Ƶ

The White House says it ‘will determine’ which news outlets cover Trump, rotating traditional ones

President Donald Trump throws a hat that reads
1 / 2
President Donald Trump throws a hat that reads "Trump Was Right About Everything" as he talks to reporters while Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick, and White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt, back center, watch, in the Oval Office at the White House in Washington, Tuesday, Feb. 25, 2025. (AP)
White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt (R) looks on as US President Donald Trump speaks to the press next to hats reading
2 / 2
White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt (R) looks on as US President Donald Trump speaks to the press next to hats reading "Trump was right about everything", after signing an Executive Order at the Oval Office of the White House in Washington, DC on February 25, 2025. (AFP)
Short Url
Updated 26 February 2025

The White House says it ‘will determine’ which news outlets cover Trump, rotating traditional ones

The White House says it ‘will determine’ which news outlets cover Trump, rotating traditional ones
  • “The White House press team, in this administration, will determine who gets to enjoy the very privileged and limited access in spaces such as Air Force One and the Oval Office,” Leavitt said at a daily briefing

WASHINGTON: The White House said Tuesday that its officials “will determine” which news outlets can regularly cover President Donald Trump up close — a sharp break from a century of tradition in which a pool of independently chosen news organizations go where the chief executive does and hold him accountable on behalf of regular Americans.
The move, coupled with the government’s arguments this week in a federal lawsuit over access filed by The Associated Press, represented an unprecedented seizing of control over coverage of the American presidency by any administration. Free speech advocates expressed alarm.
White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt said the changes would rotate traditional outlets from the group and include some streaming services. Leavitt cast the change as a modernization of the press pool, saying the move would be more inclusive and restore “access back to the American people” who elected Trump. But media experts said the move raised troubling First Amendment issues because the president is choosing who covers him.
“The White House press team, in this administration, will determine who gets to enjoy the very privileged and limited access in spaces such as Air Force One and the Oval Office,” Leavitt said at a daily briefing. She added at another point: “A select group of D.C.-based journalists should no longer have a monopoly of press access at the White House.”
Leavitt said the White House will “double down” on its decision to bar the AP from many presidential events, a departure from the time-tested and sometimes contentious practice for more than a century of a pool of journalists from every platform sharing the presidents’ words and activities with news outlets and congressional offices that can’t attend the close-quarter events. Traditionally, the members of the pool decide who goes in small spaces such as the Oval Office and Air Force One.
“It’s beyond time that the White House press operation reflects the media habits of the American people in 2025, not 1925,” Leavitt said.
At an event later in the Oval Office, the president linked the AP court case with the decision to take control of credentialing for the pool. “We’re going to be now calling those shots,” Trump said.
There are First Amendment implications
The change, said one expert on presidents and the press, “is a dangerous move for democracy.”
”It means the president can pick and choose who covers the executive branch, ignoring the fact that it is the American people who through their taxes pay for the running of the White House, the president’s travels and the press secretary’s salary,” Jon Marshall, a media history professor at Northwestern University and author of “Clash: Presidents and the Press in Times of Crisis,” said in a text.
Eugene Daniels, president of the White House Correspondents’ Association, said the organization consistently expands its membership and pool rotations to facilitate the inclusion of new and emerging outlets.
“This move tears at the independence of a free press in the United States. It suggests the government will choose the journalists who cover the president,” Daniels said in a statement. “In a free country, leaders must not be able to choose their own press corps.”
The Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press called it “a drastic change in how the public obtains information about its government.”
“The White House press pool exists to serve the public, not the presidency,” Bruce D. Brown, the group’s president, said in a statement.
It comes in the context of a federal lawsuit
Leavitt spoke a day after a federal judge refused to immediately order the White House to restore the AP’s access to many presidential events. The news outlet, citing the First Amendment, sued Leavitt and two other White House officials for barring the AP from some presidential events over its refusal to call the Gulf of Mexico the “Gulf of America” as Trump ordered. AP has said its style would retain the “Gulf of Mexico” name but also would note Trump’s decision.
“As you know, we won that lawsuit,” Trump said incorrectly. In fact, US District Judge Trevor N. McFadden said the AP had not demonstrated it had suffered irreparable harm — but urged the Trump administration to reconsider its two-week-old ban, saying that case law in the circuit “is uniformly unhelpful to the White House.”
McFadden’s decision was only for the moment, however. He told attorneys for the Trump administration and the AP that the issue required more exploration before ruling. Another hearing was scheduled for late March.
The AP Stylebook is used by international audiences as well as those within the United States. The AP has said that its guidance was offered to promote clarity.
Another Trump executive order to change the name of the United States’ largest mountain back to Mount McKinley from Denali is being recognized by the AP Stylebook. Trump has the authority to do so because the mountain is completely within the country he oversees, AP has said.


Clock ticks on US tariff hikes as Trump expands trade wars

Clock ticks on US tariff hikes as Trump expands trade wars
Updated 13 sec ago

Clock ticks on US tariff hikes as Trump expands trade wars

Clock ticks on US tariff hikes as Trump expands trade wars
  • Trump slapped 50 percent duties on imports from Brazil, saying its government’s policies and actions threaten US national security
  • After twice postponing implementation of his threatened tariffs, he said the August 1 deadline “will not be extended” any further

WASHINGTON: Time is running short for governments to strike deals with Washington to avert tariff hikes that Donald Trump has vowed against dozens of economies — and the US president continues to expand his trade wars.
As the clock ticked down on a Friday deadline for higher levies to take effect on goods from various trading partners, Trump announced a trade deal with South Korea and separate duties on Brazilian and Indian imports.
He also signed an order Wednesday to impose previously-threatened 50 percent tariffs on certain copper products and end a tariff exemption for low-value shipments from abroad.
The tariff hikes due Friday were initially announced in April as part of a package where Trump slapped a 10 percent levy on goods from almost all trading partners — citing unfair trade practices.
This rate was set to rise to varying levels for dozens of economies like the European Union, Japan and others, but Washington twice postponed their implementation as financial markets gyrated.
So far, Britain, Vietnam, Japan, Indonesia, the Philippines, the EU and South Korea have reached initial deals with Washington to secure less punishing conditions.
While the United States and China earlier slapped escalating tariffs on each other’s products, both sides are working to further a truce maintaining duties at lower levels.

But Trump has been pushing ahead in his efforts to reshape global trade.
The US leader insisted Wednesday that the August 1 deadline “will not be extended” any further.
In a Truth Social post, he vowed that this would be “a big day for America.”
Although Trump has promised a surge in government revenues from his duties, economists warn that higher tariffs can fuel an uptick in inflation and weigh on economic growth. This could change consumption patterns.
Already, consumers face an overall average effective tariff rate that is the highest since the 1930s, according to a recent analysis by The Budget Lab at Yale University.
The effect on consumer prices has been limited so far. But analysts cautioned this could become more pronounced as businesses run down on existing inventory and pass on more costs to buyers.

Among Trump’s latest announcements were a 25 percent duty on Indian goods to begin Friday — slightly lower than previously threatened — after talks between Washington and New Delhi failed to bring about a trade pact.
India would face an unspecified “penalty” over purchases of Russian weapons and energy as well, Trump said.
He also unveiled a 50 percent tariff on Brazilian goods, saying its government’s policies and actions threaten US national security.
But he delayed its implementation from Friday to August 6 and crucially exempted many products from the prohibitive levy, including orange juice, civil aircraft, iron ore and some energy products.
Trump inked an order too for a 50 percent tariff to kick in Friday on goods like copper pipes and wiring, making good on an earlier vow to impose these duties.
But the levy, which came after a Commerce Department probe on national security grounds, was less sweeping than anticipated.
It left out products like copper ores, concentrates and cathodes, bringing some relief to industry.
Meanwhile, Seoul landed a deal with Trump in which South Korean products would face a 15 percent tariff when entering the United States — significantly below a 25 percent level threatened.
 


Millions return home as Pacific tsunami warnings lifted

Millions return home as Pacific tsunami warnings lifted
Updated 31 July 2025

Millions return home as Pacific tsunami warnings lifted

Millions return home as Pacific tsunami warnings lifted
  • In Japan, almost two million people had been ordered to higher ground, before the warnings were downgraded or rescinded
  • Peru closed 65 of its 121 Pacific ports and authorities on Maui canceled flights to and from the Hawaiian island

PUERTO AYORA, Ecuador: Tsunami warnings were lifted across the Pacific rim Wednesday, allowing millions of temporary evacuees to return home.
After one of the strongest earthquakes ever recorded rattled Russia’s sparsely populated Far East, more than a dozen nations — from Japan to the United States to Ecuador — warned citizens to stay away from coastal regions.
Storm surges of up to four meters (12 feet) were predicted for some parts of the Pacific, after the 8.8 quake struck off Russia’s Kamchatka peninsula.
The tsunamis caused widespread disruption. Peru closed 65 of its 121 Pacific ports and authorities on Maui canceled flights to and from the Hawaiian island.
But fears of a catastrophe were not realized, with country after country lifting or downgrading warnings and telling coastal residents they could return.
In Japan, almost two million people had been ordered to higher ground, before the warnings were downgraded or rescinded.
The Fukushima nuclear plant in northeast Japan — destroyed by a huge quake and tsunami in 2011 — was temporarily evacuated.

 

The only reported fatality was a woman killed while driving her car off a cliff in Japan as she tried to escape, local media reported.

In Chile, authorities conducted what the Interior Ministry said was “perhaps the most massive evacuation ever carried out in our country” — with 1.4 million people ordered to high ground.
Chilean authorities reported no damage or victims and registered waves of just 60 centimeters (two feet) on the country’s north coast.
In the Galapagos Islands, where waves of up to three meters were expected, there was relief as the Ecuadoran navy’s oceanographic institute said the danger had passed.
Locals reported the sea level falling and then rising suddenly, a phenomenon which is commonly seen with the arrival of a tsunami.
But only a surge of just over a meter was reported, causing no damage.
“Everything is calm, I’m going back to work. The restaurants are reopening and the places tourists visit are also open again,” said 38-year-old Santa Cruz resident Isabel Grijalva.
Earlier national parks were closed, schools were shuttered, loudspeakers blared warnings and tourists were spirited off sightseeing boats and onto the safety of land.
The worst damage was seen in Russia, where a tsunami crashed through the port of Severo-Kurilsk and submerged the local fishing plant, officials said.
 

Russian state television footage showed buildings and debris swept into the sea.
The surge of water reached as far as the town’s World War II monument about 400 meters from the shoreline, said Mayor Alexander Ovsyannikov.
The initial quake also caused limited damage and only light injuries, despite being the strongest since 2011, when 15,000 people were killed in Japan.

Russian scientists reported that the Klyuchevskoy volcano erupted shortly after the earthquake.
“Red-hot lava is observed flowing down the western slope. There is a powerful glow above the volcano and explosions,” said Russia’s Geophysical Survey.

Wednesday’s quake was the strongest in the Kamchatka region since 1952, the regional seismic monitoring service said, warning of aftershocks of up to 7.5 magnitude.
The US Geological Survey said the quake was one of the 10 strongest tremors recorded since 1900.
It was followed by dozens of aftershocks that further shook the Russian Far East, including one of 6.9 magnitude.
The USGS said there was a 59 percent chance of an aftershock of more than 7.0 magnitude in the next week.
 


Starmer’s pledge on Palestinian state ‘grotesque,’ says campaign group

Starmer’s pledge on Palestinian state ‘grotesque,’ says campaign group
Updated 31 July 2025

Starmer’s pledge on Palestinian state ‘grotesque,’ says campaign group

Starmer’s pledge on Palestinian state ‘grotesque,’ says campaign group
  • Palestine Solidarity Campaign condemns UK PM’s conditional framing of ‘inalienable right’
  • He is ‘ensuring that Israel has all the means it needs to eradicate the Palestinian people and annex their land’

LONDON: The Palestine Solidarity Campaign on Wednesday condemned the UK prime minister’s framing of Palestinian statehood.

Keir Starmer pledged to recognize a Palestinian state in September if Israel fails to reach a ceasefire with Hamas, among other conditions.

Placing the Palestinian right to self-determination “within the context of Israel’s actions” is “shameful,” the PSC said in a statement, adding that it is an “inalienable right” that should be recognized regardless of Israel’s conduct.

Starmer’s apparent shift, which followed in French President Emmanuel Macron’s footsteps, “came in part because of intense pressure from the British public, expressed in the huge protest movement that has persevered over many months,” the PSC said.

Britain's Prime Minister Keir Starmer delivers a statement on the situation in Gaza on July 29, 2025. (REUTERS)

Since the beginning of the Gaza war in October 2023, the PSC and a host of other campaign groups have led regular protest marches through British cities.

The protests have swelled in size amid mounting public anger over Israel’s conduct in Gaza, as well as the UK government’s perceived reluctance to take action against it.

Protesters have focused on British ties to Israel and its military, waging boycott campaigns against companies with ties to the Israel Defense Forces.

“Every British MP and government official is also aware of the fact that British-exported weapons are being used by the Israeli military in its brutality against Palestinian civilians and complete devastation of the Gaza Strip’s infrastructure,” the PSC said.

“British politicians are now bemoaning the images of horror, but continuing to act as partners in Israel’s genocide by maintaining trade with Israel, including in weapons and other military items, and by implementing limited sanctions on a few individual ministers, as though Israel’s genocide is being engineered and carried out by a ‘few bad apples.’”

People gather by the bodies of victims killed while waiting for aid trucks entering the northern Gaza Strip through the Zikim crossing, at the Shifa Hospital in Gaza City on July 30, 2025.(AFP)

The PSC condemned Starmer’s move this week as “grotesque,” and one that tells Palestinians: “State recognition may come, but only if and when many, many more of you are dead.”

Rather than representing a turning point, his decision is “simply more of the same,” the PSC said, describing the pledge as having been “added to the package of collusion and complicity with genocide.”

It called on the government to take immediate steps and “everything in their power” to secure an unconditional ceasefire in Gaza. The UK must also place a comprehensive weapons embargo on Israel, the PSC demanded.

“Keir Starmer claims support for the Palestinian right to self-determination while ensuring that Israel has all the means it needs to eradicate the Palestinian people and annex their land,” it said.

“The British public will not be fooled into holding out hope for the possibility of a symbolic gesture granted by the British government in September.”
 


Canada intends to recognize Palestinian state at UN General Assembly: Carney

Canada intends to recognize Palestinian state at UN General Assembly: Carney
Updated 31 July 2025

Canada intends to recognize Palestinian state at UN General Assembly: Carney

Canada intends to recognize Palestinian state at UN General Assembly: Carney
  • Carney positioned Canada alongside France, UK

OTTAWA: Canada plans to recognize a Palestinian state at the UN General Assembly in September, Prime Minister Mark Carney said Wednesday, a dramatic policy shift he said was necessary to preserve hopes of a two-state solution.
“Canada intends to recognize the State of Palestine at the 80th Session of the United Nations General Assembly in September 2025,” Carney said.
With Wednesday’s announcement, Carney positioned Canada alongside France, after President Emmanuel Macron said his country would formally recognize a Palestinian state during the UN meeting, the most powerful European nation to announce such a move.
Macron’s announcement drew condemnation from Israel, which said the move “rewards terror,” while US President Donald Trump dismissed the decision as pointless.
Carney said his decision was informed by Canada’s “long-standing” belief in a two-state solution to the decades-long Israeli-Palestinian conflict.
“That possibility of a two-state solution is being eroded before our eyes,” the prime minister told reporters in Ottawa.
He referenced Israel’s “ongoing failure” to prevent humanitarian catastrophe in Gaza amid its war against Hamas, as well the expansion of settlements in the occupied West Bank and Israeli-annexed east Jerusalem.
“For decades, it was hoped that  would be achieved as part of a peace process built around a negotiated settlement between the Israeli government and the Palestinian Authority,” he said.
“Regrettably, this approach is no longer tenable.”


Ousted US vaccine panel members say rigorous science is being abandoned

Ousted US vaccine panel members say rigorous science is being abandoned
Updated 31 July 2025

Ousted US vaccine panel members say rigorous science is being abandoned

Ousted US vaccine panel members say rigorous science is being abandoned
  • Former panel members suggest having professional organizations working together to harmonize vaccine recommendations

NEW YORK: The 17 experts who were ousted from a government vaccine committee last month say they have little faith in what the panel has become, and have outlined possible alternative ways to make US vaccine policy.
US Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. abruptly fired the entire Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices, accusing them of being too closely aligned with manufacturers and of rubber-stamping vaccines. He handpicked replacements that include several vaccine skeptics.
In a commentary published Wednesday in the New England Journal of Medicine, the former panel members wrote that Kennedy — a leading voice in the anti-vaccine movement before becoming the US government’s top health official — and his new panel are abandoning rigorous scientific review and open deliberation.
That was clear, they said, during the new panel’s first meeting, in June. It featured a presentation by an anti-vaccine advocate that warned of dangers about a preservative used in a few flu vaccines, but the committee members didn’t hear from Centers for Disease Control and Prevention staffers about an analysis that concluded there was no link between the preservative and neurodevelopmental disorders.
The new panel recommended that the preservative, thimerosal, be removed even as some members acknowledged there was no proof it was causing harm.
“That meeting was a travesty, honestly,” said former ACIP member Dr. Yvonne Maldonado, a pediatric infectious diseases expert at Stanford University.
The 17 discharged experts last month published a shorter essay in the Journal of the American Medical Association that decried Kennedy’s “destabilizing decisions.” The focus was largely on their termination and on Kennedy’s decision in May to stop recommending COVID-19 vaccines for healthy children and pregnant women.
In the new commentary, the ousted committee members took it one step further and prescribed some steps that could be taken to maintain scientifically sound vaccine recommendations.
“An alternative to the Committee should be established quickly and — if necessary — independently from the federal government,” they wrote. “No viable pathway exists to fully replace the prior trusted and unbiased ACIP structure and process. Instead, the alternatives must focus on limiting the damage to vaccination policy in the United States.”
Options included having professional organizations working together to harmonize vaccine recommendations or establishing an external auditor of ACIP recommendations. There are huge challenges to the ideas, including having access to the best data, the authors acknowledged.
There’s also the question of whether health insurers would pay for vaccinations that are recommended by alternative groups but not ACIP.
They might pick and choose which vaccines to cover, said the University of North Carolina’s Noel Brewer, another former ACIP member.
For example, they might pay for vaccines that offer more immediate cost savings for health care, like the flu vaccine.
“But maybe not ones that have a longer-term benefit like HPV vaccine,” which is designed to prevent futures cancers, Brewer said.
Officials with the US Department of Health and Human Services did not immediately respond to a request for comment.