'I can explain why Trump administration changed its mind': Garcia drops bombshell on Epstein case
Show more
Show less
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
&w=3840&q=100)
First Post
29 minutes ago
- First Post
Release Epstein testimony: Trump tells justice department after ‘ridiculous amount of publicity'
In recent days, the White House has faced growing backlash from parts of the president's MAGA base over the administration's handling of documents related to Jeffrey Epstein's death and his alleged 'client list' read more Jeffrey Epstein died in 2019 in a US prison. Many in the Maga movement have for years alleged that he was murdered by the 'deep state'. Reuters/File Photo US President Donald Trump on Friday asked the attorney-general to release the grand jury transcripts from Jeffrey Epstein's case, as his administration came under immense pressure over the handling of the classified files related to the notorious sex offender. 'Based on the ridiculous amount of publicity given to Jeffrey Epstein, I have asked Attorney General Pam Bondi to produce any and all pertinent Grand Jury testimony, subject to Court approval. This SCAM, perpetuated by the Democrats, should end, right now!' Trump said on Truth Social. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD Bondi, in response to Trump's direction, said, 'President Trump — we are ready to move the court tomorrow to unseal the grand jury transcripts.' The president's orders came hours after he slammed the Wall Street Journal and threatened to sue it for releasing "fake" letters that Trump allegedly sent to Epstein in 2003. In recent days, the White House has faced growing backlash from parts of the president's MAGA base over the administration's handling of documents related to Jeffrey Epstein's death and his alleged 'client list. Epstein died by suicide in a New York prison in 2019 – during Trump's first term – after being charged with sex trafficking in a scheme where he allegedly groomed young and underage women for sexual abuse by the rich and powerful. In February, Bondi said that the list of Epstein's clients was 'sitting on my desk right not to review it' after Trump promised to release them during his presidential campaign. What does the letter say? The Journal story, which quickly reverberated around the US capital, says the note to Epstein bearing Trump's signature was part of a collection of notes for Epstein's 50th birthday in 2003. The newspaper says it reviewed the letter but did not print an image. The alleged letter, which Trump denies writing, is raunchy, as were others in the collection, the Journal reported. It contains several lines of typewritten text, contained in an outline of a naked woman drawn with a marker. 'The future president's signature is a squiggly 'Donald' below her waist, mimicking pubic hair,' the Journal reported. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD 'The letter concludes: 'Happy Birthday – and may every day be another wonderful secret.'' Trump supporters burn Maga hats While Trump faced flak from within his team over the delay in releasing the files, his backers outside the political circles burned Maga hats in expression of discontent. Most Americans think President Donald Trump's administration is hiding information about accused sex-trafficker and give it poor marks on the issue after pledging to make public documents in the case, a Reuters/Ipsos poll found. The two-day poll, which closed Wednesday, showed 69 per cent of respondents thought the federal government was hiding details about Epstein's clients, compared to 6 per cent who disagreed and about one in four who said they weren't sure. With inputs from agencies
&w=3840&q=100)
Business Standard
29 minutes ago
- Business Standard
Trump urges Supreme Court to reject early challenge to his tariffs
Trump's import taxes remain in effect even though two courts have said many of them exceed the president's powers Bloomberg President Donald Trump asked the US Supreme Court to turn away a challenge to his sweeping tariffs, telling the justices they should let the legal fight develop before getting involved. The filing comes in a case filed by two educational-toy makers that want the justices to take an unusual shortcut by getting involved before a federal appeals court has ruled. US Solicitor General D. John Sauer, the administration's top Supreme Court lawyer, told the justices Thursday that they 'should not leapfrog' the lower court proceedings. Trump's import taxes remain in effect even though two courts have said many of them exceed the president's powers. The challenged taxes include Trump's April 2 'Liberation Day' tariffs, which combine a universal baseline levy of 10 per cent with potentially much higher rates for various trading partners. In the case before the high court, Learning Resources Inc. and hand2mind Inc. say Trump lacked authority to issue the tariffs under the 1977 International Emergency Economic Powers Act. US District Judge Rudolph Contreras in Washington agreed, though he limited his ruling to the two companies that sued. The Trump administration then appealed, and the companies are asking the Supreme Court to directly review Contreras' ruling. The high court in June refused to put the case on an ultra-fast schedule that might have led to arguments as soon as September. In a separate case, the US Court of International Trade similarly declared many of Trump's tariffs illegal in May. A different federal appeals court scheduled arguments in that case for July 31 and said the tariffs could stay in place in the meantime. The April 2 tariffs represented the biggest increase in US import taxes since the 1930 Smoot-Hawley levies, taking the country's average applied tariff rate to its highest level in more than a century. Trump has portrayed tariffs as critical to leveling the playing field for American businesses and workers amid chronic trade deficits. The case is Learning Resources v. Trump, 24-1287.
Time of India
42 minutes ago
- Time of India
US tells WTO India has "no legal basis" for retaliatory tariffs amid trade talks, ETInfra
Advt By , ETInfra The United States has informed the World Trade Organization (WTO) that there is "no legal basis" for India's proposal to impose retaliatory tariffs on American imports. India had sought to suspend concessions in response to US safeguard duties on steel, aluminium and automobile imports As per a report by The Economic Times , in its submission, India said the US safeguard measures would impact $7.6 billion worth of Indian steel and aluminium exports , with estimated duty collections of $3.82 billion. For automobile products, the measures were projected to affect $2.89 billion worth of exports, on which duties would amount to $723.75 8 March 2018, the US announced safeguard measures on certain steel and aluminium products by imposing tariffs of 25 per cent and 10 per cent ad valorem, respectively. These came into effect on 23 March 2018. The US later revised these measures on 10 February 2025, with implementation starting from 12 invokes national security clause The US also imposed a 25 per cent ad valorem tariff on imports of passenger vehicles, light trucks and certain automobile parts from India. The tariffs on automobile parts took effect from 3 May 2025 for an indefinite has defended these actions, stating that the tariffs were introduced under its national security statute as an 'essential security exception'. It argued that India's request to suspend concessions lacks legal justification under WTO developments are unfolding at the WTO even as both countries continue discussions towards a bilateral trade agreement . Indian trade officials are currently in Washington for the fifth round of India-US BTA talks.
