I think there had to be some type of conservative sexual grooming going on under the auspices of the Trump organization.
update - Trump cuts $37.5M in grants when Atlanta airport refuses to discontinue DEI policies
- Thread starter mandrill
- Start date
WASHINGTON (AP) — A federal judge refused on Wednesday to reinstate eight former inspectors general who filed a lawsuit after the Trump administration fired them with no warning and little explanation.
U.S. District Judge Ana Reyes said that while President Donald Trump likely violated the federal law governing the process for removing the non-partisan watchdogs from office, the firings didn’t cause enough irreparable harm to justify reinstating the watchdogs before the lawsuit is resolved.
The eight plaintiffs were among 17 inspectors general who were fired by Trump on Jan. 24. Each received identical two-sentence emails from the White House that attributed their removal to unspecified “changing priorities.” The mass firings targeted all but two of the cabinet agencies’ inspectors general.
Plaintiffs’ attorneys said the firings were unlawful because the administration didn’t give Congress the legally required 30-day notice or provide a “substantive, case-specific rationale” for removing them.
Government attorneys said the president can remove inspectors general “ without any showing of cause ” and doesn’t have to wait 30 days after providing notice to Congress.
The judge noted that even if the inspectors general were reinstated, Trump could simply give notice to Congress and have them removed from their positions 30 days later.
Inspectors general are responsible for rooting out waste and fraud in federal agencies. They are nominated by the president and confirmed by the Senate.
Reyes said the inspectors general had provided “exceptional service as IGs, marked by decades of distinguished leadership across multiple administrations.”
“They deserved better from their government. They still do,” she wrote. “Unfortunately, this Court cannot provide Plaintiffs more.”
Reyes said the plaintiffs can be legally compensated later if they win their lawsuit, but in the meantime, their removals would stand.
The plaintiffs were inspectors general at the Small Business Administration and the departments of Defense, State, Veterans Affairs, Health and Human Services, Agriculture, Education and Labor. Their attorneys say work by inspectors general in 2023 alone saved more than $90 billion in taxpayer dollars.
Neither the White House nor the attorney representing the inspectors general immediately responded to requests for comment.
“Defendants’ actions, moreover, telegraph to the public that many of the largest federal agencies now lack the institutional mechanisms to detect and stop fraud and abuse (or at a minimum those mechanisms have been greatly weakened), which will likely engender wrongdoing that could harm the public,” plaintiffs’ attorneys wrote.
Justice Department lawyers said a federal law authorizes the president’s authority to remove inspectors general “at any time and with no preconditions.”
“The congressional notice provision is in a separate sentence from the removal authorization provision, with no grammatical connection between them,” they wrote.
During a March 27 hearing, Reyes said she genuinely didn’t know how she would rule on their requests for reinstatement. But she thanked the plaintiffs for “standing up and saying this is not acceptable.”
In Wednesday's ruling, Reyes made it clear that she believes the firings violated the Inspector General Act. But she also questioned whether Congress has the right to limit the President's power to remove inspectors general.
“This is a close call under the best of circumstances,” Reyes said. Case law shows Congress can give tenure protections to “inferior officers with narrowly defined duties,” but those protections do not extend to principal officers who wield significant power on their own.
“IGs do not fit cleanly into either category,” she wrote.
President Joe Biden, a Democrat, nominated Reyes to the bench. She has decided other cases challenging Trump’s executive orders, including one in which she blocked the Republican president’s administration from banning transgender people from military service.
___ Boone reported from Boise, Idaho.
Federal judge refuses to reinstate eight former inspectors general fired by Trump administration
U.S. District Judge Ana Reyes said that while President Donald Trump likely violated the federal law governing the process for removing the non-partisan watchdogs from office, the firings didn’t cause enough irreparable harm to justify reinstating the watchdogs before the lawsuit is resolved.
The eight plaintiffs were among 17 inspectors general who were fired by Trump on Jan. 24. Each received identical two-sentence emails from the White House that attributed their removal to unspecified “changing priorities.” The mass firings targeted all but two of the cabinet agencies’ inspectors general.
Plaintiffs’ attorneys said the firings were unlawful because the administration didn’t give Congress the legally required 30-day notice or provide a “substantive, case-specific rationale” for removing them.
Government attorneys said the president can remove inspectors general “ without any showing of cause ” and doesn’t have to wait 30 days after providing notice to Congress.
The judge noted that even if the inspectors general were reinstated, Trump could simply give notice to Congress and have them removed from their positions 30 days later.
Inspectors general are responsible for rooting out waste and fraud in federal agencies. They are nominated by the president and confirmed by the Senate.
Reyes said the inspectors general had provided “exceptional service as IGs, marked by decades of distinguished leadership across multiple administrations.”
“They deserved better from their government. They still do,” she wrote. “Unfortunately, this Court cannot provide Plaintiffs more.”
Reyes said the plaintiffs can be legally compensated later if they win their lawsuit, but in the meantime, their removals would stand.
The plaintiffs were inspectors general at the Small Business Administration and the departments of Defense, State, Veterans Affairs, Health and Human Services, Agriculture, Education and Labor. Their attorneys say work by inspectors general in 2023 alone saved more than $90 billion in taxpayer dollars.
Neither the White House nor the attorney representing the inspectors general immediately responded to requests for comment.
“Defendants’ actions, moreover, telegraph to the public that many of the largest federal agencies now lack the institutional mechanisms to detect and stop fraud and abuse (or at a minimum those mechanisms have been greatly weakened), which will likely engender wrongdoing that could harm the public,” plaintiffs’ attorneys wrote.
Justice Department lawyers said a federal law authorizes the president’s authority to remove inspectors general “at any time and with no preconditions.”
“The congressional notice provision is in a separate sentence from the removal authorization provision, with no grammatical connection between them,” they wrote.
During a March 27 hearing, Reyes said she genuinely didn’t know how she would rule on their requests for reinstatement. But she thanked the plaintiffs for “standing up and saying this is not acceptable.”
In Wednesday's ruling, Reyes made it clear that she believes the firings violated the Inspector General Act. But she also questioned whether Congress has the right to limit the President's power to remove inspectors general.
“This is a close call under the best of circumstances,” Reyes said. Case law shows Congress can give tenure protections to “inferior officers with narrowly defined duties,” but those protections do not extend to principal officers who wield significant power on their own.
“IGs do not fit cleanly into either category,” she wrote.
President Joe Biden, a Democrat, nominated Reyes to the bench. She has decided other cases challenging Trump’s executive orders, including one in which she blocked the Republican president’s administration from banning transgender people from military service.
___ Boone reported from Boise, Idaho.
Federal judge refuses to reinstate eight former inspectors general fired by Trump administration
The US Department of Transportation began earlier this month to rescind federal funding for local projects across the country to improve street safety and add pedestrian trails and bike lanes, because they were deemed “hostile” to cars.
A report Monday in Bloomberg cited several examples of multimillion-dollar grants being axed beginning on September 9, all with the same rationale:
"A San Diego County road improvement project including bike lanes 'appears to reduce lane capacity and a road diet that is hostile to motor vehicles,' a US Department of Transportation official wrote, rescinding a $1.2 million grant it awarded nearly a year ago.
In Fairfield, Alabama, converting street lanes to trail space on Vinesville Road was also deemed 'hostile' to cars, and “counter to DOT’s priority of preserving or increasing roadway capacity for motor vehicles.”
"Officials in Boston got a similar explanation, as the Trump administration pulled back a previously awarded grant to improve walking, biking, and transit in the city’s Mattapan Square neighborhood in a way that would change the 'current auto-centric configuration.' Another grant to improve safety at intersections in the city was terminated, the DOT said, because it could “impede vehicle capacity and speed.”
These are just a few of the projects cancelled in recent weeks by the Trump administration. According to StreetsBlog, others included a 44-mile walking trail along the Naugatuck River in Connecticut, which the administration reportedly stripped funding from because it did not “promote vehicular travel,” and new miles of rail trail in Albuquerque for which DOT said funding would be reallocated to “‘car-focused’ projects instead.”
The cuts are part of a broader effort by the Trump administration to slash discretionary federal grants under the Bipartisan Infrastructure Act signed by former President Joe Biden in 2021.
These include the RAISE infrastructure grant and Safe Streets and Roads for All programs, for which Congress has allocated a combined $2.5 billion annually to expand public transportation and address the US’s worsening epidemic of pedestrian deaths.
Data published in July by the group Transportation for America revealed that the Trump administration has been implementing funds for safety grants at about 10% of the speed of the Biden administration.
According to a report published in July by the Governors Highway Safety Association, US drivers struck and killed 7,148 pedestrians in 2024, “enough to fill more than 30 Boeing 737 jets at maximum capacity.” Though fatalities have decreased slightly from a 40-year peak in 2022, the number of fatalities last year was 20% higher than in 2016.
Research has overwhelmingly shown that adding bicycle and pedestrian lanes to streets can reduce these fatalities. Even the DOT’s own Federal Highway Administration website recommends introducing “Road Diets” that reduce four-lane intersections to three lanes, making room for pedestrian refuge islands and bike lanes to serve as a “buffer” between automobile traffic and sidewalks.
According to the website, “studies indicate a 19 to 47% reduction in overall crashes when a Road Diet is installed on a previously four-lane undivided facility as well as a decrease in crashes involving drivers under 35 years of age and over 65 years of age.”
Car crash fatalities are also up in general, according to preliminary data from the Department of Transportation: 39,345 were killed in motor accidents in 2024 compared with 32,744 a decade prior, a 20% increase.
Despite this, the Trump administration has made its preference for maximizing car travel abundantly clear. Trump has attempted to block California from constructing a massive new high-speed rail line from Los Angeles to San Francisco and has tried to stymie New York’s wildly successful congestion pricing program.
Citing isolated cases of subway and train crime, he and other members of the Republican Party often paint public transit as excessively dangerous.
In one interview on Fox News in May, Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy ranted that, “if you’re liberal, they want you to take public transportation.” While stating that he was “OK with public transportation,” he said, “the problem is that it’s dirty. You have criminals. It’s homeless shelters. It’s insane asylums. It’s a work ground for the criminal element of the city to prey upon the good people.”
However, data show that between 2007 and 2023, deaths from automobile accidents were 100 times more likely than deaths on buses and 20 times more likely than on passenger trains.
That hostility extends toward efforts to expand bicycle usage. In March, Duffy announced that the department would “review” all grants related to green infrastructure, including bike lanes, which was characterized as an effort to combat the previous president’s attempts to reduce US transportation’s carbon footprint.
Grant criteria sent to communities for the Safe Streets and Roads for All program explicitly warned communities that if “the applicant included infrastructure [resulting in] reducing lane capacity for vehicles,” the application would be “viewed less favorably by the department.”
When asked about this decision at a panel the next month, StreetsBlog reported that Duffy “grimaced and grumbled the word ‘bikes’ like it was an expletive, before repeating a string of corrosive myths about bike lanes that are all too common among people who only get around by car,” including that they supposedly increase traffic congestion.
Many of the communities that have lost funding for their projects say they are still going to move ahead with them in some capacity. However, they argue that the government providing funds to improve road safety should be common sense.
Rick Dunne, the executive director of the Naugatuck Valley Council of Governments, stated that the effort to build a trail along the river will continue, even without the funding. But he expressed bewilderment at the administration’s statement that investing in highway travel would better serve residents’ “quality of life.”
“Look, if your definition of improving quality of life is promoting vehicular travel, that’s just, on its face, bad. Increase vehicle travel, increase pollution, increase safety risks,” Dunne told the CT Post. “Taking this money from this project, putting it into highway travel, is in no way going to increase economic efficiency. I don’t see how you argue that it improves the quality of life of Americans, or the residents of this valley.”
Trump Admin Cancels Grants for Pedestrian Safety and Bike Lanes, Calling Them ‘Hostile’
A report Monday in Bloomberg cited several examples of multimillion-dollar grants being axed beginning on September 9, all with the same rationale:
"A San Diego County road improvement project including bike lanes 'appears to reduce lane capacity and a road diet that is hostile to motor vehicles,' a US Department of Transportation official wrote, rescinding a $1.2 million grant it awarded nearly a year ago.
In Fairfield, Alabama, converting street lanes to trail space on Vinesville Road was also deemed 'hostile' to cars, and “counter to DOT’s priority of preserving or increasing roadway capacity for motor vehicles.”
"Officials in Boston got a similar explanation, as the Trump administration pulled back a previously awarded grant to improve walking, biking, and transit in the city’s Mattapan Square neighborhood in a way that would change the 'current auto-centric configuration.' Another grant to improve safety at intersections in the city was terminated, the DOT said, because it could “impede vehicle capacity and speed.”
These are just a few of the projects cancelled in recent weeks by the Trump administration. According to StreetsBlog, others included a 44-mile walking trail along the Naugatuck River in Connecticut, which the administration reportedly stripped funding from because it did not “promote vehicular travel,” and new miles of rail trail in Albuquerque for which DOT said funding would be reallocated to “‘car-focused’ projects instead.”
The cuts are part of a broader effort by the Trump administration to slash discretionary federal grants under the Bipartisan Infrastructure Act signed by former President Joe Biden in 2021.
These include the RAISE infrastructure grant and Safe Streets and Roads for All programs, for which Congress has allocated a combined $2.5 billion annually to expand public transportation and address the US’s worsening epidemic of pedestrian deaths.
Data published in July by the group Transportation for America revealed that the Trump administration has been implementing funds for safety grants at about 10% of the speed of the Biden administration.
According to a report published in July by the Governors Highway Safety Association, US drivers struck and killed 7,148 pedestrians in 2024, “enough to fill more than 30 Boeing 737 jets at maximum capacity.” Though fatalities have decreased slightly from a 40-year peak in 2022, the number of fatalities last year was 20% higher than in 2016.
Research has overwhelmingly shown that adding bicycle and pedestrian lanes to streets can reduce these fatalities. Even the DOT’s own Federal Highway Administration website recommends introducing “Road Diets” that reduce four-lane intersections to three lanes, making room for pedestrian refuge islands and bike lanes to serve as a “buffer” between automobile traffic and sidewalks.
According to the website, “studies indicate a 19 to 47% reduction in overall crashes when a Road Diet is installed on a previously four-lane undivided facility as well as a decrease in crashes involving drivers under 35 years of age and over 65 years of age.”
Car crash fatalities are also up in general, according to preliminary data from the Department of Transportation: 39,345 were killed in motor accidents in 2024 compared with 32,744 a decade prior, a 20% increase.
Despite this, the Trump administration has made its preference for maximizing car travel abundantly clear. Trump has attempted to block California from constructing a massive new high-speed rail line from Los Angeles to San Francisco and has tried to stymie New York’s wildly successful congestion pricing program.
Citing isolated cases of subway and train crime, he and other members of the Republican Party often paint public transit as excessively dangerous.
In one interview on Fox News in May, Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy ranted that, “if you’re liberal, they want you to take public transportation.” While stating that he was “OK with public transportation,” he said, “the problem is that it’s dirty. You have criminals. It’s homeless shelters. It’s insane asylums. It’s a work ground for the criminal element of the city to prey upon the good people.”
However, data show that between 2007 and 2023, deaths from automobile accidents were 100 times more likely than deaths on buses and 20 times more likely than on passenger trains.
That hostility extends toward efforts to expand bicycle usage. In March, Duffy announced that the department would “review” all grants related to green infrastructure, including bike lanes, which was characterized as an effort to combat the previous president’s attempts to reduce US transportation’s carbon footprint.
Grant criteria sent to communities for the Safe Streets and Roads for All program explicitly warned communities that if “the applicant included infrastructure [resulting in] reducing lane capacity for vehicles,” the application would be “viewed less favorably by the department.”
When asked about this decision at a panel the next month, StreetsBlog reported that Duffy “grimaced and grumbled the word ‘bikes’ like it was an expletive, before repeating a string of corrosive myths about bike lanes that are all too common among people who only get around by car,” including that they supposedly increase traffic congestion.
Many of the communities that have lost funding for their projects say they are still going to move ahead with them in some capacity. However, they argue that the government providing funds to improve road safety should be common sense.
Rick Dunne, the executive director of the Naugatuck Valley Council of Governments, stated that the effort to build a trail along the river will continue, even without the funding. But he expressed bewilderment at the administration’s statement that investing in highway travel would better serve residents’ “quality of life.”
“Look, if your definition of improving quality of life is promoting vehicular travel, that’s just, on its face, bad. Increase vehicle travel, increase pollution, increase safety risks,” Dunne told the CT Post. “Taking this money from this project, putting it into highway travel, is in no way going to increase economic efficiency. I don’t see how you argue that it improves the quality of life of Americans, or the residents of this valley.”
Trump Admin Cancels Grants for Pedestrian Safety and Bike Lanes, Calling Them ‘Hostile’
Three former high-ranking FBI officials have filed a federal lawsuit alleging they were ousted in a politically motivated purge directed by the Trump administration and carried out by FBI Director Kash Patel. The Washington suit alleges that the White House has unlawfully intervened in personnel decisions, prioritizing political loyalty over national security.
FBI lawsuit
The suit claims FBI Director Kash Patel admitted the firings were “likely illegal.” By: MEGA© Knewz (CA)
The complaint — brought on behalf of Brian Driscoll, Steve Jensen and Spencer Evans — describes an alleged “campaign of retribution” aimed at eliminating agents who had been involved in investigations of former President Donald Trump. It cites a conversation in which Patel acknowledged the firings were “likely illegal” but said he was compelled to act. According to the filing, Patel told Driscoll last month that “the FBI tried to put the president in jail and he hasn’t forgotten it.” The suit portrays the dismissals as a retaliatory effort that undermined the bureau’s operational capacity. “Patel not only acted unlawfully but deliberately chose to prioritize politicizing the FBI over protecting the American people,” the complaint states. “His decision to do so degraded the country’s national security by firing three of the FBI’s most experienced operational leaders, each of them experts in preventing terrorism and reducing violent crime.”
Kash Patel
Plaintiffs argue the dismissals prioritized politics over national security. By: MEGA© Knewz (CA)
The lawsuit names Patel, Attorney General Pam Bondi, the FBI, the Department of Justice and the Executive Office of the President as defendants. It seeks reinstatement, back pay, a declaration that the firings were illegal and an opportunity for the officials to clear their names. The plaintiffs argue their reputations were smeared after Patel told Fox News that “every single person” who had weaponized the FBI was removed from leadership. The suit counters that none of the three engaged in political bias. “This false and defamatory public smear impugned the professional reputation of each of the plaintiffs, suggesting they were something other than faithful and apolitical law enforcement officials, and has caused not only the loss of the plaintiffs’ present government employment but further harmed their future employment prospects,” the filing says.
Critical FBI operations
Patel later told Fox News that “every single person” who weaponized the FBI had been removed. By: MEGA© Knewz (CA)
The plaintiffs had decades of law enforcement experience and had overseen critical FBI operations. “They were pinnacles of what the rank-and-file aspired to, and now the FBI has been deprived not only of that example but has been deprived of very important operational competence,” said attorney Chris Mattei. Another lawyer, Abbe Lowell, added that the case shows FBI leadership is “carrying out political orders to punish law enforcement agents for doing their jobs.” Driscoll, perhaps the most prominent of the group, previously commanded the FBI’s hostage rescue team and briefly served as acting director following Christopher Wray’s resignation. He clashed early with Justice Department officials over demands for lists of agents involved in the Capitol riot investigation and later led the FBI’s Critical Incident Response Group. The lawsuit says his dismissal came after he resisted pressure to fire a pilot falsely linked to the Mar-a-Lago search.
Backlash
Attorneys Chris Mattei and Abbe Lowell argue the firings deprived the FBI of vital operational competence. By: MEGA© Knewz (CA)
Jensen, who once headed the Washington field office, faced backlash from Trump loyalists due to his oversight of Capitol riot probes. Despite assurances of support, he was told to dismiss an agent who had investigated figures from both parties. Evans, former head of the FBI’s Human Resources Division, was accused of mishandling COVID-19 vaccine exemption requests and was ultimately dismissed in August while preparing for a new assignment. Together, the plaintiffs argue, their removal represents not only personal retaliation but also a dangerous politicization of the nation’s top law enforcement agency.
FBI employees fired in 'campaign of retribution' sue Kash Patel
FBI lawsuit
The suit claims FBI Director Kash Patel admitted the firings were “likely illegal.” By: MEGA© Knewz (CA)
The complaint — brought on behalf of Brian Driscoll, Steve Jensen and Spencer Evans — describes an alleged “campaign of retribution” aimed at eliminating agents who had been involved in investigations of former President Donald Trump. It cites a conversation in which Patel acknowledged the firings were “likely illegal” but said he was compelled to act. According to the filing, Patel told Driscoll last month that “the FBI tried to put the president in jail and he hasn’t forgotten it.” The suit portrays the dismissals as a retaliatory effort that undermined the bureau’s operational capacity. “Patel not only acted unlawfully but deliberately chose to prioritize politicizing the FBI over protecting the American people,” the complaint states. “His decision to do so degraded the country’s national security by firing three of the FBI’s most experienced operational leaders, each of them experts in preventing terrorism and reducing violent crime.”
Kash Patel
Plaintiffs argue the dismissals prioritized politics over national security. By: MEGA© Knewz (CA)
The lawsuit names Patel, Attorney General Pam Bondi, the FBI, the Department of Justice and the Executive Office of the President as defendants. It seeks reinstatement, back pay, a declaration that the firings were illegal and an opportunity for the officials to clear their names. The plaintiffs argue their reputations were smeared after Patel told Fox News that “every single person” who had weaponized the FBI was removed from leadership. The suit counters that none of the three engaged in political bias. “This false and defamatory public smear impugned the professional reputation of each of the plaintiffs, suggesting they were something other than faithful and apolitical law enforcement officials, and has caused not only the loss of the plaintiffs’ present government employment but further harmed their future employment prospects,” the filing says.
Critical FBI operations
Patel later told Fox News that “every single person” who weaponized the FBI had been removed. By: MEGA© Knewz (CA)
The plaintiffs had decades of law enforcement experience and had overseen critical FBI operations. “They were pinnacles of what the rank-and-file aspired to, and now the FBI has been deprived not only of that example but has been deprived of very important operational competence,” said attorney Chris Mattei. Another lawyer, Abbe Lowell, added that the case shows FBI leadership is “carrying out political orders to punish law enforcement agents for doing their jobs.” Driscoll, perhaps the most prominent of the group, previously commanded the FBI’s hostage rescue team and briefly served as acting director following Christopher Wray’s resignation. He clashed early with Justice Department officials over demands for lists of agents involved in the Capitol riot investigation and later led the FBI’s Critical Incident Response Group. The lawsuit says his dismissal came after he resisted pressure to fire a pilot falsely linked to the Mar-a-Lago search.
Backlash
Attorneys Chris Mattei and Abbe Lowell argue the firings deprived the FBI of vital operational competence. By: MEGA© Knewz (CA)
Jensen, who once headed the Washington field office, faced backlash from Trump loyalists due to his oversight of Capitol riot probes. Despite assurances of support, he was told to dismiss an agent who had investigated figures from both parties. Evans, former head of the FBI’s Human Resources Division, was accused of mishandling COVID-19 vaccine exemption requests and was ultimately dismissed in August while preparing for a new assignment. Together, the plaintiffs argue, their removal represents not only personal retaliation but also a dangerous politicization of the nation’s top law enforcement agency.
FBI employees fired in 'campaign of retribution' sue Kash Patel
Three of the nation's largest public school districts stand to lose $24 million after missing a Trump administration deadline to agree to change policies supporting transgender students, officials said Wednesday.
The U.S. Education Department's Office for Civil Rights had given New York City Schools, Chicago Public Schools and Fairfax County Public Schools in Virginia until Tuesday to agree to stop giving students access to locker rooms and restrooms corresponding with their gender identity or risk losing funding for specialty magnet schools.
In letters to the districts Sept. 16, the Education Department's acting assistant secretary for civil rights, Craig Trainor, said the practice violates Title IX, which forbids discrimination based on sex in education. Because the districts did not agree by Tuesday to take remedial action detailed in Trainor's letters, the department said, Trainor will not certify that they are in compliance with federal civil rights law, making them ineligible for the grants.
Millions in grants at stake
Fairfax County schools will lose $3.4 million in Magnet School Assistance Program funding in the next fiscal year, which begins Oct. 1. About $5.8 million will be withheld from Chicago schools and community school districts in New York City will lose about $15 million, according to the Education Department.
“The Department will not rubber-stamp civil rights compliance for New York, Chicago, and Fairfax while they blatantly discriminate against students based on race and sex,” department spokesperson Julie Hartman said via email. “These are public schools, funded by hardworking American families, and parents have every right to expect an excellent education—not ideological indoctrination masquerading as `inclusive' policy.'”
Additional policies under scrutiny
Along with restricting access to restrooms and locker rooms, the department also demanded that New York City and Chicago schools issue public statements saying they will not allow males to compete in female athletic programs.
Chicago schools were further told to abolish a program that provides remedial academic resources to Black students, which Trainor labeled “textbook racial discrimination.” School officials estimated a total of about $8 million would be lost for initiatives that have expanded staffing, technology and enrichment opportunities like field trips and after-school programming.
Chicago education officials faulted the department for failing to provide evidence that its students were being harmed and said it was acting outside of its own procedures for complaints.
“Our mission, programs, and policies not only meet our obligation to students, but they also plainly comply with the law,” acting general counsel Elizabeth Barton said in the district’s response to Trainor.
The Education Department denied requests from New York City and Chicago for more time to respond to the demands. It was unclear whether Fairfax County schools made such a request. The district did not respond to requests for information.
In his letter to New York City schools, Trainor cited several of the district's policies, including one saying that transgender students cannot be required to use an alternative facility, such as a single-occupancy bathroom, instead of a regular restroom. That means trans students “are given unqualified access to female intimate spaces,” he wrote.
Each of the districts was told they would lose funding unless they agreed to rescind policies that violate Title IX and adopt “biology-based definitions of the words male and female” in practices relating to Title IX.
“Cutting this funding — which invests in specialized curricula, afterschool education, and summer learning — harms not only the approximately 8,500 students this program currently benefits, but all of our students from underserved communities,” New York City schools said in a statement. “If the federal government pulls this funding, that means canceled courses and shrinking enrichment. That’s a consequence our city can’t afford and our students don’t deserve.”
Attention from New York City mayoral candidates
The topic came up on the campaign trail in New York City's contentious mayoral election in recent days.
Incumbent Mayor Eric Adams, a Democrat, raised eyebrows when he said at an unrelated news conference that he would like to look into changing the policy if it “is allowing boys and girls to use the same facility at the same time.” The remarks came days after the Trump administration's letter, though he has insisted they were unrelated.
Adams' comments were swiftly condemned by the race’s Democratic nominee, Zohran Mamdani, who called them “completely at odds with the values of our city.”
Adams said this week that he would like to change the city's policy — but also that he did not have the power. The state's human rights law also allows students to use bathrooms and locker rooms that align with their gender identity.
On Wednesday, Adams' office said the administration was reviewing options, including litigation.
“The federal government is threatening to defund our children’s education as a tool to change policies it doesn’t like,” City Hall spokesperson Kayla Mamelak Altus said in a statement. “While Mayor Adams may not agree with every rule or policy, we will always stand up to protect critical resources for our city’s 1 million students.”
___
Contributing to this report were Associated Press reporter Anthony Izaguirre in Albany, New York, and AP Education Writer Collin Binkley in Washington.
Carolyn Thompson, The Associated Press
Trump administration to hold back grants from NYC, Chicago, Fairfax schools over bathroom policies
The U.S. Education Department's Office for Civil Rights had given New York City Schools, Chicago Public Schools and Fairfax County Public Schools in Virginia until Tuesday to agree to stop giving students access to locker rooms and restrooms corresponding with their gender identity or risk losing funding for specialty magnet schools.
In letters to the districts Sept. 16, the Education Department's acting assistant secretary for civil rights, Craig Trainor, said the practice violates Title IX, which forbids discrimination based on sex in education. Because the districts did not agree by Tuesday to take remedial action detailed in Trainor's letters, the department said, Trainor will not certify that they are in compliance with federal civil rights law, making them ineligible for the grants.
Millions in grants at stake
Fairfax County schools will lose $3.4 million in Magnet School Assistance Program funding in the next fiscal year, which begins Oct. 1. About $5.8 million will be withheld from Chicago schools and community school districts in New York City will lose about $15 million, according to the Education Department.
“The Department will not rubber-stamp civil rights compliance for New York, Chicago, and Fairfax while they blatantly discriminate against students based on race and sex,” department spokesperson Julie Hartman said via email. “These are public schools, funded by hardworking American families, and parents have every right to expect an excellent education—not ideological indoctrination masquerading as `inclusive' policy.'”
Additional policies under scrutiny
Along with restricting access to restrooms and locker rooms, the department also demanded that New York City and Chicago schools issue public statements saying they will not allow males to compete in female athletic programs.
Chicago schools were further told to abolish a program that provides remedial academic resources to Black students, which Trainor labeled “textbook racial discrimination.” School officials estimated a total of about $8 million would be lost for initiatives that have expanded staffing, technology and enrichment opportunities like field trips and after-school programming.
Chicago education officials faulted the department for failing to provide evidence that its students were being harmed and said it was acting outside of its own procedures for complaints.
“Our mission, programs, and policies not only meet our obligation to students, but they also plainly comply with the law,” acting general counsel Elizabeth Barton said in the district’s response to Trainor.
The Education Department denied requests from New York City and Chicago for more time to respond to the demands. It was unclear whether Fairfax County schools made such a request. The district did not respond to requests for information.
In his letter to New York City schools, Trainor cited several of the district's policies, including one saying that transgender students cannot be required to use an alternative facility, such as a single-occupancy bathroom, instead of a regular restroom. That means trans students “are given unqualified access to female intimate spaces,” he wrote.
Each of the districts was told they would lose funding unless they agreed to rescind policies that violate Title IX and adopt “biology-based definitions of the words male and female” in practices relating to Title IX.
“Cutting this funding — which invests in specialized curricula, afterschool education, and summer learning — harms not only the approximately 8,500 students this program currently benefits, but all of our students from underserved communities,” New York City schools said in a statement. “If the federal government pulls this funding, that means canceled courses and shrinking enrichment. That’s a consequence our city can’t afford and our students don’t deserve.”
Attention from New York City mayoral candidates
The topic came up on the campaign trail in New York City's contentious mayoral election in recent days.
Incumbent Mayor Eric Adams, a Democrat, raised eyebrows when he said at an unrelated news conference that he would like to look into changing the policy if it “is allowing boys and girls to use the same facility at the same time.” The remarks came days after the Trump administration's letter, though he has insisted they were unrelated.
Adams' comments were swiftly condemned by the race’s Democratic nominee, Zohran Mamdani, who called them “completely at odds with the values of our city.”
Adams said this week that he would like to change the city's policy — but also that he did not have the power. The state's human rights law also allows students to use bathrooms and locker rooms that align with their gender identity.
On Wednesday, Adams' office said the administration was reviewing options, including litigation.
“The federal government is threatening to defund our children’s education as a tool to change policies it doesn’t like,” City Hall spokesperson Kayla Mamelak Altus said in a statement. “While Mayor Adams may not agree with every rule or policy, we will always stand up to protect critical resources for our city’s 1 million students.”
___
Contributing to this report were Associated Press reporter Anthony Izaguirre in Albany, New York, and AP Education Writer Collin Binkley in Washington.
Carolyn Thompson, The Associated Press
Trump administration to hold back grants from NYC, Chicago, Fairfax schools over bathroom policies
MBABANE, Eswatini (AP) — A judge failed to appear for a scheduled court hearing in Eswatini on Thursday over the continued detention of four men deported by the United States to the southern African kingdom.
FILE - The Matsapha Correctional Complex is seen in Matsapha, near Mbabane, Eswatini, on Thursday, July 17, 2025. (AP Photo/File)© The Associated Press
The case was brought by several non-profit organizations that have challenged the legality of holding the men from Cuba, Laos, Vietnam and Yemen without charges. The four were deported to Eswatini in mid-July under the Trump administration's third-country deportation program.
FILE - Matsapha Correctional Complex is seen in Matsapha, near Mbabane, Eswatini, Thursday July 17, 2025. (AP Photo, File)© The Associated Press
The four men have been denied access to legal counsel while being held at the country's top maximum-security prison for more than two months, their U.S.-based lawyers have said.
No reason weas given for Judge Titus Mlangeni's absence.
Zakhithi Sibandze, national coordinator for the Swaziland Rural Women's Assembly — one of the non-profit organizations — accused the Eswatini authorities of using delaying tactics to avoid criticism over the case.
U.S. authorities originally deported five men to Eswatini. One of them, a Jamaican national, was repatriated to his home country last weekend.
The U.S. has deported more than 30 people to several countries in Africa since July under the new program. U.S. authorities described the five sent to Eswatini as dangerous criminals who served sentences for crimes including murder.
International rights groups have criticized the deportations for sending migrants to third countries where they could be denied due process by repressive governments.
Eswatini, a small country bordering South Africa, is one of the world's last absolute monarchies and the king rules by decree. A second case brought by a lawyer seeking to provide legal counsel for the deportees has also been repeatedly delayed.
Members of Eswatin Pro-democracy activists, hold placards during their protest outside the U.S. Embassy in Pretoria, South Africa, Friday, Sept. 19, 2025. (AP Photo/Themba Hadebe)© The Associated Press
The U.S. has said it wants to deport Kilmar Abrego Garcia to Eswatini.
Eswatini government spokesperson Thabile Mdluli said she wouldn't comment on an ongoing case.
___
AP Africa news: https://apnews.com/hub/africa
The Associated Press
Judge fails to appear for court hearing in Eswatini over 4 men deported by the US
FILE - The Matsapha Correctional Complex is seen in Matsapha, near Mbabane, Eswatini, on Thursday, July 17, 2025. (AP Photo/File)© The Associated Press
The case was brought by several non-profit organizations that have challenged the legality of holding the men from Cuba, Laos, Vietnam and Yemen without charges. The four were deported to Eswatini in mid-July under the Trump administration's third-country deportation program.
FILE - Matsapha Correctional Complex is seen in Matsapha, near Mbabane, Eswatini, Thursday July 17, 2025. (AP Photo, File)© The Associated Press
The four men have been denied access to legal counsel while being held at the country's top maximum-security prison for more than two months, their U.S.-based lawyers have said.
No reason weas given for Judge Titus Mlangeni's absence.
Zakhithi Sibandze, national coordinator for the Swaziland Rural Women's Assembly — one of the non-profit organizations — accused the Eswatini authorities of using delaying tactics to avoid criticism over the case.
U.S. authorities originally deported five men to Eswatini. One of them, a Jamaican national, was repatriated to his home country last weekend.
The U.S. has deported more than 30 people to several countries in Africa since July under the new program. U.S. authorities described the five sent to Eswatini as dangerous criminals who served sentences for crimes including murder.
International rights groups have criticized the deportations for sending migrants to third countries where they could be denied due process by repressive governments.
Eswatini, a small country bordering South Africa, is one of the world's last absolute monarchies and the king rules by decree. A second case brought by a lawyer seeking to provide legal counsel for the deportees has also been repeatedly delayed.
Members of Eswatin Pro-democracy activists, hold placards during their protest outside the U.S. Embassy in Pretoria, South Africa, Friday, Sept. 19, 2025. (AP Photo/Themba Hadebe)© The Associated Press
The U.S. has said it wants to deport Kilmar Abrego Garcia to Eswatini.
Eswatini government spokesperson Thabile Mdluli said she wouldn't comment on an ongoing case.
___
AP Africa news: https://apnews.com/hub/africa
The Associated Press
Judge fails to appear for court hearing in Eswatini over 4 men deported by the US
WASHINGTON (AP) — A bipartisan group of former Federal Reserve chairs, Treasury secretaries, and top White House economists urged the Supreme Court Thursday to reject an attempt by President Donald Trump to fire Federal Reserve governor Lisa Cook.
In a filing with the court, the former officials argued that allowing the removal to proceed would undermine the Fed's longtime independence from day-to-day politics and lead to higher inflation and a weaker economy.
The filing from such an influential group underscores the unpredecented nature of Trump's effort to remove Cook and the potentially far-reaching consequences for the economy if he were to succeed.
“There is broad consensus among economists, based on decades of macroeconomic research, that a more independent central bank will lead to lower and more stable inflation without creating higher unemployment,” the brief, signed by 18 top economists from both political parties, said. “Independent central banks also help increase confidence in the stability of the U.S. dollar, enabling the United States, businesses, and households to borrow at lower interest rates.”
Former Fed chairs Janet Yellen, Ben Bernanke, and Alan Greenspan signed onto the filing. Former Treasury Secretaries Henry Paulson, Lawrence Summers, Robert Rubin, Timothy Geithner, and Jacob Lew also signed. Paulson served in the George W. Bush administration while Rubin and Summers served in Bill Clinton's administration. Geithner and Lew served in President Barack Obama's White House.
Trump sought to fire Lisa Cook last month after members of the administration accused her of mortgage fraud, the first time a president has tried to remove a Federal Reserve governor in the institution's 112-year history. Cook has denied the accusations and some documents have surfaced that appear to undercut the fraud claims.
Cook sued to keep her job and two federal courts have ruled that she can stay in her position while her case is considered by the courts.
Federal Reserve officials aren't like cabinet secretaries and don't serve at the pleasure of the president. Instead, they can only be fired “for cause,” which has traditionally meant some kind of malfeasance or neglect on the job. At issue in the legal fight is whether the mortgage fraud allegations are sufficient cause for her to be removed. Governors vote on the Fed's interest-rate policies as well as oversee banking regulation.
Bernanke and the other former officials argued in their filing that the perception of Fed independence is crucial for the central bank, because it can fight inflation much more effectively if businesses and workers — whom the filing refers to as “price-setters” — believe the Fed will fight to keep inflation at its 2% target.
“If the Federal Reserve announces its commitment to a policy of low inflation and the price-setters believe that the commitment is real, then price-setters will choose lower prices (and lower wages) consistent with that belief,” they write. The Fed typically seeks to combat inflation by raising its short-term interest rate to cool borrowing and spending.
But if political pressure forces the Fed to shift its focus away from inflation and instead lower its key interest rate to provide a short-term boost to the economy, “the price-setters will not believe a future Fed announcement of a commitment to low-inflation policies and will therefore not structure their own economic decisions around the expectation of low inflation," the brief said. “Instead, price-setters will expect inflation to go up and act accordingly, leading to a vicious cycle of high inflation and low employment.”
“Central bank independence is the solution that Congress and the President have chosen, effectively tying their hands, like Ulysses as he passed the sirens, to protect against the risk that monetary policy will be mishandled,” they added.
Former officials from both parties also signed onto the brief, including Phil Gramm, a former Republican senator from Texas, as well as Jason Furman, who was a top economic adviser to Obama; Glenn Hubbard and Gregory Mankiw, economic advisers to George W. Bush; Kenneth Rogoff, former chief economist at the International Monetary Fund; and Cecilia Rouse, a top adviser to former president Joe Biden.
John Cochrane, a frequent Fed critic and a senior fellow at the right-leaning Hoover Institution signed onto the brief, as did Jared Bernstein, an adviser to Biden.
The Trump administration appealed the case to the Supreme Court after an appeals court upheld an earlier court ruling that allowed Cook to keep her job. The administration argues that the allegations of mortgage fraud provide the president with sufficient cause to remove Cook from a position that included oversight of the financial system.
Christopher Rugaber, The Associated Press
Bipartisan group of top officials urges Court to reject Trump's effort to fire Fed governor
In a filing with the court, the former officials argued that allowing the removal to proceed would undermine the Fed's longtime independence from day-to-day politics and lead to higher inflation and a weaker economy.
The filing from such an influential group underscores the unpredecented nature of Trump's effort to remove Cook and the potentially far-reaching consequences for the economy if he were to succeed.
“There is broad consensus among economists, based on decades of macroeconomic research, that a more independent central bank will lead to lower and more stable inflation without creating higher unemployment,” the brief, signed by 18 top economists from both political parties, said. “Independent central banks also help increase confidence in the stability of the U.S. dollar, enabling the United States, businesses, and households to borrow at lower interest rates.”
Former Fed chairs Janet Yellen, Ben Bernanke, and Alan Greenspan signed onto the filing. Former Treasury Secretaries Henry Paulson, Lawrence Summers, Robert Rubin, Timothy Geithner, and Jacob Lew also signed. Paulson served in the George W. Bush administration while Rubin and Summers served in Bill Clinton's administration. Geithner and Lew served in President Barack Obama's White House.
Trump sought to fire Lisa Cook last month after members of the administration accused her of mortgage fraud, the first time a president has tried to remove a Federal Reserve governor in the institution's 112-year history. Cook has denied the accusations and some documents have surfaced that appear to undercut the fraud claims.
Cook sued to keep her job and two federal courts have ruled that she can stay in her position while her case is considered by the courts.
Federal Reserve officials aren't like cabinet secretaries and don't serve at the pleasure of the president. Instead, they can only be fired “for cause,” which has traditionally meant some kind of malfeasance or neglect on the job. At issue in the legal fight is whether the mortgage fraud allegations are sufficient cause for her to be removed. Governors vote on the Fed's interest-rate policies as well as oversee banking regulation.
Bernanke and the other former officials argued in their filing that the perception of Fed independence is crucial for the central bank, because it can fight inflation much more effectively if businesses and workers — whom the filing refers to as “price-setters” — believe the Fed will fight to keep inflation at its 2% target.
“If the Federal Reserve announces its commitment to a policy of low inflation and the price-setters believe that the commitment is real, then price-setters will choose lower prices (and lower wages) consistent with that belief,” they write. The Fed typically seeks to combat inflation by raising its short-term interest rate to cool borrowing and spending.
But if political pressure forces the Fed to shift its focus away from inflation and instead lower its key interest rate to provide a short-term boost to the economy, “the price-setters will not believe a future Fed announcement of a commitment to low-inflation policies and will therefore not structure their own economic decisions around the expectation of low inflation," the brief said. “Instead, price-setters will expect inflation to go up and act accordingly, leading to a vicious cycle of high inflation and low employment.”
“Central bank independence is the solution that Congress and the President have chosen, effectively tying their hands, like Ulysses as he passed the sirens, to protect against the risk that monetary policy will be mishandled,” they added.
Former officials from both parties also signed onto the brief, including Phil Gramm, a former Republican senator from Texas, as well as Jason Furman, who was a top economic adviser to Obama; Glenn Hubbard and Gregory Mankiw, economic advisers to George W. Bush; Kenneth Rogoff, former chief economist at the International Monetary Fund; and Cecilia Rouse, a top adviser to former president Joe Biden.
John Cochrane, a frequent Fed critic and a senior fellow at the right-leaning Hoover Institution signed onto the brief, as did Jared Bernstein, an adviser to Biden.
The Trump administration appealed the case to the Supreme Court after an appeals court upheld an earlier court ruling that allowed Cook to keep her job. The administration argues that the allegations of mortgage fraud provide the president with sufficient cause to remove Cook from a position that included oversight of the financial system.
Christopher Rugaber, The Associated Press
Bipartisan group of top officials urges Court to reject Trump's effort to fire Fed governor
President Donald Trump's Justice Department has announced it will take six blue states to court demanding access to voter registration lists.
"Every state has a responsibility to ensure that voter registration records are accurate, accessible, and secure — states that don’t fulfill that obligation will see this Department of Justice in court," Attorney General Pamela Bondi said in a statement, according to Reuters.
California, New York, Michigan, Minnesota, New Hampshire, and Pennsylvania are all being targeted by the DOJ's Civil Rights Division.
The court filing claims that the Justice Department has a legal right to access the voter registration lists to conduct oversight.
"The Civil Rights Division has, in the last several months, sent requests for voter registration-related information to at least 24 states, including requesting a complete list of all registered voters from at least 22 states," said Reuters.
The lawsuit against these six states adds to the lawsuit announced last week against Maine and Oregon, which also alleged the states refused to turn over copies of all voter registration lists.
The demands for the lists follow a September report stating that the Justice Department is collaborating with the Department of Homeland Security to transfer voter registration data for use in immigration investigations.
President Donald Trump has spent years alleging unverified claims that millions of undocumented immigrants are voting illegally in the United States.
Trump DOJ sues 6 blue states for access to voter rolls
"Every state has a responsibility to ensure that voter registration records are accurate, accessible, and secure — states that don’t fulfill that obligation will see this Department of Justice in court," Attorney General Pamela Bondi said in a statement, according to Reuters.
California, New York, Michigan, Minnesota, New Hampshire, and Pennsylvania are all being targeted by the DOJ's Civil Rights Division.
The court filing claims that the Justice Department has a legal right to access the voter registration lists to conduct oversight.
"The Civil Rights Division has, in the last several months, sent requests for voter registration-related information to at least 24 states, including requesting a complete list of all registered voters from at least 22 states," said Reuters.
The lawsuit against these six states adds to the lawsuit announced last week against Maine and Oregon, which also alleged the states refused to turn over copies of all voter registration lists.
The demands for the lists follow a September report stating that the Justice Department is collaborating with the Department of Homeland Security to transfer voter registration data for use in immigration investigations.
President Donald Trump has spent years alleging unverified claims that millions of undocumented immigrants are voting illegally in the United States.
Trump DOJ sues 6 blue states for access to voter rolls
FBI Director Kash Patel and Attorney General Pam Bondi on Thursday failed to name one terrorist organization they plan to investigate during a news conference at the Oval Office with President Donald Trump.
Trump signed a memorandum on the implementation of the death penalty in Washington, D.C, then a series of press questions followed after claims that "this is a very safe city right now, we don't play games."
"Who do you specifically want to target?" a reporter asked.
The three leaders were unable to respond to the questions, saying that they would "follow the money" and investigate "any organized group."
But they still didn't specifically name anything or anyone.
When pressed again, he responded, "antifa Soros... Well, [billionaire Democratic donor George] Soros is a name certainly that I keep hearing... I hear a lot of different names. I hear names of some pretty rich people that are radical left people, Maybe I hear about a guy named Reid Hoffman."
Trump reportedly demanded that Soros, a longtime villain to conservatives, be thrown in prison, and the senior DOJ official's directive lists possible charges – from arson to material support of terrorism – that prosecutors could file, according to a copy of the document viewed by The New York Times, which noted the memo suggests department officials are targeting individuals on the president's orders.
"I don't know, maybe, and maybe could be him, could be a lot of people," Trump said.
Trump indicated that he wants to stop these unnamed groups or individuals from "performing acts of violence."
"We're looking at the funders of a lot of these groups. You know, when you see the signs, and they're all beautiful signs, made professionally. These aren't your protesters that make the sign in their basement late in the evening because they really believe it," Trump claimed.
"These are anarchists and agitators — professional anarchists and agitators — and they get hired by wealthy people, some of whom I know, I guess, you know, probably know 'em. And you wouldn't know it. You're at dinner with them, everything's nice and then you find out that they funded millions of dollars to these lunatics."
Trump also invited his deputy chief of staff, Stephen Miller, to say a few words.
"This is a very historic and significant day," Miller said. "This is the first time in American history that there is an all-government effort to dismantle left-wing terrorism, to dismantle antifa, to dismantle violence and terrorism."
Last week, Trump designated antifa as a "domestic terrorist organization." The loose-knit group does not have a leader and is comprised of people who generally describe themselves as anarchists, socialists, communists, and don't generally share their identities to avoid retaliation from right-wing conservatives.
Miller argued that the government was looking at Black Lives Matter, Charlie Kirk's killing, and attacks on ICE agents as "not lone, isolated events, this is part of an organized campaign of radical left terrorism... there is really no parallel like this..."
He claimed that a feeder organization was isolating public officials, doxxing government officials and attempting political assassinations.
"It is terrorism on our soil. Because of this executive order, Kash and Pam are going to have the tools they need working with Scott to take these organizations apart piece by piece, and the central hub of that effort is going to be the Joint Terrorism Task Force, or JTTF, which sits inside the Federal Bureau of Investigation," Miller said.
Miller added that the investigation of terrorists, although it's unclear who they are, would have the full support of the U.S. government.
"But for those at home who are worried about terrorism, understand because of President Trump's strength, because of his vision, because of his leadership, we are now going to use the entire force of the federal government to uproot these organizations root and branch," Miller said.
'Who?' Pam Bondi and Kash Patel fail to name a single terrorist group they plan to target
Trump signed a memorandum on the implementation of the death penalty in Washington, D.C, then a series of press questions followed after claims that "this is a very safe city right now, we don't play games."
"Who do you specifically want to target?" a reporter asked.
The three leaders were unable to respond to the questions, saying that they would "follow the money" and investigate "any organized group."
But they still didn't specifically name anything or anyone.
When pressed again, he responded, "antifa Soros... Well, [billionaire Democratic donor George] Soros is a name certainly that I keep hearing... I hear a lot of different names. I hear names of some pretty rich people that are radical left people, Maybe I hear about a guy named Reid Hoffman."
Trump reportedly demanded that Soros, a longtime villain to conservatives, be thrown in prison, and the senior DOJ official's directive lists possible charges – from arson to material support of terrorism – that prosecutors could file, according to a copy of the document viewed by The New York Times, which noted the memo suggests department officials are targeting individuals on the president's orders.
"I don't know, maybe, and maybe could be him, could be a lot of people," Trump said.
Trump indicated that he wants to stop these unnamed groups or individuals from "performing acts of violence."
"We're looking at the funders of a lot of these groups. You know, when you see the signs, and they're all beautiful signs, made professionally. These aren't your protesters that make the sign in their basement late in the evening because they really believe it," Trump claimed.
"These are anarchists and agitators — professional anarchists and agitators — and they get hired by wealthy people, some of whom I know, I guess, you know, probably know 'em. And you wouldn't know it. You're at dinner with them, everything's nice and then you find out that they funded millions of dollars to these lunatics."
Trump also invited his deputy chief of staff, Stephen Miller, to say a few words.
"This is a very historic and significant day," Miller said. "This is the first time in American history that there is an all-government effort to dismantle left-wing terrorism, to dismantle antifa, to dismantle violence and terrorism."
Last week, Trump designated antifa as a "domestic terrorist organization." The loose-knit group does not have a leader and is comprised of people who generally describe themselves as anarchists, socialists, communists, and don't generally share their identities to avoid retaliation from right-wing conservatives.
Miller argued that the government was looking at Black Lives Matter, Charlie Kirk's killing, and attacks on ICE agents as "not lone, isolated events, this is part of an organized campaign of radical left terrorism... there is really no parallel like this..."
He claimed that a feeder organization was isolating public officials, doxxing government officials and attempting political assassinations.
"It is terrorism on our soil. Because of this executive order, Kash and Pam are going to have the tools they need working with Scott to take these organizations apart piece by piece, and the central hub of that effort is going to be the Joint Terrorism Task Force, or JTTF, which sits inside the Federal Bureau of Investigation," Miller said.
Miller added that the investigation of terrorists, although it's unclear who they are, would have the full support of the U.S. government.
"But for those at home who are worried about terrorism, understand because of President Trump's strength, because of his vision, because of his leadership, we are now going to use the entire force of the federal government to uproot these organizations root and branch," Miller said.
'Who?' Pam Bondi and Kash Patel fail to name a single terrorist group they plan to target
A group of people arrested by United States Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents in Washington, D.C., over the past month have filed a class-action lawsuit, Politico legal reporter Kyle Cheney wrote on social media.
Digging into the individual stories in the case, Aaron Reichlin-Melnick, a senior fellow at the American Immigration Council, pointed to the lead plaintiff — a 24-year resident of the U.S. who was snatched by plain-clothed federal agents who didn't even ask him his status.
"He was detained overnight and only released once a supervisor realized he had been illegally arrested," wrote Reichlin-Melnick.
The same thing reportedly happened with the arrest of the workers at the Hyundai plant in Georgia, where nearly 500 workers were taken into custody. Of those workers were American citizens arrested, as well as those under DACA protections and on valid visas.
A New York Times report cited some saying that they were shackled and held for a week in horrific conditions.
"A few dozen workers have started a chat group where they discuss their claims of human rights abuses," the report said.
Lawsuit claims ICE is snatching US residents and not even asking immigration status
Digging into the individual stories in the case, Aaron Reichlin-Melnick, a senior fellow at the American Immigration Council, pointed to the lead plaintiff — a 24-year resident of the U.S. who was snatched by plain-clothed federal agents who didn't even ask him his status.
"He was detained overnight and only released once a supervisor realized he had been illegally arrested," wrote Reichlin-Melnick.
The same thing reportedly happened with the arrest of the workers at the Hyundai plant in Georgia, where nearly 500 workers were taken into custody. Of those workers were American citizens arrested, as well as those under DACA protections and on valid visas.
A New York Times report cited some saying that they were shackled and held for a week in horrific conditions.
"A few dozen workers have started a chat group where they discuss their claims of human rights abuses," the report said.
Lawsuit claims ICE is snatching US residents and not even asking immigration status
The Department of Justice indicted former FBI Director James Comey on Thursday, the first in a series of potential charges against Trump critics after the president made a highly unusual public demand that the attorney general launch swift prosecutions against his political enemies.
“No one is above the law,” Attorney General Pam Bondi wrote on X on Thursday. “Today’s indictment reflects this Department of Justice’s commitment to holding those who abuse positions of power accountable for misleading the American people. We will follow the facts in this case.”
The indictment in the Eastern District of Virginia accuses Comey, whom Trump fired in 2017, of making false statements and obstructing justice during congressional testimony in September of 2020. The document notes that a grand jury didn’t concur on one of the charges prosecutors originally sought.
During questioning in the Senate at the time mentioned in the indictment, Comey defended the truthfulness of prior testimony where he said he did not authorize leaking to the press about FBI investigations into President Trump and former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton.
A former official who worked under Comey, Andrew McCabe, has claimed the director did in fact authorize him to leak to the press, a 2018 inspector general report found, though the report also found McCabe had made false and misleading statements in the past.
“Comey stated that he did not authorize someone at the FBI to be an anonymous source,” the Justice Department said in a statement on Thursday. “According to the indictment that statement was false.”
The former FBI director said in a statement on Instagram he was innocent and accused President Trump of being a “tyrant.”
“My family and I have known for years that there are costs to standing up to Donald Trump, but we couldn’t imagine ourselves living any other way,” Comey said. “We will not live on our knees and you shouldn’t either.”
“My heart is broken for the Department of Justice, but I have great confidence in the federal judicial system and I am innocent, so let’s have a trial,” he added.
President Trump and his allies have long criticized Comey over the FBI investigation into whether Russia sought to meddle in the 2016 election through contacts with the Republican’s campaign (AFP/Getty)
The president celebrated the charges on Thursday in a Truth Social post, calling Comey “one of the worst human beings this Country has ever been exposed to.”
“He has been so bad for our Country, for so long, and is now at the beginning of being held responsible for his crimes against our Nation,” Trump wrote.
The federal charges are the first to hit one of the individuals Trump named in a Truth Social post on Saturday, in which the president publicly told Bondi, “We can’t delay any longer.”
The president called for action “now” against Comey, New York Attorney General Leticia James, and Democratic Sen. Adam Schiff of California, another frequent critic of the president.
The charges against Comey come after the U.S. attorney for the Eastern District, Erik Siebert, an experienced federal prosecutor, resigned on Friday.
The official reportedly left his post because of pressure to bring a mortgage fraud case against James, despite investigators failing to find evidence of wrongdoing.
Charges against Comey come after federal prosecutor in Virginia overseeing district resigned last week and was replaced with Lindsey Halligan, a former personal lawyer for the president with no prior experience as a prosecutor (AP)
Trump criticized Siebert in the weekend Truth Social post as a “woke” official “who was never going to do his job.”
Siebert was then replaced on an acting basis with Lindsey Halligan, a Trump administration official with no prior experience as a prosecutor.
Halligan has previously worked as one of the president’s personal lawyers and oversaw a White House effort to review materials at the Smithsonian Institution.
The current FBI Director, Kash Patel, hailed the indictment of Comey.
“Nowhere was...politicization of law enforcement more blatant than during the Russiagate hoax, a disgraceful chapter in history we continue to investigate and expose,” he wrote on X. “Everyone, especially those in positions of power, will be held to account - no matter their perch. No one is above the law.”
Schiff, writing on X, said the indictment meant the DOJ is “now little more than an arm of the president’s retribution campaign.”
“Donald Trump forced out a respected U.S. Attorney because they wouldn't go along with Trump’s demands for political prosecutions,” the senator wrote. “Less than a week later, his inexperienced handpicked successor brings charges against a member of Trump's enemies list. In my almost six years as an Assistant U.S. Attorney, I never witnessed such a blatant abuse of the department.”
Former FBI Director and Trump critic James Comey indicted on two charges
“No one is above the law,” Attorney General Pam Bondi wrote on X on Thursday. “Today’s indictment reflects this Department of Justice’s commitment to holding those who abuse positions of power accountable for misleading the American people. We will follow the facts in this case.”
The indictment in the Eastern District of Virginia accuses Comey, whom Trump fired in 2017, of making false statements and obstructing justice during congressional testimony in September of 2020. The document notes that a grand jury didn’t concur on one of the charges prosecutors originally sought.
During questioning in the Senate at the time mentioned in the indictment, Comey defended the truthfulness of prior testimony where he said he did not authorize leaking to the press about FBI investigations into President Trump and former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton.
A former official who worked under Comey, Andrew McCabe, has claimed the director did in fact authorize him to leak to the press, a 2018 inspector general report found, though the report also found McCabe had made false and misleading statements in the past.
“Comey stated that he did not authorize someone at the FBI to be an anonymous source,” the Justice Department said in a statement on Thursday. “According to the indictment that statement was false.”
The former FBI director said in a statement on Instagram he was innocent and accused President Trump of being a “tyrant.”
“My family and I have known for years that there are costs to standing up to Donald Trump, but we couldn’t imagine ourselves living any other way,” Comey said. “We will not live on our knees and you shouldn’t either.”
“My heart is broken for the Department of Justice, but I have great confidence in the federal judicial system and I am innocent, so let’s have a trial,” he added.
President Trump and his allies have long criticized Comey over the FBI investigation into whether Russia sought to meddle in the 2016 election through contacts with the Republican’s campaign (AFP/Getty)
The president celebrated the charges on Thursday in a Truth Social post, calling Comey “one of the worst human beings this Country has ever been exposed to.”
“He has been so bad for our Country, for so long, and is now at the beginning of being held responsible for his crimes against our Nation,” Trump wrote.
The federal charges are the first to hit one of the individuals Trump named in a Truth Social post on Saturday, in which the president publicly told Bondi, “We can’t delay any longer.”
The president called for action “now” against Comey, New York Attorney General Leticia James, and Democratic Sen. Adam Schiff of California, another frequent critic of the president.
The charges against Comey come after the U.S. attorney for the Eastern District, Erik Siebert, an experienced federal prosecutor, resigned on Friday.
The official reportedly left his post because of pressure to bring a mortgage fraud case against James, despite investigators failing to find evidence of wrongdoing.
Charges against Comey come after federal prosecutor in Virginia overseeing district resigned last week and was replaced with Lindsey Halligan, a former personal lawyer for the president with no prior experience as a prosecutor (AP)
Trump criticized Siebert in the weekend Truth Social post as a “woke” official “who was never going to do his job.”
Siebert was then replaced on an acting basis with Lindsey Halligan, a Trump administration official with no prior experience as a prosecutor.
Halligan has previously worked as one of the president’s personal lawyers and oversaw a White House effort to review materials at the Smithsonian Institution.
The current FBI Director, Kash Patel, hailed the indictment of Comey.
“Nowhere was...politicization of law enforcement more blatant than during the Russiagate hoax, a disgraceful chapter in history we continue to investigate and expose,” he wrote on X. “Everyone, especially those in positions of power, will be held to account - no matter their perch. No one is above the law.”
Schiff, writing on X, said the indictment meant the DOJ is “now little more than an arm of the president’s retribution campaign.”
“Donald Trump forced out a respected U.S. Attorney because they wouldn't go along with Trump’s demands for political prosecutions,” the senator wrote. “Less than a week later, his inexperienced handpicked successor brings charges against a member of Trump's enemies list. In my almost six years as an Assistant U.S. Attorney, I never witnessed such a blatant abuse of the department.”
Former FBI Director and Trump critic James Comey indicted on two charges
Stephen Miran, one of President Donald Trump’s top economic advisers, was narrowly confirmed by the Senate to serve on the Federal Reserve’s Board of Governors, just hours before the Fed’s two-day monetary policy meeting began.
Trump’s pick
The Senate confirmed Stephen Miran to the Federal Reserve’s Board of Governors. By: MEGA© Knewz (CA)
The Senate voted 48-47 to approve Miran’s appointment, with Sen. Lisa Murkowski of Alaska as the lone Republican to oppose his confirmation. Miran will join 11 other officials in voting on interest rate decisions. He was nominated to complete the term of former Fed Governor Adriana Kugler, which expires in January 2026. Miran has said he will not resign from his influential White House post while serving on the Fed’s board, opting instead to take unpaid leave. That decision has sparked controversy, as the Fed has long maintained its independence from partisan politics. For the first time in its 111-year history, one of the board’s members will simultaneously hold ties to the executive branch.
Miran’s confirmation
Sen. Lisa Murkowski of Alaska was the only Republican to oppose his confirmation. By: MEGA© Knewz (CA)
During his Senate confirmation hearing, Miran defended the arrangement, stating that an attorney had advised him that it was legal. He pledged to carry out his duties as a Fed governor on his own. “I’m very independently minded, as shown by my willingness to stray from consensus and have out-of-consensus views, and I believe that I will continue to be as independent in my thinking process, if confirmed,” Miran told senators.
Trump’s tariffs
Miran will take unpaid leave from his White House role instead of resigning. By: MEGA© Knewz (CA)
Miran’s confirmation comes at a pivotal moment. The U.S. labor market is weakening as Trump’s widespread tariffs begin to push up prices, putting pressure on both sides of the Fed’s dual mandate: stable prices and full employment. At the same time, the Trump administration has escalated its campaign against the central bank, blasting officials for not lowering interest rates. The White House has aimed personal insults at Fed Chair Jerome Powell and attempted to fire Governor Lisa Cook — an unprecedented move against a sitting policymaker. Miran told senators that he believes the Fed’s independence “is critical to the well functioning of the economy and financial markets.” He added that he will abide by federal law and ethics rules in his new role.
Democrats respond
Democrats expressed skepticism about his independence and noted the irony of his nomination. By: MEGA© Knewz (CA)
Democrats remain skeptical of his ability to separate himself from Trump, especially given his decision to take leave rather than resign from the White House. Some lawmakers highlighted a Manhattan Institute paper Miran co-authored last year, criticizing the revolving door between the White House and the Fed, calling his nomination ironic. In response, Miran said his paper had laid out proposals to reform the central bank and stressed that “it’s important that we have democratic oversight.”
Trump scores big win with the Fed
Trump’s pick
The Senate confirmed Stephen Miran to the Federal Reserve’s Board of Governors. By: MEGA© Knewz (CA)
The Senate voted 48-47 to approve Miran’s appointment, with Sen. Lisa Murkowski of Alaska as the lone Republican to oppose his confirmation. Miran will join 11 other officials in voting on interest rate decisions. He was nominated to complete the term of former Fed Governor Adriana Kugler, which expires in January 2026. Miran has said he will not resign from his influential White House post while serving on the Fed’s board, opting instead to take unpaid leave. That decision has sparked controversy, as the Fed has long maintained its independence from partisan politics. For the first time in its 111-year history, one of the board’s members will simultaneously hold ties to the executive branch.
Miran’s confirmation
Sen. Lisa Murkowski of Alaska was the only Republican to oppose his confirmation. By: MEGA© Knewz (CA)
During his Senate confirmation hearing, Miran defended the arrangement, stating that an attorney had advised him that it was legal. He pledged to carry out his duties as a Fed governor on his own. “I’m very independently minded, as shown by my willingness to stray from consensus and have out-of-consensus views, and I believe that I will continue to be as independent in my thinking process, if confirmed,” Miran told senators.
Trump’s tariffs
Miran will take unpaid leave from his White House role instead of resigning. By: MEGA© Knewz (CA)
Miran’s confirmation comes at a pivotal moment. The U.S. labor market is weakening as Trump’s widespread tariffs begin to push up prices, putting pressure on both sides of the Fed’s dual mandate: stable prices and full employment. At the same time, the Trump administration has escalated its campaign against the central bank, blasting officials for not lowering interest rates. The White House has aimed personal insults at Fed Chair Jerome Powell and attempted to fire Governor Lisa Cook — an unprecedented move against a sitting policymaker. Miran told senators that he believes the Fed’s independence “is critical to the well functioning of the economy and financial markets.” He added that he will abide by federal law and ethics rules in his new role.
Democrats respond
Democrats expressed skepticism about his independence and noted the irony of his nomination. By: MEGA© Knewz (CA)
Democrats remain skeptical of his ability to separate himself from Trump, especially given his decision to take leave rather than resign from the White House. Some lawmakers highlighted a Manhattan Institute paper Miran co-authored last year, criticizing the revolving door between the White House and the Fed, calling his nomination ironic. In response, Miran said his paper had laid out proposals to reform the central bank and stressed that “it’s important that we have democratic oversight.”
Trump scores big win with the Fed
