Inquirer.com – Zurich DR

Category: Business Wires

  • GOP Sen. John Curtis calls for probe of Trump Jr. after wedding party bankrolled by Russian oligarch

    GOP Sen. John Curtis calls for probe of Trump Jr. after wedding party bankrolled by Russian oligarch

    WASHINGTON — Republican Sen. John Curtis of Utah is calling on the Senate Judiciary Committee to investigate whether Donald Trump Jr. used his proximity to the presidency for financial benefit, after his recent wedding party was partially bankrolled by a Russian oligarch.

    In a letter sent Tuesday, Curtis called on the committee to subpoena Trump Jr. over his business dealings, relationships with foreign individuals and entities, gifts, or other benefits he has received and any instances in which his relationship to President Donald Trump, a Republican, “was invoked or understood to provide value.” Curtis called for the same scrutiny of Hunter Biden, the son of former President Joe Biden, a Democrat.

    “The country should not have to accept one standard for the family of a Republican president and another for the family of a Democratic president,” Curtis wrote in the letter addressed to GOP Sen. Chuck Grassley of Iowa, chairperson of the committee, and Sen. Dick Durbin of Illinois, the top Democrat on the committee.

    The letter comes as a few Republicans have shown a growing willingness to criticize Trump after largely avoiding public breaks with the president during much of his second term. The unpopular war in Iran, high gas prices, and mounting concerns about the GOP’s prospects in November’s midterm elections have brought increased scrutiny of the president from within his own party.

    The Trumps say it was a generous gift from a dear friend

    ProPublica first reported last week that Umar Kremlev, who has close ties to Russian President Vladimir Putin, helped pay to rent a private island and for a fireworks show when Trump Jr. and socialite Bettina Anderson were married in the Bahamas in May.

    In a subsequent post on her Instagram page signed by the couple, Bettina Trump wrote that Kremlev, head of the International Boxing Association, was a “dear friend” who “very generously hosted two incredible nights of celebrations for us AFTER our wedding.”

    The president, who did not attend his son’s wedding, defended Kremlev’s involvement but said the money would be paid back.

    Curtis calls the funding ‘corruption’

    Curtis, first elected to the Senate in 2024, vowed upon taking office not to shy away from disagreeing with Trump. He has publicly broken with the president several times since, including rejecting Trump’s calls to eliminate the Senate filibuster. In a July Wall Street Journal op-ed, Curtis wrote that “under no circumstance” would he support efforts to end or alter the filibuster, which requires 60 votes to advance most legislation in the 100-member chamber.

    Curtis’ criticism involving Trump’s son goes beyond those policy disagreements. Curtis last Friday called the gift “corruption” and vowed to say more in the coming days.

    “A Russian oligarch paid for a lavish wedding after-party for Donald Trump Jr., which to me just stinks. It’s corruption. I don’t like it,” Curtis said in a video posted on social media.

    On Tuesday, Curtis wrote on social media that Republicans “nearly wore out the subpoena machine investigating Hunter Biden’s foreign relationships” and that they “should not unplug it now.”

    Any congressional committee can launch an investigation at any time. In 2017, Grassley led a Senate Judiciary Committee investigation of the Trump campaign’s ties to Russia, including a meeting that Trump Jr. held with Russians in 2016. The panel has also conducted multiple investigations of Hunter Biden.

    Clare Slattery, a spokesperson for the Senate Judiciary Committee, confirmed that the committee had received Curtis’ letter but indicated that a hearing before the end of the year would be difficult, citing the limited Senate schedule and the amount of time it takes to prepare for an investigative hearing. She did not say whether the committee will investigate.

    Durbin said in a statement that Curtis had made a “good faith request” and that while Hunter Biden has given a sworn deposition in the past, Trump Jr. has not.

    “For the Committee to ignore this matter is to run the risk of being complicit in a coverup. I will join in supporting Senator Curtis’ request,” Durbin said.

    Republicans investigated the Bidens

    Grassley worked alongside House Republicans in 2023 and 2024 to investigate whether Hunter Biden used his father’s name and political position to benefit his business dealings with foreign interests. The Biden family dismissed the investigations as politically motivated and denied any wrongdoing.

    The GOP effort culminated in a report accusing Joe Biden of participating in a conspiracy to use his public office to enrich his family. But the House never voted on articles of impeachment against him.

    “‘Trust us’ was not enough then, and it is not enough now,” Curtis wrote.

    Democrats have foreshadowed plans to investigate Trump and his family if they win control of Congress in November, with particular scrutiny on the family’s financial interests. Rep. Robert Garcia, the top Democrat on the House Oversight Committee, said in a statement that the revelations surrounding Trump Jr.’s wedding “may be the most serious allegation against you to date.”

  • Iran’s Revolutionary Guard warns U.S. over escalation

    Iran’s Revolutionary Guard warns U.S. over escalation

    Iran’s Revolutionary Guard warned Monday that it would “change the geography of the war” if the United States escalates the conflict.

    Meanwhile, the British military said an “unknown projectile” struck a tanker as it entered the Strait of Hormuz on Monday, injuring two crew members.

    The Israeli military remained on alert as much of the country shuts down for Yom Kippur, the holiest day in Judaism.

    Iran’s Revolutionary Guard says ‘war is not over’

    A spokesperson for Iran’s paramilitary Revolutionary Guard, Hossein Mohebbi, said Monday that “the war is not over” and warned that Iran would change its weapons, military tactics, and targets if the conflict with the U.S. escalates.

    “We will certainly change the geography of the war,” Mohebbi said in a statement carried by Iranian state media. “We will certainly bring new weapons with new capabilities into the battle.” He said the Guard had prepared for a long-term war.

    “Our targets will no longer necessarily be the same as before,” he said, according to the Islamic Republic of Iran Broadcasting, adding that Iran has targets that have not yet been struck.

    The more than six-month war began with U.S. and Israeli strikes on Iran on Feb. 28. The conflict has included repeated attacks and efforts to negotiate an end to the fighting, with no agreement reached to reopen the Strait of Hormuz or revive talks over Iran’s nuclear program.

    Projectile strikes tanker in Strait of Hormuz, British military says

    The United Kingdom Maritime Trade Operations Center (UKMTO) said a tanker was struck by an “unknown projectile” as it headed into the Strait of Hormuz. Two crew members sustained minor injuries.

    The UKMTO said Monday the vessel is reportedly continuing to its next port of call under its own power. No reports indicated any environmental impact at this time.

    Tehran has asserted control over much of the Strait of Hormuz since the U.S. and Israel launched the war on Feb. 28. In peacetime, about 20 million barrels — roughly a fifth of the world’s oil supply — passed through Hormuz each day.

    Some tankers are again traversing the strait, but traffic is well below what it once was.

    Houthi leader lashes out at Saudis in televised speech

    In Yemen, the leader of the Iran-backed Houthi rebels used the anniversary of his group’s overthrow of the Yemeni government to lash out at Saudi Arabia.

    In a recorded speech aired Monday, Abdul Malik al-Houthi said his group’s demands include an end to what he called Saudi “aggression” and the blockade the Saudi-led coalition has imposed on the rebels for about a decade.

    “Stop the aggression and end the blockade. Our demands represent the legitimate rights of our people,” he said in the speech aired by the Houthi-run al-Masirah channel.

    The Houthis descended from their stronghold in northern Yemen, taking over the capital of Sanaa in September 2014 and forcing the country’s government into exile in Saudi Arabia.

    The following year, Saudi Arabia led a multi-national coalition that entered the war in an attempt to restore the government. The coalition imposed an air and sea blockade on the Houthi-held areas, as part of its war efforts.

    WHO reports 680 new casualties in a week in Yemen

    The World Health Organization says 680 people were killed or injured across Yemen over the course of a week as fighting between the Houthi rebels and Saudi-backed government forces continues.

    WHO said on Monday in a post on X that 164 people were killed and 516 injured between Sept. 13 and Friday. This brings the total number of casualties since Aug. 6 to 3,672, including 674 deaths and 2,998 injuries.

    Lahj province in southwestern Yemen is currently an active front line where 58 deaths and 226 injuries were reported within six days, according to the U.N. agency.

    Fighting between the Houthis and government forces has so far displaced 129,438 people across seven provinces, the International Organization for Migration says.

    The IOM said in an update Monday that people escaping the conflict inside the country were forced from their homes in only a few weeks, with many already fleeing more than once.

    Israeli military on guard on Jewish faith’s holiest day

    Israel’s military remained on alert even as the country woke up to the silence and empty streets of Yom Kippur, the Day of Atonement, considered the holiest day for the Jewish faith.

    Streetlights blinked yellow Monday as the faithful walked to the Western Wall in Jerusalem’s Old City.

    “For the next 25 hours, Israel is offline,” the foreign ministry said on X after sundown Sunday. But the military said it bolstered its frontline forces following the killing of an Israeli settler Sunday in the occupied West Bank. The Palestinian suspect was detained after a search.

  • States settle lawsuit over Paramount-Warner merger, clearing key hurdle for $81 billion deal

    States settle lawsuit over Paramount-Warner merger, clearing key hurdle for $81 billion deal

    CHICAGO — California Attorney General Rob Bonta announced a settlement with Paramount in a lawsuit his state led challenging the company’s acquisition of Warner Bros. Discovery on Monday, effectively paving the way for the mega merger to move forward, with some new commitments.

    The $81 billion blockbuster deal will bring together two of Hollywood’s oldest studios, key TV networks like CBS and CNN, and streaming platforms HBO Max and Paramount+, as well as decades of libraries with titles ranging from Harry Potter to Top Gun.

    But terms of Monday’s agreement include what Bonta called “court enforceable” requirements for Skydance-owned Paramount to increase domestic production and establish monitoring of editorial independence of the company’s news operations.

    The settlement still needs final court approval. Bonta maintained that Monday’s agreement “is not a vote of support for this merger” — but that he was always willing to come to the table and “find a strong solution that protects competition and consumers.”

    The coalition of states — including entertainment heavyweights like California and New York — sued to block the merger back in July, alleging a Paramount-Warner combo would “extinguish competition” and lead to fewer choices for consumers, particularly movie theatergoers and cable customers across the U.S.

    Accompanied by a complaint also filed by the Writers Guild of America, the challenge was headed toward a full antitrust trial set to kick off in March.

    Paramount said the allegations were meritless, but previously agreed to delay its transaction well into next year so the case could make its way through court. It then quickly called for a settlement — arguing that it had satisfied all regulatory clearances worldwide (including from the Trump administration’s Justice Department ) and the states’ challenge was its “final obstacle.”

    As reports of the states reaching a settlement with Paramount emerged Monday, critics decried the deal — while warning of what further consolidation could mean in an industry already controlled by just a few major players.

    “Today, billionaires have yet again bribed, censored, and bullied their way to the top,” Alvaro Bedoya, senior adviser at the American Economic Liberties Project and former FTC commissioner, said in a statement earlier Monday. “Layoffs will follow. People from L.A. to Atlanta will lose their jobs, small businesses will lose their contracts, your cable bill and movie ticket will be even more expensive.”

  • German leader faces tough time ahead after election defeats, but no sign of leadership challenge

    German leader faces tough time ahead after election defeats, but no sign of leadership challenge

    BERLIN — German Chancellor Friedrich Merz stood by his vow to stay in office Monday after his party suffered two more regional election defeats and was voted out of a state legislature in a humiliating first. But he faces a struggle to keep his reform agenda intact.

    Minutes after polls closed on Sunday, the unpopular Merz said he planned to stay on as leader of both Germany and his center-right party, and said that he would push through reforms to Europe’s biggest economy.

    Hours later, final results underlined the extent of what Merz conceded was a “disaster” in Mecklenburg-Western Pomerania, an eastern region on the Baltic Sea coast. His center-right Christian Democratic Union fell just below the 5% of the vote needed to keep seats in the regional parliament, the first time that has happened in 77 years of modern Germany’s federal republic, after losing more than half its support. The far-right Alternative for Germany finished as the strongest party.

    In Sunday’s other election, the CDU dropped to second place in Berlin behind the hard-left Left Party, which is in pole position to lead the next city government — though Merz’s party could, depending on how coalition talks go, still retain city hall.

    But after days of speculation about Merz’s future, there were no prominent public calls Monday for his departure and no sign of a challenge. The chancellor said no one raised any “personnel questions” in party leadership meetings Sunday or Monday.

    “It is the historic task of the (governing) coalition here in Berlin and the political center as a whole to make our country fit for the coming years,” Merz said. “Extremists suggest that there are easy solutions. But everyone who has ever governed knows there are no easy solutions.”

    At the same time, he acknowledged that the CDU needs to work on its profile. He said that it “no longer has satisfactory answers to too many questions, and we will and must change that.”

    A far-right party gains again

    Neither of the states that voted Sunday is a political heavyweight. The CDU’s 2023 win in Berlin was its only one in the past 25 years in the capital, which has tended to lean left. The party was already weak in Mecklenburg-Western Pomerania.

    But the results added to the headwinds Merz faces after a stinging defeat by the far-right, anti-immigration Alternative for Germany, or AfD, two weeks ago in Saxony-Anhalt, another region in the formerly communist east, damaged his authority and set off speculation that he might be replaced.

    While AfD was the strongest party in Mecklenburg-Western Pomerania, the center-left Social Democrats — the junior party in Merz’s national governing coalition — were fairly close behind after a campaign focused squarely on the state governor, Manuela Schwesig, as a bulwark against the far right. That polarization helped squeeze other mainstream parties, including the CDU.

    A left-leaning three-party coalition under Schwesig would have a majority in the new regional legislature.

    Questions over how Germany should be reformed

    Schwesig and others in the governing parties have cast doubt on aspects of the federal government’s reform agenda, which is meant to bolster a chronically sluggish economy. The reform plans include a potentially painful overhaul of the creaking pension system and of the healthcare system. A proposal to scrap a rule allowing people who have paid pension contributions for 45 years to retire early without taking a financial hit has drawn particular criticism.

    The Social Democrats’ national leaders said Monday that they stand by the coalition. But they made clear that they will seek at least some changes to the plans.

    Vice Chancellor Lars Klingbeil, who is also the finance minister, said that “saying we will ignore what voters told us in three state elections won’t work.”

    “We need reforms, but these reforms must be fair and they need support in the population,” he said. The party’s other co-leader, Labor Minister Bärbel Bas, said the plans need a “reality check” and a “fairness check,” but that she was optimistic of finding solutions on the pension system reform, the most controversial plan.

    “There would be nothing more lethal than letting this coalition break apart over some technical question,” Bas said.

    Merz said he wouldn’t speculate about “where we must make corrections.”

    There are at least no more electoral tests this year. However, five state elections are scheduled next year, three of them in April.

    They include one in North Rhine-Westphalia, Germany’s most populous state, currently led by a prominent CDU figure often cited as a possible successor to Merz, Hendrik Wüst. None of the five elections is in the east, where AfD is strongest.

    Looking forward, much will depend on the CDU’s influential regional leaders. But there was no sign of a challenge to Merz Monday from them or others.

    “You get the feeling that the stronger figures are trying to stay away from Berlin at the moment,” Thomas Poguntke, a longtime political science professor at the Heinrich Heine University in Duesseldorf, told Phoenix television.

    “Swapping out a leadership figure wouldn’t achieve so terribly much now,” he added, but the chancellor has made avoidable mistakes in the past, “and the government’s handicraft simply must improve.”

  • Rising gas prices frustrate voters. Trump says it’s an ‘inexpensive price to pay’ for the Iran war

    Rising gas prices frustrate voters. Trump says it’s an ‘inexpensive price to pay’ for the Iran war

    EDINBURG, Texas — Quinten Martinez, pumping gas under a hot South Texas sun, remembers a time when fueling up didn’t require difficult decisions.

    “Is it going to be groceries this week?” asked the 28-year-old Amazon delivery driver as he watched the numbers tick higher. ”Is it going to be getting gas in our tank to go to work?”

    He shook his head when asked about President Donald Trump’s assertion last week that higher gas prices are a small price to pay for the war with Iran.

    “I don’t feel like it’s a good trade-off,” Martinez said. “I don’t feel like this is good for anyone.”

    Voters across the country, and across the political spectrum, tend to agree.

    Interviews with voters in several states, along with a fresh round of national polling, reveal an overwhelming sense of frustration that skyrocketing gas prices — a direct result of Trump’s war — are creating serious and sustained financial hardships for America’s working class.

    The acute concerns are adding to a bad political environment that may be worsening for Trump and his Republican Party as early voting gets underway in the November midterm elections.

    Historically, the party holding the White House has suffered major losses in midterms. Today, seven weeks before Election Day, Republican candidates at all levels are struggling with the additional burden of Trump’s weak approval ratings, an unpopular foreign conflict and an affordability crisis that Trump and his congressional allies had promised to fix.

    But when Trump campaigned in North Carolina on Wednesday, he played down the impact of surging gas prices.

    “You have a little higher. It’s a very inexpensive price to pay for what we’ve done,” Trump said of the war, which he describes as critical to prevent Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon. ”Remember that. It’s a little more. Frankly, even if it was a lot more.”

    ‘Gas prices matter,’ Republican strategist says

    Despite what Trump says, there are few things that may matter more this election year than the price of a gallon of gasoline, according to political operatives in both parties.

    Gas prices are moving sharply in the wrong direction at a time of year when drivers typically get some relief. The national average for a gallon of gas reached $4.48 on Friday, according to AAA, up roughly 17 cents over the last week, 40 cents in a month and $1.27 from a year ago.

    “Gas prices matter because they’re one of the few economic indicators voters experience and see in real time,” said veteran Republican strategist Chris Wilson. “The price is literally staring them in the face several times a week. So I wouldn’t minimize the frustration we’re seeing, particularly among working- and middle-class voters.”

    Interviews with voters this week found bipartisan frustration and disappointment.

    Democrats and independents were especially motivated to punish Republicans at the ballot box for their economic hardship, while some of Trump’s working-class supporters pledged to support Republicans this fall, even if they weren’t happy with the president’s leadership on the economy.

    Some Republicans say they’re disappointed

    Dan Lloyd, who voted for Trump, lamented the president’s leadership as the 63-year-old carpenter paid $4.39 a gallon to fill up his pickup truck in Mesa, Ariz.

    “He hurt himself stepping into this,” Lloyd said of Trump. “Where’s all this oil from Venezuela? I thought we were flush with gas and everything, but no. The American people eat it every time, whether it’s interest rates, food, gasoline.”

    Still, he expects to vote Republican in the midterms.

    “I think the Democratic Party has lost its way,” Lloyd said. “I just feel like the whole system’s on the verge of collapse.”

    In sweltering Edinburg, Texas, 52-year-old Kristin Jimenez shrugged off the rising price of gas after filling up her Mercedes.

    “We’ve paid the same price under Republican presidents, we’ve paid this price under Democrat presidents,” said Jimenez, a mother who runs a small business. She plans to vote for a Republican in November because they’re the “lesser of two evils.”

    She said gas prices aren’t part of her calculation.

    “We don’t mind paying $8 for a cup of coffee at Starbucks, but we have a problem paying four bucks at the pump?” she said. “Make it make sense.”

    More than 1,500 miles to the north in central Michigan, 35-year-old Garth Johnson is trying to make ends meet running a deep-cleaning business with several gas-powered vehicles and one machine fueled by diesel, which was $6.79 a gallon as he filled up his SUV.

    Johnson voted for Trump, but doesn’t know what he’s going to do in November. Johnson doesn’t feel qualified to second-guess the president’s evaluation of the war, but he’s feeling financial pressure in his own life.

    “I like a lot of the things he’s done,” Johnson said, but added, “I’m a little guy and I’ve got to live my life.”

    Other voters are not so forgiving

    Midterm voting was already underway on Friday in Virginia, where 60-year-old engineer Alan Johnson said Trump seems to have “no empathy” for Americans who are struggling financially.

    “With the gas prices being what they are and continuing to grow, we’ve got to do something. Hopefully the Democrats can get into office and turn the ship around,” said Johnson, who cast ballots in the morning for Democrats for the U.S. Senate and U.S. House.

    In Raleigh, N.C., teacher Brittney Bivins sees surging gas prices as evidence that Trump and his Republican Party aren’t dealing with the issues that matter most to people like her.

    “He really doesn’t care about everyday people,” the 45-year-old said. “He can afford the gas, but most of us can’t. So it feels like he’s not even connected to his own people.”

    Bivins, who described herself as an independent, said she’s eager to support Democrats this fall — especially the party’s emerging democratic socialist wing.

    At a gas station in Lansing, Michigan., Rina Risper spent $50 on 8 gallons of premium gas.

    “When I rolled up I was in shock, actually, and said, well, maybe I should drink water instead of having that $4.99 bottle of whatever it was I was going to get,” Risper said. She thinks Trump’s tariffs will make affordability even worse.

    “We’re not in Miami. We’re in Lansing, Mich.,” she said. “It’s really going to impact our people.”

    Most voters think administration has made economy worse, poll shows

    Nationwide, more than three times as many voters say they are falling behind financially as getting ahead, according to a Fox News survey released Wednesday. By a 15 percentage point margin, Democrats are considered the party that would better handle inflation and prices at a time when the cost of living and the economy are voters’ top concerns.

    The Fox poll found that 61% of voters say gas prices are a major problem for their household, compared with 48% two years ago, while 52% say the same for healthcare costs, compared with 44% in 2024. Majorities also view housing costs and grocery prices as major problems, although neither has increased.

    Overall, nearly two-thirds of voters (63%) say the administration has made the economy worse, compared with 52% in September 2025, including one-quarter of Republicans. Only 46% of Republicans say the administration has improved the economy, while about one-quarter don’t see an impact.

    Back in rural South Texas, an area where Trump’s GOP made gains in recent elections, Martinez, the Amazon delivery driver, could not contain his frustration.

    Trump “likes to tout that we are the best economy in the world,” said Martinez, but in more rural towns, “you don’t see any of the winning, you don’t see any of the ups that he’s talking about.”

    “You just see struggles for day to day life,” he said.

  • The poorest in the U.S. can’t find housing even as low-income units sit empty

    The poorest in the U.S. can’t find housing even as low-income units sit empty

    PORTLAND, Ore. — Mathew Davis, who lives in a homeless shelter in Austin, Texas, would love an apartment of his own. But with the little money he makes donating blood plasma, even a $450-a-month tiny home with no running water and a communal bathroom would be a stretch.

    Meanwhile, over 4,500 units the city classifies as affordable — nearly 16% — sit empty.

    “I don’t make enough money really to afford anything,” Davis, 49, said of the few hundred dollars he earns a month. “I just keep trying to swim uphill.”

    The poorest people in the U.S. face the most acute shortages of affordable homes. But the majority of low-income housing financed in recent years is for those earning 50% of an area’s median income or above, according to a survey of state housing agencies.

    Some cities are now seeing an uptick in vacancies as rents for these units approach market rates. The result: Apartments designated as affordable sit empty because the poorest of the poor cannot afford them.

    Meanwhile, some people are forced into homelessness and others into desperate circumstances to pay for housing they can’t afford.

    The poorest have few housing options

    There are only about 4 million affordable rental units available for the country’s 11 million extremely low-income renter households, according to the National Low Income Housing Coalition’s most recent annual report.

    These are people with annual incomes either below the federal poverty guidelines — just under $16,000 for a single-person household — or 30% of the median income in their area, whichever is higher. They comprise about a quarter of U.S. renter households, and include many people working low-wage jobs, seniors, and those with disabilities living on fixed incomes.

    About three-quarters of extremely low-income renter households pay over half their income on rent and utilities, the report said, leaving little leftover for other necessities.

    Yet homes set aside for these renters were only about 12% of the affordable housing units financed in 2024 by the Low-Income Housing Tax Credit — a federal program providing tax credits to developers in exchange for keeping rents low for at least 30 years, according to figures from the National Council of State Housing Agencies.

    The majority are for those earning at least 50% of an area’s median income, or AMI. In Austin, that’s a single person earning roughly $47,000 a year, as compared with an extremely low-income person earning under $28,000.

    The program has financed nearly 4 million affordable units nationwide since its creation 40 years ago. But some experts say it’s inefficient — and more costly than housing vouchers.

    “It’s enormously complex and bureaucratic, and it raises the cost of construction enormously because the rules are so complicated,” said Chris Edwards, an economist at the Cato Institute, a libertarian think tank, who told Congress the program’s complexity “spawned” an industry of law and accounting firms just to administer it.

    “If you’re going to subsidize affordable housing, you should give the money directly to tenants,” he said, referring to housing vouchers.

    Other experts say the two programs work together well because properties built with the tax credit are required to accept vouchers — while landlords of market-rate apartments in many states are not.

    Still, there’s a major federal funding shortfall: Experts estimate only one in four eligible families ever receive vouchers. Vouchers can help the poorest pay for housing that’s targeted to higher income groups, but the waitlist can be yearslong.

    Some affordable housing developers say that without vouchers, it’s not economically feasible to provide units for extremely low-income people.

    True Ground Housing Partners, an affordable housing developer in the Washington, D.C., area, gives an example: A unit for those earning 60% of the area’s median income — nearly $70,000 a year — brings in $1,715 per month in rent. But after $1,575 in mortgage and operating expenses, only $140 is left.

    “The math does not lie,” said president and CEO Carmen Romero, noting that an extremely low-income person would pay only half that rent.

    “Our expenses don’t make it really possible to create a 30% AMI unit, unless there was this extraordinary amount of subsidy that just doesn’t exist.”

    Affordable housing competes with market-rate rents

    Meanwhile, affordable housing rents for 60% AMI units are approaching those of market-rate apartments in U.S. cities like Austin, Denver, and Portland, Ore.

    As a result, some people are opting to pay a bit more for market-rate apartments with less income-verification and faster approval — leaving growing numbers of affordable units vacant.

    In Austin, the vacancy rate for all affordable housing is nearly 16% with over 4,500 vacant units, according to real estate data and analytics firm CoStar. A healthy vacancy rate is around 5%.

    LDG Development, an affordable housing developer, cited a 12% vacancy rate for its 60% AMI units in Austin. Chief portfolio officer Rebekah Fischer said LDG is “in direct competition” with the thousands of new market-rate apartments recently built in Austin.

    “I have to have every bank statement, every pay check, every bill, every Venmo transaction that you had with your friends,” Fischer said of affordable housing applicants.

    “When we’re almost going after the same renter, you can be approved within two minutes at a market-rate deal, where unfortunately in affordable housing … it takes time.”

    In Denver, there’s a 13% vacancy rate among 60% AMI units financed by the federal tax credit program — and a 21% vacancy rate for 80% AMI units, according to the Colorado Housing and Finance Authority. Meanwhile, there is far too little housing for the city’s poorest.

    In Portland, where there is also a housing shortage for the lowest income groups, there are over 1,700 vacant affordable units for an overall vacancy rate of 7.5%, according to the Portland Housing Bureau. Most are for those earning 60% AMI, or about $54,000 for a single-person household, with rent capped at $1,444 per month.

    That’s close to the average rent of $1,581 for a one-bedroom market-rate apartment, according to CoStar figures shared by the bureau.

    Portland resident Jaiden Barbee earns around 55% of the area median income and is on waitlists for affordable housing. But, he says, he’d pay more for a market-rate apartment to avoid the lengthy application process.

    “I’d rather spend the $200 extra just to get into a place easier that’s wherever I want” and doesn’t have “all these hoops,” he said.

    ‘I want to shut the door at night and sleep’

    Austin officials set a goal of building 20,000 units between 2018 and 2027 for extremely low-income people — 17% of the city’s households.

    Just 543 were built as of 2024, city documents show.

    Meanwhile, all 15,000 units planned for those earning between 60% and 80% of area median income were built.

    In response to questions from the Associated Press, the Austin housing department said it recognized the need to do more to produce housing for the poorest people and was taking steps to do that, including giving preference to funding proposals that include 30% AMI units.

    For Davis, who lived in his car for a year before getting a bed in the Austin shelter, the housing shortage for people like him is frustrating.

    “I want to shut the door at night and be able to sleep,” he said. “I really just want to find the right place.”

    Charlotte Kramon contributed to this article.

  • MS NOW, CNN, and Politico say their journalists were denied access to White House after Trump ban

    MS NOW, CNN, and Politico say their journalists were denied access to White House after Trump ban

    NEW YORK — Reporters from three major news organizations — CNN, MS NOW, and Politico — were denied access to the White House on Saturday, a day after President Donald Trump said he was barring them because of reporting he found to be “fake news.”

    The actions were a clear escalation of Trump’s long-running efforts — in the courts and through administrative action — to restrict news coverage by journalists he finds objectionable, and the latest test of First Amendment protections in the United States. Trump had said Friday he would ban all three outlets because of coverage he disliked.

    White House reporters from the two cable networks — Betsy Klein of CNN and Akayla Gardner of MS NOW — both went live to report they’d been turned away when arriving for their jobs at the White House. Soon after, Politico said its White House reporter Cheyenne Haslett was also denied entry and had her badge confiscated.

    Politico editor-in-chief Jonathan Greenberger said in a statement to the Politico newsroom: “We stand by her and all reporters here covering the White House. … We will vigorously defend our First Amendment rights.”

    CNN and MS NOW issued similar statements. “We will not be deflected from our duty to hold the government and other public bodies to account,” CNN said.

    “The White House belongs to the American people and the decisions made inside are funded by our tax dollars,” MS NOW said in its statement. “MS NOW intends to take any and all steps necessary to defend our First Amendment rights and the essential role of independent journalism in our democracy.“ ‘

    In his second term, Trump and his administration have upped the ante and punished certain media outlets, both in the courtroom and through regulatory action. Trump has also lashed out at individual reporters in person or over social media, sometimes in strikingly personal terms — insulting them in briefings, or in his recent speech at the White House Correspondents’ Association dinner.

    CNN and MS NOW correspondents are turned away

    Network correspondents are usually present on the weekends when the president is in Washington or at nearby Camp David. Trump is at the presidential retreat in Maryland this weekend.

    MS NOW’s Gardner reported that she had walked through two gates successfully, but once she got to where her badge needed to be scanned, an officer told her it was disabled and asked her to hand it over. He said the decision “was above him,” she reported. An MS NOW producer was able to get in, but a photographer’s badge was also disabled, Gardner said.

    Klein, senior White House reporter at CNN, also said her badge had been deactivated. It was confiscated, and she was handed back the clear plastic case. She said she was referred to the White House press office for further information.

    Amy Kristin Sanders, a professor at Pennsylvania State University and an expert in media law, said it has “become pretty clear that this administration is not interested in playing by traditional First Amendment rules and norms.

    “The second Trump administration’s efforts to crack down on press freedom and delegitimize independent journalism far exceed those of any other modern American president,” Sanders said. ”It is not an exaggeration to say his hostile actions toward news organizations and individual reporters have a chilling effect on freedom of expression around the world.”

    CNN media analyst Brian Stelter called the move “a direct threat to press freedom in the United States.”

    “It’s so much bigger than CNN,” Stelter said. “This is a free speech test in America.”

    Trump calls these and other outlets ‘fake news’

    The president wrote on his social media site Friday that effective immediately, “I am banning” CNN, MS NOW, and Politico “from the White House as a result of their constant ‘reporting’ FAKE NEWS!” Minutes later, speaking at an event in the Oval Office, Trump was asked to explain his statement.

    “Because they’re fake news,” he said. “You get so tired of reading and seeing fake news. When you look at CNN, it’s just fake. That’s why their ratings are no good. When you look at MS NOW … it’s fake news.”

    “And when you look at Politico … the stories they wrote are fake. So there’s a lot of news and there may be others to join them, and maybe they can get better,” he said. “But our country has to have honest news.”

    The move follows the president’s decision last year to bar Associated Press reporters from the Oval Office, Air Force One, and other events in retaliation for the news outlet’s decision not to follow his lead in changing the name of the Gulf of Mexico, which lies partially in Mexican and other waters. The AP said that it would note when appropriate that Trump had ordered it renamed the “Gulf of America.”

    The AP filed suit and the case is ongoing. Since returning to office, Trump has pursued other legal action against a variety of different outlets, including the New York Times, the Wall Street Journal, and the BBC. His administration is also involved in a long-simmering confrontation involving ABC over renewal of its broadcast licenses.

    The AP said Saturday it supported the news organizations banned this week. In a statement, it said: “No news organization — or person — should be retaliated against by the government over the words they use.”

  • Trump says he is banning CNN, MS NOW, and Politico from the White House

    Trump says he is banning CNN, MS NOW, and Politico from the White House

    President Donald Trump said on Friday that he would ban CNN, MS NOW, and Politico from the White House, although it was unclear how such a prohibition would be enforced or legally defended.

    The president’s abrupt proclamation, which he said was “effective immediately,” came in a post on Truth Social, the social media platform he owns.

    Journalists from those news outlets were still working as usual on the White House grounds on Friday afternoon, and there were no immediate signs that they were being evicted.

    Speaking later with reporters in the Oval Office, Trump said he announced a ban “because they’re fake news. You get so tired of reading and seeing fake news.” He added, “You get sick of it.”

    Asked exactly what he meant by a ban, the president replied: “A very simple ban. I don’t want them in my office. I don’t want them here. I would say the ban would go as far as you can. And if they could straighten themselves out, I’d love it.”

    Asked if his ban could survive a court challenge, Trump replied, “I don’t think that a court should allow fake news to be written day after day after day.”

    CNN said in a statement that Trump’s ban would be “an illegal assault” on a “fundamental and constitutionally-protected right.”

    “We have a right under the U.S. Constitution to do that reporting without hindrance or interference from the government,” the network said.

    A spokesperson for MS NOW declined to comment. A spokesperson for Politico did not immediately respond to a request for comment. An inquiry to the White House Correspondents’ Association was not immediately returned.

    A prospective ban would open yet another front in Trump’s ever-expanding battles with the news media, whose output he has increasingly attempted to control using a variety of bureaucratic levers and intimidation tactics. The president has filed lawsuits and used government tools like subpoenas to target newspapers, late-night talk show hosts, corporate media conglomerates, and journalists whose reporting he dislikes.

    In his social media post on Friday, Trump warned that he might add other organizations to his prospective ban, writing, “Other Fake News Media Outlets to follow.”

    Trump expanded on his feelings at his Oval Office appearance, echoing the usual protestations about the media that he unspools at rallies, news conferences, and in interviews. “They purposely write negative news,” the president said. “And they do that because they want to try and diminish the Republicans and a Republican administration.”

    Any prospective ban on journalists from specific news outlets would almost certainly prompt a legal challenge.

    Trump has tried to bar some news organizations from parts of the White House in the past. During his first term, he revoked a White House pass for Jim Acosta, the former CNN journalist. CNN succeeded in restoring Acosta’s press credentials in court.

    This term, Trump has attempted to bar Associated Press journalists from parts of the White House, including the Oval Office and Air Force One. The AP has sued to restore its access, but that case remains in litigation; in the meantime, AP photographers have had continued access to the Oval Office. Its print journalists have had more limited access.

    His administration has also taken command of the daily White House press pool, a small, rotating group of reporters who relay the president’s daily activities to the public. Previously, the Correspondents’ Association chose which outlets participated; now, the administration handpicks the news outlets that are included.

    Jameel Jaffer, the executive director of the Knight First Amendment Institute at Columbia University, said that the ban floated by Trump on Friday is clearly unconstitutional because it would punish news organizations for the content of their reporting.

    “If President Trump means to expel these news organizations from the White House press pool, his action is doubly unconstitutional because the press pool is a ‘public forum’ under the First Amendment, which means the president can’t exclude journalists from it on the basis of their viewpoints,” Jaffer said.

  • A global AI safety strategy depends on U.S.-China cooperation. They each see the other as the problem

    A global AI safety strategy depends on U.S.-China cooperation. They each see the other as the problem

    HONG KONG — As concern rises over the risks of artificial intelligence, hopes for any kind of global approach depend on cooperation between the U.S. and China — superpowers that seem only to be more skeptical of each other’s AI strategy.

    AI governance is expected to be on the agenda in a meeting planned for next week in Washington between President Donald Trump and Chinese leader Xi Jinping. The topic has gained urgency in both countries, with American tech leaders saying that averting worst-case scenarios for rogue AI depends on a degree of cooperation with China.

    But both countries are vying for a decisive advantage on AI, with Trump warning that any efforts to regulate the technology would help China. That sets up a meeting in which any agreements might be superficial but a possible start to something larger.

    “A formal agreement or consensus may be near impossible, but they do not need to go that far,” said Samm Sacks, a senior fellow at the Johns Hopkins School of Advanced International Studies’ Institute for America, China, and the Future of Global Affairs. “Trump and Xi just need to create political space by acknowledging AI poses risks to both countries.”

    China and the U.S. are increasingly at odds on AI

    Trump has pushed back on calls to strengthen regulation of the technology, claiming that doing so could cause China to eclipse America on AI. He has repeatedly declared that the nation that leads on the technology “wins.”

    “We are leading China, and all others,” Trump said Monday on social media.

    The two countries are moving the technology forward in different ways. U.S. companies are chasing AI frontiers with computing power supported by cutting-edge chips and the country’s rapidly expanding data center infrastructure. China is pursuing wide global adoption of its open-source, more affordable models.

    Chinese AI models have made major advances and gained traction with American companies even as U.S.-led restrictions bar China from getting the world’s most advanced AI chips. While most American frontier models are closed-source, with their design elements kept secret, U.S. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent said Tuesday the U.S. needs to develop more open-source models to counter China.

    The U.S. has accused China of “aggressive, malicious” efforts to extract capabilities from American AI systems. China has hit back, accusing the U.S. of trying to suppress Chinese companies so it can build a “monopoly of the AI industry.”

    David Sacks, a top AI adviser to Trump, said that China has “already rejected” slowing down the pace of developing the most advanced forms of AI. He said on Fox News’ “The Ingraham Angle” that unlike the nuclear tensions with the Soviet Union during the Cold War it would be impossible to verify whether China honored any AI commitments.

    “In this case, we don’t have trust and we can’t verify,” Sacks said. “So let’s not be foolish about this and just hand the whole ball game to China.”

    Still, those with ties to the Chinese government see coordination on AI as helpful.

    At an annual security and defense conference in Beijing, Cui Tiankai, a former Chinese ambassador to the U.S., said Tuesday that AI is an area where “we should go ahead and build up” dialogue between Beijing and Washington. “Because there is a need, a growing need, for cooperation,” he told the Xiangshan Forum. “So how can we manage the balance?”

    American AI leaders call for keeping China in check — and cooperating with China

    Two leading American AI companies, Anthropic and OpenAI, each restrict access in China and have said the U.S. has a national security imperative to protect its lead on AI technology. But they also have called for cooperation with China to manage safety.

    In his essay last weekend calling for a slowdown of AI development for safety reasons, Anthropic CEO Dario Amodei said the U.S. should slow China’s progress, including keeping up U.S. restrictions on China’s purchases of the world’s most advanced AI chips.

    He also added, however, that “global pacing will require cooperation with China, the autocratic country with by far the most advanced AI capabilities.”

    His essay quickly drew criticism from Beijing, with China’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs saying on Monday that “fearmongering, confrontation, and vicious competition will only disrupt the process of global AI governance which serves no one’s interest.”

    China’s state-run Global Times newspaper went further, calling his remarks “packed with containment provisions targeting China and is, in essence, a ‘Cold War playbook’ for the AI sector.”

    Trump has consulted with Nvidia CEO Jensen Huang, even calling the maker of the world’s most advanced computer chips in the middle of a Monday podcast interview. Nvidia has generally favored some chip exports to China as a way to create an American ecosystem for the technology and a more open relationship on AI given the number of researchers in China.

    Both countries have been alarmed by emerging AI capabilities

    In both the U.S. and China, AI’s increasingly powerful capabilities have alarmed top officials and policymakers.

    The head of China’s Ministry of State Security, its spy agency, warned in an article Sunday that AI poses many threats to the country, from political and ideological security to cyberattacks.

    In the article, Chen Yixin argued that AI could threaten China’s political and ideological security if used by those “with ulterior motives,” while singling out Anthropic’s and OpenAI’s powerful AI models. It said they could be used to “weaponize” cybersecurity vulnerabilities and threaten China’s critical information infrastructure.

    Several other recent AI-related events were also causing concern in China when it comes to AI governance. That includes a U.S. security firm’s recent discovery of AI vulnerabilities in WeChat, China’s key messaging app that also offers payment services among other functions, said Paul Triolo, a partner at DGA-Albright Stonebridge Group.

    While Chinese officials said after Trump’s Beijing summit with Xi in mid-May that China and the United States had agreed to pursue dialogue on AI development and governance, little progress has been made.

    At the same time, China and the U.S. have been working to form AI alliances with like-minded nations.

    In July, China launched the World Artificial Intelligence Cooperation Organization, a group with 29 initial founding member countries, including Russia and Pakistan, meant to promote global AI governance. This month, China’s Xi has called on BRICS member countries to accelerate the setting up of a global AI governance framework and establish an open-source AI community.

    Some political observers saw the China-led organization as a response to the U.S.-led Pax Silica initiative, which launched last year focusing on strengthening collaboration with countries including Japan, the U.K., and Australia on AI supply chains.

    Asked about his expectations on AI from the Trump-Xi meeting on AI in an interview with CBS’ Face the Nation, Amodei said “the more long-term thing would be working together to put a speed limit on the rate of AI progress.” But he said it likely would be very difficult.

    In the run-up to the Trump-Xi meeting, a recent social media post by Yuyuantantian, a Chinese state media-linked account, was similarly circumspect.

    “Only after the United States first demonstrates that the safety rules are equally effective for its own model companies can substantive discussions between the U.S. and China take place,” the post said.

  • Senate blocks cryptocurrency regulation as Democrats push back on Trump investments

    Senate blocks cryptocurrency regulation as Democrats push back on Trump investments

    WASHINGTON — Senate Democrats on Tuesday blocked legislation to create a new regulatory framework for cryptocurrency, stalling an industry-backed effort to place new guardrails around digital assets after demanding more limits on President Donald Trump’s investments.

    The 49-50 vote on whether to move forward with the legislation was a pivotal election-year test for the $2.3 trillion cryptocurrency market as the industry has pushed aggressively for a uniform set of rules. The Senate debate came as cryptocurrency companies have become a major political force, and as Trump has amassed significant wealth in crypto while in office.

    While some Democrats are friendly toward the industry and support the idea of regulation, they have been adamant that the bill include strong ethics safeguards to prevent the president and his family from enriching themselves while he’s in office. The opposition appears to have only solidified two months before the midterm elections, despite significant donations that crypto groups have given to some Democrats in recent years. In the end, no Democrats supported it.

    “Let’s make sure that we do not pass a crypto bill that will let Donald Trump continue to rake in billions of dollars in crypto profits while working families across this country struggle to deal with higher prices and an economy that gets worse by the day,” said Massachusetts Sen. Elizabeth Warren, the top Democrat on the Senate Banking Committee.

    Several Democrats who have been supportive of the bill aside from the ethics concerns said they were still open to negotiating.

    Virginia Sen. Mark Warner said he still wants regulation of the crypto industry, but “we cannot pass landmark legislation governing this industry while allowing the president of the United States to personally profit from it.”

    The White House indicated Tuesday that it would now turn to agencies to implement parts of their crypto agenda and warned that the failed vote would continue to stifle financial innovation domestically while it flourishes abroad.

    “The full cost of today’s result may not be known for years to come, but this much is clear: It increases the risk that the standards that global financial markets adhere to in the future will be those of Brussels or Beijing, rather than Washington and New York,” Patrick Witt, the White House’s crypto adviser, said.

    Trump agrees to some changes as Democrats push back

    As Democrats made clear they would block the bill, Trump agreed to some concessions on ethics, including new restrictions on federal elected officials from issuing digital assets like the presidential meme coins he and his wife Melania launched before he took office for his second term. He agreed to new concessions Sunday, such as additional powers for state attorneys general that Democrats had sought to enforce the crypto measures.

    Those concessions were not enough for Democrats, who sent a counteroffer late Monday to expand the ethics provision but were not able to strike a final deal. Among other issues, they said the bill still needed stricter enforcement and a requirement for Trump or any future president to divest if holdings reach a certain value.

    “Instead of spending their time twisting themselves into knots to appease President Trump, Republicans should have worked more closely with Senate Democrats to craft a bill that could pass with strong ethics provisions,” said Arizona Sen. Ruben Gallego, who was involved in last-minute talks with GOP senators on the bill.

    Republicans needed Democratic support to win the 60 votes necessary to move forward on the bill in the 53-47 Senate.

    North Carolina Sen. Thom Tillis, a Republican who worked with Gallego to strengthen the ethics provision, said before the vote that he was pleased with Trump’s latest concessions.

    “We’re so close,” Tillis said. “It’s just a shame to not take this opportunity.”

    Trump has amassed big crypto profits

    Trump’s family has raked in big profits in the crypto sector since he was reelected, including the meme coin, announced the day before Trump took office. Top investors were invited to a private reception with the president.

    Trump’s family also has a controlling stake in World Liberty Financial, a crypto firm co-founded with the president’s special envoy Steve Witkoff. Trump reported more than $500 million in revenue from World Liberty Financial sales of crypto products, including “governance tokens,” in his annual disclosure report filed with the Office of Government Ethics. That is a significant share of the more than $1.4 billion that the president reported from crypto businesses last year.

    A measure enacted into law last year regulating stablecoins, a type of cryptocurrency, barred members of Congress and their families from profiting off them, but it did not extend to Trump or his family.

    Legislation aims to give crypto firms legal certainty

    Republicans who have been working on the legislation for more than a year say it could now stall indefinitely. The House and Senate will be out of session during October and before the elections, and the dynamics could significantly shift if Democrats win back the majorities of the House or Senate, or both, in November.

    Republican Sen. Cynthia Lummis of Wyoming, a lead sponsor of the bill, said beforehand that a no vote means ”opposing real ethics reforms on politicians’ personal investments, handing American leadership in digital assets to our foreign competitors, and leaving Americans with zero protections in the digital asset markets.”

    Supporters say the legislation aims to give the industry more legal certainty and protect consumers by creating a broad set of guardrails and regulatory requirements, including better enforcement to prevent bad actors and protections to prevent a market collapse.

    As talks continued Tuesday morning, Lummis posted on X that it was “now or never for the Clarity Act,” referring to the bill’s name.

    “The time for negotiating is over,” she wrote.

    Crypto cash has flooded campaigns

    Opponents, mostly Democrats, say the bill is a giveaway to the industry as crypto companies have become generous donors to candidates in both parties around the country.

    “It’s no secret that they are seeking to ram a bill through Congress based upon not the merits of the bill, but the threat that they will spend even more money in elections against people who vote against it,” said Democratic Sen. Chris Murphy of Connecticut.

    In 2024, the crypto industry spent more than $130 million in congressional races, including $40 million in Ohio and $10 million each in Arizona and Michigan.

    “DC received a clear message that being anti-crypto is a good way to end your career, as it doesn’t represent the will of the voters,” Brian Armstrong, the CEO of Coinbase, the nation’s largest crypto exchange, wrote in a social media post the day after the 2024 election.