing a 10% global tariff under Section 122 of the Trade Expansion Act of 1962, which allows temporary duties for trade imbalances up to 150 days. “We have alternatives—great alternatives. Could be more money. We’ll take in more money, and we’ll be a lot stronger for it,” he declared.

    The administration also launched Section 301 investigations into unfair practices by key partners, enabling targeted tariffs post-probe—a more deliberate but equally potent tool. “Other alternatives will now be used to replace the ones that the court incorrectly rejected,” Trump affirmed, spinning the setback as a clarifying win that bolsters his arsenal.

    This resilience highlights why tariffs remain a cornerstone of Trump’s America First doctrine. Bureau of Economic Analysis data released Thursday showed the policy’s triumphs: The U.S. goods trade deficit with China plunged 32% to $202.1 billion in 2025—the lowest since 2006—while imbalances with Canada (25%), South Korea (14%), Germany (14%), and Japan (8%) narrowed sharply.

    Overall, the deficit dipped 0.2% despite AI-driven high-tech import surges, with tariffs raking in $216 billion—slashing the federal budget gap from $1.84 trillion in 2024 to $1.78 trillion. “It’s ultimately pretty clear that tariffs weighed on imports,” noted Wells Fargo economists Shannon Grein and Tim Quinlan, crediting the duties for reshaping flows in America’s favor and boosting domestic jobs.

    Critics like Maya MacGuineas of the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget decried the ruling as a $2 trillion “hole” in debt reduction, but proponents argue tariffs have been a fiscal boon, funding infrastructure without tax hikes. The immediate drop in effective rates—from 16% to 13%, per Wells Fargo—offers short-term relief, but Trump’s plan promises restoration.

    Most Read in Politics

    Morgan Stanley strategists Ariana Salvatore and Bradley Tian predict a “lighter-touch” approach could balance affordability with protectionism, reducing sudden shocks while concentrating on strategic sectors.

    The ruling injects procedural hurdles—Section 301 probes take months—but economists at State Street Investment Management see it shifting risk to targeted, non-tariff measures like sanctions, enhancing precision in geopolitical contests. For Trump, facing midterms, it’s a chance to rally his base: “We’re screwed if we don’t fight back,” he posted on Truth Social last month. As the White House eyes congressional tweaks to IEEPA or new statutes, the decision may fortify tariffs’ legacy—proving their efficacy in deficit slashing and revenue generation, even amid legal battles.

    Trump’s morning woes—Q4 2025 GDP growth slowed by shutdowns and spending dips—only amplified his defiance. “I’ve been waiting forever,” he lamented in Georgia Thursday, confident in his authority. With refunds looming but barriers high, the economic impulse leans positive: lower duties boost margins for import-heavy sectors, softening the dollar modestly. Yet, Trump’s vow for “higher” tariffs reaffirms his vision: a stronger, fairer America through bold trade action.

    Exclusive articles

  • Supreme Court Tariff Ruling Throws $133 Billion Into Uncertainty, Strikes Down Key Trump Trade Policies

    Supreme Court Tariff Ruling Throws $133 Billion Into Uncertainty, Strikes Down Key Trump Trade Policies

    The Supreme Court on Friday struck down a swath of President Trump’s tariffs, paving the way for businesses to try to reclaim billions of dollars.

    The decision was a major blow for the Trump administration, which had said the money could be used to help pay down federal debt, fund rebate checks to Americans and bail out farmers hurt by tariffs. Trump even claimed that tariff revenues would be large enough to replace the need for income taxes.

    On Friday, Trump panned the decision and said he would sign an order to impose a 10% global tariff under a different authority, “over and above our normal tariffs already being charged.”

    Source: Treasury Department

    Through mid-December, U.S. Customs and Border Protection had brought in about $133.5 billion worth of tariffs under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA), the law that was struck down. Such tariffs accounted for about 67% of the tariffs collected in the 2025 fiscal year, which runs through September, and 57% of the tariffs collected between the end of September and Dec 14.

    Altogether, including a host of miscellaneous duties not related to trade measures by the president, customs collected fees of about $202 billion in the 2025 fiscal year, about 2.4 times the total amount collected the previous year.

    The Supreme Court didn’t provide guidance on whether, or how, tariffs would be refunded, likely leaving those issues to lower courts. Still, trade lawyers say that hundreds of firms have already filed lawsuits to increase their chances of clawing back money.

    The president declared 10% across-the-board tariffs on all imports back in April, and imposed even higher rates on a slew of nations. His team branded these “reciprocal” tariffs, saying they were intended to ensure fair treatment for American companies and goods.

    Trump walked back or delayed some of the threatened reciprocal tariffs. But the government was still able to collect significant sums from major trading partners using different tariffs also imposed under IEEPA. In regard to China, the president at one point slapped the nation with 125% “reciprocal” duties and added another 20% for the country’s alleged role in the fentanyl trade. The two tariffs were each lowered to 10% under a trade agreement later.

  • US Grants Two Licences Allowing Oil Majors to Restart Operations in Venezuela

    US Grants Two Licences Allowing Oil Majors to Restart Operations in Venezuela

    he US has relaxed its sanctions on Venezuela’s energy sector by granting two general licences and allowing several global energy companies to resume operations and negotiate new contracts in the South American country. This decision follows the capture and removal of Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro by US forces in early January 2026, reported Reuters.

    The US Treasury Department’s Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) issued general licences to companies such as Chevron, bp, Eni, Shell and Repsol, enabling them to operate oil and gas projects in Venezuela. These companies are major partners of Venezuela’s state-run company PDVSA and maintain offices and stakes in Venezuelan projects.

    The licences require payments for royalties and taxes to be routed through a US-controlled fund.

    A separate licence allows international companies to engage with PDVSA for new investments.

    However, these agreements necessitate additional permits from the OFAC and exclude transactions with entities in Russia, Iran or China.

    A spokesperson of Chevron was quoted by the news agency as saying: “The new General Licenses, coupled with recent changes in Venezuela’s Hydrocarbons Law, are important steps towards enabling the further development of Venezuela’s resources for its people and for advancing regional energy security.”

    Additionally, in a separate development, as reported by Reuters, India’s Reliance Industries has secured a general licence from the US, allowing it to purchase Venezuelan oil directly without breaching sanctions.

    (Photograph: Reuters)
    (Photograph: Reuters)

    This move is expected to expedite Venezuela’s oil exports while helping Reliance replace Russian crude with discounted Venezuelan oil.

    The issuance comes amid reports that India is shifting away from Russian oil purchases following President Donald Trump’s removal of a 25% tariff on Indian imports.

    Earlier this year, Reliance acquired two million barrels of Venezuelan oil from trader Vitol, which also received US licences alongside Trafigura.

    The relaxation of sanctions is part of a broader strategy to support economic recovery in Venezuela and foster responsible investment.

    The US aims to revitalise Venezuela’s oil industry through a $100bn reconstruction plan and strengthen ties between Caracas and Washington.

    The proceeds from Venezuelan oil sales are directed through a fund in Qatar before reaching the interim Venezuelan Government.

    ExxonMobil and ConocoPhillips are currently evaluating potential re-entry into Venezuela after having their assets expropriated in 2007 under then-President Hugo Chavez.

    While ExxonMobil considers Venezuela “uninvestable” at present, talks with the government continue while data is being gathered on the sector.

    Last month, Venezuela reached an agreement with the US to export up to $2.8bn (1.1tn bolivars) worth of oil, according to President Trump.