In Brazil, Lula resists pressure from the Trump administration
A few hours later, Trump also signed an emergency executive order to impose 50% tariffs on goods imported from Brazil, as he had announced on July 9. Describing Brazil as posing "an unusual and extraordinary threat (...) to the national security, foreign policy and economy of the United States," Trump ultimately excluded 694 products from the measure, which is now set to take effect on August 6, five days later than originally planned.
These new retaliatory measures, however, have not swayed the Brazilian government. On X, President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva quickly defended Brazil's sovereignty and expressed his support for Judge de Moraes. "Brazil is a sovereign and democratic country that respects human rights and the independence of powers; it is unacceptable for the American government to interfere in the Brazilian judiciary," he declared on Wednesday. Earlier in the day, before the executive order was announced, the Brazilian president also urged his US counterpart, during an interview with the New York Times, not to "mix everything together": "If he wants to have a political fight, then let's treat it as a political fight. If he wants to talk trade, let's sit down and discuss trade."
"These sanctions are absolutely unprecedented," said Marco Antonio Carvalho Teixeira, a political scientist at the Getulio Vargas Foundation. "There is no historical precedent for such foreign interference in Brazil, aimed at favoring a political group close to the [US] president," the researcher explained.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
France 24
32 minutes ago
- France 24
Trump's DOJ to open grand jury probe into Obama officials over 'Russiagate'
US Attorney General Pam Bondi has directed federal prosecutors to launch a grand jury investigation into allegations that members of Democratic former president Barack Obama's administration manufactured intelligence on Russia's interference in the 2016 elections, a source familiar with the matter said on Monday. The Justice Department said late last month it was forming a strike force to assess claims made by Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard about "alleged weaponization of the U.S. intelligence community". Republican US President Donald Trump has leaped on comments from Gabbard in which she threatened to refer Obama administration officials to the Justice Department for prosecution over an intelligence assessment of Russian interference. Fox News first reported that Bondi personally ordered an unnamed federal prosecutor to initiate legal proceedings and the prosecutor is expected to present department evidence to a grand jury, which could consider an indictment if the Justice Department pursued a criminal case. The report cited a letter from Bondi and a source. A DOJ spokesperson declined to comment. Last month, Trump accused Obama of treason, alleging, without providing evidence, that the Democrat led an effort to falsely tie him to Russia and undermine his 2016 presidential campaign. Trump won the 2016 election against Democrat Hillary Clinton. A spokesperson for Obama had denounced Trump's claims, saying "these bizarre allegations are ridiculous and a weak attempt at distraction". Gabbard had declassified documents and said the information she released showed a "treasonous conspiracy" in 2016 by top Obama officials to undermine Trump, claims that Democrats called false and politically motivated. An assessment by the US intelligence community published in January 2017 concluded that Russia, using social media disinformation, hacking, and Russian bot farms, sought to damage Clinton's 2016 presidential campaign and bolster Trump, who won that election. The assessment determined the actual impact was likely limited and showed no evidence that Moscow's efforts actually changed voting outcomes. Russia has denied it attempted to interfere in US elections.
Sustainability Times
an hour ago
- Sustainability Times
"This Is The $400 Million Palace In The Sky" Air Force One Gifted To Donald Trump By Qatar Sparks $1 Billion Controversy
IN A NUTSHELL ✈️ The Trump administration received a **Boeing 747-8** from Qatar to serve as the new Air Force One, but modifications could cost up to **$1 billion**. 💰 Significant funds are being redirected from the **Sentinel program**, intended for nuclear missile modernization, to finance the aircraft's conversion. 🛡️ Required upgrades include **ultra-secure communications**, **missile defense shields**, and lavish interior redesigns, raising concerns about financial prudence. ⏳ Delays in other Air Force One projects and potential obsolescence by **2029** have intensified debates over strategic priorities and resource allocation. In recent months, the Trump administration found itself in the midst of a controversy centered around a seemingly generous gift from Qatar: a Boeing 747-8 intended to serve as the new Air Force One. Initially celebrated as a diplomatic success, this aircraft has now become a political and financial quagmire. Critics are voicing concerns that the costs associated with adapting this plane to the stringent requirements of a presidential aircraft could skyrocket to nearly $1 billion. The implications of this expenditure have sparked heated debates about financial priorities and strategic credibility within the U.S. government. The Transformation of Air Force One The newly gifted Boeing 747-8 is far from ready to serve as Air Force One. Extensive modifications are required to meet the unique demands of a presidential aircraft. These changes include the installation of ultra-secure communication systems, enhancements against electronic attacks, and the addition of missile defense shields. Moreover, the interior must be redesigned to align with the luxurious aesthetic preferences of the Trump administration. Each of these elements comes with significant costs. While officials from the U.S. Air Force have suggested a budget cap of $400 million for these modifications, experts and lawmakers remain skeptical. Some sources indicate that the true cost, shrouded in secrecy, could well exceed $934 million, potentially reaching $1 billion. As these expenses mount, questions arise about the necessity and prudence of such an investment, particularly when considering the aircraft's anticipated service life. Buried Reactors, Silent Power: Deep Fission's Radical Nuclear Plan Could Revolutionize How the World Feeds Its Data Machines Political and Financial Backlash The financial implications of transforming the Boeing 747-8 into Air Force One have not gone unnoticed by political opponents. The decision to reallocate funds from the Sentinel program, initially intended for modernizing the U.S. nuclear missile arsenal, has provoked significant controversy. This program, which had an original budget of $77.7 billion, has already ballooned to $140 billion, providing a cushion for additional expenditures like this aviation endeavor. Jeanne Shaheen, a Democratic senator from New Hampshire, voiced her concerns about this budgetary maneuver, stating that diverting funds from a critical nuclear program to finance a prestige project undermines U.S. strategic credibility. Her sentiments echo the unease felt by many in Congress, particularly within the Senate, over the potential mismanagement of military resources. 'Hotter Than Hellfire Itself': Critics Slam Fusion Reactor Part That Withstands Temperatures Higher Than Asteroid Impacts Operational Challenges and Delays The challenges facing the new Air Force One do not end with its financial burden. The aircraft's modifications are to be undertaken in Texas at a highly secure facility that specializes in handling sensitive programs. However, these upgrades are expected to be time-consuming, raising concerns about the plane's operational viability. By 2029, the aircraft may already be considered obsolete, with plans in place for its eventual retirement to a presidential museum. Adding to the complexity is the fact that two other Air Force One aircraft, ordered from Boeing, are already behind schedule. These delays reportedly influenced Donald Trump's decision to accept the Qatari gift despite numerous warning signs. The situation has created a logistical puzzle, as the administration must now balance the demands of multiple aircraft projects. Slovakia Removes 7,400 Tons of Soviet Nuclear Waste as Officials Admit 'We've Been Sitting on a Toxic Time Bomb' Strategic Implications and Future Considerations The decision to accept and modify the Qatari Boeing 747-8 has broader implications beyond financial and political concerns. It raises questions about the strategic direction of U.S. military and diplomatic engagements. By allocating substantial resources to this aircraft, the administration may be signaling a shift in priorities that could affect other critical programs. This development also underscores the need for transparent decision-making processes, especially when national security and taxpayer dollars are at stake. As discussions continue in Congress and among defense experts, the future of this aircraft remains uncertain. The controversy has prompted a reevaluation of the balance between prestige and practicality in government expenditures. The saga of the new Air Force One encapsulates the complexities of modern governance, where diplomacy, finance, and national security intersect. As the U.S. navigates these challenges, one question remains: How will future administrations reconcile the competing demands of prestige projects and strategic necessities? This article is based on verified sources and supported by editorial technologies. Did you like it? 4.5/5 (30)
Euronews
2 hours ago
- Euronews
US backtracks on tying FEMA funds to stance on Israel boycott
The Trump administration has reversed course on Monday after it faced backlash for threatening to withhold at least $1.9 billion (€1.64 billion) in disaster funds from cities and states that support boycotts of Israel and Israeli companies. The US Department of Homeland Security (DHS) appears to have removed an article from its website under its internal terms and conditions which stipulated that states 'must not support severing commercial relations, or otherwise limiting commercial relations specifically with Israeli companies or with companies doing business in or with Israel' to qualify for the funding. States rely on the emergency line of funding to finance search and rescue operations in cases of natural disasters or local emergencies, staff salaries, equipment and resources. The DHS oversees the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) funding operations. Spokesperson for the DHS Tricia McLaughlin said in a statement on Monday that 'FEMA grants remain governed by existing law and policy and not political litmus tests'. This marks a shift in the Trump administration's policy which has tried to penalise local governments, institutions, federal agencies and private companies for not aligning with its views on Israel or antisemitism. The now seemingly rebuked clause attempted to take aim at the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) movement, which is designed to place economic strain on Israel and force them to end their more than 20-month long offensive on Gaza. The old terms and conditions, which states must follow to be allowed access to funds, followed what the DHS called a 'discriminatory prohibited boycott', but the updated version, quietly published late on Monday no longer uses that language. 'There is NO FEMA requirement tied to Israel in any current NOFO. No states have lost funding, and no new conditions have been imposed,' wrote the Department of Homeland Security in a post on X. 'DHS will enforce all anti-discrimination laws and policies, including as it relates to the BDS movement, which is expressly grounded in antisemitism. Those who engage in racial discrimination should not receive a single dollar of federal funding.' The decision to quietly remove the clause from the terms and conditions comes after various US media outlets slammed the department for tying access to federal emergency funds to political agendas and ideologies. It also comes as global pressure and criticism mounts on Israel over its Gaza offensive. The Trump administration has routinely stated that it will continue to fight what it called a wave of left-wing induced antisemitism, stressing that it has no place in the Untied States and will not be tolerated.
