Latest news with #pending
Atlantic
16 hours ago
- Politics
- Atlantic
Trump's Running Tab in the Abrego Garcia Case
The Trump administration's long, belabored campaign to prove that Kilmar Abrego Garcia is a gang leader, a terrorist, and an all-around bad guy—not a wrongfully deported Maryland man—has produced some extraordinary legal maneuvers. The administration fought Abrego Garcia's return from El Salvador all the way to the Supreme Court, lost, and eventually brought him back to the United States to slap him with criminal charges it had started investigating after it had already sent him to a foreign prison. But with that criminal case off to a shaky start, the administration is threatening to deport Abrego Garcia again—this time to a country other than his native El Salvador—because the judge has ordered his release while the trial is pending. Having spent months trying to gather evidence against Abrego Garcia, the administration is suggesting it may walk away from it all by sending him to Mexico, Guatemala, or another nation willing to take him. The threat of Abrego Garcia's imminent re-deportation prompted his attorneys to take the extraordinary step today of asking a district court to delay their client's release and keep him locked up for several more weeks to protect him from ICE. 'The irony of this request is not lost on anyone,' his attorneys told the court. 'In a just world, he would not seek to prolong his detention further.' The lawyers accused the government of pretending to want Abrego Garcia to face 'American justice,' while really only wanting to 'convict him in the court of public opinion.' The head-spinning developments of the past several days add to the administration's running tab in a case that has challenged its determination to admit no wrongdoing. The case has produced nearly 57,000 pages of documents; ended the Department of Justice careers of one, perhaps two prosecutors; and prompted the Trump administration to cut deals with convicted felons that protect them from deportation in exchange for testimony. Some of the most remarkable accommodations appear in the transcript of a June 13 pretrial hearing for Abrego Garcia in Tennessee, where the government is trying to convict him of human smuggling. Under cross-examination by defense attorneys, the government's lead investigator, the Department of Homeland Security agent Peter Joseph, told the court that his primary cooperating witness—the source of the most damning testimony—is a twice-convicted felon who had been previously deported five times. Magistrate Judge Barbara Holmes, who was presiding over the hearing, did a double take. 'Sorry. Deported how many times?' she asked. Joseph, who confirmed the total, said the cooperator has been moved out of prison to a halfway house and is now awaiting a U.S. work permit. He told the court that a second cooperating witness is seeking similar inducements from the government. Trump and his top officials have said for months that their mass-deportation campaign would prioritize the swift removal of criminals from the United States. But in its effort to punish Abrego Garcia—who does not have a criminal record—the administration is protecting convicted felons from deportation. Other costs include ending the 15-year career of a Department of Justice attorney, Erez Reuveni, who filed a whistleblower claim with Congress this week alleging that he was fired for refusing to go along with unsubstantiated claims, pushed by the White House, that Abrego Garcia is an MS-13 gang leader and a terrorist. When Reuveni's superiors told him to sign a legal brief making those claims, he refused, saying he 'didn't sign up to lie' when he became a federal prosecutor. He was suspended seven hours later and fired on April 11. Reuveni's career may not be the only DOJ casualty. Another federal prosecutor, Ben Schrader, the head of the criminal division at the U.S. attorney's office in Nashville, submitted his resignation last month when the government brought Abrego Garcia there to face charges. Schrader, who declined to comment and has not discussed his departure publicly, wrote in a LinkedIn post that 'the only job description I've ever known is to do the right thing, in the right way, for the right reasons.' As Reuveni and others have pointed out, ICE officials initially recognized that Abrego Garcia had been deported on March 15 due to an ' administrative error.' His removal from the country was in violation of a 2019 order protecting him from being sent to El Salvador, which he fled at age 16, after a U.S. immigration judge found that he was likely to be attacked by gangs. At that point, the Trump administration could have brought Abrego Garcia back and deported him to another country, or reopened his case to try to strip him of his protected status. But Trump, Vice President J. D. Vance, Attorney General Pam Bondi, the White House aide Stephen Miller, and other administration officials dug in and insisted there was no error. They declared that Abrego Garcia would never come back and never go free in the United States. They launched an all-of-government campaign to make the case about his character, not his due-process rights. How the Trump administration flipped on Kilmar Abrego Garcia Abigail Jackson, a White House spokesperson, told me in a statement that Abrego Garcia 'is a terrorist illegal alien gang member.' Those who defend him 'should take a good look in the mirror and ask themselves if they really want to side with this heinous illegal criminal,' she said, 'simply because they dislike President Trump.' 'If the answer is yes, they need to seek help,' Jackson added. 'The American people elected President Trump to hold criminals like Abrego Garcia accountable.' But as attorneys for the Justice Department put it in a court filing Wednesday: 'This is no typical case.' Not one, but two, overlapping cases will determine Abrego Garcia's fate. The first is the civil lawsuit that Abrego Garcia's wife, a U.S. citizen, filed in district court in Maryland in March, which seeks his release. The Trump administration opened a second case when it brought Abrego Garcia back from El Salvador earlier this month to face criminal charges in Tennessee. The charges stem from a 2022 highway stop in which Abrego Garcia was pulled over in a Chevrolet Suburban by officers who said he'd been driving 70 miles per hour in a 65-miles-per-hour zone. Police said there were nine passengers in the vehicle and no luggage, raising suspicions of smuggling. Abrego Garcia told officers he was driving construction workers from St. Louis to Maryland on behalf of his boss. The highway-patrol officers reported the incident to federal authorities, but Abrego Garcia was not charged and allowed to continue the journey. Police-bodycam footage of the stop was obtained and released by the Trump administration as it called him a 'human trafficker' and later alleged, citing unnamed cooperating witnesses, that Abrego Garcia transported thousands of migrants during smuggling trips across the United States as part of a conspiracy dating back to 2016 that earned him roughly $100,000 a year. Joseph, the Homeland Security investigator, said cooperating witnesses told him more: that Abrego Garcia transported guns and narcotics, that he sexually abused younger female passengers in his care, and that he routinely endangered underage minors, including his own children, whom he left sitting without seat belts on the floor of the vehicle during lengthy trips from Texas to Maryland. The government made its claims to convince Judge Holmes that Abrego Garcia should remain in federal custody while awaiting his criminal trial. Holmes was not swayed. The defense attorneys representing Abrego Garcia pointed out that the government was relying on stories transmitted through multiple levels of hearsay—claims made outside court, not under oath—by cooperating witnesses seeking some benefit from the government. 'You've got agents going to jails and prisons around the United States right now trying to talk to people who you think might know something about Mr. Abrego?' the federal public defender Dumaka Shabazz asked Joseph, the investigator. 'They have done it through the course of the investigation, yes, sir,' Joseph answered. Shabazz told the court that the first cooperator, 'despite all of his deportations, his criminal history, being the criminal mastermind behind a transport business,' was 'chilling at the halfway house.' 'He's not in jail. He's not getting deported. He's living his life right here in the United States of America. But he sounds like the exact type of person that this government should be wanting to deport.' Holmes largely agreed, issuing a decision Sunday denying the government's attempt to keep Abrego Garica locked up. Her decision did not seem to bode well for the evidence and testimony the government is preparing against Abrego Garcia. Holmes said she gave 'little weight to this hearsay testimony' of the top cooperating witness, whom she called 'a two-time, previously-deported felon, and acknowledged ringleader of a human smuggling operation.' Holmes wrote that she considered the hearsay statements of the second cooperator no more reliable. Furthermore, she said the testimony and statements 'defy common sense,' because she did not believe the claims that Abrego Garcia drove thousands of miles every week with his children—two of whom have autism—sitting on the floor. Another federal judge in Tennessee decided on Wednesday that Abrego Garcia should not remain in criminal custody. District Court Judge Waverly D. Crenshaw, who is overseeing the criminal case, said the government had largely failed to prove he was a flight risk or a threat to the community. The Trump administration made clear that as soon as Abrego Garcia was released, ICE could immediately take him back into custody. Then it played a new card, warning that ICE could try to deport Abrego Garcia before the criminal case goes to trial. By threatening to deport Abrego Garcia again, the government was pressuring his legal team and the judge to agree to his continued detention. Kilmar Abrego Garcia was never coming back. Then he did. Crenshaw tried to shift responsibility from his courtroom back to the administration, saying the Justice Department needed to convey its deportation concerns to DHS, which oversees ICE, not him. 'If the Government finds this case to be as high priority as it argues here, it is incumbent upon it to ensure that Abrego is held accountable for the charges in the Indictment,' Crenshaw wrote. 'If the Department of Justice and DHS cannot do so, that speaks for itself.' egotiations over where Abrego Garcia should go next ping-ponged through the courts yesterday, as his lawyers reacted to the administration saying one thing in court and other things publicly. At first, Abrego Garcia's attorneys in Maryland asked the district court to have him transferred there while he awaits the Tennessee criminal trial. 'Absent order from this Court, the Government will likely shuttle Abrego Garcia elsewhere,' they wrote. The attorneys said the government's public statements 'leave little doubt about its plan: remove Abrego Garcia to El Salvador once more.' The last time the government detained Abrego Garcia for deportation, they noted, it sent him to detention facilities in Louisiana and Texas, a move they said was part of a 'pattern' in which the administration sends detainees to those states in anticipation that the more conservative federal courts in that circuit are likelier to side with the government. The administration's position became even more muddled after a Justice Department attorney told the court in Maryland that the administration was indeed planning to deport Abrego Garcia if he's released from custody but would send him to a country other than El Salvador. Abrego Garcia's 2019 protections—the ones the Trump administration violated—prevent his deportation only to El Salvador. The Trump administration has secured agreements with Guatemala, Honduras, and other countries around the region to take back deportees from other nations. The rushed, blundering effort to send deportees to third countries Jackson, the White House spokesperson, said on social media last night that the Department of Justice threat to deport Abrego Garcia was 'fake news' and that the criminal case in Tennessee would go forward. 'He will face the full force of the American justice system - including serving time in American prison for the crimes he's committed,' Jackson wrote. In response to the mixed messages and distrust of the government's intentions, Abrego Garcia's lawyers wrote today that they would rather keep him in jail than trust the administration not to deport him. 'When Mr. Abrego revealed the weaknesses in that case—securing the pretrial release to which he is entitled—the government threatened to remove him to a third country,' they wrote. Government attorneys said they intend to 'see this case to resolution,' a message echoed by White House officials. But if Abrego Garcia were poised to walk out of detention and reunite with his family as news cameras rolled, those involved know the administration could be tempted to do something drastic, even if it meant ditching their own case. 'Anything is possible,' an attorney who is tracking the case but did not want to be named told me. 'It seems clear they are committed to not allowing him to be at liberty during the case.'
The Hindu
3 days ago
- Health
- The Hindu
CM wants comprehensive action plan for core urban region within ORR
Chief Minister A. Revanth Reddy has instructed the officials of the Municipal Administration department to prepare a comprehensive policy for the development of core urban region located inside the Outer Ring Road. Simultaneously, a policy with action plan for all round development of semi-urban and rural areas should be prepared, he said. The Chief Minister reviewed the status of ongoing and pending works in the Municipal Administration department with senior officials on Wednesday. Officials briefed him about the developmental works that were in different stages. Mr. Revanth Reddy instructed the officials to prepare a comprehensive plan to meet the future needs of the core urban region. The action plan should accord priority to drinking water supply, drainage, roads, metro connectivity and elevated corridors. He wanted the officials to ensure that the infrastructure development works that were being taken up in the core urban region should take into consideration the requirements of the growing urban population in the next 25 years. A transparent policy should be prepared for semi-urban and rural areas along with an action plan on the way forward. The Chief Minister enquired about the progress of the ongoing drinking water supply and sewage treatment plant works under the GHMC limits. Officials were instructed to complete the pending works at the earliest. He advised officials not to neglect sanitation in the city and to take precautions against the spread of seasonal diseases like Dengue and Chikungunya as the monsoon had set in. Identification of water stagnating points on roads and preventive measures was also discussed in the meeting. Strict measures to prevent drainage overflow during the monsoon and appropriate steps to prevent the contamination of drinking water and mosquito menace was also reviewed.
The Hill
5 days ago
- Politics
- The Hill
Trump's immigration policy is a resounding success
The Democrats' decisive defeat in 2024 exposed their catastrophic failures on immigration, yet they are doubling down on the chaos with calculated recklessness. By fueling anti-ICE riots and pushing lawless policies, they have declared war on America's safety and its citizens. Meanwhile, President Trump is demolishing them on this issue, as Americans rise up against the Democrats' dangerous, self-destructive illegal immigration agenda. Trump's 'Worst Goes First' policy is doing precisely what Democrats wouldn't — putting Americans first. In Trump's first 100 days, 75 percent of ICE arrests targeted criminals with convictions or pending charges, according to data from the Department of Homeland Security. This relentless crackdown is making communities safer, despite Democrats' cries of 'fascism.' The border numbers don't lie. In May 2025, border encounters crashed to 8,725 — a staggering 93 percent drop from May 2024, when 117,905 crossed under Biden. The real shocker? Not a single illegal border-crosser was released into the U.S. in May 2025, compared to more than 62,000 dumped into the country in May 2024 under Biden. Americans are fed up. A New York Times poll shows 87 percent support deporting illegal immigrants with criminal records. Even 63 percent back deporting those who entered illegally under Biden, and 55 percent want all illegal immigrants removed. These numbers obliterate Democrats' delusions. Legal immigrant voters may be turning on Democrats harder than anyone else. In 2020, they favored Democrats by 32 points on the immigration issue. Now they trust Trump and Republicans more by a net 8 points — an astonishing 40-point swing, per CNN's Harry Enten. The verdict is clear: Americans—and immigrants—are done with Democrats' lawless and calculated sabotage of border enforcement under Biden. They are rallying behind Trump's bold, results-driven vision of law and order. While Trump's immigration policies deliver results, Democrats are consumed by petty theatrics. Their obsession with stunts is endangering Americans. Rep. Lamonica McIver (D-N.J.) has been indicted for obstructing law enforcement during a DHS operation. Sen. Alex Padilla (D-Calif.) turned a Homeland Security press event into a circus, only to be detained for his antics. These aren't isolated incidents — they comprise a pattern of Democrats prioritizing showmanship over safety. In Wisconsin, Judge Hannah Dugan was indicted for allegedly helping an illegal alien evade Immigration and Customs Enforcement. A judge betraying the very laws she's sworn to uphold? It is a disgrace that undermines trust in the justice system and cripples law enforcement. The contrast is stark: Trump delivers results, while Democrats play games with American cities fuel chaos, shielding dangerous criminal illegal aliens and crippling law enforcement. By refusing to work with immigration agents to hand over immigrants who have been arrested, these jurisdictions simply force them to go looking for them in neighborhoods — endangering both citizens and non-criminal illegal migrants, as well as wasting resources. Meanwhile, violent illegal alien offenders exploit these policies to escape justice. Worse, sanctuary policies push the lie that illegal entry is harmless. It isn't. Under Title 8 of the U.S. Code, illegal entry is a crime, and re-entry after deportation carries even more severe penalties. Ignoring these laws doesn't just erode the rule of law — it sends a reckless message: Break the law, face no consequences. Sanctuary cities don't protect — they endanger. Americans deserve better. Illegal immigration isn't just a border crisis. It is an all-out assault on America's sovereignty and safety. Under Biden, individuals from over 160 countries, including terror-sponsoring nations, stormed the border. Many destroyed their identification papers in order to avoid being vetted. Hostile regimes such as Venezuela and Cuba refuse to share intelligence, leaving America vulnerable. The result? Criminals and potential terrorists have been slipping through, endangering American lives. And to call them 'undocumented' instead of 'illegal' isn't compassion — it's a blatant lie. Democrats are intentionally whitewashing lawbreaking to push mass amnesty, all to secure a permanent voter base. This isn't policy — it's a reckless power grab that jeopardizes national security for the sake of political control. The price? Potentially catastrophic. Democrats' relentless obstruction of Trump's immigration policies is nothing short of a betrayal of America. By championing open borders and sanctuary cities, they have turned their backs on safety, security, and the rule of law. While Americans overwhelmingly demand stronger enforcement, Democrats bow to radical ideologies, leaving our nation exposed and vulnerable. Their reckless, self-serving agenda is an insult to every American. But in 2026, voters will again deliver a clear verdict: no more lies, no more chaos, no more betrayal. Ford O'Connell is an attorney, a veteran Republican operative and political analyst, and adjunct professor at George Washington University's Graduate School of Political Management.
The Wire
19-06-2025
- Politics
- The Wire
A University That Punishes Dissent
The following is an open letter to JNU vice chancellor Santishree Dhulipudi Pandit (and if he cares to read it, ex-vice chancellor M. Jagadesh Kumar). § Dear Professor Pandit, After an agonising wait of five years for my gratuity illegally withheld by the JNU administration, the Hon'ble Delhi high court has ordered JNU to pay the amount with interest of 6%. Previous to this, I had approached the same court for the recovery of my leave encashment dues, which were also illegally withheld by JNU. The court then (2022) awarded 9% interest. It is more than evident that JNU has acted illegally in withholding my dues (and those of other retired faculty). At the time of my retirement in January 2020, I received no written explanation for the same, despite many written and oral requests to the then-registrar Pramod Kumar. Finally, I was sent a letter on March 17, 2020, saying that I was refused leave encashment and gratuity pending an enquiry into misconduct (which incidentally had been stayed by the Hon'ble Delhi high court). The previous communication I received was on July 24, 2019, when I was informed that under Rule 14 of the Central Civil Service (Classification, Control and Appeal) (CCS/CCA) Rules, 1965, I would be subjected to an enquiry for 'misconduct'. The charge was violating Rule 7 of the CCS/CCA rules. The enquiry was purportedly about a silent and peaceful march on July 31, 2018 taken out by about 200 JNU faculty around the campus, for about half an hour, without disrupting any academic or administrative duties. Less than 50 of us were singled out for the show cause, and later, chargesheet. I referred to the service contract which I had signed when I joined JNU in September 2009. It speaks nowhere of CCS/CCA rules. It only says that I agree to 'Statutes, Ordinances, Regulation and rules for the time being in force in the University…' Since the matter regarding the applicability of CCS/CCA rules to JNU faculty is still pending, let me acquaint you with a brief history of the Jawaharlal Nehru University Teachers' Association (JNUTA)'s struggle which began in February 2016, when Prof Mamidala Jagadesh Kumar had just been appointed as VC of JNU. This was no coincidence. The JNUTA had decided, through a democratic and consultative process, following the turbulence on the campus, and the arrest of some of our students under Section 124a of the IPC, that it would oppose the attempts of the administration to challenge and alter the long-established traditions of debate, dialogue and discussion, including dissent, and norms and practices that recognised seniority in administrative duties. It planned to do this in a number of peaceful and constructive ways. Also read | Chargesheets, Denied Pension, Leaves: JNU's Punitive Measures Against Dissenting Faculty One of these was a month-long series of lectures on nationalism which was held at the steps of the administration in February and March 2016. The events were extremely well-attended, live- streamed and eventually became a book entitled What the Nation Really Needs to Know. Both the YouTube lectures and the book have received widespread attention and use; the book has sold well over 10,000 copies in addition to being translated into many different Indian languages. I hasten to point out that this 'Teach In' was in addition to the classroom teaching, research, administrative work, etc which all JNU teachers continued without interruption. It was, in short, well in keeping with JNU faculty's commitment to innovative teaching and learning. The JNUTA organised a series of other creative and educative events in many parts of the campus (following the Delhi high court order forbidding such actions by students within 100 metres of the administration building). These have continued over the years. None of these were disruptive, noisy or at the cost of the teaching/evaluation/administrative responsibilities of teachers. Overall, the then-new JNU administration could not challenge the JNUTA academically or on any intellectual grounds. Its preferred mode was to seek the support of the judiciary, which has also largely failed. The two cases referred to above clearly show that the JNU administration did not have a legal leg to stand on. None of its executive orders have stood legal scrutiny in case after case, whether it is related to the denial of sabbatical leave, denial of pensions or denial of NOCs to those who wished to travel abroad for fellowships. But we have all learned that in 'New India/Naya Bharat', the process is the punishment, even when there is no wrongdoing. The university soon received adverse publicity nationwide, and there was severe erosion of its carefully built-up academic reputation, which the JNU administration did nothing to rectify. Instead, teachers were maligned in multiple ways for opposing the rapid changes to long-established norms in the university. For instance, chairpersons were appointed, no longer on the basis of seniority, which was the well-established norm, but in arbitrary fashion. Centre for Historical Studies faculty attempted in 2017 to persuade the newly appointed chair, who had superseded many other senior faculty (in direct violation of long-accepted norms) against accepting the responsibility. We failed. (Later, that out-of-turn appointment was reversed by the Hon'ble high court). Instead, as punishment, 12 or 13 of us were asked to appear before an enquiry committee at the Equal Opportunity Office in JNU in 2017/2018, ostensibly for having been discriminatory towards the chair. To date, the report of this committee and its findings have not been made public or shared with all those who repeatedly appeared before the committee, and also submitted explanations in writing. Clearly, there was nothing at all to substantiate these charges. The only goal was harassment. Such mental and psychic harassment continued on many fronts even as the 'dilution' of, and assault on, JNU's original mandate and formidable reputation as an institution of higher learning continued. The academic standing of this premier institution in social sciences and humanities, international relations, languages, and life and physical sciences was undermined in multiple ways. Despite all data indicating a steep fall in enrollments in engineering studies nationwide, Prof Jagadesh Kumar began an undergraduate engineering programme with neither faculty nor buildings. Likewise, a Management Studies Centre was established, once more without teachers and buildings, and student enrolments begun. Both of these efforts basically encashed JNU's carefully built-up brand value in social sciences and the humanities, while undermining it as an institution of higher learning. Finally, on January 5, 2020, having failed to academically or legally dent the formidable spirit of the JNU teaching and learning community, a physical attack, using an unruly armed brigade of 150 storm troopers, was launched on the JNU campus, at which many students and faculty were injured. Although CCTV cameras revealed the identity of the attackers, they were allowed to leave unscathed. To this day, five years later, neither the JNU administration nor the Delhi police have submitted their reports on what happened on that fateful day. We were hopeful that a new vice chancellor, and especially one who has had the privilege of studying in JNU, such as yourself, would restore the intellectual ethos, ethical values and uniquely forged civility that had been systematically undermined under Prof Jagadesh Kumar. You have gone on public record several times praising the achievements of this university. But, alas, you have not lived up to these expectations, and the dismantling of the institution has continued apace, as you have remained steadfastly loyal to your political masters. Also read: Political Intolerance and Declining Academic Freedom in India Prof Pandit, let me conclude with a few personal details. When I retired in January 2020, there was no one to teach the compulsory Capitalism and Colonialism course which I had co-taught with pleasure for a decade. I agreed, in February 2020, to deliver the lectures for the first half of this course. For this, I never asked for, nor was given, any remuneration (and not even a cup of tea was forthcoming from the then-chair of the department!) Thereafter, five of my PhD students remained in my supervision and in continuous touch, and I saw them through their doctoral degrees until their vivas were held (the last was in 2023). In other words, in the best spirit of an earlier JNU ethos, I did not abandon my students even when the institution I had loyally served was abandoning me. The harassment of currently employed faculty who were issued the chargesheet continues, in the form of promotions denied, and the denial of administrative responsibility, withholding permission for leave, etc. Here, again, the JNU administration is bound to lose legally, but the long-drawn-out process is itself the punishment. I have concluded, given the steadfast adherence to illegality by your administration and the previous one, that such recklessness arises from a complete lack of accountability on your part. It is, after all, the taxpayer's money that has to compensate the JNU teachers, such as myself, who were denied their retirement rights in time. I am painfully reminded of the senseless and illiterate noise regarding JNU students and their 'exploitation' of the low fee structure that was aggressively generated after 2016, in articles, WhatsApp messages and TV channels alike. The JNU administration did nothing to counter such relentless calumny. Where are those guardians of taxpayers' money now when lakhs of rupees are being paid out by JNU/the state, for interest on dues which should have been paid a long time ago and for lawyers' fees? Why have those who so long and loudly demanded 'accountability' from students now fallen silent about lakhs of rupees spent on cases which were a tactic to delay, not win? I am suggesting, Prof Pandit, that it will set a very good example and high standard for institutional and personal ethics, if you and Prof Jagadesh Kumar put your money where your mouth is. You should jointly agree to compensate the University – and the Indian state, and the beleaguered tax payer – for the lakhs of rupees in interest that have been paid to each of us for these illegally delayed retirement dues and lawyers' fees on both sides. That will usher in the 'Naya Bharat' that we so desperately need. Janaki NairProfessor of History (retd)JNU Janaki Nair taught at the Centre for Historical Studies, JNU. The Wire is now on WhatsApp. Follow our channel for sharp analysis and opinions on the latest developments.
Economic Times
17-06-2025
- Politics
- Economic Times
Are Trump's policies undermining civil liberties & America's democratic values?
Agencies Donald Trump Singapore: Trump's increasingly authoritarian behaviour prompted sundry 'No Kings' marches across the US on his 79th birthday last Saturday. Many claim he's using brute force to suspend civil liberties by invoking spectres of foreign invasion and domestic revolution, threatening the future of the republic. Perhaps. Perhaps not. Riding a wave of popular, but divergent, angst focused on wage disparities, disproportionate foreign spending, profligate government inefficiency, aggressive diversity-based affirmative action, and inconsistent immigration policy enforcement, Trump sailed into office promising each constituency a swift resolution. A promise, however, is no guarantee of success. While many of these issues warranted serious scrutiny, plans drawn up by his administration offered little resolution. To stem the supposed tide of antisemitism in colleges, for instance, Marco Rubio has directed US embassies to stop processing new student visas, pending vetting of social media accounts to understand applicant sympathies with regard to Palestine. Setting concerns of legitimacy is unsustainable, since many US universities depend on foreign students to grow revenue and acquire global talent, for which there are no ready substitutes. Likewise, other acts of brinkmanship — negotiating the end of the Ukraine conflict, trying to repatriate jobs through threats of hiking import tariffs, setting up DOGE, defunding colleges for non-compliance, using ICE agents to deport citizens and residents without due process —have all proved to be disastrous. Consequently, like a snubbed bully, the Trump regime has now chosen to focus on two ostensibly soft targets: working-class migrants, and Iran. To curtail the first, Trump has augmented the remit of Department of Homeland Security under Kristi Noem, to include a daily target of 'capturing' 3,000 illegal aliens. This has drawn widespread opposition, first in LA, where the president called in National Guards, and then Marines, without consulting the governor of California, to deal with 'paid insurrectionists' and 'criminal invaders', who were fomenting 'anarchy'. This, however, like other Trumpspeak, errs on the side of pathological exaggeration. While there were some instances of violence and lawlessness, local law enforcement authorities were quickly able to bring things under control. Protests in other cities have likewise been peaceful, with citizens decrying methods of ICE, whose ruthless ways spared neither assembled army veterans, nor Californian senator Alex Padilla, who was led away in handcuffs from a press conference. And, yet, as Trump knows, if low-paid migrants were asked to leave the US, nobody would take their place. To placate the second, Trump promised to pacify crippling sanctions if Iran revoked its uranium-enrichment programme. But this ended in disaster, when Israel decided to thwart negotiations by bombing Iran's nuclear facilities and neutralising many of its generals and scientists, despite being warned by Trump not to do of berating Israel, Trump has now tried to make capital of a bad situation of his own devising by claiming he had given Iran 'chance after chance to make a deal', and that while there 'has already been great death and destruction, there is still time to make this slaughter… come to an end', urging Iran to accept terms before there was 'nothing left'. Iran promptly responded by firing missiles at Israel, in what looks like the start of a looming conflict. Rebuffed again, Trump has claimed he has forced both parties to negotiate peace, though neither party is willing to confirm such, Trump is only a diminutive parody of a dictator: at best, a reality TV despot. He lacks even the myopic vision and dogged stamina to see his hare-brained plans to fruition. Despite this, he may be extremely deleterious to America's future. For he is at heart an oligarch, whose principal aim is self-aggrandisement. His circus of illusory achievements is a public distraction. Indeed, in the imbroglio that constituted his first 5 months in office, the real losers were the American people. They have little to show for it except rising prices and a quarter-million jobless claims in each of the last two weeks. Only Trump and his cronies have benefited. Trump's earnings alone have grown to $1.6 bn on the back of his crypto, golf club and personal licensing all this, Republicans, who dominate Congress — many of whom baulk at what they consider presidential overreach and constitutional infringement — have been silent, either from false hope that things will miraculously improve, or in the belief that people should be allowed to flip the Senate and House in 2026, if they so desire. Perhaps. Perhaps years could fill an eternity of misadventures. And may be two years too late. Perhaps it's time for members of Congress to make a bipartisan effort to restore values of the republic, lest the president be tempted to deploy regular troops to suppress the First Amendment. And for the people, inspired by the Second Amendment, to form a regulated militia to repel the same. Who knows? This is the United States of America, after all. (Disclaimer: The opinions expressed in this column are that of the writer. The facts and opinions expressed here do not reflect the views of Elevate your knowledge and leadership skills at a cost cheaper than your daily tea. Benchmarked with BSE 1000, this index fund will diversify your bets. But at a cost. Yet another battle over neem; this time it's a startup vs. Procter & Gamble For investors with ability to take a contrarian stand: 6 mid-cap stocks from different sectors with upside potential of over 26% return Buy, Sell or Hold: Motilal Oswal remains neutral on Tata Motors; Antique recommends Hold on Hindustan Zinc These 7 banking stocks can give more than 21% returns in 1 year, according to analysts
