Company

Program

Terms & Policies

© 2025 TikTok

We're having trouble playing this video. Please refresh and try again.

40 comments

You may like

Are U.S. citizen children being deported? Early Friday, three U.S. citizen children from two families were removed from the United States with their mothers by Immigration and Customs Enforcement. One of them is a 4-year-old with Stage 4 cancer who was sent without medication or the ability to contact their doctors, a lawyer for the child’s family said. The others are 2 and 7 years old. The children’s situations have intensified concerns that the Trump administration is carrying out deportations in a way that violates the legal rights of both citizens and noncitizens. Charles Kuck, an immigration attorney and law professor at Emory University, said that while Tom Homan, President Donald Trump’s border czar, might argue that the children weren’t, by legal definition, “deported,” the U.S. government effectively facilitated their removal from the country. 
“Who paid for the ticket? It is clear that the U.S. government paid for this ticket — that means these children were deported,” Kuck said. “Whether they had [due] process or not, whether ICE appropriately followed the rules or not, these children were deported. The question you have to ask yourself is: What’s stopping this from happening to me and my kids?” — After weeks of mounting questions about whether Trump was defying court orders, the administration arrested a Wisconsin judge and accused her of helping a Mexican immigrant evade arrest by federal agents. Officers handcuffed Milwaukee County Judge Hannah Dugan in public. Attorney General Pam Bondi bragged on the Fox News show “America Reports” about the administration’s willingness to go after judges who “think they’re above the law.” FBI Director Kash Patel began the day by announcing Dugan’s arrest on social media and ended it by posting a photo of agents leading her away. Caption from articles by Mariana Alfaro, Patrick Marley and Jeremy Roebuck.
Are U.S. citizen children being deported? Early Friday, three U.S. citizen children from two families were removed from the United States with their mothers by Immigration and Customs Enforcement. One of them is a 4-year-old with Stage 4 cancer who was sent without medication or the ability to contact their doctors, a lawyer for the child’s family said. The others are 2 and 7 years old. The children’s situations have intensified concerns that the Trump administration is carrying out deportations in a way that violates the legal rights of both citizens and noncitizens. Charles Kuck, an immigration attorney and law professor at Emory University, said that while Tom Homan, President Donald Trump’s border czar, might argue that the children weren’t, by legal definition, “deported,” the U.S. government effectively facilitated their removal from the country. 
“Who paid for the ticket? It is clear that the U.S. government paid for this ticket — that means these children were deported,” Kuck said. “Whether they had [due] process or not, whether ICE appropriately followed the rules or not, these children were deported. The question you have to ask yourself is: What’s stopping this from happening to me and my kids?” — After weeks of mounting questions about whether Trump was defying court orders, the administration arrested a Wisconsin judge and accused her of helping a Mexican immigrant evade arrest by federal agents. Officers handcuffed Milwaukee County Judge Hannah Dugan in public. Attorney General Pam Bondi bragged on the Fox News show “America Reports” about the administration’s willingness to go after judges who “think they’re above the law.” FBI Director Kash Patel began the day by announcing Dugan’s arrest on social media and ended it by posting a photo of agents leading her away. Caption from articles by Mariana Alfaro, Patrick Marley and Jeremy Roebuck.
washingtonpost
57.6K
·4-28
What happens if Meta gets broken up?? Ft @NaomiNixWrites  Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg argued in federal court Monday that his company competes against a broad array of online competitors, rejecting the Federal Trade Commission’s claim that the social media giant maintains a monopoly among a small group of communication apps that connect people to friends and family. FTC lawyer Daniel Matheson sought to use Zuckerberg’s previous comments and company documents to show that Facebook prioritized helping users connect with people they knew. For instance, Matheson cited the company’s registration documents with the Securities and Exchange Commission, where it states “people use Facebook to stay connected.” But the social media CEO argued that the company’s broader goal is to enable its users to learn about the world and consume content posted from others outside their personal networks. Caption from a story by: Naomi Nix
What happens if Meta gets broken up?? Ft @NaomiNixWrites Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg argued in federal court Monday that his company competes against a broad array of online competitors, rejecting the Federal Trade Commission’s claim that the social media giant maintains a monopoly among a small group of communication apps that connect people to friends and family. FTC lawyer Daniel Matheson sought to use Zuckerberg’s previous comments and company documents to show that Facebook prioritized helping users connect with people they knew. For instance, Matheson cited the company’s registration documents with the Securities and Exchange Commission, where it states “people use Facebook to stay connected.” But the social media CEO argued that the company’s broader goal is to enable its users to learn about the world and consume content posted from others outside their personal networks. Caption from a story by: Naomi Nix
washingtonpost
1036
·4-24
Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth continued Tuesday to blame “leakers” who were ousted from the Pentagon for a report that has revived scrutiny of his use of the commercial messaging application Signal to talk about military attack plans. “Once a leaker, always a leaker, often a leaker,” Hegseth told Fox News on Tuesday in his first major television interview since the story was published in the New York Times. “I don’t have time for leakers. I don’t have time for the hoax press that peddles old stories from disgruntled employees.” The Times reported Sunday that Hegseth used a Signal chat with his wife, brother and personal lawyer to discuss sensitive information about a forthcoming bombing campaign in Yemen. It was the second reported episode of Hegseth using the application to talk about the strikes in Yemen. Caption from article by Patrick Svitek and Abigail Hauslohner.
Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth continued Tuesday to blame “leakers” who were ousted from the Pentagon for a report that has revived scrutiny of his use of the commercial messaging application Signal to talk about military attack plans. “Once a leaker, always a leaker, often a leaker,” Hegseth told Fox News on Tuesday in his first major television interview since the story was published in the New York Times. “I don’t have time for leakers. I don’t have time for the hoax press that peddles old stories from disgruntled employees.” The Times reported Sunday that Hegseth used a Signal chat with his wife, brother and personal lawyer to discuss sensitive information about a forthcoming bombing campaign in Yemen. It was the second reported episode of Hegseth using the application to talk about the strikes in Yemen. Caption from article by Patrick Svitek and Abigail Hauslohner.
washingtonpost
18.7K
·4-22
A federal judge on Tuesday said she will require the Trump administration to produce records and sworn answers about the U.S. government’s attempts, or lack thereof, to return a Maryland resident who was apprehended by immigration authorities and illegally sent to a notorious prison in El Salvador. The decision from U.S. District Judge Paula Xinis, where she left open the possibility of a contempt ruling against the Trump administration, marks another escalation in the legal showdown with the White House. The case has widespread implications, with Justice Department lawyers arguing that the judge lacks the authority to force the administration to coordinate with the Salvadoran government to bring Kilmar Abrego García back to the United States. “It’s going to be two weeks of intense discovery,” Xinis told Justice Department attorneys at the hearing. From article by Steve Thompson and Katie Mettler.
A federal judge on Tuesday said she will require the Trump administration to produce records and sworn answers about the U.S. government’s attempts, or lack thereof, to return a Maryland resident who was apprehended by immigration authorities and illegally sent to a notorious prison in El Salvador. The decision from U.S. District Judge Paula Xinis, where she left open the possibility of a contempt ruling against the Trump administration, marks another escalation in the legal showdown with the White House. The case has widespread implications, with Justice Department lawyers arguing that the judge lacks the authority to force the administration to coordinate with the Salvadoran government to bring Kilmar Abrego García back to the United States. “It’s going to be two weeks of intense discovery,” Xinis told Justice Department attorneys at the hearing. From article by Steve Thompson and Katie Mettler.
washingtonpost
75.6K
·4-16
President Donald Trump on Monday signaled he was open to cutting deals with countries around the world to ease tariffs, partially stabilizing markets that have been rattled by an intensifying trade war. While Trump and many White House advisers continued to suggest there would be no quick end to new import duties, the president also fueled optimism that deals with individual countries could avert the worst-case economic scenarios. Major stock indexes closed largely flat after sinking for several consecutive days since the White House unveiled major new tariffs last week. After a dizzying session, the S&P 500 ended down just 0.2 percent on Monday, while the tech-heavy Nasdaq was barely positive. The Dow Jones Industrial Average, which contains just 30 stocks, closed down just shy of 1 percent. “We’re going to get fair deals and good deals with every country. And if we don’t, we’re going to have nothing to do with them,” Trump said in a joint Oval Office appearance with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. “They’re not going to be allowed to participate in the United States.” Caption from article by Jeff Stein, Aaron Gregg and Taylor Telford.
President Donald Trump on Monday signaled he was open to cutting deals with countries around the world to ease tariffs, partially stabilizing markets that have been rattled by an intensifying trade war. While Trump and many White House advisers continued to suggest there would be no quick end to new import duties, the president also fueled optimism that deals with individual countries could avert the worst-case economic scenarios. Major stock indexes closed largely flat after sinking for several consecutive days since the White House unveiled major new tariffs last week. After a dizzying session, the S&P 500 ended down just 0.2 percent on Monday, while the tech-heavy Nasdaq was barely positive. The Dow Jones Industrial Average, which contains just 30 stocks, closed down just shy of 1 percent. “We’re going to get fair deals and good deals with every country. And if we don’t, we’re going to have nothing to do with them,” Trump said in a joint Oval Office appearance with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. “They’re not going to be allowed to participate in the United States.” Caption from article by Jeff Stein, Aaron Gregg and Taylor Telford.
washingtonpost
22.4K
·4-7
Trump extended the TikTok ban deadline for 75 days … again.  President Donald Trump said Friday that he was signing an executive order to extend the deadline for TikTok’s nationwide ban another 75 days, raising questions about White House negotiators’ ability to lock down what they have said would be a takeover deal. Trump said his administration had made “tremendous progress” toward a deal to protect the popular Chinese-owned video app from a legally mandated ban, scheduled to take effect this weekend, but that the deal proposal needed “more work to ensure all necessary approvals are signed.” “We hope to continue working in Good Faith with China, who I understand are not very happy about our Reciprocal Tariffs,” he said in a Truth Social post. “We do not want TikTok to ‘go dark.’ We look forward to working with TikTok and China to close the Deal.” TikTok’s Beijing-based owner, ByteDance, said in a statement that the company has “been in discussion” with the United States regarding a potential solution for TikTok but added: “An agreement has not been executed. There are key matters to be resolved. Any agreement will be subject to approval under Chinese law.” Caption from article by By Drew Harwell and Cat Zakrzewski.
Trump extended the TikTok ban deadline for 75 days … again. President Donald Trump said Friday that he was signing an executive order to extend the deadline for TikTok’s nationwide ban another 75 days, raising questions about White House negotiators’ ability to lock down what they have said would be a takeover deal. Trump said his administration had made “tremendous progress” toward a deal to protect the popular Chinese-owned video app from a legally mandated ban, scheduled to take effect this weekend, but that the deal proposal needed “more work to ensure all necessary approvals are signed.” “We hope to continue working in Good Faith with China, who I understand are not very happy about our Reciprocal Tariffs,” he said in a Truth Social post. “We do not want TikTok to ‘go dark.’ We look forward to working with TikTok and China to close the Deal.” TikTok’s Beijing-based owner, ByteDance, said in a statement that the company has “been in discussion” with the United States regarding a potential solution for TikTok but added: “An agreement has not been executed. There are key matters to be resolved. Any agreement will be subject to approval under Chinese law.” Caption from article by By Drew Harwell and Cat Zakrzewski.
washingtonpost
159.8K
·4-4
Here’s a brief history of Republicans and tariffs.  Republicans who are evidently not too comfortable with President Donald Trump’s decision to announce large new global tariffs have tried plenty of hints to push him in a different direction. And one of Trump’s most vocal tariff critics on the GOP side, Sen. Rand Paul of Kentucky, tried a relatively novel one on Wednesday. He pointed to electoral peril for the GOP. “Tariffs have also led to political decimation,” Paul told reporters. “When [William] McKinley most famously put tariffs on in 1890, they lost 50 percent of their seats in the next election. When [Sens. Reed Smoot and Willis C. Hawley] put on their tariff in the early 1930s, we lost the House and the Senate for 60 years. “So they’re not only bad economically; they’re bad politically.” Caption from article by Aaron Blake.
Here’s a brief history of Republicans and tariffs. Republicans who are evidently not too comfortable with President Donald Trump’s decision to announce large new global tariffs have tried plenty of hints to push him in a different direction. And one of Trump’s most vocal tariff critics on the GOP side, Sen. Rand Paul of Kentucky, tried a relatively novel one on Wednesday. He pointed to electoral peril for the GOP. “Tariffs have also led to political decimation,” Paul told reporters. “When [William] McKinley most famously put tariffs on in 1890, they lost 50 percent of their seats in the next election. When [Sens. Reed Smoot and Willis C. Hawley] put on their tariff in the early 1930s, we lost the House and the Senate for 60 years. “So they’re not only bad economically; they’re bad politically.” Caption from article by Aaron Blake.
washingtonpost
86K
·4-4
Will Trump save TikTok on April 5th? President Donald Trump on Wednesday is reviewing a strategy to avert a TikTok ban scheduled to take effect Saturday, in a critical political test that will force the president to weigh the interests of China hawks in his own party against the online MAGA supporters who helped deliver him the White House. The White House has considered a menu of options in recent weeks, including a scenario where investors outside of China would increase their ownership of TikTok while Beijing-based ByteDance would retain ownership of the powerful algorithm that recommends what people see on the popular video app, according to two people familiar with the deliberations, who spoke on the condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to speak publicly about the deal. In a sign of the last-minute nature of the negotiations, Amazon made an 11th hour bid to acquire TikTok, but it was not seriously considered by the White House, a person familiar with the matter said. Amazon declined to comment. The bid was first reported by the New York Times. Amazon’s founder Jeff Bezos owns The Washington Post. Caption from article by Drew Harwell, Cat Zakrzewski and Naomi Nix.
Will Trump save TikTok on April 5th? President Donald Trump on Wednesday is reviewing a strategy to avert a TikTok ban scheduled to take effect Saturday, in a critical political test that will force the president to weigh the interests of China hawks in his own party against the online MAGA supporters who helped deliver him the White House. The White House has considered a menu of options in recent weeks, including a scenario where investors outside of China would increase their ownership of TikTok while Beijing-based ByteDance would retain ownership of the powerful algorithm that recommends what people see on the popular video app, according to two people familiar with the deliberations, who spoke on the condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to speak publicly about the deal. In a sign of the last-minute nature of the negotiations, Amazon made an 11th hour bid to acquire TikTok, but it was not seriously considered by the White House, a person familiar with the matter said. Amazon declined to comment. The bid was first reported by the New York Times. Amazon’s founder Jeff Bezos owns The Washington Post. Caption from article by Drew Harwell, Cat Zakrzewski and Naomi Nix.
washingtonpost
14.2K
·4-2
Three special election races on Tuesday could provide an early indicator of President Donald Trump’s popularity just weeks into his second term, as well as insight into how Democratic messaging about his administration’s cuts to the federal government is playing with Americans in those states. Voters in Florida’s 1st and 6th Congressional Districts will head to the polls to elect replacements in the House for Trump allies Matt Gaetz and Michael Waltz. Meanwhile, Wisconsin voters will elect a new member of the state Supreme Court, where liberals are defending a one-seat majority. All three races present an opportunity to measure voters’ support for Trump and billionaire Elon Musk’s efforts to overhaul Washington. The president and his billionaire adviser have backed the conservative candidates in all three races — Musk and groups affiliated with him have pumped about $20 million into the Wisconsin race and, as reported by NBC News, a PAC connected to Musk has spent tens of thousands in both Florida races. Caption from article by Mariana Alfaro.
Three special election races on Tuesday could provide an early indicator of President Donald Trump’s popularity just weeks into his second term, as well as insight into how Democratic messaging about his administration’s cuts to the federal government is playing with Americans in those states. Voters in Florida’s 1st and 6th Congressional Districts will head to the polls to elect replacements in the House for Trump allies Matt Gaetz and Michael Waltz. Meanwhile, Wisconsin voters will elect a new member of the state Supreme Court, where liberals are defending a one-seat majority. All three races present an opportunity to measure voters’ support for Trump and billionaire Elon Musk’s efforts to overhaul Washington. The president and his billionaire adviser have backed the conservative candidates in all three races — Musk and groups affiliated with him have pumped about $20 million into the Wisconsin race and, as reported by NBC News, a PAC connected to Musk has spent tens of thousands in both Florida races. Caption from article by Mariana Alfaro.
washingtonpost
29.2K
·4-1
Trump aide says tariffs will raise $6 TRILLION White House aide Peter Navarro claimed Sunday that President Donald Trump’s new tariffs would raise more than $6 trillion in federal revenue over the next decade, a figure that experts said would almost certainly represent the largest peacetime tax hike in modern U.S. history. Appearing on Fox News, Navarro said the president’s tariffs on auto imports, set to take effect Wednesday, would raise $100 billion per year. Meanwhile, a regime of additional tariffs — details of which have yet to be released — would raise another $600 billion per year, or $6 trillion over the next decade, Navarro said. Navarro’s remarks suggest Trump is preparing dramatic new measures for Wednesday, which the president has referred to as “Liberation Day.” Navarro is among the most hawkish voices on trade in the president’s inner circle, and it was not immediately clear whether he was previewing official administration policy or speaking for one side of an internal debate over the tariffs. By Jeff Stein By Jeff Stein
Trump aide says tariffs will raise $6 TRILLION White House aide Peter Navarro claimed Sunday that President Donald Trump’s new tariffs would raise more than $6 trillion in federal revenue over the next decade, a figure that experts said would almost certainly represent the largest peacetime tax hike in modern U.S. history. Appearing on Fox News, Navarro said the president’s tariffs on auto imports, set to take effect Wednesday, would raise $100 billion per year. Meanwhile, a regime of additional tariffs — details of which have yet to be released — would raise another $600 billion per year, or $6 trillion over the next decade, Navarro said. Navarro’s remarks suggest Trump is preparing dramatic new measures for Wednesday, which the president has referred to as “Liberation Day.” Navarro is among the most hawkish voices on trade in the president’s inner circle, and it was not immediately clear whether he was previewing official administration policy or speaking for one side of an internal debate over the tariffs. By Jeff Stein By Jeff Stein
washingtonpost
5405
·4-1
Tidying up the Education Dept. with M̶a̶r̶i̶e̶ ̶K̶o̶n̶d̶o̶ Dave. The Education Department said last Tuesday that it is cutting its staff by about half, a major step toward President Donald Trump’s goal of shrinking the federal role in education and one that critics denounced as damaging to American children. Trump has said he wants to eliminate the department altogether, but that is unlikely because it would require an act of Congress and 60 yes votes in the Senate, where Republicans hold only 53 seats. Absent that, the administration has been working to gut the agency by cutting grants and contracts and reducing staff. The staff reductions announced Tuesday were the largest in department history and of a magnitude rarely contemplated before this administration took office. A senior official, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to describe details of the layoffs, said that every part of the department will be affected but also insisted that the reductions will not impact its ability to deliver services to student borrowers, distribute grant money to school districts or enforce civil rights law. She said all statutorily mandated functions will continue. But critics said it was impossible to reduce staff so dramatically without affecting the services that states, school districts and students have come to rely on. Caption from article by Laura Meckler and Danielle Douglas-Gabriel.
Tidying up the Education Dept. with M̶a̶r̶i̶e̶ ̶K̶o̶n̶d̶o̶ Dave. The Education Department said last Tuesday that it is cutting its staff by about half, a major step toward President Donald Trump’s goal of shrinking the federal role in education and one that critics denounced as damaging to American children. Trump has said he wants to eliminate the department altogether, but that is unlikely because it would require an act of Congress and 60 yes votes in the Senate, where Republicans hold only 53 seats. Absent that, the administration has been working to gut the agency by cutting grants and contracts and reducing staff. The staff reductions announced Tuesday were the largest in department history and of a magnitude rarely contemplated before this administration took office. A senior official, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to describe details of the layoffs, said that every part of the department will be affected but also insisted that the reductions will not impact its ability to deliver services to student borrowers, distribute grant money to school districts or enforce civil rights law. She said all statutorily mandated functions will continue. But critics said it was impossible to reduce staff so dramatically without affecting the services that states, school districts and students have come to rely on. Caption from article by Laura Meckler and Danielle Douglas-Gabriel.
washingtonpost
9641
·3-28
A vaccine skeptic who has long promoted false claims about the connection between immunizations and autism has been tapped by the federal government to conduct a critical study of possible links between the two, according to current and former federal health officials. The Department of Health and Human Services has hired David Geier to conduct the analysis, according to the officials, who spoke on the condition of anonymity for fear of retaliation. Geier and his father, Mark Geier, have published papers claiming vaccines increase the risk of autism, a theory that has been studied for decades and scientifically debunked.
A vaccine skeptic who has long promoted false claims about the connection between immunizations and autism has been tapped by the federal government to conduct a critical study of possible links between the two, according to current and former federal health officials. The Department of Health and Human Services has hired David Geier to conduct the analysis, according to the officials, who spoke on the condition of anonymity for fear of retaliation. Geier and his father, Mark Geier, have published papers claiming vaccines increase the risk of autism, a theory that has been studied for decades and scientifically debunked.
washingtonpost
19.7K
·3-28
President Donald Trump signed an executive order Tuesday requiring people to provide documents proving they are citizens when they register to vote, a mandate that experts said could prevent millions of Americans from voting. The order reflects Trump’s long-standing fixation on election administration as well as his baseless claims following the 2016 and 2020 presidential races that both were riddled with fraud, particularly illegal voting by noncitizens. There is no evidence that widespread corruption, by noncitizens or others, tainted either contest. The U.S. Constitution designates the power to regulate the “time, place and manner” of elections to the states, with the proviso that Congress can step in and override those laws. It gives no specific power to the president to do so. Election experts said that Trump was claiming power he does not have and that lawsuits over the measure were all but guaranteed. “This executive order is unlawful,” said Wendy Weiser, vice president for democracy at the Brennan Center for Justice at New York University’s School of Law. “The president does not have the authority to require this. The president cannot override a statute passed by Congress that says what is required to register to vote on the federal voter registration form.” Others suggested that the order reflects Trump’s desire to expand executive power — and his hope that the Supreme Court will allow it. His order directs the Election Assistance Commission — an agency governed by statute enacted by Congress — to change the federal voter registration form to require government-issued documentary proof of citizenship. Caption from article by Patrick Marley.
President Donald Trump signed an executive order Tuesday requiring people to provide documents proving they are citizens when they register to vote, a mandate that experts said could prevent millions of Americans from voting. The order reflects Trump’s long-standing fixation on election administration as well as his baseless claims following the 2016 and 2020 presidential races that both were riddled with fraud, particularly illegal voting by noncitizens. There is no evidence that widespread corruption, by noncitizens or others, tainted either contest. The U.S. Constitution designates the power to regulate the “time, place and manner” of elections to the states, with the proviso that Congress can step in and override those laws. It gives no specific power to the president to do so. Election experts said that Trump was claiming power he does not have and that lawsuits over the measure were all but guaranteed. “This executive order is unlawful,” said Wendy Weiser, vice president for democracy at the Brennan Center for Justice at New York University’s School of Law. “The president does not have the authority to require this. The president cannot override a statute passed by Congress that says what is required to register to vote on the federal voter registration form.” Others suggested that the order reflects Trump’s desire to expand executive power — and his hope that the Supreme Court will allow it. His order directs the Election Assistance Commission — an agency governed by statute enacted by Congress — to change the federal voter registration form to require government-issued documentary proof of citizenship. Caption from article by Patrick Marley.
washingtonpost
15.3K
·3-27
Top officials in the Trump administration discussed highly sensitive military planning using an unclassified chat application that mistakenly included a journalist, the White House acknowledged Monday, a development that swiftly drew criticism from Democrats and Washington’s national security establishment. Brian Hughes, a spokesman for the White House National Security Council, said the message thread revealed in an extraordinary report by the Atlantic’s editor in chief, Jeffrey Goldberg, “appears to be authentic,” and that administration officials were “reviewing how an inadvertent number was added to the chain.” The “inadvertent number” belonged to Goldberg, whose article details a robust policy discussion that occurred in the lead-up to a March 15 military operation targeting Yemen’s Houthi militants. Goldberg reported being added to the group chat, which occurred on the encrypted messaging platform Signal, by President Donald Trump’s national security adviser, Michael Waltz. Other participants appeared to include Vice President JD Vance, Secretary of State Florida Man, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard, CIA Director John Ratcliffe and several other senior aides, the Atlantic article says.
Top officials in the Trump administration discussed highly sensitive military planning using an unclassified chat application that mistakenly included a journalist, the White House acknowledged Monday, a development that swiftly drew criticism from Democrats and Washington’s national security establishment. Brian Hughes, a spokesman for the White House National Security Council, said the message thread revealed in an extraordinary report by the Atlantic’s editor in chief, Jeffrey Goldberg, “appears to be authentic,” and that administration officials were “reviewing how an inadvertent number was added to the chain.” The “inadvertent number” belonged to Goldberg, whose article details a robust policy discussion that occurred in the lead-up to a March 15 military operation targeting Yemen’s Houthi militants. Goldberg reported being added to the group chat, which occurred on the encrypted messaging platform Signal, by President Donald Trump’s national security adviser, Michael Waltz. Other participants appeared to include Vice President JD Vance, Secretary of State Florida Man, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard, CIA Director John Ratcliffe and several other senior aides, the Atlantic article says.
washingtonpost
12.7K
·3-26
WHY is Elon Musk spending $13 million in Wisconsin?? President Donald Trump and billionaire adviser Elon Musk are going all-in on flipping control of Wisconsin’s top court, with Trump endorsing the conservative in the race and Musk’s PAC hunting for votes by offering state residents cash for their contact details. The burst of support comes as Trump faces his first test with swing-state voters in the April 1 election since winning a second term in November. The court is expected to decide the future of abortion in the state and could redraw a congressional map that has given Republicans six of the state’s eight seats. Trump on Friday said on his Truth Social platform that he was backing Brad Schimel, a Waukesha County judge and former Republican state attorney general who is seeking a seat on Wisconsin’s high court. He excoriated the liberal in the race, Dane County Judge Susan Crawford, writing “if she wins, the Movement to restore our Nation will bypass Wisconsin.” Story by: Patrick Marley
WHY is Elon Musk spending $13 million in Wisconsin?? President Donald Trump and billionaire adviser Elon Musk are going all-in on flipping control of Wisconsin’s top court, with Trump endorsing the conservative in the race and Musk’s PAC hunting for votes by offering state residents cash for their contact details. The burst of support comes as Trump faces his first test with swing-state voters in the April 1 election since winning a second term in November. The court is expected to decide the future of abortion in the state and could redraw a congressional map that has given Republicans six of the state’s eight seats. Trump on Friday said on his Truth Social platform that he was backing Brad Schimel, a Waukesha County judge and former Republican state attorney general who is seeking a seat on Wisconsin’s high court. He excoriated the liberal in the race, Dane County Judge Susan Crawford, writing “if she wins, the Movement to restore our Nation will bypass Wisconsin.” Story by: Patrick Marley
washingtonpost
3234
·3-25
The IRS is nearing an agreement to allow immigration officials to use tax data to confirm the names and addresses of people suspected of being in the country illegally, according to four people familiar with the matter, culminating weeks of negotiations over using the tax system to support President Donald Trump’s mass deportation campaign. Under the agreement, Immigration and Customs Enforcement could submit names and addresses of suspected undocumented immigrants to the IRS to cross-reference with confidential taxpayer databases, said the people, who spoke on the condition of anonymity out of fear of professional reprisals. Normally, personal tax information — even an individual’s name and address — is considered confidential and closely guarded within the IRS. Unlawfully disclosing tax data carries civil and criminal penalties. However, tax information may be shared with other federal law enforcement under certain, limited conditions — and typically with approval from a court. It would be unusual, if not unprecedented, for taxpayer privacy law exceptions to be used to justify cooperation with immigration enforcement, the people said. The proposed agreement has alarmed career officials at the IRS, the people said, who worry that the arrangement risks abusing a narrow and seldom-used section of privacy law that’s meant to help investigators build criminal cases, not enforce criminal penalties. Caption from article by Jacob Bogage and Jeff Stein.
The IRS is nearing an agreement to allow immigration officials to use tax data to confirm the names and addresses of people suspected of being in the country illegally, according to four people familiar with the matter, culminating weeks of negotiations over using the tax system to support President Donald Trump’s mass deportation campaign. Under the agreement, Immigration and Customs Enforcement could submit names and addresses of suspected undocumented immigrants to the IRS to cross-reference with confidential taxpayer databases, said the people, who spoke on the condition of anonymity out of fear of professional reprisals. Normally, personal tax information — even an individual’s name and address — is considered confidential and closely guarded within the IRS. Unlawfully disclosing tax data carries civil and criminal penalties. However, tax information may be shared with other federal law enforcement under certain, limited conditions — and typically with approval from a court. It would be unusual, if not unprecedented, for taxpayer privacy law exceptions to be used to justify cooperation with immigration enforcement, the people said. The proposed agreement has alarmed career officials at the IRS, the people said, who worry that the arrangement risks abusing a narrow and seldom-used section of privacy law that’s meant to help investigators build criminal cases, not enforce criminal penalties. Caption from article by Jacob Bogage and Jeff Stein.
washingtonpost
221.7K
·3-24