Donald Trump

Liz Oyer, a lawyer with the United States Department of Justice handling pardons for a long time, was fired by the Trump administration in March. Since then, Oyer has publicly criticised the administration, including its approach to pardons.

In an April 30 video on TikTok, Oyer took issue with many of Trump’s pardons, not only because they short-circuited the justice system but also because of their financial impact.

“President Trump has granted pardons that have wiped out over $1bn in debts owed by wealthy Americans who have committed fraud and broken the law,” claims Oyer, who said she was fired because she opposed a pardon to restore gun rights to actor Mel Gibson, a Trump supporter who was convicted on misdemeanour domestic violence charges in 2011.

US Senator Cory Booker, a Democrat from New Jersey, shared her post on May 31 on Instagram, saying Trump is “selling pardons to criminals who dump money on him and ingratiate themselves to his ego. They not only get out of jail, but they get out of the money they owe to make restitution for their crimes. This is wrong.”

Oyer’s Substack includes a running list of Trump’s pardons, along with a dollar figure for each that she says the pardon erased. The dollar figures on her list include fines – a financial penalty for being convicted of a crime – and restitution, which is designed to compensate victims for their losses.

As of June 5, Oyer’s pardon tracker listed 24 people with federal convictions whom Trump pardoned, along with the dollar amounts to be forgiven.

People and companies pardoned by Trump could save up to $1.3bn

On the surface, the maths holds: collectively, the 24 pardoned people and companies Oyer listed were on the hook for $1.34bn.

“A full pardon would wipe out any payments that were required as part of the criminal sentence”, as long as they have not already been paid, said Brian Kalt, a Michigan State University law professor.

But legal experts offered some caveats about this calculation. Some of the dollar amounts on Oyer’s list were not finalised, which adds some speculation to her total.

Oyer did not respond to inquiries for this article.

The biggest debts erased by pardons so far

After four and a half months in office, Trump has surpassed all but three post-World War II presidents for the number of clemency actions, which include pardons and commutations. His total is dominated by the roughly 1,500 pardons he granted to people who faced legal consequences from their participation in the events of January 6, 2021, when pro-Trump rioters stormed the US Capitol.

Trump’s second-term clemency acts exceed all but three modern presidents

The vast majority of clemency actions by Trump’s predecessor, President Joe Biden, were commutations, meaning they did not affect fines or restitution. (Biden commuted sentences for 37 people on death row and about 2,500 others convicted of nonviolent drug crimes.)

Biden pardoned 80 people over four years; Trump has pardoned 58 people in four and a half months, excluding the January 6, 2021-related pardons.

The four pardon recipients on Oyer’s list with the highest debt would collectively exceed $1bn by themselves. They are:

• Trevor Milton, an electric-truck company owner, who had been convicted of securities fraud and wire fraud in 2023 and sentenced to four years in prison. He was ordered to pay $676m in restitution.
• Ross William Ulbricht, the founder of Silk Road, an online marketplace that sold illegal drugs such as cocaine and heroin. Ulbricht had been convicted of aiding and abetting the distribution of drugs over the internet, continuing criminal enterprise, computer hacking conspiracy, and money laundering conspiracy. He had been sentenced to life in prison. (Ulbricht’s pardon fulfilled a Trump campaign promise.) Ulbricht was ordered to pay almost $184m.
• HDR Global Trading Limited, operator of a cryptocurrency exchange that had been ordered to pay a $100m fine for violating the Bank Secrecy Act’s anti-money laundering provisions.
• Lawrence Duran, owner of American Therapeutic Corp, a Miami-area mental health company, convicted of multiple counts related to healthcare fraud; Duran was sentenced to 50 years in prison and $87.5m in restitution.

However, it is unclear whether these four would add up to $1bn plus in forgone payments to the federal government, because not every amount listed had been formally approved by a judge.

“Almost always, a pardon has come after sentencing, so we know the amount of the fine or restitution with certainty,” said Mark Osler, a University of St Thomas law professor. But at least in Milton’s case, the pardon came before the restitution portion of his sentencing was completed.

Milton is the most important pardon recipient for judging the accuracy of Oyer’s statement, because it is the largest, accounting for about two-thirds of the $1bn figure.

He was sentenced in December 2023, but legal skirmishing over his restitution package was delayed. In March 2025, federal prosecutors requested that the judge approve about $676m in restitution – $660.8m to shareholders in his company and $15m to one victim. That request was pending at the time of Milton’s pardon.

It is impossible to know whether the judge would have ultimately accepted that amount.

Defendants can contest the prosecution’s restitution request, and they often do, said Frank O Bowman III, a University of Missouri emeritus law professor.

However, “a judge will usually accept” what the government suggests, Osler said.

For the second-, third- and fourth-ranking dollar amounts on Oyer’s list, each was finalised in court. For these, though, it is unclear whether the pardon recipients had already begun to pay any of their restitution. If they had, that could reduce the dollar amounts on Oyer’s list. (Our reporting did not turn up a central, publicly accessible repository showing who had paid what by the time of their pardon.)

Restitution owed by January 6, 2021, pardon recipients, which is not included in Oyer’s figure, could also push the total higher. Democrats on the House Oversight Committee said in a March 2025 letter that people receiving pardons related to January 6, 2021, owed nearly $3m in restitution before being pardoned.

Other high-profile names on Oyer’s list with smaller dollar amounts include: Devon Archer, Hunter Biden’s former business partner, who was interviewed by congressional Republicans during an investigation of Joe Biden, Hunter’s father; Carlos Watson, the founder of Ozy Media Inc, who was convicted on several fraud counts; reality TV stars Todd Chrisley and Julie Chrisley, who were also convicted on fraud counts; and former politicians Michael Grimm, John Rowland, Michelle Fiore and Alexander Sittenfeld.

Oyer told The Washington Post that when deciding clemency, past presidents have hewed closer to the recommendations of her former Justice Department office, which has guidelines stating that potential pardon recipients should have already completed their sentence, including paying any restitution.

“It’s unprecedented for a president to grant pardons that have the effect of wiping out so much debt owed by people who have committed frauds,” Oyer told the Post. “They do not meet Justice Department standards for recommending a pardon.”

Legal experts told PolitiFact that courts have not ruled on what happens to fines or restitution payments after a pardon if they had not already been paid. A 1995 Justice Department memo said that although payments already made and received would not be subject to being clawed back, the obligations not yet paid at the time of the pardon would be forgiven.

“This question, to our knowledge, has not been decided by any court, but we conclude, based upon existing precedent, that a pardon does reach such restitution where the victim has not yet received the restitution award, provided the pardon does not contain an express limitation to the contrary,” the memo said.

Margaret Love, who held Oyer’s former post at the Justice Department from 1990 to 1997, said, “If money is paid to the government, you can’t get the money back except through a congressional appropriation.”

For restitution intended to compensate a person — such as the victim of a fraudulent scheme — it appears that the victims are out of luck once a pardon is issued if they have not received that money already, legal experts said. It is unclear whether the victims would be obliged to repay the restitution they had already received back to the pardoned convict who defrauded them.

“I don’t know if it has ever come up,” Osler said.

Our ruling

Oyer said, “President Trump has granted pardons that have wiped out over $1bn in debts owed by wealthy Americans who have committed fraud and broken the law.”

In 24 Trump pardons Oyer cited, the four biggest dollar amounts top $1bn. However, the single biggest – about $676m – relates to an amount sought by prosecutors that had not been formally approved by a judge before the pardon was issued, making the dollar figure speculative. It accounts for about two-thirds of the $1bn figure.

The statement is accurate but requires additional information, so we rate it Mostly True.

June 8 (UPI) — Pope Leo asked God to “open borders, break down walls and dispel hatred,” during Sunday mass with tens of thousands of people in St. Peter’s Square Sunday.

The pontiff has been critical of nationalist political movements and the “exclusionary mindset” they convey, but did not name a specific country or government.

“There is no room for prejudice , for ‘security zones’ separating us from our neighbors, for the exclusionary mindset that, unfortunately, we now see emerging in political nationalisms,” the pope said during the mass.

Leo added that the church “must open the borders between peoples and break down the barriers between class and race.”

“People must move beyond our fear of those who are different,” he continued, and said the Holy Spirit “breaks down barriers and tears down the walls of indifference and hatred.”

While the pontiff did not mention President Donald Trump by name, he has been critical of his administration and policies.

Prior to ascending to pope in May, Leo, formerly known as Cardinal Robert Prevost, routinely posted negative comments about Trump and vice-president JD Vance on social media. The Prevost X account was deactivated shortly after he became pope.

Prior to Leo, pope Francis, who died earlier this year, was also critical of Trump.

“A person who thinks only about building walls, wherever they may be, and not building bridges, is not a Christian,” Francis said about Trump when asked about him in 2016.

June 8 (UPI) — More than 1,000 people gathered on the National Mall in Washington, D.C., on Sunday as part of WorldPride 2025 to protest what organizers called a “coordinated and systemic attack” on human rights.

The rally, which promotes LGBTQ+ visibility with events around the world and pushes back on an increasingly hostile attitude towards gay, lesbian and transgender people that organizers said has been stepped up under the Trump administration.

“Our fundamental freedoms — and our very democracy — are at risk,” a statement on the WorldPride website said. “And if we fail to recognize the urgency of this moment, we’ll only have ourselves to blame. Resist the marginalization and persecution of people just for being who they are.”

The Washington event, which saw marchers gather at the steps of the Lincoln Memorial, is being hosted by DC’s Capital Pride Alliance, which is marking 50 years of celebrating Pride Month in the capital.

Marchers gathered near the Reflecting Pool at the Lincoln Memorial waving rainbow colored Pride flags representing transgender and bisexual communities and held up signs that read “Proud and Gay,” “Trans rights are human rights,” and “Gender affirming care saved my life.”

The rally and march on the National Mall came a day after a march through the streets of Washington. The Sunday event is scheduled to conclude with a festival and concert.

Former vice presidential candidate Kamala Harris made an unannounced appearance at the Sunday event.

Hundreds of people gathered along the parade route, and marchers waved rainbow flags and balloons as they gathered along the steps and columns of the National City Christian Church.

June is Pride Month and is celebrated this year amid President Donald Trump‘s push to remove transgender members from the military and roll back diversity, equity and inclusion policies at federal agencies and at universities that receive federal money.

US National Guard soldiers have begun deploying on Los Angeles streets after United States President Donald Trump sent in 2,000 troops in a bid to suppress protests against a wave of federal immigration raids in the region, sparking a sharp rebuke from California’s Democratic leadership.

Troops were seen early Sunday at the federal complex in downtown Los Angeles, including around the Metropolitan Detention Center, which has been a flashpoint over the past two days.

The deployment follows intense confrontations between demonstrators and federal agents near a Department of Homeland Security facility in Paramount, a city south of Los Angeles with a large Latino population.

The clashes erupted after federal authorities carried out mass arrests in several locations, including the city’s fashion district and a Home Depot store.

More than 100 people have been detained over the past week, according to immigration officials.

Trump accused of inflaming tensions

During Saturday’s confrontation, agents fired tear gas, stun grenades, and pepper balls, while protesters responded with rocks and debris. Fires burned in the streets as tensions spiralled.

“This deployment of National Guard troops was done in a very unusual manner,” said Rob Reynolds, Al Jazeera’s senior correspondent reporting from Los Angeles.

“Usually, the National Guard presence is requested by the governor of a state. In this case, Trump went around [California Governor Gavin] Newsom using a different provision of the law that allows him to nationalise the state National Guard and call it out in cases of insurrection against the United States government,” said Reynolds.

He added that many in the city, including community leaders and politicians, fear that the very presence of the National Guard “could constitute in and of itself a provocation, an inflammatory situation that might actually lead to more confrontations”.

“That’s certainly something that the leaders of this city do not want to see happen,” Reynolds said.

Newsom, who has long been at odds with Trump, condemned the move as “inflammatory” and warned it would only make the situation more combustible.

“They want a spectacle. Don’t give them one,” Newsom posted on X.

He accused the administration of using heavy-handed tactics to provoke unrest and distract from its controversial immigration agenda.

Trump has denounced the protests as “a form of rebellion”.

“There has long been a sense of antagonism between Trump and the state of California in general and also particularly against Newsom, who Trump refers to on social media by the somewhat juvenile nickname of Gavin New Scum. He was brandishing that nickname on social media earlier today,” Reynolds noted.

The White House defended the decision, saying the Guard was being sent to “address the lawlessness that has been allowed to fester.”

Alexandra Miller, an immigration justice attorney at VECINA, a non-governmental organisation working on immigrant legal needs, said the raids by US Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) are “incredibly concerning”, with local communities afraid of what they should do to defend their area.

“I think that’s exactly the point of the raids … to create a massive public fear tactic to undermine communities into demonstrating the force of the administration,” Miller told Al Jazeera.

While the US government has the authority to enforce immigration laws, the way that it is being handled is “disproportionate to the needs and priorities” that the government should have, Miller said.

“ICE and other federal authorities have to abide by the rules of due process and to ensure that migrants have the ability to defend themselves against removal and they’re not having that full due process [at] this moment,” she added.

The last deployment of the National Guard in Los Angeles was in 1992, during the rioting triggered by the brutal police beating by white officers of Black motorist Rodney King, which was caught on video.

Robert Patillo, a civil and human rights attorney, called the president’s move to bypass the governor and call in troops as “unprecedented” in recent history.

“Normally, if federal troops are going to be used inside of states, it’s going to be at the invitation of the governor of that state. For example, in 1992, the California governor invited federal troops in to put down the LA riots. But if the governor, such as Gavin Newsom, has not asked for federal troops to come in, and these troops are coming in against his will, then there will be challenges,” he said.

In Compton, another site of protest, a vehicle was set alight, while in Paramount, hundreds of demonstrators rallied near a doughnut shop as police erected barriers of barbed wire. The protests extended into the night, with crowds also returning to federal buildings in central Los Angeles.

Police later declared an unlawful assembly and began making arrests.

In a further escalation, US Defence Secretary Pete Hegseth warned that active-duty Marines based at Camp Pendleton were on high alert and could be mobilised if unrest continues.

Progressive Vermont Senator Bernie Sanders said the Trump order captured  “a president moving this country rapidly into authoritarianism” and “usurping the powers of the United States Congress”.

Several Republican leaders voiced their support for the involvement of the National Guard.

US President Donald Trump ordered the deployment of 2,000 National Guard troops to combat the ongoing protests against ICE immigration raids in Los Angeles, citing ‘lawlessness’ in the city. Activists have called for a third day of protests Sunday in opposition to the immigration sweeps and national guard deployment.

June 8 (UPI) — The Los Angeles Sheriff’s Department arrested one person overnight in Paramount, a city in Los Angeles County, amid ongoing protests against raids by Immigration and Customs Enforcement officers, officials said Sunday.

The sheriff’s department confirmed the arrest by email to UPI but did not provide any further details about the arrest.

More protests have been planned in Los Angeles ahead of the arrival of National Guardsmen called up by President Donald Trump to curb the demonstrations, as Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth said he might send in U.S. Marines if necessary to aid them.

“The National Guard, and Marines if need be, stand with ICE,” Hegseth said. White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt said in a statement to UPI late Saturday that the administration has “a zero tolerance for criminal behavior and violence,” especially violence allegedly targeted at law enforcement.

Protesters clashed with police in riot gear in Los Angeles on Saturday as outrage mounted over a series of ICE raids carried out last week across southern California.

Trump then ordered 2,000 members of the National Guard to Los Angeles, later thanking them Saturday night for their “good job” in handling the protests.

“Great job by the National Guard in Los Angeles after two days of violence, clashes and unrest,” Trump said on his Truth Social platform. “These radical left protests, by instigators and often paid troublemakers, will not be tolerated.”

Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass said afterward on social media that no National Guardsmen had yet arrived. “Just to be clear, the National Guard has not been deployed in the City of Los Angeles,” she said.

Trump, who pardoned mask-wearing demonstrators who rioted at the U.S. Capitol in 2021, also said protesters would not be allowed to wear masks.

Demonstrators have criticized ICE officers for also wearing masks while conducting raids. Federal law does not explicitly forbid them from wearing masks but they are required by law to clearly identify themselves with badges or patches and to state their identity in an arrest.

“Masks will not be allowed to be worn at protests. What do these people have to hide, and why?” Trump said of the protesters. “Again, thank you to the National Guard for a job well done!” The streets were quiet in Los Angeles around 7 a.m. local time, The New York Times reported.

Meanwhile, the Northern California Coalition for Just Immigration Reform said Saturday that it would be organizing a protest rally outside the California State Capitol on Monday.

“The Trump administration’s baseless deployment of the National Guard is plainly retaliation against California, a stronghold for immigrant communities, and is akin to a declaration of war on all Californians,” the ACLU’s division in southern California said in a statement.

“The only threat to safety today is the masked goon squads that the Trump administration has deployed to terrorize the communities of Los Angeles County,” the organization said.

United States President Donald Trump has ordered the deployment of 2,000 members of the National Guard to Los Angeles County to quell protests against coordinated immigration raids, bypassing the authority of the governor of California.

The extraordinary development came on Saturday, the second day of protests, amid clashes between law enforcement officers and demonstrators in the city.

The Los Angeles Police Department said Saturday’s demonstrations were peaceful and that “the day concluded without incident”. But in the two cities south of Los Angeles, Compton and Paramount, street battles broke out between protesters and police who used tear gas and flashbangs to disperse the crowds.

Local authorities did not request federal assistance. On the contrary, California Governor Gavin Newsom called Trump’s decision to call in National Guard troops “purposefully inflammatory”.

He accused the Trump administration of ordering the deployment “not because there is a shortage of law enforcement, but because they want a spectacle”.

How did it start?

It all started on Friday, when law enforcement officials in full riot gear descended on Los Angeles, rounding up day labourers at a building supply shop.

The raids, part of a military-style operation, signalled a step up in the Trump administration’s use of force in its crackdown against undocumented immigrants. The arrests were carried out without judicial warrants, according to multiple legal observers and the American Civil Liberties Union.

The Department of Homeland Security said more than 100 undocumented immigrants have been arrested in two days of raids across southern California.

After word spread through southern Los Angeles of immigration agents arresting people, residents came out to show their outrage, and a police crackdown followed.

What is the National Guard?

It is made up of part-time soldiers who can be used at the state and federal levels. Under the authority of state governors, National Guard troops can be deployed to respond to emergencies, such as the COVID pandemic, hurricanes and other natural disasters. It can also be used to tackle social unrest when local police are overwhelmed.

During times of war or national emergencies, the federal government can order a deployment for military service – that is, when the National Guard is federalised and serves under the control of the president.

Can the president deploy the National Guard in a state?

The president can federalise, or take control of, the National Guard in very specific cases.

The main legal mechanism that a president can use to send military forces is the Insurrection Act to suppress insurrections, rebellions, and civil disorder within the country. If certain conditions are met, the president can send in the National Guard, bypassing the authority of the governor, though that is rare and politically sensitive.

Following the breakout of protests in Los Angeles, Trump did not invoke the Insurrection Act, but rather a specific provision of the US Code on Armed Services. It says National Guard troops can be placed under federal command when “there is a rebellion or danger of a rebellion against the authority” of the US.

But the law also says “orders for these purposes shall be issued through the governors” of the states, making it not clear whether Trump had the legal authority to bypass Newsom.

Trump’s directive ordering the deployment of troops said “protests or acts of violence” directly inhibiting the execution of the laws would “constitute a form of rebellion” against the government.

According to Robert Patillo, a civil and human rights lawyer, Trump’s order will likely face legal challenges.

“Normally, federal troops are going to be used inside states at the invitation of the governor of that state,” he told Al Jazeera, citing the 1992 riots in Los Angeles, which were put down by federal troops invited by Pete Wilson, then-governor of California.

“But if the governor, such as Gavin Newsom, has not asked for federal troops to come in, and these troops are coming in against his will, then there will be challenges … and this will have to go to the Supreme Court in order to determine who has a legal right to deploy those troops,” Patillo said.

Is it the first time Trump has activated the National Guard?

In 2020, Trump threatened to invoke the Insurrection Act to respond to the protests that followed the killing by a Minneapolis police officer of George Floyd. Then-Secretary of Defense Mark Esper pushed back, saying active-duty troops in a law enforcement role should be used “only in the most urgent and dire of situations”.

Finally, Trump did not invoke the Insurrection Act and asked governors of several states to deploy their National Guard troops to Washington, DC. Those who refused to send them were allowed to do so.

But this time around, Trump has already signalled his unwillingness to hold back on calling in troops. When on the campaign trail in 2023, Trump told supporters in Iowa that he would not be waiting for a governor to be asked to send in troops as during his first term.

“The next time, I’m not waiting,” he said.

It’s official: United States President Donald Trump and the world’s richest person, Elon Musk, have broken up.

At the end of last month, Musk departed from his post as the head of Trump’s Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), where he oversaw the mass firing of federal employees and dismantling of various government agencies – all the while benefitting from his own companies’ lucrative contracts with the government.

Anyway, US “democracy” has never met a conflict of interest it didn’t like.

Musk’s service at the White House initially appeared to end on an amicable note as Trump praised him for the “colossal change” he had achieved “in the old ways of doing business in Washington”. The former head of DOGE in turn thanked the president for the opportunity.

But soon after his departure, Musk publicly criticised the “One Big Beautiful Bill Act”, a tax and spending bill that Trump is currently obsessed with passing, slamming it as a “disgusting abomination”.

There ensued predictably dramatic social media exchanges between the two right-wing billionaires with Trump pronouncing Musk “so depressed and so heartbroken” after leaving the White House and offering the additional coherent analysis:

“ It’s sort of Trump derangement syndrome. We have it with others, too. They leave, and they wake up in the morning, and the glamour’s gone. The whole world is different, and they become hostile.”

Musk has repeatedly taken credit for Trump’s 2024 election victory on account of the gobs of money he donated to the president’s campaign and those of other Republican candidates. Now that the relationship is over, Trump has wasted no time in warning Musk that he’ll face “very serious consequences” if he chooses to fund Democratic campaigns in the future.

But some Democratic ears, at least, have perked up at the possibility of getting the planet’s richest person back on their side – which he abandoned in favour of Trump after having extended support to Democratic former Presidents Barack Obama and Joe Biden. The political switcheroo was hardly extreme. At the end of the day, ideology matters little when you’re just in the business of buying power.

California Congressman Ro Khanna, for example, recently opined that Democrats should “be in a dialogue” with Musk in light of their shared opposition to Trump’s big beautiful bill.

As per Khanna’s view, “we should ultimately be trying to convince [Musk] that the Democratic Party has more of the values that he agrees with.” He went on to list a few of these alleged values: “A commitment to science funding, a commitment to clean technology, a commitment to seeing international students like him.”

Never mind that Musk’s main “value” is a commitment to controlling as much of the earth – not to mention the whole solar system – as he possibly can for the benefit of himself and himself alone. Beyond his mass firing activities while head of DOGE, a brief review of Musk’s entrepreneurial track record reveals a total lack of the “values” that Democrats purport to espouse.

Over recent years, reports have abounded of sexual harassment and acute racism at Musk’s Tesla car factories. In October 2021, a federal jury in San Francisco ordered Tesla to pay $137m to a Black former employee who claimed he was told to “go back to Africa” among other abuses suffered at his workplace.

Along with violating federal labour laws, Musk as chief executive of Tesla threatened workers over the prospect of unionisation. When the COVID-19 pandemic hit in 2020, he violated local regulations to keep his factories up and running, underscoring a general contempt for human life that, again, should not be a “value” that anyone aspires to.

To be sure, not all Democrats are on board with the proposal to woo Musk back into the Democratic camp – but he may be getting a growing cheering squad. In addition to Khanna’s advocacy on his behalf, New York Democratic Congressman Ritchie Torres seems prepared to give Musk his vote as well: “I’m a believer in redemption, and he is telling the truth about the [big beautiful] legislation.”

Anthony Scaramucci, Trump’s former White House director of communications, has, meanwhile, suggested that Democrats could “bring Elon Musk back into the fold as a prodigal son” by foregoing more left-wing policies – as if there’s anything truly left-wing about the Democratic Party in the first place.

Newsweek’s write-up of Scaramucci’s comments observed that “It would be a coup for Democrats if they could court the influence of the world’s richest man once more.” It would not, obviously, be a coup for democracy, which is supposed to be rule by the people and not by money.

And yet a longstanding bipartisan commitment to plutocracy means the US has never been in danger of true democracy. Instead, billions upon billions of dollars are spent to sustain an electoral charade and ensure that capital remains concentrated in the hands of the few – while Americans continue to literally die of poverty.

Now it remains to be seen whether the Trump-Musk breakup will drive Democrats into Musk’s arms. But either way, the country’s plutocratic values remain rock solid – and that is nothing less than a “disgusting abomination”.

The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect Al Jazeera’s editorial stance.

To hear Republicans tell it, California is a failed state and Donald Trump won the presidency in a landslide that gives him a mandate to do as he pleases. No surprise there.

But more and more, Democrats are echoing those talking points. Ever since Kamala Harris lost the election, the Democratic Party has been on a nationwide self-flagellation tour. One after another, its leaders have stuck their heads deep into their navels, hoping to find out why so many Americans — especially young people, Black voters and Latinos — shunned the former vice president.

Even in California, a reliably blue state, the soul-searching has been extreme, as seen at last weekend’s state Democratic Party convention, where a parade of speakers — including Harris’ 2024 running mate, Tim Walz — wailed and moaned and did the woe-is-us-thing.

Is it long-overdue introspection, or just annoying self-pity? Our columnists Anita Chabria and Mark Z. Barabak hash it out.

Chabria: Mark, you were at the convention in Anaheim. Thoughts?

Barabak: I’ll start by noting this is the first convention I’ve attended — and I’ve been to dozens — rated “R” for adult language. Apparently, Democrats think by dropping a lot of f-bombs they can demonstrate to voters their authenticity and passion. But it seemed kind of stagy and, after a while, grew tiresome.

I’ve covered Nancy Pelosi for more than three decades and never once heard her utter a curse word, in public or private. I don’t recall Martin Luther King Jr., saying, “I have a [expletive deleted] dream.” Both were pretty darned effective leaders.

Democrats have a lot of work to do. But cursing a blue streak isn’t going to win them back the White House or control of Congress.

Chabria: As someone known to routinely curse in polite society, I’m not one to judge an expletive. But that cussing and fussing brings up a larger point: Democrats are desperate to prove how serious and passionate they are about fixing themselves. Gov. Gavin Newsom has called the Democratic brand “toxic.” Walz told his fellow Dems: “We’re in this mess because some of it’s our own doing.”

It seems like across the country, the one thing Democrats can agree on is that they are lame. Or at least, they see themselves as lame. I’m not sure the average person finds Democratic ideals such as equality or due process quite so off-putting, especially as Trump and his MAGA brigade move forward on the many campaign promises — deportations, rollbacks of civil rights, stripping the names of civil rights icons off ships — that at least some voters believed were more talk than substance.

I always tell my kids to be their own hero, and I’m starting to think the Democrats need to hear that. Pick yourself up. Dust yourself off. Move on. Do you think all this self-reproach is useful, Mark? Does Harris’ loss really mean the party is bereft of value or values?

Barabak: I think self-reflection is good for the party, to a point. Democrats suffered a soul-crushing loss in November — at the presidential level and in the Senate, where the GOP seized control — and they did so in part because many of their traditional voters stayed home. It would be political malpractice not to figure out why.

That said, there is a tendency to go overboard and over-interpret the long-term significance of any one election.

This is not the end of the Democratic Party. It’s not even the first time one of the two major parties has been cast into the political wilderness.

Democrats went through similar soul-searching after presidential losses in 1984 and 1988. In 1991, a book was published explaining how Democrats were again destined to lose the White House and suggesting they would do so for the foreseeable future. In November 1992, Bill Clinton was elected president. Four years later, he romped to reelection.

In 2013, after two straight losing presidential campaigns, Republicans commissioned a political autopsy that, among other recommendations, urged the party to increase its outreach to gay and Latino voters. In 2016, Donald Trump — not exactly a model of inclusion — was elected.

Here, by the way, is how The Times wrote up that postmortem: “A smug, uncaring, ideologically rigid national Republican Party is turning off the majority of American voters, with stale policies that have changed little in 30 years and an image that alienates minorities and the young, according to an internal GOP study.”

Sound familar?

So, sure, look inward. But spare us the existential freakout.

Chabria: I would also argue that this moment is about more than the next election. I do think there are questions about if democracy will make it that long, and if so, if the next round at the polls will be a free and fair one.

I know the price of everything continues to rise, and conventional wisdom is that it’s all about the economy. But Democrats seem stuck in election politics as usual. These however, are unusual times that call for something more. There are a lot of folks who don’t like to see their neighbors, family or friends rounded up by Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents in masks; a lot of people who don’t want to see Medicaid cut for millions, with Medicare likely to be on the chopping block next; a lot of people who are afraid our courts won’t hold the line until the midterms.

They want to know Democrats are fighting to protect these things, not fighting each other. I agree with you that any loss should be followed by introspection. But also, there’s a hunger for leadership in opposition to this administration, and the Democrats are losing an opportunity to be those leaders with their endless self-immolation.

Did Harris really lose that bad? Did Trump really receive a mandate to end America as we know it?

Barabak: No, and no.

I mean, a loss is a loss. Trump swept all seven battleground states and the election result was beyond dispute unlike, say, 2000.

But Trump’s margin over Harris in the popular vote was just 1.5% — which is far from landslide territory — and he didn’t even win a majority of support, falling just shy of 50%.

As for a supposed mandate, the most pithy and perceptive post-election analysis I read came from the American Enterprise Institute’s Yuval Levin, who noted Trump’s victory marked the third presidential campaign in a row in which the incumbent party lost — something not seen since the 19th century.

Challengers “win elections because their opponents were unpopular,” Levin wrote, “and then — imagining the public has endorsed their party activists’ agenda — they use the power of their office to make themselves unpopular.”

It’s a long way to 2026, and an even longer way to 2028.

But Levin is sure looking smart.

Chabria: I know Kamala-bashing is popular right now, but I’d argue that Harris wasn’t resoundingly unpopular — just unpopular enough, with some.

Harris had 107 days to campaign. Many candidates spend years running for the White House, and much longer if you count the coy “maybe” period. She was unknown to most Americans, faced double discrimination from race and gender, and (to be fair) has never been considered wildly charismatic. So to nearly split the popular vote with all that baggage is notable.

But maybe Elon Musk said it best. As part of his messy breakup with Trump, the billionaire tweeted, “Without me, Trump would have lost the election, Dems would control the House and the Republicans would be 51-49 in the Senate.”

Sometimes there’s truth in anger. Musk’s money influenced this election, and probably tipped it to Trump in at least one battleground state. Any postmortem needs to examine not just the message, but also the medium. Is it what Democrats are saying that isn’t resonating, or is it that right-wing oligarchs are dominating communication?

Barabak:

Chabria: Mark?

Barabak: Sorry.

I was so caught up in the spectacle of the world’s richest man going all neener-neener with the world’s most powerful man I lost track of where we were.

With all due respect to Marshall McLuhan, I think Democrats need first off to figure out a message to carry them through the 2026 midterms. They were quite successful in 2018 pushing back on GOP efforts to dismantle the Affordable Care Act, or Obamacare, if you prefer. It’s not hard to see them resurrecting that playbook if Republicans take a meat-ax to Medicare and millions of Americans lose their healthcare coverage.

Then, come 2028, they’ll pick a presidential nominee and have their messenger, who can then focus on the medium — TV, radio, podcasts, TikTok, Bluesky or whatever else is in political fashion at the moment.

Now, excuse me while I return my sights to the sandbox.

Federal agents have fired flashbangs and tear gas towards crowds angered by the arrests of dozens of migrants in Los Angeles, United States, a city with a large Latino population.

The Department for Homeland Security said Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) operations in Los Angeles this week had led to the arrest of “118 aliens, including five gang members”.

The standoff came on Saturday in the suburb of Paramount, where demonstrators gathered outside a reported federal facility, which the local mayor said was being used as a staging post by agents.

On Friday, masked and armed immigration agents carried out high-profile workplace raids across different parts of Los Angeles, drawing angry crowds and causing hours-long standoffs.

Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass acknowledged that some residents were “feeling fear” following the federal actions.

“Everyone has the right to peacefully protest, but let me be clear: violence and destruction are unacceptable, and those responsible will be held accountable,” she said on X.

FBI Deputy Director Dan Bongino said multiple arrests had been made after Friday’s clashes.

“You bring chaos, and we’ll bring handcuffs. Law and order will prevail,” he said on X.

The White House has taken a firm stance against the protests, with deputy chief of staff Stephen Miller describing them as “an insurrection against the laws and sovereignty of the United States”.

DONALD TRUMP has made a surprise appearance at UFC 316 – but this time Elon Musk was nowhere to be seen.

The President was cageside to watch Merab Dvalishvili’s title scrap with Sean O’Malley on Saturday night.

9

9

9

9

9

9

Trump was flanked by UFC kingpin Dana White in a one-man entourage as he entered the arena in Newark, New Jersey.

He received loud cheers from the capacity crowd at the Prudential Center before taking his seat close to boxing icon Mike Tyson.

Trump shook hands with former NFL stars Will Compton and Taylor Lewan as he settled in to watch a packed main card.

Son Eric, daughter Ivanka and her husband Jared Kushner were also in the audience, as well as US Secretary of State Marco Rubio.

The 47th President arrived in New Jersey on Friday, where he stayed at his golf course in Bedminster.

Trump was on the end of a high five from Kevin Holland after his submission victory against fellow welterweight Vicente Luque.

And he later shared words of encouragement to Georgian star Dvalishvili following an epic end to the main event.

Trump’s appearance was also notable for the absence of former sidekick Elon Musk.

His relationship with the world’s richest man disintegrated earlier this week.

The former allies battled it out on social media after disagreeing on Trump’s ‘Big Beautiful Bill’, with the President claiming Elon had “gone crazy”.

Musk, who is worth an estimated $330 billion, was a major contributor to Trump’s presidential campaign.

He reportedly spent $250 million in supporting the Republican’s race for the White House last year.

Musk accompanied Trump to his last UFC showing in April.

The President was given a thunderous reception as he entered the arena for UFC 314 in Miami, Florida.

But prior to Saturday’s action, Trump indicated his working relationship with Musk was irreparable.

“I’m too busy doing other things. I won an election in a landslide,” he said.

“I gave [Musk] a lot of breaks, long before this happened.

“I gave him breaks in my first administration, and saved his life in my first administration, I have no intention of speaking to him.”

9

In the Octagon, it was a night to remember for Dvalishvili, who proved too strong for O’Malley in their main event rematch.

The reigning bantamweight champion secured his first-ever UFC submission following a brutal choke-out.

And he celebrated by vaulting out of the Octagon for a handshake and words with Trump.

The President also shook hands with a devastated O’Malley, who was able to leave the Octagon under his own steam after the choke.

“He was well trained, he was well prepared, and I knew that he was going to make changes,” Dvalishvili told reporters after the third round win.

“Every time I lost I made big changes and I learned from it.

“But I’m getting better and better. I wasn’t showing this technique [before] and I have more tools in my pocket I’m still working on, and then little by little I will show.

“Now it’s my time.”

Elsewhere on the main card, there were also wins for Kayla Harrison, Joe Pyfer, Holland, and Mario Bautista.

9

9

June 7 (UPI) — China has agreed to fast-track approvals for the shipment of rare earth minerals to the United States and some European Union nations.

U.S. President Donald Trump and Chinese leader Xi Jinping spoke Thursday about easing trade tensions.

On Saturday, China’s Minister Seceary Wang Wentao said his nation is “willing to establish a green channel for qualified applications to speed up approval.” Details weren’t given, including the speed of the process and which EU nations are included.

China controls 90% of the global processing of rare earth minerals. Major deposits also are found in the United States, Australia and Russia. Smaller amounts are in Canada, India, South Africa and Southeast Asia.

Rare earth minerals are in the Earth’s crust, making them difficult to extract. They include lanthanide, scandium and yttrium, all on the Periodic Table of Elements. Some major minerals that contain rare earth elements are bastnasite, monazite, loparite and laterite clays.

The first rare-earth mineral was discovered in 1787 — gadolinite, a black mineral composed of cerium, yttrium, iron, silicon and other elements.

U.S. needs rare earth minerals

The minerals are critical to American industries and defense, including use in cars and fighter jets. Batteries contain the minerals

Trump posted on Truth Social on Thursday “there should no longer be any questions respecting the complexity of rare Earth products.”

On April 29, the United States and Ukraine created a Reconstruction Investment Fund that includes rare earth mineral rights in the European nation. Trump and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky were originally set to sign the minerals deal on Feb. 28, but the plan was scrapped after a tense exchange between them in the Oval Office in which Trump accused him of “gambling with World War III.”

The United States wants access to more than 20 raw materials in Ukraine, including some non-minerals, such as oil and natural gas, as well as titanium, lithium, graphite and manganese.

The Chinese commerce ministry confirmed some applications have been approved without specifying industries covered.

Some Chinese suppliers have recently received six-month export licenses, the American Chamber of Commerce in China said Friday, but it noted that there is a backlog of license applications.

In a survey of member companies conducted by the American Chamber of Commerce in China late week, 75% say their stock would run out within three months, CNN reported.

Jens Eskelund, the chamber president, said member companies were “still struggling” with the situation.

“I hadn’t realized just how important this rare earth card was before. Now the U.S. side is clearly anxious and eager to resolve this issue,” he said a video on Thursday. “But of course, we’ll link this issue to others — the U.S. is restricting China on chips and jet engines, then China certainly has every reason to make use of this card.

“As for whether China will change its rare earth export control policy, that probably still needs to be negotiated in more detail,” Jin added.

Trump said Xi and himself “straightened out” some points related to rare earth magnets, calling it “very complex stuff.”

The U.S. federal government said China had reneged on its promise made in Geneva on May 12.

Delegations from Beijing and Washington plan to meet in Great Britain on Monday for trade negotiations.

At the height of tariff war, China had imposed export restrictions on some minerals on April 4. Trump two days planned a 120% “reciprocal” tax on top of 25% levy on Chinese goods.

But one week later it paused the bigger tariffs, including on other countries for 90 days.

European nations’ needs

China’s commerce ministry pledged to address the EU’s concerns and establish a “green channel” for eligible applications to expedite approvals. He went to Brussels, Belgium, earlier this week and met with European Union’s trade commissioner, Maros Sefcovic.

It’s a problem for China and the EU.

Sefcovic said the pause was slowing deliveries for manufacturers of a wide range of items from cars to washing machines.

Wang urged the EU to “take effective measures to facilitate, safeguard and promote compliant trade of high-tech products to China.”

On Friday, the European Chamber, a Beijing lobby group, warned progress had “not been sufficient” to prevent severe supply chain disruptions for many companies.

June 7 (UPI) — President Donald Trump on Saturday ordered 2,000 National Guardsmen to Los Angeles to quell protester violence while Immigration and Customs Enforcement officers conduct local raids.

ICE agents used riot gear as they clashed with protestors during a series of raids in Los Angeles, where they detained dozens of people.

“In recent days, violent mobs have attacked ICE officers and federal law enforcement agents carrying out basic deportation operations in Los Angeles,” White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt said in a statement shared with UPI.

“These operations are essential to halting and reversing the invasion of illegal criminals into the United States,” Leavitt said.

“In the wake of this violence, California’s feckless Democrat leaders have completely abdicated their responsibility to protect their citizens,” she added.

President Trump signed a memorandum deploying 2,000 National Guardsmen to Los Angeles to end the violence.

“The Trump administration has a zero tolerance policy for criminal behavior and violence, especially when that violence is aimed at law enforcement officers trying to do their jobs,” Leavitt said.

“These criminals will be arrested and swiftly brought to justice,” she continued.

“The Commander-in-Chief will ensure the laws of the United States are executed fully and completely.”

Separate raids by ICE agents earlier this week at a Home Depot and two separate clothing outlet stores drew crowds of protestors on Friday.

In some instances, the federal agents carried shields, military-style rifles and shotguns while conducting the raids.

The department later confirmed it was executing four federal search warrants at the three locations.

“Approximately 44 people were administratively arrested and one arrest for obstruction,” a Department of Homeland Security spokesperson told KTLA TV.

“The investigation remains ongoing, updates will follow as appropriate.”

Service Employees International Union leader David Huerta was among those detained.

The SEIU local president was charged with obstruction of justice.

“Federal agents were executing a lawful judicial warrant at a LA worksite this morning when David Huerta deliberately obstructed their access by blocking their vehicle. He was arrested for interfering with federal officers and will face arraignment in federal court on Monday,” U.S. Attorney for the Central District of California Bill Essayli wrote on X.

“Let me be clear: I don’t care who you are — if you impede federal agents, you will be arrested and prosecuted. No one has the right to assault, obstruct, or interfere with federal authorities carrying out their duties,” he wrote.

People can be heard on video yelling at the crowds in Spanish, and telling them not to sign paperwork or speak to federal officials.

By Friday evening, the Los Angeles Police Department declared unlawful assembly near the Civic Center in the northern part of the city’s downtown core, issuing a city-wide alert that forced all officers to remain on-duty.

LAPD officers were later forced to use tear gas and flash-bang grenades to disperse crowds in the city. At one point, protesters were reportedly throwing large pieces of concrete during the unrest

The alert was cancelled around midnight Friday.

“As mayor of a proud city of immigrants, who contribute to our city in so many ways, I am deeply angered by what has taken place,” Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass wrote on X.

“These tactics sow terror in our communities and disrupt basic principles of safety in our city. My office is in close coordination with immigrant rights community organizations. We will not stand for this.”

DONALD Trump called Elon Musk a “big-time drug addict” as his spat with the world’s richest man intensified.

The US President is said to have blasted his billionaire ex-backer as reliant on ketamine in phone calls.

2

It came after the Tesla billionaire linked Mr Trump to paedophile Jeffrey Epstein.

Their feud went public on Thursday night as both men used their own social media platforms — X and Truth Social — to insult each other.

Mr Musk, 53, turned on the US leader, calling his Congressional spending bill a “disgusting abomination” on Wednesday.

The President, 78, has called it his “big, beautiful bill”, but Mr Musk believes it will increase national debt by an unsustainable amount.

It triggered the ugly public bust-up, with Musk calling for Trump to be impeached and accusing him of being a close associate of Epstein.

Yesterday, Mr Musk deleted the post, which was seen hundreds of millions of times.

The Washington Post reported Mr Trump used private calls to urge his allies not to pour fuel on the fire and told Vice President JD Vance to be cautious.

But the President, whose campaign took £250million from Mr Musk, is also said to have become weary with the tycoon’s alleged drug use.

He called Mr Musk an “addict” in the calls and claimed he “lost his mind” after leaving the administration.

The businessman previously admitted using ketamine, but it is alleged he became so hooked last year it affected his kidneys.

Mr Musk officially left the government last week but said he would remain as a “friend and adviser” to Mr Trump.

The President last night said he had “no intention” of speaking to Mr Musk, adding: “I think it’s a very bad thing because he’s very disrespectful”.

2

June 7 (UPI) — The Defense Department’s Inspector General is investigating Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth’s March 13 Signal chat ahead of the U.S. military’s extended aerial strikes on Houthi targets in Yemen.

The IG’s office initiated the investigation weeks ago and has interviewed current and former Hegseth staffers to learn how the chat and one other that occurred on the Signal encrypted mobile messaging app included civilians, ABC News reported.

A DOD IG spokesperson declined to comment on the investigation because it is ongoing.

Signal supports encrypted group messaging chats, but at least two chats discussed the onset of U.S. military action against the Houthis that started on March 15.

The first erroneously included The Atlantic editor-in-chief Jeffrey Goldberg, while a second Signal chat included Hegseth’s wife and brother.

Hegseth in April blamed “disgruntled” former employees and media for the controversy over the Signalchat mishaps that many have dubbed “Signalgate.”

“This is what media does,” Hegseth told media during the annual Easter Egg Roll event at the White House on April 21.

“They take anonymous sources from disgruntled former employees and they try to slash and burn people and ruin their reputations,” he said.

“We’re changing the Defense Department and putting the Pentagon back in the hands of warfighters,” Hegseth said. “Anonymous smears from disgruntled former employees on old news don’t matter.”

The aerial attacks continued from March 15 until May 6, when President Donald Trump announced the Houthis agreed to stop attacking U.S.-flagged vessels.

The Houthis did not stop attacking Israel or commercial shipping in the Red Sea and the Gulf of Aden.

June 7 (UPI) — President Donald Trump is taking aim at drone technology from two directions — boost the U.S. industry and crack down on malicious activity.

Trump on Friday signed executive orders on efforts to spur U.S. production relevant to drone technology, increase U.S. drone security and regulation efforts, and an unleated one to promote design and eventual use of commercial supersonic aircraft.

“Unmanned aircraft systems, otherwise known as drones, offer the potential to enhance public safety as well as cement America’s leadership in global innovation,” an executive order titled Restoring American Airspace Sovereignty read. “But criminals, terrorists, and hostile foreign actors have intensified their weaponization of these technologies, creating new and serious threats to our homeland.

Another order, titled Unleashing American Drone Dominance, declares that “building a strong and secure domestic drone sector is vital to reducing reliance on foreign sources, strengthening critical supply chains and ensuring that the benefits of this technology are delivered to the American people.”

There are more than a million registered drones in the United States, according to the FAA with more than 400,000 commercial drones and more than 350,000 for recreational use.

In a press release, the Commercial Drone Alliance said it has “believed that innovation and security are two sides of the same coin. Outdated regulations have long impeded technological innovation and hindered transparency in our airspace.”

Lisa Ellman, chief executive of the Commercial Drone Alliance, also lauded the executive orders for aiming at both innovation and security simultaneously.

“We fully support the long-overdue steps taken by the Trump administration in these Executive Orders — establishing a framework to scale safe and secure drone operations while enhancing drone security and airspace transparency — to modernize our domestic drone policy and assure American aviation leadership into the next century of flight,” she said in the release.

Drone dangers

Trump has warned that drones have been used to smuggle drugs across borders, and could threaten large public gatherings, such as the 2026 World Cup and the 2028 Summer Olympics, both in the United States.

“It is the policy of the United States to ensure control over our national airspace and to protect the public, critical infrastructure, mass gathering events, and military and sensitive government installations and operations from threats posed by the careless or unlawful use of UAS,” the security related order reads.

Chinese-made drones from companies like DJI or Autel are not outright banned, but the Federal Acquisition Security Council has been called on to “publish a Covered Foreign Entity List … identifying companies that pose supply chain risks.”

In 2022, the U.S. Treasury added DJI and seven other companies to its Chinese Military-Industrial Complex list, which indicates some level of national security concern. The includes a ban on U.S.-based companies exporting technology to them.

The majority of drones are estimated to be built in China, The New York Times reported.

The Justice Department and FAA were told to enforce civil and criminal penalties for drone operators who violate laws or airspace restrictions. There will be grants for state and local law enforcement to access drone-detection and tracking equipment.

The Federal Aviation Administration requires all drones weighing more than 0.55 of a pound to be registered, in addition to restricting how high they can be flown without authorization.

The Justice Department and FAA were told to more robustly enforce civil and criminal penalties for drone operators who violate laws or airspace restrictions. Grant programs are planned for state and local law enforcement to access drone-detection and tracking equipment., the order also indicates

Drone industry growth

In his first term, Trump sought to increase the use of drones and Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick has been directed to promote exports of U.S.-made drones, in addition to federal agencies being ordered to prioritize purchases of them.

“The United States must accelerate the safe commercialization of drone technologies and fully integrate UAS into the National Airspace System,” the order reads. “The time has come to accelerate testing and to enable routine drone operations, scale up domestic production, and expand the export of trusted, American-manufactured drone technologies to global markets.”

The order directs the FAA to allow commercial users and public safety officials not to fly drones beyond their range of sight, meaning that a user must be able to see the drone they are operating.

“Building a strong and secure domestic drone sector is vital to reducing reliance on foreign sources, strengthening critical supply chains, and ensuring that the benefits of this technology are delivered to the American people,” the order says.

Secretary of Transportation Sean Duffy was directed to initiate artificial intelligence tools to assist in and expedite the review of a UAS waiver application, and the Transportation Department was told to develop an Electric Vertical Takeoff and Landing Pilot Program to accelerate the deployment of safe and lawful eVTOL operations in the United States.

Supersonic flight

An additional executive order titled “Leading the World in Supersonic Flight” seeks to promise planes that travel at supersonic speeds, which are greater than the speed of sound at approximately 768 mph at sea level, or Mach 1.

“The United States stands at the threshold of a bold new chapter in aerospace innovation,” the order reads. “For more than 50 years, outdated and overly restrictive regulations have grounded the promise of supersonic flight over land, stifling American ingenuity, weakening our global competitiveness, and ceding leadership to foreign adversaries.”

The order noted that “advances in aerospace engineering, materials science, and noise reduction now make supersonic flight not just possible, but safe, sustainable, and commercially viable.”

The order repeals regulations prohibiting cross-country supersonic flights, which for decades have precluded nonmilitary air travel over land at faster-than-sound speeds.

The Concorde was manufactured from 1965 to 1979, but are no longer flown by airlines, however, Boom Supersonic and NASA are currently developing new supersonic passenger jets.

June 7 (UPI) — The U.S. Army celebrates its 250th birthday on June 14th in the nation’s capital, which coincides with President Donald Trump‘s 79th birthday, and will be marked by a parade that may include tanks, rocket launchers and more than 100 military vehicles.

With the two birthdays occurring on the same day, the previously scheduled parade that was intended as a relatively small event at the National Mall in Washington, D.C., has grown in size and cost.

Up to 300 soldiers and civilians, the U.S. Army Band and four cannons were initially slated to honor the Army’s 250th birthday, with seating available for 120 attendees, The Washington Post reported.

U.S. Army leaders last year sought a permit for the event, but Trump’s election victory has changed its scope, while doubling as an unofficial celebration of the president’s birthday.

Axios reported the parade will live up to Trump’s request for a showcase the U.S. miliatary’s might, with dozens of tanks, rocket launchers, missiles and more than 100 other military aircraft and vehicles participating.

About 6,600 Army troops will participate, and the Army is paying to house them in area hotels.

The parade route has been moved to the northwest portion of Constitution Avenue and will include a flyover of F-22 fighter jets, World War II planes and Vietnam-era aircraft.

The event is scheduled to start at 6:30 p.m. EDT at 23rd Street and continue along Constitution Avenue N.W. to 15th Street. Trump will review the parade on the Ellipse.

The event has an estimated cost of nearly $45 million, including more than $10 million for road repairs after the heavy military equipment passes over.

The parade’s estimated cost has Senate Armed Services Committee Chairman Roger Wicker, R-Miss., skeptical about its benefits.

“I would have recommended against the parade,” Wicker told an interviewer on Thursday, but the Department of Defense wants to use it as a recruiting tool.

“On the other hand, [Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth] feels that it will be a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity for thousands of young Americans to see what a great opportunity it is to participate in a great military force,” Wicker said. “So, we’ll see.”

It’s over: US president no desire to make up with Musk, who dredged up allegations of links to sex offender Epstein.

United States President Donald Trump has warned billionaire former ally Elon Musk against funding Democratic candidates in the country’s 2026 midterm elections as the pair’s volcanic break-up continued to play out on the world stage.

“He’ll have to pay very serious consequences if he does that,” Trump told US network NBC News in an interview published Saturday, without spelling out what the repercussions might be for the tech mogul, whose businesses benefit from lucrative US federal contracts.

Trump aides, various Republicans, and key wealthy donors to the GOP  have urged the two to temper the bitter feud and make peace, fearing irreparable political and economic fallout.

But, asked whether he thought his relationship with the Tesla and SpaceX CEO was over, Trump said, “I would assume so, yeah”.

The interview featured Trump’s most extensive comments yet on the spectacular bust-up that saw Musk criticising his signature tax and spending bill as an “abomination”, tensions escalating after he went on to highlight one-time links between the president and the late sex offender Jeffrey Epstein.

By Saturday morning, Musk had deleted his “big bomb” allegation that Trump featured in unreleased government files on former associates of Epstein, who died by suicide in 2019 while facing sex trafficking charges.

“That is the real reason they have not been made public,” he said in Thursday’s post on X.

The Trump administration has acknowledged it is reviewing tens of thousands of documents, videos, and investigative material that his “MAGA” movement says will unmask public figures complicit in Epstein’s crimes.

Trump was named in a trove of deposition and statements linked to Epstein that were unsealed by a New York judge in early 2024. The president has not been accused of any wrongdoing, but he had a long and well-publicised friendship with Epstein.

Trump has denied spending time on Little Saint James, the private redoubt in the US Virgin Islands where prosecutors alleged Epstein trafficked underage girls for sex.

Just last week, Trump had given Musk a glowing send-off as he left his cost-cutting role at the so-called Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE).

Vice President JD Vance said Musk was making a “huge mistake” going after Trump, though he also tried to downplay his attacks as the frustrations of an “emotional guy”.

“I hope that eventually Elon comes back into the fold. Maybe that’s not possible now because he’s gone so nuclear,” he said in the interview with comedian Theo Von, released Friday.

Trump also told NBC that it was the Department of Justice, rather than he, that had decided to return Salvadoran immigrant Kilmar Abrego Garcia to the US, where he faces charges of transporting undocumented migrants inside the country.

Trump added that he had not spoken to El Salvador President Nayib Bukele about Abrego Garcia’s return.

June 7 (UPI) — The U.S. Supreme Court is allowing members of the Trump administration’s Department of Government Efficiency to access personal Social Security Administration data.

On Friday, the Court’s six conservatives granted an emergency application filed by the Trump administration to lift an injunction issued by a federal judge in Maryland. Opposing the injunction were the three liberal justices: Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan and Ketanji Brown Jackson.

There are 69 million retirees, disabled workers, dependents and survivors who receive Social Security benefits, representing 28.75% of the U.S. population.

In a separate two-page order issued Friday, the Supreme Court allowed the Trump administration for now to shield DOGE from freedom of information requests seeking thousands of pages of material. This vote also was 6-3 with no written dissenting opinions.

In the two-page unsigned order on access, the court said: “We conclude that, under the present circumstances, SSA may proceed to afford members of the SSA DOGE Team access to the agency records in question in order for those members to do their work.”

The conservatives are Chief Justice John Roberts, and Associate Justices Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito, Neil Gorsuch, Brett Kavanaugh and Amy Coney Barrett. Three of them were nominated by President Donald Trump during his first term.

U.S. District Judge Ellen Hollander, appointed by President Barack Obama, had ruled that DOGE staffers had no need to access the specific data. The 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, based in Virginia, declined to block Hollander’s decision.

The lawsuit was filed by progressive group Democracy Forward on behalf of two unions, the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees, and the American Federation of Teachers, as well as the Alliance for Retired Americans.

They alleged broader access to personal information would violate a federal law, the Privacy Act and the Administrative Procedure Act.

“This is a sad day for our democracy and a scary day for millions of people,” the groups said in a statement. “This ruling will enable President Trump and DOGE’s affiliates to steal Americans’ private and personal data. Elon Musk may have left Washington, D.C., but his impact continues to harm millions of people. We will continue to use every legal tool at our disposal to keep unelected bureaucrats from misusing the public’s most sensitive data as this case moves forward.”

Social Security Works posted on X: “No one in history — no commissioner, no president, no one — has ever had the access that these DOGE minions have.”

White House spokesperson Liz Huston after the ruling told NBC News that “the Supreme Court allowing the Trump Administration to carry out commonsense efforts to eliminate waste, fraud, and abuse and modernize government information systems is a huge victory for the rule of law.”

Brown Jackson wrote a nine-page dissenting opinion that the “Government fails to substantiate its stay request by showing that it or the public will suffer irreparable harm absent this Court’s intervention. In essence, the ‘urgency’ underlying the government’s stay application is the mere fact that it cannot be bothered to wait for the litigation process to play out before proceeding as it wishes.”

She concluded her dissent by writing: “The Court opts instead to relieve the Government of the standard obligations, jettisoning careful judicial decisionmaking and creates grave privacy risks for millions of Americans in the process.”

Kathleen Romig, who worked as a senior adviser at the agency during the Biden administration, told CNN that Americans should be concerned about how DOGE has handled highly sensitive data so far. She said the personal data runs “from cradle to grave.”

“While the appeals court considers whether DOGE is violating the law, its operatives will have ‘God-level’ access to Social Security numbers, earnings records, bank routing numbers, mental and reproductive health records and much more,” Romig, who now is director of Social Security and disability policy at the left-leaning Center on Budget and Policy Priorities.

When Trump became president again on Jan. 20, he signed an executive order establishing DOGE with the goal of “modernizing Federal technology and software to maximize governmental efficiency and productivity.”

Nearly a dozen DOGE members have been installed at the agency, according to court filings. In all, there are about 90 DOGE workers.

DOGE, which was run by billionaire Elon Musk until he left the White House one week ago, wants to modernize systems and detect waste and fraud at the agency.

“These teams have a business need to access the data at their assigned agency and subject the government’s records to much-needed scrutiny,” Solicitor General D. John Sauer wrote in the court motion.

The data includes Social Security numbers, date and place of birth, gender, addresses, marital and parental status, parents’ names, lifetime earnings, bank account information, immigration and work authorization status, health conditions for disability benefits and use of Medicare.

SSA also has data-sharing agreements with the IRS and the Department of Health and Human Services.

The plaintiffs wrote: “The agency is obligated by the Privacy Act and its own regulations, practices, and procedures to keep that information secure — and not to share it beyond the circle of those who truly need it.”

Social Security Administration Commissioner Frank Bisignano, who was sworn in to the post on May 7, said in a statement: that”The Supreme Court’s ruling is a major victory for American taxpayers. The Social Security Administration will continue driving forward modernization efforts, streamlining government systems, and ensuring improved service and outcomes for our beneficiaries.”

On May 23, Roberts temporarily put lower court decisions on hold while the Supreme Court considered what next steps to take.

Musk called Social Security “the biggest Ponzi scheme of all time” during an interview with Joe Rogan on Feb. 28.

The Social Security system, which started in 1935, transfers current workers’ payroll tax payments to people who are already retired.

The payroll tax is a mandatory tax paid by employees and employers. The total current tax rate is 12.4%. There is a separate 2.9% tax for Medicare.

The big break-up: The president of the United States, Donald Trump, has parted ways with the richest man in the world, billionaire entrepreneur Elon Musk.

Once their friendship reaped rewards for both: Musk donated around hundreds of millions of dollars to Trump’s re-election campaign and the president created a role for Musk in his government.

But political, or fiscal, differences soured the relationship, and what was once a mutually beneficial alliance deteriorated into an exchange of insults on social media.

So, did Elon Musk’s position undermine US democracy?

And do Donald Trump’s friendships and interests influence US policy?

Presenter: Elizabeth Puranam

Guests:

Niall Stanage – Political analyst and White House columnist for The Hill newspaper

Dan Ives – Technology analyst and managing director of Wedbush Securities

Faiz Siddiqui – Author of, Hubris Maximus: The Shattering of Elon Musk