Go to content
Skip menu

"Where you can find almost anything with A Click A Pick!"
Skip menu
Skip menu
US Monthly Headline News
Story by George Chidi

As Donald Trump threatens to deploy national guard units to Chicago and Baltimore, ostensibly to quell violence, a pattern has emerged as he describes which cities he talks about.

Chicago, Philadelphia, Washington DC and Baltimore.

But not Jackson, Birmingham, St Louis or Memphis.

An analysis of crime trends over the last four years shows two things. First, violent crime rates in America’s big cities have been falling over the last two years, and at an even greater rate over the last six months. The decrease in violence in America is unprecedented.

Second, crime in large cities in the aggregate is lower in states with Democratic leadership. But the president focuses his ire almost exclusively on large blue cities in blue states, sidestepping political conflict with red Republican governors.

The four cities of populations larger than 100,000 with the highest murder rates in 2024 are in Republican states: Jackson, Mississippi (78.7 per 100,000 residents), Birmingham, Alabama (58.8), St Louis, Missouri (54.1) and Memphis, Tennessee (40.6).

On Tuesday, Trump called Chicago “the most dangerous city in the world”, and pledged to send military troops there, as well as to Baltimore. “I have an obligation. This isn’t a political thing,” he said at a press conference. “I have an obligation when 20 people are killed over the last two and a half weeks and 75 are shot with bullets.”
Story by Joshua Shanes

On Nov. 19, 1863, Abraham Lincoln delivered one of the greatest speeches in American history, the Gettysburg Address. It opened “Four score and seven years ago our fathers brought forth, on this continent, a new nation, conceived in Liberty, and dedicated to the proposition that all men are created equal.”

On Tuesday, Eric Schmitt, the junior senator from Missouri, declared that Lincoln was wrong.

“What is an American?” This was the question Schmitt posed at the fifth annual National Conservatism Conference in Washington. His answer is that the nation is fundamentally not based on the idea of equality or freedom or any other ideal. Nor is it accessible to people of all races and religions. It is fundamentally, he told an assembled crowd, a white homeland.

The white Europeans who settled America and conquered the West “believed they were forging a nation—a homeland for themselves and their descendants,” he said. “They fought, they bled, they struggled, they died for us. They built this country for us. America, in all its glory, is their gift to us, handed down across the generations. It belongs to us. It’s our birthright, our heritage, our destiny. If America is everything and everyone, then it is nothing and no one at all. But we know that’s not true. America is not a ‘universal nation.’ ”

The implications of this vision are serious. This is a repudiation of our Constitution and the core of a national identity that includes all its citizens. It means that to be American is not about citizenship at all. “What is an American?” Schmitt asked. It is a white person. America is a white homeland that organically binds together white people of the past, present and future. And its policies must be guided for their benefit if they are to succeed.

“A strong, sovereign nation—not just an idea but a home, belonging to a people bound together by a common past and a shared destiny.”

Schmitt makes clear that the problem of immigration is not that people violate the rules or that the rules are not enforced. It is about immigration per se, about non-Europeans stealing the birthright of the descendants of America’s original white Christian settlers. This includes German settlers like Schmitt’s ancestors, a group at one time considered nonwhite, but not the Black slaves who built much of the country and whose roots here largely predate his own, nor countless other ethnic groups who have made significant contributions to this nation.
Story by Peter Charalambous, Benjamin Siegel, Alexander Mallin, Katherine Faulders

President Donald's Trump's announcement this week that he was firing Federal Reserve governor Lisa Cook made her the latest target in what critics call a campaign of retribution against Trump's perceived enemies.

Administration officials have insisted that any such actions are, as Vice President JD Vance said last week, "driven by law and not by politics." But they come after Trump vowed during last year's presidential campaign that he would seek retribution if reelected.

Trump's announcement regarding Cook follows months of the administration vowing investigations into perceived enemies, stripping individuals of security clearances, and removing protective details.

Here's a look at some of the actions that the president's critics have experienced, which many of them perceive as retribution.
By Jeff Mason

WASHINGTON, Sept 6 (Reuters) - President Donald Trump is standing by Robert F. Kennedy Jr., the health secretary who is upending the U.S. healthcare system, despite congressional pressure, public health concerns and the political risks of changing vaccine policies nationwide.

Since becoming the top U.S. health official, Kennedy has slashed funding for vaccine research, limited access for COVID-19 shots and ousted the head of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, which makes U.S. vaccine recommendations.

The consequences of those changes for Americans and their wellness are vast, public health professionals warn. They also carry possible political peril: If an outbreak of an infectious disease occurs after vaccination rates go down, Trump could be blamed.
But the president so far has been steadfast in his support for Kennedy, according to sources familiar with their relationship, underscoring Trump's willingness to take a proverbial sledgehammer to the U.S. healthcare system, just as he has to academia, the law, the media and other institutions throughout U.S. society.

"He's a, a very good person ... and he means very well, and he's got some little different ideas," Trump told reporters on Thursday at the White House after lawmakers grilled Kennedy at a hearing earlier in the day. "If you look at what's going on in the world with health, and look at this country also with regard to health, I like the fact that he's different."
Story by Snigdha Gairola

President Donald Trump's sweeping tariffs, meant to boost American jobs and revenue, are driving major exporters in Brazil and India toward China while U.S. consumers face looming price hikes.

Brazil Coffee Exporters Turn To China After 50% US Tariff
Brazil, the world's largest coffee supplier, was hit with a 50% U.S. import tax, prompting exporters to redirect shipments to China's growing cafe market, as reported by BBC News on Friday.

"If the tariffs are meant to weaken Brazil, in reality, it is pushing sellers closer to China," said Hugo Portes, a global coffee trader.

More than 180 Brazilian coffee firms recently registered to export to China, an "unprecedented" shift, according to Portes.

India's Seafood And Tea Producers Diversify Amid US Trade Pressures
Indian exporters of tea and seafood are also adjusting after Washington imposed 50% tariffs and additional levies tied to New Delhi's oil trade with Moscow.

"It will be a difficult time," said K.N. Raghavan of the Seafood Exporters Association of India, while adding that he was optimistic about securing new markets.

China and Europe are emerging as top alternatives for Indian producers, though exporters warn they could lose ground to cheaper African suppliers.
Republicans were upset when they thought democrat’s weaponized the government.  Trump has weaponized the government. Where is the republican outrage at Trump weaponizing the government?

Story by Jonathan J. Cooper

President Trump, once a casino owner and always a man in search of his next deal, is fond of a poker analogy when sizing up partners and adversaries.

“We have much bigger and better cards than they do,” he said of China last month. Compared with Canada, he said in June, “we have all the cards. We have every single one.” And most famously, he told Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky in their Oval Office confrontation earlier this year: “You don’t have the cards.”

The phrase offers a window into the worldview of Trump, who has spent his second stint in the White House amassing cards to deploy in pursuit of his interests.

Seven months into his second term, he’s accumulated presidential power that he’s used against universities, media companies, law firms and individuals he dislikes. A man who ran for president as an angry victim of a weaponized “deep state" is, in many ways, supercharging government power and training it on his opponents.

And the supporters who responded to his complaints about overzealous Democrats aren’t recoiling. They’re egging him on.

“Weaponizing the state to win the culture war has been essential to their agenda,” said David N. Smith, a University of Kansas sociologist who has extensively researched the motivations of Trump voters. “They didn’t like it when the state was mobilized to restrain Trump, but they’re happy to see the state acting to fight the culture war on their behalf.”

How Trump has weaponized the government
Trump began putting the federal government to work for him within hours of taking office in January, and he’s been collecting and using power in novel ways ever since. It's a high-velocity push to carry out his political agendas and grudges.

This past month, hundreds of federal agents and National Guard troops fanned out across Washington after Trump drew on a never-used law that allows him to take control of law enforcement in the nation’s capital. He’s threatened similar deployments in other cities run by Democrats, including Baltimore, Chicago, New York and New Orleans. He has also moved to fire a Federal Reserve governor, pointing to unproven claims of mortgage fraud that she denies.

Trump, his aides and allies throughout the executive branch have trained the government, or threatened to, on a dizzying array of targets:

—He threatened to block a stadium plan for the Washington Commanders football team unless it readopted the racial slur it used as its team name until 2020.

President Donald Trump childishly attacked national security figure Chris Krebs for claiming that the 2020 Election was not stolen. This occurred several weeks ago

Donald Trump signed a series of executive orders days ago in the Oval Office, the most important of which is renaming the "Department of Defense" back to the "Department of War." During his gaggle with the press, Trump brazenly admitted that he relocated the Space Command from Colorado to Alabama because of mail-in voting. Trump stated, "Colorado just went to all mail-in voting. That means they cheat... that's a big reason why they just lost the whole Space Command situation that is going to Alabama."
Story by Nicole Duncan-Smith

President Donald Trump found himself at the center of an amusing mix-up this Friday when he seemingly mistook an American flag for a blanket during an Oval Office ceremony.

The incident occurred as Tennessee Rep. John Rose presented the 79-year-old president with a gift following the signing of the Homebuyers Privacy Protection Act, legislation designed to shield Americans from harassment during the home-buying process by limiting how personal financial data can be shared.

The moment unfolded as Rose explained the significance of his bill, noting how difficult it had become for Americans to purchase homes “particularly after the last four years,” according to the Daily Beast.

He emphasized how the new legislation would protect citizens from unwanted phone calls and text messages that result from their private information being sold on the open market. Rose then reached into a clear plastic bag and presented Trump with what he described as “a gift from a constituent back in Tennessee.”

Trump’s response caught everyone off guard.

“Oh, I could use that at night,” the president replied, apparently believing the folded flag was a blanket. Rose, laughing at the confusion, gently corrected him: “It’s an American flag.”

Trump quickly recovered, responding graciously, “It’s very nice, I like that. Thank you very much.”

The exchange sparked immediate reaction when the Daily Beast posted about it on Threads.


“Grandpa is sundowning and can’t recognize a flag from a blanket,” one person commented.

Another user was more direct in their criticism, writing, “Derp. Grandpa’s getting worse. The rotting continues day by day. Just not fast enough.”

One other person questioned, “Why is he gifted an American flag, he’s far from being an American.”
Republican’s standard M.O. taking credit for things they opposed.

Story by Peter Wade

Donald Trump is apparently trying to take credit for infrastructure projects funded by a bill former president Joe Biden signed into law - legislation that Trump vehemently opposed at the time as "a loser for the U.S.A."

Now, The New York Times reported, the Trump administration is taking down blue signs that once touted projects "funded by President Joe Biden's Bipartisan Infrastructure Law" and putting up red signs that read, in all caps: "President Donald J. Trump" and "Rebuilding America's Infrastructure." Those signs have been showing up at several major infrastructure projects funded by Biden's bill, including bridges in Maryland and Connecticut as well as rail improvements in Seattle, Boston, and Philadelphia, and an Amtrak tunnel replacement project between Baltimore and Washington, D.C. The signs also acknowledge (but in smaller font) that the projects are "funded by the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act" but do not mention Biden.

Not only did Trump oppose the infrastructure bill's passage before he became president for a second term, he signed an executive order shortly after his inauguration demanding federal agencies "immediately pause the disbursement of funds" under Biden's 2021 infrastructure law and 2022 inflation reduction act that invested in climate initiatives. A day later, the administration clarified that the order only applied to funds for programs that disincentivize investments in fossil fuels or encourage the use of electric vehicles.
Story by José Olivares

At least one of the Korean workers swept up in a huge immigration raid on a Hyundai Motor factory site in Georgia last week was living and working legally in the US, according to an internal federal government document obtained by the Guardian.

Officials then “mandated” that he agree to be removed from the US despite not having violated his visa.

The document shows that immigration officials are aware that someone with a valid visa was among the people arrested during the raid at the Hyundai factory and taken to Immigration and Customs Enforcement (Ice) detention for removal proceedings, where the people arrested remained on Tuesday before expected deportation flights back to South Korea.

The document in question reports on the man’s case and was leaked exclusively to the Guardian. It was written by an Ice agent. The Guardian is redacting the identity of the man in question, who arrived in the US in June, because it has not been possible to reach him directly and it is unclear whether he has any legal representation.

The document says that immigration agents from Atlanta “determined that [redacted] entered into the United States in [redacted], with a valid B1/B2 visa and [redacted] was employed at HL-GA Battery Company LLC as a contractor from the South Korean company SFA. From statements made and queries in law enforcement databases, [redacted] has not violated his visa; however, the Atlanta Field Office Director has mandated [redacted] be presented as a Voluntary Departure. [Redacted] has accepted voluntary departure despite not violating his B1/B2 visa requirements.”
Story by Evan Hummel

The Department of Education announced Wednesday it will halt $350 million in grants to hundreds of colleges that serve minority students, arguing the longtime programs are discriminatory. The department said it will stop funding eight grant programs that support Black, Native, Hispanic and Asian American college students nationwide and reallocate that money to new priorities.

However, about $132 million will still go to four of the grant programs because of congressional mandates. The Trump administration said only that money must be disbursed.

"Discrimination based upon race or ethnicity has no place in the United States," Education Secretary Linda McMahon said in a statement. "The department looks forward to working with Congress to re-envision these programs to support institutions that serve underprepared or under-resourced students, without relying on race quotas and will continue fighting to ensure that students are judged as individuals, not prejudged by their membership of a racial group."

Background
The move comes after the Department of Justice declined to defend the constitutionality of an initiative that assists colleges where at at least 25% of undergraduates are Hispanic.

The state of Tennessee and a conservative nonprofit group, Students for Fair Admissions, eventually prevailed in a lawsuit challenging the initiative. The plaintiffs sought an end to the program, arguing it was discriminatory by denying federal funding to colleges that didn't meet the 25% requirement.
Back to content