Trump tells Republicans to kill top US state media outlet
The president has labeled the Voice of America a left-wing disaster
US President Donald Trump has called on Republicans to support his campaign to dismantle the state-funded news outlet Voice of America (VOA).
Launched in 1942 to counter Nazi propaganda during World War II, the broadcaster later served as a key vehicle for pro-American messaging during the Cold War.
Trump has argued, however, that VOA has in recent decades veered toward partisanship, and vowed to shut it down as part of his broader push to eliminate wasteful government spending.
"Why would a Republican want Democrat 'mouthpiece' Voice of America (VOA) to continue? It's a TOTAL, LEFTWING DISASTER - No Republican should vote for its survival. KILL IT!" the president wrote on his Truth Social platform on Wednesday.
Earlier that day, Trump's senior adviser Kari Lake told the House Foreign Affairs Committee that the US Agency for Global Media (USAGM), which oversees VOA, was "rotten to the core" and should be reshaped to align with Trump's "America First" agenda.
Committee Chairman Brian Mast described USAGM as "a cesspool of spies, lies, and mismanagement" that "has promoted the very propaganda it was created to defeat." He accused the agency of hiring foreign nationals, many of whom he said were "quite literally, security risks."
Lake, who has been tasked by Trump with overseeing the dismantling of the agency, said last week that nearly 640 full-time staffers and more than 500 contractors had been laid off at USAGM and VOA.
Democrats and press freedom advocates have criticized the move. "The wholesale destruction of public media outlets like Voice of America represents an unprecedented gift from Trump to the dictatorial censorship regimes in countries like China and Iran," said Clayton Weimers, executive director of Reporters Without Borders USA.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Japan Forward
2 hours ago
- Japan Forward
Immigration in Japan: Rethinking Refugee Protection in a Changing World
このページを 日本語 で読む The Refugee Convention, specifically the 1951 Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees and its 1967 Protocol, was established in the aftermath of World War II. Its primary aim was to protect civilians fleeing from the Eastern Bloc to the West. Born out of the Cold War, the convention's origins continue to shape how "refugee" is defined today. At the time, the focus was clear. In communist states, individuals were often persecuted for their political or religious beliefs. To counter that behavior, the convention aimed to provide legal protection for those targeted by authoritarian regimes. Last in the series. Read the series: Immigration in Japa n Since then, however, the nature of global displacement has dramatically evolved. Today's international community faces crises not only along ideological lines but across divides between the Global North and South, and even within the Global South itself. Conflicts driven by ethnic tension, poverty, and inequality have triggered civil wars, lawlessness, and mass atrocities. Many have fled in search of safety. Others have left not because their lives were immediately endangered, but to escape poverty, disaster, or systemic discrimination in hopes of building a better future. As global challenges have shifted from Cold War-era ideological divides to the complex realities of North-South and South-South tensions, the original framework of the Refugee Convention has become increasingly difficult to apply. It was designed to protect those fleeing political persecution under authoritarian regimes. For the most part, that did not include those escaping fragile governance, chronic instability, or daily insecurity. At the same time, it's overly simplistic and unjust to dismiss everyone in these circumstances as mere economic migrants and deny them protection outright. In response, new systems have begun to emerge under terms like "complementary protection." These frameworks are meant to assist individuals fleeing indiscriminate violence, conflict, or systemic collapse — even if they don't strictly qualify as refugees under the original convention. Japan is among the countries starting to adopt such measures. Looking ahead, political repression, armed conflict, economic collapse, and natural disasters will continue to force people from their homelands. Across borders, there remains a shared moral instinct, a sense that we should help those in need. But when it comes to the concrete questions of how to help and through what systems, the world is still feeling its way forward. On March 28, 2025, central Myanmar was struck by a powerful magnitude 7.7 earthquake. Around the same time, a high-rise building under construction collapsed in Bangkok — a tragedy still fresh in public memory. I extend my sincere condolences to all those affected and pray for their swift recovery. What stood out to me in the aftermath was a striking detail: many of the workers at the collapse site were from Myanmar. A behavioral study by the Media Intelligence Group (MI Group) estimates that there are currently 6.8 million Myanmar nationals working in Thailand. Of these, only about 1.85 million have valid work permits. In other words, over 67% of Thailand's roughly 2.7 million foreign workers are from Myanmar. And the vast majority of them are undocumented. Rohingya refugees from Myanmar cross a bamboo-made bridge during an ongoing heatwave in Cox's Bazar, Bangladesh, May 2, 2024. (@Reuters) Roughly five million Myanmar nationals are working in Thailand without legal status. If one of them is killed or injured in a workplace accident, like in the recent building collapse, there's often no registration, no records, and no protections. They vanish without a trace, unrecognized by any official system. In the case of Myanmar-Thailand migration, this undocumented status often results from informal land crossings. Japan, by contrast, requires all entrants to pass through official ports or airports, making irregular entry less common. Still, once someone overstays their visa or fails to obtain proper residency, they too become undocumented. I believe Japan should not accept foreign workers under such conditions. Anyone living here should hold a valid residence status — not only to ensure access to emergency support and legal protections, but also to earn the trust of both Japanese society and fellow foreigners. Japan's system should help those in need obtain and maintain legal status, not fall through the cracks. At the same time, Japan must take a hard look at the immigration and refugee policy failures seen in many Western countries. There are people who don't qualify as refugees under the convention but are fleeing instability, poor governance, or systemic failure. We should recognize their hardship and create mechanisms that offer fair access to information, assistance, and opportunities. However, reliance solely on international organizations like UNHCR or the International Organization for Migration to manage refugee and migration issues is not ideal. Japan should strengthen its own efforts through agencies like the Japan International Cooperation Agency. By focusing on international cooperation, technical assistance, and financial aid, Japan can help developing countries build the conditions that allow people to thrive at home, surrounded by family and community, in peace and stability. April 30, 2025, marked 50 years since the end of the Vietnam War. It was a moment that evoked memories of the harrowing refugee crisis that followed. In the late 1970s and 1980s, the exodus from Indochina shocked the world. Between two and three million "boat people" fled Vietnam alone. In an era before the internet or mobile phones, they were driven by fear, misinformation, and desperation, setting out into the sea with nothing but hope for survival. A Helicopter offloads evacuees onto the US Navy aircraft carrier USS Midway (CVA-41) during the evacuation of South Vietnam. ("Operation Frequent Wind") in April 1975. A boy who fled his country at the age of ten would now be 60. Rescued by Japan, he became a citizen more than three decades ago. Today, he runs his own company and actively supports students and technical interns from his homeland. He is one of many who now serve as living bridges between Japan and Vietnam. Foreign workers come with different hopes and plans. Some aim to stay briefly, earn money, and return home. Others dream of reuniting with family and building a permanent life in Japan. Whatever their path, we must ensure they can live here legally — in a society built on mutual respect and shared effort. Author: Fusako Yanase In addition to being an expert on immigration, Yanase is a best-selling author and former Honorary Chair of the Certified NPO Association for Aid and Relief, Japan. このページを 日本語 で読む
Winnipeg Free Press
2 hours ago
- Winnipeg Free Press
Fireworks will light up this Fourth of July. Next year could be different if tariff talks fizzle
ALBUQUERQUE, N.M. (AP) — Like clockwork, Carla Johnson sends out letters every spring asking for donations to help pay for the annual Fourth of July fireworks show that draws tens of thousands of people to New Mexico's largest lake. And she has no reservations about doling out verbal reminders when she sees her patrons around town. There's too much at stake to be shy about fundraising when donations collected by Friends of Elephant Butte Lake State Park are what make the tradition possible. But even Johnson's ardent efforts as the group's fundraiser might not cut it next year if the U.S. and China remain locked in a trade war. With nearly all of the aerial shells, paper rockets and sparkly fountains that fuel America's Fourth of July celebrations being imported from China, volunteer groups like Johnson's and cities big and small have been closely watching the negotiations. A 90-day pause on what had been massive tariffs brought some temporary relief, but industry experts acknowledge that the tiff has lit a fuse of uncertainty as the price tag for future fireworks displays could skyrocket if an agreement isn't reached. Not the first time There were similar concerns in 2019 as trade talks between the U.S. and China dragged on. Industry groups had called on officials then to exempt fireworks from escalating tariffs. The American Pyrotechnics Association and the National Fireworks Association reignited the lobbying effort this spring, noting in letters to President Donald Trump that fireworks play a crucial role in American celebrations. The groups say the industry is made up mostly of family-owned companies that are often locked into long-term contracts that leave them unable to raise prices to offset cost surges brought on by higher tariffs. And there are few options for sourcing the more than 300 million pounds (136 million kilograms) of fireworks needed to feed demands. China produces 99% of consumer fireworks and 90% of professional display fireworks used in the U.S., according to the APA. 'I think overall it's the uncertainty,' said Julie Heckman, the APA's executive director. 'Yeah, we have a 90-day pause, but are the negotiations with China going to go well? Or is it going to go sky-high again? You know, triple digits. It's very hard for a small business to plan.' How it began Fireworks have their roots in China. To ward off evil spirits, people would throw bamboo stalks into a fire, causing them to pop as the air inside the hollow pockets heated up. These early firecrackers evolved into more sophisticated fireworks after the Chinese developed gunpowder in the 9th century. By the 15th century, Europe was using fireworks for religious festivals and entertainment. In 1777, they were used in Philadelphia and Boston for what were the first organized Independence Day celebrations. Now, fireworks are synonymous with the summer holiday and with ringing in the new year. Shows have become elaborately choreographed displays that are often synced to live music. In Nashville, the Music City's award-winning symphony orchestra puts its own spin on the festivities. In New York City, organizers of the Macy's show will fire off 80,000 shells, with some reaching heights of 1,000 feet (304 meters). The National Park Service promises a spectacular show on the National Mall in Washington, D.C. At Elephant Butte in southern New Mexico, they're going old school and will light the fireworks by hand. Charlie Warren, vice president of the Friends of Elephant Butte Lake State Park, said it's like spectators are getting two shows at once as the colors reflect on the water below and the loud booms reverberate off the lake. Johnson, who also serves as the group's treasurer, gets emotional describing the experience. 'Oh man, in my heart and sometimes out loud, I'm singing the Star-Spangled Banner. I'll sing it out loud to the top of my lungs when I watch that show,' she said. 'It makes you proud to be in this country, and we're celebrating our freedom, and I'm going to start crying now. Don't get me started.' Stocking up before the tariffs Organizers in Nashville ordered fireworks for that show over a year ago so they weren't affected by the tariffs. It was the same in one of New Mexico's largest cities, where Rio Rancho officials planned to spend a little more to go bigger and higher this year. In Oklahoma, Big Blast Fireworks supplies nonprofit groups so they can fundraise by setting up fireworks stands. The company received its first container from China in January before the tariffs hit. The second container arrived in February and was subject to a 10% tariff. The third container was put on hold to avoid the highest tariffs, meaning inventory could be tight later this year if nothing changes. 'As a small business, we are passionate about watching our price points and intentional about passing along as much savings on to customers as possible,' said Melissa Torkleson, a managing partner at Big Blast. With some orders on hold, industry experts say Chinese manufacturers throttled back production as warehouses filled up. The backup in the supply chain also has resulted in competition for shipping space aboard ocean vessels, and Heckman, the APA's director, said it will take much more than flipping a light switch to ease either situation. If the trade war drags on, she said, there are ways that show organizers can adjust and spectators might not notice. A minute or two could be shaved from a show or certain types of fireworks could be substituted with less expensive options. As for this year, Warren said the price tag for the Elephant Butte show was unchanged and he and Johnson can't wait to see spectators lining the shoreline, on the surrounding hillsides and on boats bobbing on the lake. The mission every year is to make sure 'that the T's are all crossed,' Warren said. 'Because this community would not be happy if this show didn't come off,' he said.
Winnipeg Free Press
3 hours ago
- Winnipeg Free Press
What to know about the US Supreme Court's ruling on public school lessons using LGBTQ books
A divided U.S. Supreme Court has sided with religious parents who want to pull their children out of the classroom when a public school lesson uses LGBTQ-themed storybooks. The 6-3 decision Friday in a case brought by parents in Maryland comes as certain books are increasingly being banned from public schools and libraries. In Justice Samuel Alito's majority opinion — joined by the rest of the court's conservatives — he wrote that the lack of an 'opt-out' option for parents places an unconstitutional burden on their rights to religious freedom. Justice Sonia Sotomayor wrote in dissent for the three liberal justices that public schools expose children to different views in a multicultural society. 'That experience is critical to our Nation's civic vitality,' she wrote. 'Yet it will become a mere memory if children must be insulated from exposure to ideas and concepts that may conflict with their parents' religious beliefs.' Here's what to know about the case and its potential impacts: What happens next The decision was not a final ruling in the case. It reversed lower-court rulings that sided with the Montgomery County school system, which introduced the storybooks in 2022 as part of an effort to better reflect the district's diversity. At first, the school district allowed parents to opt their children out of the lessons for religious and other reasons, but the district later reversed course, saying it became disruptive. The move prompted protests and eventually a lawsuit. Now, the case goes back to the lower court to be reevaluated under the Supreme Court's new guidance. But the justices strongly suggested that the parents will win in the end. The court ruled that policies like the one at issue in this case are subjected to the strictest level of review, nearly always dooming them. The ruling could have national implications for public education Jessica Levinson, a law professor at Loyola Law School in Los Angeles, said the court's ruling could inspire similar lawsuits in other states. 'I think any school district that reads similar books to their children is now subject to suit by parents who don't want their kids to hear these books because it substantially interferes with their religious beliefs,' she said. Whether it could open the door to broader legal challenges remains to be seen. Levinson said the majority opinion's emphasis on the particular books at the center of the case, including 'Uncle Bobby's Wedding,' a story about a two men getting married, could narrow its impact. 'The question that people will ask,' Levinson said, 'is if this could now allow parents to say, 'We don't want our kids to learn about certain aspects of American history.' ' LGBTQ rights advocates slam court ruling Adam Zimmerman, who has two kids in school in Montgomery County, Maryland, called the ruling abhorrent. 'We need to call out what's being dressed up as religious faith and values and expose it for the intolerance that it really is,' he said. Zimmerman has lived in Montgomery County for 16 years and wanted to raise his son and daughter there, in large part, because of the school district's diversity. It was important to him, he said, that his kids be exposed to people from all walks of life. 'It's a beautiful thing, and this ruling just spits on that diversity,' he said. Other rights groups described the court's decision as harmful and dangerous. 'No matter what the Supreme Court has said, and what extremist groups are advocating for, book bans and other censorship will not erase LGBTQIA+ people from our communities,' said Fatima Goss Graves, CEO and president of the National Women's Law Center. Conservative advocates say the case is about parental rights and religious freedom Republican U.S. Sen. Bill Cassidy of Louisiana, who was part of an amicus brief filed in the case in support of the Maryland parents, called the ruling a 'win for families.' 'Students should not be forced to learn about gender and sexuality subject matter that violates their family's religious beliefs,' he said. Lawyer Eric Baxter, who represented the parents at the Supreme Court, also called the decision a 'historic victory for parental rights.' 'Kids shouldn't be forced into conversations about drag queens, pride parades, or gender transitions without their parents' permission,' Baxter said. Other opponents say ruling will have 'broad chilling effect' PEN America, a group advocating for free expression, said the court's decision could open the door to censorship and discrimination in classrooms. 'In practice, opt outs for religious objections will chill what is taught in schools and usher in a more narrow orthodoxy as fear of offending any ideology or sensibility takes hold,' said Elly Brinkley, a staff attorney at PEN America. In a joint statement Friday, some of the authors and illustrators of the books in question described the ruling as a threat to First Amendment rights to free speech, as well as diversity in schools. 'To treat children's books about LGBTQ+ characters differently than similar books about non-LGBTQ+ characters is discriminatory and harmful,' the statement said.
