A place were I can write...

My simple blog of pictures of travel, friends, activities and the Universe we live in as we go slowly around the Sun.



July 21, 2025

100 people killed seeking aid in Gaza on Sunday.....

Nearly 100 people killed seeking aid in Gaza on Sunday, Palestinian officials say

By Joe Hernandez, Daniel Estrin, Anas Baba

At least 94 Palestinians were killed by Israeli military fire across Gaza on Sunday as they tried to get food aid, according to local health authorities and hospital morgue officials, in one of the deadliest days in recent months for those seeking assistance.

The deadliest incident occurred in northern Gaza, near the Israeli border area of Zikim, where at least 81 Palestinians were killed as they tried to grab sacks of flour for bread from U.N. World Food Programme trucks entering from Israel.

The Palestinian Red Crescent said Israeli military forces had "targeted civilians waiting for humanitarian aid" north of Beit Lahia. The organization said a Gaza City field hospital it operates had received 95 people with injuries, some of whom were in critical condition.

In a statement, the Israel Defense Forces said its troops encountered thousands of Palestinians gathered in northern Gaza and "fired warning shots in order to remove an immediate threat posed to them."

The Israeli military said it was examining the incident but that an "initial review suggests that the number of casualties reported does not align with the information held by the IDF."

Since May, the WFP has been delivering food aid to Gaza in a separate program from the U.S. and Israeli-backed food distribution system. Many of the WFP aid trucks have been looted by armed gangs and hungry crowds as they enter Gaza.

In a statement, the WFP said its 25-truck convoy had been released from checkpoints to enter Gaza Sunday morning when it encountered massive crowds of "hungry civilians" and then came under fire.

"WFP reiterates that any violence involving civilians seeking humanitarian aid is completely unacceptable," the group said. "We continue to call for the protection of all civilians and aid workers delivering life-saving assistance."

Sunday was one of the deadliest days Gaza health officials have recorded in recent months for Palestinians seeking aid amid severe food shortages and widespread hunger.

Among them was Hassan Abu Marasah, who was wounded in his head and leg from Israeli tank fire in northern Gaza and was being treated at Shifa Hospital in Gaza City.

"Hunger makes you desperate," he cried. "I have no food at home. I went out to feed my kids. And this is what happened to me."

Also on Sunday, Israel announced new evacuations in a part of central Gaza where it said its military had not operated before.

People in the southwestern part of Deir al-Balah, a city about 10 miles southwest of Gaza City, were urged to leave for their safety, according to a post on X by Avichay Adraee, the Israel Defense Forces spokesperson for Arab media.

Adraee told anyone nearby, "including those inside the tents located in the area," to evacuate south toward Al-Mawasi, in the post translated from Arabic.

In a subsequent post on X, Adraee urged people not to return to a number of areas in northern Gaza — including "Beit Lahia, Jabalia, Beit Hanoun, Shuja'iyya, Daraj, Old City, Tuffah, Zaytoun, and their neighborhoods."

He said the areas were "dangerous combat zones" and said the IDF was operating there "with extreme intensity."

Pope Leo XIV, speaking on Sunday, mourned the deaths of three people sheltering at the Holy Family church in Gaza City and called for an "immediate halt to the barbarity" in Gaza.

YOU PAY THE TARIFF..........

U.S. coffee drinkers and businesses will pay the price for Trump's Brazil tariffs

Jaclyn Diaz

At a small, industrial roastery in Washington, D.C., the nutty, inviting smell of roasting coffee hangs heavy in the air. It's where Lost Sock Roasters, a local company, roasts and packages its coffee beans — destined for its two cafes, customers' homes and local bakeries and restaurants.

After nearly a decade of running the company with co-founder Nico Cabrera, Lost Sock's Jeff Yerxa says the strong coffee aroma barely registers. "I can't even smell it anymore," he says with a laugh.

But something else is grabbing his attention these days: tariffs.

This month, President Trump announced plans to levy a 50% tariff on all goods from Brazil — the world's largest coffee producer and the source of about 30% of U.S. coffee imports. That's on top of the 10% tariff that impacts nearly everything the U.S. brings in. This looming tariff threat has sent shock waves through the U.S. coffee industry, raising fears especially among small roasters like Lost Sock.

"When people go to their local coffee shop, whether it's Starbucks or something else, by and large they will likely be buying some form of Brazilian coffee," says Monica de Bolle, senior fellow at the Peterson Institute for International Economics. "A 50% tariff will kill that market."

While the tariffs on imports from Brazil, as well as on imports from other nations, aren't set to begin until Aug. 1, the uncertainty is rattling the industry already.

But it's consumers who will end up paying the price, de Bolle, Yerxa and others warn.

"It's a massive price impact," de Bolle says.

Tariff threats extend beyond imports from Brazil: The Trump administration has announced a number of tariffs on imports from other coffee-producing countries, like Vietnam (which produces 17% of the world's coffee), Colombia (which produces 8%) and Ethiopia and Indonesia (which produce 6% each).

Yerxa says he is trying not to react until he knows details are final, but he says profit margins are already thin. "It's the uncertainty that's probably the worst."

"At the end of the day, the consumer is the one that's going to bear the brunt of it," he says. "I don't want to raise prices, but we're seeing increased costs of 30% on coffee, potentially."

Trump's messaging rings hollow for business owners

The Trump administration defends its trade policy and the dozens of tariffs on a number of countries as necessary to protect American jobs, to renegotiate trade deals and to reduce the trade deficit.

In the case of Brazil, Trump also indicated that the proposed tariffs are political retribution for the treatment of former far-right President Jair Bolsonaro, who is currently on trial for trying to overturn the country's 2022 election.

For roasters like Yerxa and Colby Barr, CEO and co-founder of Verve Coffee Roasters, a Santa Cruz, Calif.-based craft coffee roaster and wholesaler launched in 2007, much of the administration's reasoning falls flat. The U.S., aside from small coffee farms in Hawaii and California, doesn't produce coffee at the scale that Americans consume it.

"It's a tax on Americans' mornings," Barr says.

The past several years have been volatile for the coffee industry, contributing to a major increase in market prices for coffee even in the last year, Barr says. The price volatility can be attributed, in part, to the COVID-19 pandemic and back-to-back low-yield coffee harvests in Brazil in the last year, Yerxa says. Those weak harvests, in turn, are due to drought and high temperatures and more generally climate change, which has negatively impacted coffee harvests for several years.

Roasted coffee prices in the U.S. surged 12.7% in June compared with a year prior, according to data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics. Instant coffee saw a 16.3% increase. The average retail price for a pound of ground coffee was $8.13 in June, up more than $1 per pound since the start of the year.

Nika Finkelstein says she's already well aware of the sticker shock that comes with buying coffee out. The 27-year-old sat outside Blue Bottle Coffee at Union Station in Washington, D.C., on a recent July afternoon. She makes coffee at home as much as possible. On the rare occasions she buys one out, she sticks with drip coffee rather than specialty drinks, like a latte.

If tariffs bump prices even higher? "I would just have to reel back on spending money at coffee shops and just make it from home, which I can do — it's just not as fun," she says. "There's a certain romance to being able to go to the coffee shop and sit there and read your book or scroll on your phone."

Why customers will pay more

So much coffee in the U.S. comes from Brazil because of the country's large-scale production capacity, low costs, favorable climate and flavor profile, Yerxa and de Bolle say.

"Most of the industry relies on those coffees to be the backbone of their blends," Yerxa says, referring to the mixture of beans from different regions.

Lost Sock, the D.C. coffee company, is best known for single-origin, higher-end coffees sourced from nearly a dozen countries each year. But it uses Brazilian beans for some of its blends — products that stem from its long-standing relationships with two cooperatives in Brazil.

Getting those beans from Brazil to D.C. is a long process that involves international partners, contracts negotiated months to years in advance, and plenty of other planning. Lost Sock coordinates with producers and exporters, and it places orders with them for specific amounts of specific beans from specific Brazilian farms, exports the coffee, and stores it in a U.S. warehouse.

The importer adds a margin for logistics, and Yerxa then factors that final price per pound into Lost Sock's wholesale and retail pricing.

And where would the tariffs come in?

That is initially something that the importer would have to pay once it brings beans into the U.S., he says. "That tariff would just be another line item on the receipt that we're getting when we release that coffee. And then for us, we take that coffee price, and again it's added on to the price per pound of that coffee, when we come up with the pricing for wholesale and for retail."

De Bolle explains that if tariffs hit on Aug. 1, it could be a few months before customers feel price increases at cafes or restaurants. That's because those businesses generally buy in bulk and have a stock of coffee that could last them a while — stockpiles like this could last a few months, she says. People who buy their coffee beans at the grocery store could feel the tariff impacts more quickly.

"For people who don't stock up, so the regular consumer who's going to the supermarket … and getting their coffee, maybe those price increases will be felt sooner," de Bolle says, adding that coffee is perishable and stocking up on beans can get a business, or consumer, only so far.

The ripple effects

Long term, if it looks like these tariffs stick, Lost Sock may have to consider pivoting away from using Brazilian coffees in some blends, Yerxa says. Walking away from longtime partnerships in Brazil really isn't an option for him, however.

"It feels unfair to pull out of a relationship when the going gets tough," he says. "So we'll probably bear the brunt of it a little bit, but with the hope that the prices in the future will come back down."

But if Brazil's coffee prices go up, coffee roasters will rush to buy from other sources, Barr of Verve Coffee warns. And these other coffee-producing countries, such as Vietnam, are also facing tariffs.

"It's really, really difficult, and more like impossible, to really prepare for it," Barr says. "Tariffs don't help the coffee producer. They don't help the small- and medium-sized businesses across the country, and they don't help the consumer. Why are we doing it?"

There is 0, none, absolutely no reason for this....

Trump administration shuts down EPA's scientific research arm

Rob Stein

The Environmental Protection Agency is planning to shutter the agency's scientific research arm that provides expertise for environmental policies and regulations, as part of the Trump administration's continuing downsizing of the federal government.

The agency is closing the Office of Research and Development, which analyzes dangers posed by a variety of hazards, including toxic chemicals, climate change, smog, wildfires, indoor air contaminants, water pollution, watershed destruction and drinking water pollutants. The office also manages grant programs that fund universities and private companies.

"Under President Trump's leadership, EPA has taken a close look at our operations to ensure the agency is better equipped than ever to deliver on our core mission of protecting human health and the environment while powering the great American comeback," said EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin in a statement announcing the plan Friday. "This reduction in force will ensure we can better fulfill that mission while being responsible stewards of your hard-earned tax dollars."

The cut, part of a plan to cut 23% of the EPA's staff, will save $748.8 million, according to the agency. It said the EPA would at the same time add "laboratory functions and hundreds of scientific, technical, bioinformatic, and information technology experts to EPA's air, water, and chemical offices on top of the thousands of scientists and engineers employed by EPA within those program offices."

In addition, the agency is moving ahead with a plan to create a new "Office of Applied Science and Environmental Solutions," the EPA says. That new office "will allow EPA to prioritize research and science more than ever before and put it at the forefront of rulemakings and technical assistance to states," according to the agency.

The EPA said in a statement to NPR that some employees were being reassigned and that no employees have been laid off yet, but 'that is the next step in the process.'"

Democratic Rep. Zoe Lofgren of California, the ranking member on the House Science, Space, and Technology Committee, condemned the cuts.

"Administrator Zeldin has finally confirmed what he has denied for months and months — the destruction of the Office of Research and Development," she said in a statement. "The Trump Administration is firing hardworking scientists while employing political appointees whose job it is to lie incessantly to Congress and to the American people. The obliteration of ORD will have generational impacts on Americans' health and safety. This is a travesty."

Kyla Bennett, director of science policy for the nonprofit Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility (PEER), said eliminating the ORD "will not only cripple EPA's ability to do its own research, but also to apply the research of other scientists. This [reduction in force], together with the slashing of travel and training budgets, will leave EPA flying blind and unable to use the best available science. These short-sighted cuts will ultimately affect every American, and it is despicable."

The American Chemistry Council, which represents chemical manufacturers, said the organization "supports EPA evaluating its resources to ensure American taxpayer dollars are being used efficiently and effectively to meet the Agency's statutory requirements. If necessary, that includes shifting resources from certain offices."

In January, the agency had 16,155 employees, but has reduced that number to 12,448, the EPA says. The agency has also eliminated the EPA's Environmental Justice and Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion arms among other cuts.

Why are there only 3 legged tables in China? If they had four legs, they would eat them....

China begins building world's largest dam, fuelling fears in India

Tessa Wong

Chinese authorities have begun constructing what will be the world's largest hydropower dam in Tibetan territory, in a project that has sparked concerns from India and Bangladesh.

Chinese Premier Li Qiang presided over a ceremony marking the start of construction on the Yarlung Tsangpo river on Saturday, according to local media.

The river flows through the Tibetan plateau. The project has attracted criticism for its potential impact on millions of Indians and Bangladeshis living downriver, as well as the surrounding environment and local Tibetans.

Beijing says the scheme, costing an estimated 1.2tn yuan ($167bn; £125bn), will prioritise ecological protection and boost local prosperity.

When completed, the project - also known as the Motuo Hydropower Station - will overtake the Three Gorges dam as the world's largest, and could generate three times more energy.

Experts and officials have flagged concerns that the new dam would empower China to control or divert the trans-border Yarlung Tsangpo, which flows south into India's Arunachal Pradesh and Assam states as well as Bangladesh, where it feeds into the Siang, Brahmaputra and Jamuna rivers.

A 2020 report published by the Lowy Institute, an Australian-based think tank, noted that "control over these rivers [in the Tibetan Plateau] effectively gives China a chokehold on India's economy".

In an interview with news agency PTI earlier this month, Arunachal Pradesh chief minister Pema Khandu expressed concern that the Siang and Brahmaputra could "dry up considerably" once the dam was completed.

He added that the dam was "going to cause an existential threat to our tribes and our livelihoods. It is quite serious because China could even use this as a sort of 'water bomb'".

"Suppose the dam is built and they suddenly release water, our entire Siang belt would be destroyed," he said. "In particular, the Adi tribe and similar groups... would see all their property, land, and especially human life, suffer devastating effects."

In January a spokesperson for India's ministry of external affairs said they had expressed concerns to China about the impact of mega-dams and had urged Beijing to "ensure the interests of downstream states" were not harmed. They had also emphasised the "need for transparency and consultation with downstream countries".

India plans to build a hydropower dam on the Siang river, which would act as a buffer against sudden water releases from China's dam and prevent flooding in their areas.

China's foreign ministry has previously responded to India, saying in 2020 that China has a "legitimate right" to dam the river and has considered downstream impacts.

Bangladesh also expressed concerns to China about the project, with officials in February sending a letter to Beijing requesting more information on the dam.

Chinese authorities have long eyed the hydropower potential of the dam's location in the Tibet Autonomous Region.

It's in a massive canyon that is said to be the world's deepest and longest on land, along a section where the Yarlung Tsangpo - Tibet's longest river - makes a sharp U-turn around the Namcha Barwa mountain.

In the process of making this turn - which has been termed "the Great Bend" - the river drops hundreds of metres in its elevation.

Earlier reports indicated that authorities planned to drill multiple 20km-long tunnels through the Namcha Barwa mountain, via which they would divert part of the river.

Over the weekend a Xinhua report on Li Qiang's visit said that engineers would conduct "straightening" work and "divert water through tunnels" to build five cascading power stations.

Xinhua also reported that the hydropower dam's electricity would be mainly transmitted out of the region to be used elsewhere, while accommodating for Tibet's needs.

China has been eyeing the steep valleys and mighty rivers in the rural west - where Tibetan territories are located - to build mega-dams and hydropower stations that can sustain the country's electricity-hungry eastern metropolises. President Xi Jinping has personally pushed for this in a policy called "xidiandongsong", or "sending western electricity eastwards".

The Chinese government and state media have presented these dams as a win-win solution that cuts pollution and generates clean energy while uplifting rural Tibetans.

But activists say the dams are the latest example of Beijing's exploitation of Tibetans and their land - and past protests have been crushed.

Last year, the Chinese government rounded up hundreds of Tibetans who had been protesting against another hydropower dam. It ended in arrests and beatings, with some people seriously injured, the BBC learned through sources and verified footage.

There are also environmental concerns over the flooding of Tibetan valleys renowned for their biodiversity, and the possible dangers of building dams in a region rife with earthquake fault lines.

Condemnation.....

Key takeaways from statement by 25 nations calling for end to war

Reuters

As we've been reporting this afternoon, the UK and more than 20 other nations have signed a joint statement calling for an end to the war in Gaza.

It's a long statement, so here are some of the main points from it summarised:
  • The nations say "the suffering of civilians in Gaza has reached new depths" and call Israel's aid delivery model "dangerous", saying it "fuels instability and deprives Gazans of human dignity"
  • "Drip feeding of aid" and "inhumane killing of civilians" seeking essentials such as water and food is another focus of condemnation in the statement
  • The foreign ministers describe the Israeli government's denial of essential humanitarian assistance unacceptable, adding that Israel must comply with its obligations under international law
  • The nations also call for the "immediate and unconditional release" of hostages taken by Hamas during the deadly 7 October 2023 attacks
  • They call on Israel to "immediately lift restrictions on the flow of aid" and allow the UN and humanitarian NGOs [non-governmental organisations] to do their "life-saving work"
  • Proposals to remove the Palestinian population into a "humanitarian city" are described as "completely unacceptable", and the countries add that "permanent forced displacement is a violation of international humanitarian law"
  • They also voice their strong opposition to "any steps towards territorial or demographic change in the occupied Palestinian territories"

A brutal dismissal

A brutal dismissal of Israel's aid delivery model by several nations

James Landale

There have in recent years been many international statements condemning Israel’s tactics in Gaza.

But this declaration is notable for its candour, reflecting both western frustration at Israeli intransigence and also the growing political pressure that many governments are feeling.

The signatories are largely European - plus Australia, Canada, New Zealand and Japan.

They nod to the most notable but unsurprising absentee, the United States, saying they support US efforts to find a ceasefire.

But they are brutal in their dismissal of the new US-supported mechanism of delivering aid in Gaza, which they condemn as the drip feeding of aid and the inhumane killing of civilians.

In a key paragraph, the 25 countries say they are prepared to take further action to support a ceasefire and political pathway to security and peace.

That is code for recognising a state of Palestine, something many countries have done but not all, including the UK and France.

That is one point of leverage on Israel that both countries are discussing but have yet to pull.

Workers rebuke........

In scathing letter, NASA workers rebuke ‘rapid and wasteful changes’ at agency

By Jackie Wattles

A group of 287 scientists and current and former NASA employees has issued a declaration lambasting budget cuts, grant cancellations and a “culture of organizational silence” that they say could pose a risk to astronauts’ safety.

The document — titled “The Voyager Declaration” and dedicated to astronauts who lost their lives in tragic spaceflight incidents of the past — is addressed to acting NASA Administrator Sean Duffy, a staunch Trump loyalist who abruptly replaced Janet Petro, a longtime NASA employee, in the agency’s top role on July 9. The letter has 156 anonymous signatories and 131 public signatures — including at least 55 current employees.

“Major programmatic shifts at NASA must be implemented strategically so that risks are managed carefully,” states the letter to Duffy, a former member of Congress, prosecutor and reality TV personality who also currently serves as Transportation secretary. “Instead, the last six months have seen rapid and wasteful changes which have undermined our mission and caused catastrophic impacts on NASA’s workforce.”

The letter raises concerns about suggested changes to NASA’s Technical Authority, a system of safety checks and balances at the agency.

Established in the wake of the 2003 Columbia shuttle disaster that killed seven astronauts, the Technical Authority aims to ensure mission safety by allowing NASA employees at all levels of the agency to voice safety concerns to leaders outside their direct chain of command.

“If you have a significant disagreement with a technical decision that’s being made, (the system) gives someone an alternate avenue that’s not their project manager or program manager” to express that concern, a source at Goddard Space Flight Center in Greenbelt, Maryland who asked to remain anonymous for fear of retribution, told CNN.

Changes to that system “should be made only in the interests of improving safety, not in anticipation of future budget cuts,” the declaration reads.

The source said that they considered looming changes “a really scary prospect, especially for my colleagues who work directly on the human spaceflight side of things.”

The letter comes as the agency is grappling with the impending loss of thousands of employees and broader restructuring.

A spokesperson for NASA leadership did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

A risky resistance

The signed letter is the most recent in a string of declarations rebuking proposed cuts and changes at other federal agencies.

Some National Institutes of Health employees led the way in June, publishing a declaration opposing what they called the politicization of research.

Another letter, signed by federal workers at the Environmental Protection Agency earlier this month, resulted in about 140 people being placed on administrative leave. At least some of those workers will remain on leave until at least August 1, “pending the Agency’s inquiry,” according to internal email correspondence obtained by CNN.

One signatory of the NASA letter who spoke to CNN said they felt that expressing dissent against the Trump administration may pose a risk to their livelihoods, but they believed the stakes were too high to remain silent.

Ella Kaplan, a contractor employed by Global Science and Technology Inc. and the website administrator for the NASA Scientific Visualization Studio, said she decided to publicly attach her name to the Voyager Declaration because “the overall culture at NASA has very much shifted — and it feels a lot less safe for me.”

“That’s been felt kind of universally by most minority employees at NASA,” Kaplan said.

While Kaplan said her job has not yet been directly threatened, in her view, “I’m a member of the LGBT community … and I’m probably going to be fired for this at some point, so I might as well do as much community organizing as possible before that point.”

A changing culture

The letter and its signatories implore Duffy to evaluate recent policies they say “have or threaten to waste public resources, compromise human safety, weaken national security, and undermine the core NASA mission.”

The declaration’s criticism of changes to NASA’s Technical Authority stem from statements made at an agency town hall in June. During that meeting, NASA executives said they planned to attempt to make the Technical Authority more “efficient.”

“We’re looking at: ‘How do we do programs and projects more efficiently? And how much should we be spending on oversight?’” said Vanessa Wyche, NASA’s acting associate administrator.

Garrett Reisman — a former NASA astronaut and engineer who later served as a SpaceX advisor — told CNN that he believes implementing some changes to the Technical Authority may be welcome. He noted that NASA may have become too risk averse in the wake of the Columbia tragedy, and the current structure may be hampering innovation.

But, Reisman said, any changes to the space agency’s safety backstops need to be made with extreme care. And currently, he said, he does not trust that will happen.

“I have very little confidence that it will be done the right way,” Reisman, who signed the declaration, said. “So far, this administration has used a very heavy hand with their attempts to remove bureaucracy — and what they’ve ended up doing is not making things more efficient, but just eliminating things.”

Trump’s anti-DEIA efforts

The signatories who spoke to CNN each expressed opposition to President Donald Trump’s directives to shutter Diversity, Equity, Inclusion and Accessibility — or DEIA — initiatives.

At NASA, leadership complied with Trump’s executive order by shuttering a DEIA-focused branch, scrubbing pronouns from email signatures, and removing references to a pledge made during the president’s previous term to land a woman and person of color on the moon for the first time. The space agency also shuttered employee groups that lent support to minority workers.

The source who spoke with CNN anonymously said that DEIA policies not only ensure a welcoming work environment — they’re also essential to practicing sound science.

“The concept of inclusivity being a pathway to better science is something that has become really entrenched in the overall academic and scientific community in the last decade or so,” the source said, adding that the changes “set an immediate tone for the destruction that was going to come.”

‘Indiscriminate cuts’

Among the other policies that the letter decries is the Trump administration’s call for NASA to shutter some projects that have Congressional backing — a move the signatories say is wasteful and “represents a permanent loss of capability to the United States both in space and on Earth.”

The NASA employee told CNN that leadership has already begun shutting down some facilities that the Trump administration put on the chopping block in its budget proposal, despite the fact that Congress appears poised to continue funding some of them.

“We’ve also been hearing repeatedly passed down from every level of management: No one is coming to save you; Congress is not coming to save you,” the source said. “But it seems like Congress is moving towards an appropriations that’s going to continue to fund our projects at approximately the same level.”

The source noted that they have first-hand knowledge of leadership beginning to decommission a clean room — a facility free of dust and debris where sensitive hardware and science instruments must be prepared for spaceflight — despite the fact that there are ongoing tests happening at the facility.

The Voyager Declaration also criticizes what it refers to as “indiscriminate cuts” planned for the agency.

The White House’s proposal to slash NASA’s science budget by as much as half has been met with widespread condemnation from stakeholders who say such cuts threaten to cripple US leadership in the field.

Recent agency communication to staff has also noted that at least 3,000 staff members are taking deferred resignation offers, according to an internal memo, the authenticity of which was confirmed to CNN by two sources who had seen the communication.

Broader workforce cuts could also be on the horizon. NASA leadership under Petro also worked on an agency restructuring plan, though the details of that initiative have not yet been made public.

Other Trump-era changes denounced in the Voyager Declaration include directives to cancel contracts and grants that affect private-sector workers across the country and plans to pull the space agency out of some projects with international partners. The White House budget proposal calls for defunding dozens of projects, including the Lunar Gateway space station that the US would have worked on with space agencies in Canada, Europe, Japan and the United Arab Emirates.

The letter and its signatories argue these policies are wasteful, squandering investments that have been years or decades in the making.

“American taxpayers have invested a lot of money in my education and training directly,” the Goddard source said. “I’m in it for the public service — and I want to return that investment to them.”

Yes, the stupid people and the not stupid people... Remember, he like the un-educated.. Which one are you?

Six months into Trump’s second term, voters remain divided

By John King

Jaclyn Taylor and Lawrence Malinconico live on opposite sides of the Trump canyon that defines and divides American politics.

“The amount of progress he has made over the first six months is unmatched,” said Taylor, a businesswoman in Iowa. She grades the first six months of President Donald Trump’s new term a nine out of 10.

Zero was the grade offered by Malinconico, a college professor in Pennsylvania.

“His slashing of government and putting incompetent people in charge is going to harm every aspect of American life,” is Malinconico’s take at six months.

Their polar opposite assessments highlight one big takeaway of a check-in with voters participating in CNN’s “All Over the Map” project: The black or white views of Trump that animated the 2024 campaign now carry over to how most voters view his presidency.

Those who voted for Trump remain overwhelmingly loyal, enthusiastically backing his agenda. “Better,” is how New Hampshire Trump voter Deven McIver described his standard of living since Trump returned to the White House. “Lower fuel costs. Less job competition from illegals and I feel safer.”

But those who opposed Trump in the campaign are just as fiercely opposed to his governing now. “Disappointed doesn’t come close to what I am feeling,” said Pat Levin, a lifelong Democrat who lives in Pennsylvania. “Terrified, petrified, horrified come close to describing how I feel about the unraveling of our country and the rule of law.”

Nothing in the responses suggested any give in the polarization of the Trump era. Views on Trump’s immigration agenda offer a telling snapshot of that.

“He has turned ICE and CBP into the American gestapo,” said Tonya Rincon, a Michigan Democrat, who criticized ICE tactics as overly aggressive “with no due process.” Rincon said using tax dollars to send migrants “to other countries is an abomination reminiscent of the Third Reich.”

On the other side, “He did what he promised,” Taylor said. “Trump is making progress and standing up for the rights of those who honor our country and our process.”

These voters helped us track the 2024 campaign. Now, we keep in touch for their assessments of the Trump presidency and other big issues as we inch closer to the 2026 midterm elections.

Other noteworthy points:

►Most of the voters, regardless of their choice last November, said the cost of living remains frustratingly high.

►Many of the Democrats voiced support for Trump’s recent decision to do more to help Ukraine get weapons for the war with Russia, though many of them questioned his motives for this shift. Several Trump voters, on the other hand, oppose helping Ukraine.

“Hopefully he realizes the stakes of letting his former friend (Russian President Vladimir) Putin taking over more of Ukraine,” said Darrell Ann Murphy, a Democrat from Pennsylvania.

“He reluctantly came to the conclusion he was getting played by Putin,” said Marvin Boyer, also a Pennsylvania Democrat.

► Trump’s handling of the saga over accused sex trafficker Jeffrey Epstein was criticized, even ridiculed, by both Trump voters and Democrats who despise him. None of the Trump voters went as far as saying this issue might make them rethink supporting Trump, but many of them were harsh as they voiced suspicion that Trump is hiding something.

“I want to see the truth,” said McIver, a blue-collar Trump voter in New Hampshire. “I don’t believe the administration’s claims.”

Pete Burdett, also a New Hampshire Republican, offered high praise of the Trump agenda overall but said he was flummoxed by the change of Trump’s tone on Epstein. “NOT SURE at this point.” Burdett wrote in an email. “What changed?”

Rachal Kulak, a Christian conservative Trump supporter in Virginia, said the “Epstein files debacle” was a black mark on an administration she believes is otherwise much more transparent than the Biden administration. “It may be better to just rip the Band-Aid off and let people see.”

Kulak said “it may have taken a minute,” but she voiced confidence Trump would ultimately move forward “with giving the people what they want to see.”

Other respondents brought up a conspiracy theory that Trump’s refusal to make all Epstein files public is somehow tied to Israel, a notion that has gained footing among Trump supporters.

The conspiracy theory is unfounded and has been dismissed as without merit by current and former Israeli government officials.

Those who raised the idea in our check-in were troubled by it, but said they still supported the president.

Voters who opposed Trump, meanwhile, expressed other concerns about the Epstein saga.

Joan London is a Pennsylvania attorney and longtime Reagan Republican who switched her registration to independent because of her misgivings about Trump.

“The ‘nothing to see here’ tone after getting elected by fueling speculation among supporters is suspicious,” London said of the Epstein saga. “If there is nothing to fear, then the books need to be opened.”

Democrats see the Epstein dustup as Trump finally getting some accountability for his love of conspiracy theories. For years, Trump and his allies suggested Democrats were hiding the Epstein files to protect themselves. Now, Trump calls his own supporters “weaklings” for demanding the transparency Trump himself repeatedly said was critical.

“Watching him scrambling between explanations is comical,” said Rincon, the Michigan Democrat who is a recently retired union auto worker.

“Fumble,” was the one-word assessment of Walter Robinson, a Michigan Democrat and auto worker.

“Outrageous but predictable” is how Levin, the Pennsylvania Democrat, described Trump’s efforts to manage the Epstein blowback. “Deny, shift responsibility, claim a Democratic conspiracy.”

The voter assessments on the cost of living are worth tracking as we move into the 2026 midterm cycle. Reducing costs was a major Trump and Republican 2024 promise, and Democrats are already arguing the president’s unpredictable back-and-forth on tariffs and other policies are hurting consumers.

“Costs are increasing, especially rent,” said Jacob Dials, an Arizona Democrat.

“Currently about the same, perhaps slightly better,” said Kulak, the Virginia Republican.

“The same,” said Democrat Robinson.

“Same, but getting better,” said Taylor, the Iowa Republican.

“Inflation still persists,” said Cynthia Sabatini, a suburban Philadelphia Republican who supports many Trump policies but sees him as lacking character and humility. “Across the board tariffs are not a good approach.”

Kim Cavaliere, an independent who lives in Georgia, said her standard of living was down since Trump took office.

“Everything he has done so far is for the wealthy,” she said. “Housing is still way out of reach.”

Cavaliere did offer a dose of humor to close her answers to our questions about Trump at the six-month mark.

“Well, I wish I could predict my lottery numbers the way I predicted Elon Musk and Trump would sever their relationship within a year of him being president,” Cavaliere said. “LOL.”

Dummy Donny and the Pedophile... (Child rapist)

Trump Sues the Wall Street Journal Over Epstein Birthday Album Story

Trump called the newspaper a “useless rag” and boasted about the previous times he’s sued journalists and media outlets. 

Anna Merlan

Donald Trump filed suit late Friday afternoon against the Wall Street Journal’s parent company, media mogul Rupert Murdoch, and several other defendants, saying he was defamed by a story that claimed he contributed to a 50th birthday album for Jeffrey Epstein in 2003. Trump is demanding $10 billion in damages; in a post on TruthSocial, he called the legal action a “POWERHOUSE Lawsuit,” calling the article “false, malicious, defamatory, FAKE NEWS” and the Journal a “useless ‘rag.'”

The story concerns a birthday album compiled by Epstein’s ex-girlfriend and procurer Ghislaine Maxwell, who’s now serving 20 years on sex trafficking charges. In the album, the paper wrote, was a “bawdy” letter bearing Donald Trump’s name.

“It contains several lines of typewritten text framed by the outline of a naked woman, which appears to be hand-drawn with a heavy marker,” reporters Khadeeja Safdar and Joe Palazzolo wrote. “A pair of small arcs denotes the woman’s breasts, and the future president’s signature is a squiggly ‘Donald’ below her waist, mimicking pubic hair.” The typewritten text features an imaginary conversation between Epstein and Trump, written in the third person. The letter closes with the words, “Happy Birthday — and may every day be another wonderful secret.” 

The Journal story also prominently featured Trump’s denial, in which he called the letter “a fake thing,” adding, “I never wrote a picture in my life. I don’t draw pictures of women,” he said. “It’s not my language. It’s not my words.”

Trump also immediately threatened to sue the paper, “just like I sued everyone else.” Paramount recently agreed to pay a $16 million settlement to settle a suit from Trump alleging that CBS had engaged in election interference by what he loudly insisted was unfair editing of a 60 Minutes interview with then-presidential nominee Kamala Harris. (For good measure, CBS is also canceling Stephen Colbert’s show, days after he called the Paramount settlement “a big fat bribe” on air, citing vague financial concerns.) In December 2024, ABC News agreed to make a $15 million donation to Trump’s presidential library to settle a lawsuit over comments that anchor George Stephanopoulos made about writer E. Jean Carroll’s civil lawsuits, which she brought against Trump for sexual abuse and defamation. Trump was ordered to pay Caroll $5 million, a judgment that was just upheld by a federal appeals court in June. But Stephanopoulos incorrectly stated that Trump was “found liable for rape,” which he was not. 

In his suit against Murdoch and the Journal, filed by Florida law firm Brito PLC, Trump also names Dow Jonesand NewsCorp CEO Robert Thomson as defendants as well as each journalist on the story individually. In the complaint, Trump’s lawyers write that Safdar and Palazzolo “failed to attach the letter, failed to attach the alleged drawing, failed to show proof that President Trump authored or signed any such letter, and failed to explain how this purported letter was obtained.” It also complains that the story went “viral” on the internet and Twitter, including screenshots of organizations like the Lincoln Project and figures like former MSNBC host Keith Olbermann sharing it. 

In a post on TruthSocial after the lawsuit was filed, Trump cast it as part of a long history of legal actions against the media. 

“We have proudly held to account ABC and George Slopadopoulos, CBS and 60 Minutes, The Fake Pulitzer Prizes, and many others who deal in, and push, disgusting LIES, and even FRAUD, to the American People,” he wrote. “This lawsuit is filed not only on behalf of your favorite President, ME, but also in order to continue standing up for ALL Americans who will no longer tolerate the abusive wrongdoings of the Fake News Media. I hope Rupert and his ‘friends’ are looking forward to the many hours of depositions and testimonies they will have to provide in this case.” 

Pedophiles hang together..

There’s a Lot We Still Don’t Know About Jeffrey Epstein

Amid the conspiracy theories, the totality of Epstein’s crimes—and how he made his fortune—is still a disturbing mystery. 

Anna Merlan

“I want every email from Epstein,” declared MAGA activist, self-styled journalist, former men’s rights advocate, former Pizzagate promoter, and former juicing evangelist Mike Cernovich recently, speaking to MAGA-world figure and disgraced BuzzFeed plagiarist Benny Johnson. “It might embarrass people, I don’t care. We’re done.” 

In the decades since the Jeffrey Epstein scandal began, it has attracted a lot of attention from very strange and distinctly unsavory people, each drawn to the case for their own reasons. Cernovich, for instance, got involved in his capacity as a quasi-journalist and promoter of conspiracy theories involving wealthy and powerful cabals of sexual abusers. He was one of the people who sued to unseal documents in the civil case of Virginia Giuffre, a woman who alleged that Epstein trafficked her to numerous wealthy and powerful men.

But these days even the frequent disinformation peddlers like Cernovich have a reasonable point: There is a disturbing amount that we still don’t know about Jeffrey Epstein. 

The basic facts are clear, of course: Epstein was a billionaire pedophile and friend to the world’s wealthy and powerful who, in all likelihood and according to every piece of available evidence, died by suicide in 2019 while incarcerated and facing sex trafficking charges. But from the time Epstein’s crimes first began to attract notice from the police and press in the early 2000s to the scandal and chaos that ensued this month after Trump’s FBI and Department of Justice tried to quietly close the book on the case, there have been loose ends, unanswered questions, unreleased documents, and an endless amount of fodder for future conspiracy theories. 

The first real question is about Epstein’s personal fortune; it’s never been clear how, exactly, he got so rich. In a 2019 story, the New York Times attempted to answer that question, noting that in the 1980s, Epstein befriended Victoria’s Secret founder Les Wexner, quickly becoming his personal money manager. Epstein had worked for two years as a math and physics teacher at the elite Dalton School and then as an options trader for Bear Stearns before being dismissed in 1981. From there, he founded his own money management firm for billionaire clients. That business was an immediate, almost baffling, success. As New York magazine wrote in 2002, “There were no road shows, no whiz-bang marketing demos—just this: Jeff Epstein was open for business for those with $1 billion–plus.”

Among those clients—central among them, as far as anyone can tell—was Wexner of Victoria’s Secret. Those around the executive also couldn’t understand why Epstein had so quickly assumed a position of trust in his financial life. “Virtually from the moment in the 1980s that Mr. Epstein arrived on the scene in Columbus, Ohio, where L Brands was based,” the Times wrote in its 2019 story, “Mr. Wexner’s friends and colleagues were mystified as to why a renowned businessman in the prime of his career would place such trust in an outsider with a thin résumé and scant financial experience.” And it was through his association with Wexner’s companies that Epstein began trying to expand his access to young women, the Times wrote, “trying to involve himself in the recruitment of lingerie models for the Victoria’s Secret catalog.” 

(While Wexner didn’t speak to the Times after Epstein’s second arrest, he told his employees in a 2019 letter acquired by the paper that he was “NEVER aware of the illegal activity charged in the indictment.”) 

By the time Vicky Ward wrote a famous profile of Epstein for Vanity Fair in 2003, he was committed to a life of secrecy, what Ward described as “fastidiously, almost obsessively private—he lists himself in the phone book under a pseudonym.” 

“There are many women in his life, mostly young,” Ward wrote, in a line that now sounds incredibly ominous. “But there is no one of them to whom he has been able to commit.”

By the early 2000s, Epstein was living in a Palm Beach mansion. There, he and his accomplices, including ex-girlfriend Ghislaine Maxwell, hired teenage girls to massage him; during these sessions, Epstein would sexually abuse them. (Maxwell was not charged until 2020; she’s now serving 20 years on sex trafficking charges.)

Epstein was finally indicted in 2006, but as journalist Julie K. Brown at the Miami Herald has meticulously documented for years, he was almost immediately handed an extraordinarily, scandalously gentle plea deal. Epstein pleaded guilty to just two felony prostitution charges, and he and his accomplices received a federal non-prosecution agreement where he wasn’t charged for sex trafficking. Top federal prosecutor Alex Acosta was directly involved in brokering the deal; years later, while serving as Donald Trump’s labor secretary, renewed criticism of his role in the Epstein deal led him to resign. Epstein served just 13 months in county jail, where he spent most of his time at his office on what was dubbed work release. A jail supervisor wrote in a memo that his jail cell should be left unlocked “for the time being” and he should be given “liberal access to the attorney room where a TV will be installed.” It would take until 2019 before furor over the non-prosecution agreement reached a fever pitch and Epstein was indicted again in New York, this time on federal sex trafficking charges, with the date of the alleged offenses listed as from 2oo2 to “at least 2005.” 

Besides the mystery of Epstein’s wealth and his exceptionally soft-handed treatment by the justice system, there’s also a mountain of unreleased material attached to the many civil and two criminal cases filed against him. As Brown outlined in March, material from numerous cases has never been released, including discovery documents for a civil case filed in 2008 against the FBI by Epstein’s alleged victims. There’s also unreleased evidence relating to Epstein’s properties in the US Virgin Islands, Little Saint James and Greater Saint James.  

(After weeks of criticism, Trump recently called for the release of grand jury records from Epstein’s Florida and New York cases; since grand jury records are usually secret, the process of releasing those records could take a very long time. “I have asked the Justice Department to release all Grand Jury testimony with respect to Jeffrey Epstein, subject only to Court Approval,” Trump wrote on TruthSocial on Saturday morning. “With that being said, and even if the Court gave its full and unwavering approval, nothing will be good enough for the troublemakers and radical left lunatics making the request. It will always be more, more, more. MAGA!”)

Besides all the unreleased court records and the mystery of Epstein’s wealth, there is, of course, the question of why the FBI and DOJ released an unsigned memo declaring the case closed. And just this week, Senate Democratic whip Dick Durbin of Illinois alleged that the FBI was told to “flag” any Epstein files relating to Trump. The implications of that allegation, however, are not yet fully clear. 

“Why were personnel told to flag records in which President Trump was mentioned?” Durbin wrote in open letters to Attorney General Pam Bondi, FBI Director Kash Patel, and FBI Deputy Director Dan Bongino. “What happened to the records mentioning President Trump once they were flagged?”

One of the less compelling allegations in the Epstein saga is the idea that a Deep State assassin snuck into his Manhattan jail cell in 2019. In all likelihood, Epstein died alone, facing something approaching a real consequence for the first time in his sordid life. But it’s absolutely true that it’s still not fully clear who aided his rise, bolstered his fortune, and possibly helped him evade responsibility for his crimes, nor is the extent of those crimes or the infrastructure of wealth, power, and coercion that made them possible. In a rare moment of unity for the American public during an impossibly fractured time, that, at least, is something we can all agree on. 

Delightful Video

Mamdani Skewers Racist Critics With Delightful Video

Meanwhile, Cuomo went to a Hamptons fundraiser hosted by a billionaire, where he said he’d move to Florida if Mamdani wins.

Inae Oh

As Zohran Mamdani, the democratic socialist who made history last month with his stunning victory in the Democratic primary for New York City mayor, continues to rake in powerful endorsements, he made a scheduling announcement: He’s on a brief trip to celebrate his February nuptials with “family and friends.”

Such bland news wouldn’t normally require the creation of an entire social media video. But it was the trip’s destination—Uganda, where Mamdani was born and lived for seven years before moving to the United States—that Mamdani highlighted to cheekily skewer his critics head-on.

In the clip, Mamdani played on the explosion of racist attacks telling him to “go back” to Africa. He also prepared a string of pun-heavy headlines for the conservative-leaning New York Post.

“UGANDA MISS ME.”

“HE AFRI-CAN’T BE SERIOUS.”

The clip once again underscored the Mamdani campaign’s ability to use social media videos to engage with everyday New Yorkers in ways that are widely praised as authentic, a crucial ingredient to his success. In turn, Mamdani’s opponents, Andrew Cuomo and Eric Adams, have used Mamdani’s social media savvy to attack him. “Let’s be clear: They have a record of tweets,” Adams said last month when he launched his independent campaign.

The Uganda trip follows a much-maligned New York Times story on Mamdani’s 2009 college application to Columbia University, in which Mamdani identified as both African-American and Asian. The leaked info used by the Times came from a right-wing eugenicist, whom my colleague Noah Lanard later reported once wished a happy birthday to Adolf Hitler, and used a racial slur when saying those who are attracted to Black people should kill themselves.

Since stunning the country with his victory last month, Mamdani has worked to charm his detractors, including powerful figures in the business community, with direct meetings. On Friday, he scored the powerful endorsement of a local health care union, which had previously backed Mamdani’s opponent, Andrew Cuomo, who told an audience at a Hamptons fundraiser hosted by Gristedes billionaire John Catsimatidis this weekend that he would move to Florida if Mamdani becomes mayor.

Snatching

ICE Agents Keep Snatching Asylum Seekers Immediately After Their Court Hearings

At least two immigrants taken in San Francisco on Friday still had cases pending.

Margaret Kadifa

Three asylum-seekers were arrested Friday directly after court hearings at San Francisco immigration court, continuing a weeks-long pattern of federal agents waiting just outside courtrooms and arresting people as they step into the halls. 

Mission Local saw all three arrests, which took place at 630 Sansome Street, which houses an ICE field office and several courtrooms. The first was at about 8:40 a.m., when a woman, surrounded by people who appeared to be ICE agents, was handcuffed in the hallway outside of the courtroom.

The second and third arrests were later that morning, before noon. In both cases, asylum-seekers had barely stepped outside the courtroom when about five federal agents, some of whom clearly wore Immigration and Customs Enforcement badges, arrested them. They were swarmed and directed through a nearby door.

One lawyer pleaded with a courtroom security guard to let a man use his cellphone to text his attorney: “He’s about to be arrested outside.”

In all three cases, a Department of Homeland Security attorney had moved to dismiss the asylum-seekers’ petition, a novel tactic the Trump administration is using to arrest immigrants and put them on a fast-track to deportations. In at least two of the three cases, the judge did not accept the attorney’s motion. 

Instead, the judge gave the asylum-seeker time to respond in writing, which should have given them protections from deportation. But, as has happened routinely in San Francisco, ICE agents arrested them anyway.

They are likely to be taken to detention centers in California or even outside the state. There are no centers near San Francisco, so for most people arrested at court, it means travel to far-flung parts of the state like the Golden State Annex in McFarland or Mesa Verde in Bakersfield.

Friday’s arrests are the latest at increasingly-tense courtrooms in San Francisco: ICE has made more than 30 arrests after court hearings since May 27, and on Friday agents, at least one of whom was armed, walked up and down the hallways outside the courtrooms, waiting to make arrests. 

Those inside the courtroom are more fearful than ever: One woman, who arrived at court with a young child, started crying in the back of the courtroom. When the judge asked her how she was, she told him in Spanish through an interpreter, “Nervous.” 

While immigration attorneys giving free legal advice have typically conferred with asylum-seekers in a private room, on Friday and, at a different courtroom at 630 Sansome Street on July 10, they huddled in the back of the courtrooms instead. The attorneys knew that if they stepped out into the halls even en route to give legal advice, the asylum-seekers would be detained immediately. 

These attorneys, dispatched to court by the Bar Association of San Francisco under the “Attorney of the Day Program,” also collect contact information of relatives, so they can be told that their family member may be detained.

But even that simple communication is facing increasing scrutiny from court security. 

On Friday, a security guard came into the courtroom and tried to get an asylum-seeker—whose case DHS had moved to dismiss and who was about to be arrested—to put away his phone while in court as he spoke with the immigration attorney. The attorney pushed back and stood between the guard and the asylum-seeker.

“He’s about to be arrested outside,” she said. He would not be able to contact his attorney out in the hall, he said, “because he’s about to be arrested.” 

The security guard relented. But he stood just a few feet from the asylum-seeker, occasionally looking over his shoulder, as the man whispered to his lawyer and continued to text.

Electronics are not allowed in court, though the rule has not always been strictly enforced. Mission Local has observed security guards cracking down, and on Friday a guard told two court observers to put their phones away.

In a different courtroom at 630 Sansome Street on July 10, Mission Local saw a security guard raise his voice at a member of the public who was observing court for having her phone out. The judge in that courtroom, Patrick O’Brien, told the security guard to let him handle it.

Goon Squad

The Plainclothes Goon Squad

The aesthetics of ICE—puff-chested and average bro—do more than shroud Trump’s immigration cops in secrecy.

Inae Oh

When Reps. Jerry Nadler and Dan Goldman of New York were barred last month from entering 26 Federal Plaza in Lower Manhattan, where immigrants reportedly have been detained in inhumane conditions, the two Democrats became the latest in a string of lawmakers refused entry from US Immigration and Customs Enforcement facilities. The denial was not surprising. Such refusals are happening with increasing regularity around the country, as it becomes clear that ICE is not a federal agency concerned with even a patina of transparency.

But neither Nadler nor Goldman could have anticipated the manner of refusal: a man in a short-sleeved novelty shirt emblazoned with a large Guinness toucan arguing with them in a hallway.

The shirt’s owner, seemingly unconcerned with its top buttons, allowed an ample view of his chest. He spent a considerable part of the encounter adopting a faux hapless position, hands in his pockets. Yet what William Joyce lacked in basic notions of professionalism, he made up for in his authority. “We’re not going to do it because we don’t have to,” Joyce replied when pressed for a reason for the refusal to allow federal legislators into the building. (Nadler and Goldman soon left, vowing to take the issue up the chain of command.)

Although hardly the most alarming feature of the encounter, Joyce’s appearance was striking. Here was a government official who had received advance notice that he was to meet with two sitting members of Congress on a Wednesday morning. Did he intend to convey disrespect? Maybe. But more notably, a clear throughline emerges between Joyce and an unofficial uniform that has taken root among those assigned to carry out President Donald Trump’s plans for mass deportations. The apparel is pedestrian, but specific in its register of American bro-iness, evocative of a puff-chested dude in a graphic tee. Maybe he’s a divorcee seething with low-hum aggression as he walks into the vape store. “The types of people who open carry handguns to go to Buffalo Wild Wings,” the writer Hamilton Nolan noted.

It’s easy to mock. But accessible masculinity appears to be the aesthetic of the new institutionalized terror in our burgeoning $200 billion police state, as ICE disappears immigrants. Members of this goon squad look like the guys who roam around America’s dead malls. Yes, the aesthetic affords them powerful obscurity, sowing fear and confusion in the communities they torment; they dodge accountability through the use of facial coverings and unmarked cars. But it also makes you wonder about all the other men who look the same and aren’t ICE agents.

“You don’t know where they’re from. You don’t have any idea who they are, and they are given carte blanche [authority],” said Kriss Ravetto-Biagioli, author of The Unmaking of Fascist Aesthetics and a professor at UCLA. She likens ICE agents to the Nazi-era Sturmabteilung, also known as Brownshirts, many of them unemployed men and former soldiers who terrorized German towns with chaos and violence. “They were the rabble-rousers and drunks,” Ravetto-Biagioli said. “They looked like a bunch of ‘bros,’ as you might say in common parlance, and angry men who felt disaffected by being on the losing side of World War I.”

If what we are witnessing is indeed the arrival of fascism in the United States, it’s helpful to understand ICE’s bro aesthetic as a small feature of a larger repudiation of things outside the right’s liking: gender fluidity, increased transgender visibility, MeToo, reproductive rights. The result has been a hyperfocus on traditional gender norms, embraced in the faces and fashion across MAGA.

Accessible masculinity is the aesthetic of the new institutionalized terror in our burgeoning $200 billion police state. Members of this goon squad look like the guys who roam around America’s dead malls.

“I am fascinated by what is beautiful, strong, healthy, what is living,” Leni Riefenstahl, the infamous German filmmaker whose work fueled Nazi propaganda, once said. Riefenstahl is given a special focus in Susan Sontag’s essay “Fascinating Fascism.” Sontag argues, among many things, that perceptions of cleanliness and purity were integral to fascist power, especially when performed in unison.

Officers who reportedly pin down and punch immigrants may not conjure ideas of beauty to you and me. But for Trump and his ilk, ICE inspires a reverence that mirrors Riefenstahl’s. “These officers are doing a tremendous job,” the president likes to say. “They’re great patriots.” On Truth Social, Trump has praised agents for demonstrating “incredible strength, determination, and courage.” Squint and you start to get the picture that ICE belongs to a larger MAGA cultural project to imbue American life with a virility. We like the strong, silent type—the cowboy. What better way to make a state crackdown look like an American reclamation—a project of the anti-government party—than to have cops dress like an average guy with a gun?

Yet for all the presidential admiration and immense financial priority ICE enjoys, morale among officers is said to be at an all-time nadir, laying the groundwork for a hellish recruitment effort to meet Trump’s plan to carry out the “largest Mass Deportation Program in History.” Images of the everyday man in a snapback hat and jeans—turned “heroes” in the eyes of the most powerful man in the world—are instrumental to ICE’s recruiting. The group has set out to hire a staggering 10,000 more officers quickly, thanks to the Republican spending bill.

“It’s a uniform that is accessible to anybody, so that any person can feel like they can become an ICE member,” Alison Kinney, author of Hood from the Object Lessons series, told me.

For apologists, the aesthetic makes it easy to argue that these are ordinary American men simply doing their job. Consider the Ku Klux Klan hood. Today, it provokes terror. But in the early days of the Klan, defenders were quick to point to the hood as evidence that these were just good ol’ boys engaging in play. As Georgia state Rep. John Harrison Christy told Congress in 1871: “Sometimes, mischievous boys who want to have some fun go on a masquerading frolic to scare the negroes, but they do not interrupt them, do not hurt them in any way. Stories are exaggerated.”

What kind of person grows up to be an ICE agent? It’s hard to know what those now working for ICE, created in March 2003, had in mind as adolescents considering future career paths.

But my mind traces back to the dudes I knew as a kid, growing up as a first-generation American and a kid of color in suburban New Jersey, where the concept of my “otherness” arrived early. One feature I found striking then, as I do now, is that reminders of this “otherness” nearly always came from boys; I can’t recall an encounter in which my Korean background was called out by a girl. The pattern created the impression, even as a kid, that boys enjoyed a special permission to deploy such taunting. That boys, by their very nature, couldn’t help themselves. It was fun. Wasn’t I having fun, too?

A similar cruelty animates ICE’s harassment of immigrant advocates, the volunteers who show up to court to observe hearings and assist immigrants. Now grown men, these agents shove volunteers, lock people in elevators where they push all the buttons—“we’ll just go for a little ride,” one volunteer recalls an agent telling her—threaten, and sexually harass. Such actions are followed up by public notices from the Trump administration that the project of horror is, in fact, very enjoyable. Here’s a meme about sending people to an El Salvador megaprison. You’re having fun, right?

That ICE is an agency rife with allegations of sexual abuse against detainees is not surprising. “He grabbed my breasts,” a detainee named Maria told the New York Times in 2018, describing an assault by a male guard. “He put his hands in my pants and he touched my private parts. He touched me again inside the van, and my hands were tied. And he started masturbating.” Today, as Republicans work with the president to shield ICE from outside transparency, you can imagine that the opportunity for sexual assaults is skyrocketing.

It is not an accident that Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem, a woman, is at the top of this hierarchy, with her literal face prioritized by Trump to help sell his brutal immigration policy. “She’s like the most delicate, beautiful, tiny woman,” Rep. Anna Paulina Luna (R-Fla.) said, defending Noem after security at her press conference violently removed Sen. Alex Padilla to block him from asking questions. “What actual testosterone dude goes in and tries to break Kristi Noem?”

Here, a woman’s perceived beauty appears to serve as cover for the incredible cruelty of the men beneath her. Their critics, like Padilla, must lack “testosterone.” Today, like yesterday, the same rules of the boys’ club prevail.

ICE’s aesthetics—the choice to look like a plainclothes goon squad—doesn’t just help the agency keep its secrecy. It helps another mission: to make it seem like this is all normal. Because you know this American man. And he might do bad things. But he isn’t so bad, is he? And you’re having fun—even if you’re cringing—right?

Distraction = Look over there, while the shit piles up here...

Trump threatens to hold up stadium deal if Washington Commanders don't switch back to Redskins

By JOE REEDY and ADRIANA GOMEZ LICON

President Donald Trump is threatening to hold up a new stadium deal for Washington's NFL team if it does not restore its old name of the Redskins, which was considered offensive to Native Americans.

Trump also said Sunday that he wants Cleveland's baseball team to revert to its former name, the Indians, saying there was a “big clamoring for this" as well.

The Washington Commanders and Cleveland Guardians have had their current names since the 2022 seasons and both have said they have no plans to change them back.

Trump said the Washington football team would be “much more valuable” if it restored its old name.

“I may put a restriction on them that if they don’t change the name back to the original ‘Washington Redskins,’ and get rid of the ridiculous moniker, ‘Washington Commanders,’ I won’t make a deal for them to build a Stadium in Washington," Trump said on his social media site.

His latest interest in changing the name reflects his broader effort to roll back changes that followed a national debate on cultural sensitivity and racial justice. The team announced it would drop the Redskins name and the Indian head logo in 2020 during a broader reckoning with systemic racism and police brutality.

The Commanders and the District of Columbia government announced a deal earlier this year to build a new home for the football team at the site the old RFK Stadium, the place the franchise called home for more than three decades.

Trump's ability to hold up the deal remains to be seen. President Joe Biden signed a bill in January that transferred the land from the federal government to the District of Columbia.

The provision was part of a short-term spending bill passed by Congress in December. While D.C. residents elect a mayor, a city council and commissioners to run day-to-day operations, Congress maintains control of the city’s budget.

Josh Harris, whose group bought the Commanders from former owner Dan Snyder in 2023, said earlier this year the name was here to stay. Not long after taking over, Harris quieted speculation about going back to Redskins, saying that would not happen. The team did not immediately respond to a request for comment following Trump's statement.

The Washington team started in Boston as the Redskins in 1933 before moving to the nation’s capital four years later.

The Cleveland Guardians' president of baseball operations, Chris Antonetti, indicated before Sunday's game against the Athletics that there weren't any plans to revisit the name change.

“We understand there are different perspectives on the decision we made a few years ago, but obviously it’s a decision we made. We’ve got the opportunity to build a brand as the Guardians over the last four years and are excited about the future that's in front of us," he said.

Cleveland announced in December 2020 it would drop Indians. It announced the switch to Guardians in July 2021. In 2018, the team phased out "Chief Wahoo” as its primary logo.

The name changes had their share of supporters and critics as part of the national discussions about logos and names considered racist.

Trump posted Sunday afternoon that “The Owner of the Cleveland Baseball Team, Matt Dolan, who is very political, has lost three Elections in a row because of that ridiculous name change. What he doesn’t understand is that if he changed the name back to the Cleveland Indians, he might actually win an Election. Indians are being treated very unfairly. MAKE INDIANS GREAT AGAIN (MIGA)!”

Matt Dolan, the son of the late Larry Dolan, no longer has a role with the Guardians. He ran the team's charity endeavors until 2016.

Matt Dolan was a candidate in the Ohio U.S. Senate elections in 2022 and '24, but lost.

Washington and Cleveland share another thing in common. David Blitzer is a member of Harris’ ownership group with the Commanders and holds a minority stake in the Guardians.

Epstein case

Trump rails against ‘NOTHING’ Epstein case after WSJ report

Some of the president’s wayward allies have — at least temporarily — rallied to his side after a bombshell report from The Wall Street Journal.

By Giselle Ruhiyyih Ewing

President Donald Trump continued to rage over the Jeffrey Epstein case Friday after The Wall Street Journal published a bawdy birthday letter he allegedly wrote to the disgraced financier decades ago, prompting the president to threaten suit against the newspaper — and instruct Attorney General Pam Bondi to unseal grand jury testimony in Epstein’s case.

The Wall Street Journal report came after a week of turmoil over the Epstein case among MAGA circles, which have fractured over the Trump administration’s handling of the investigation into the convicted sex offender while the president has repeatedly sought to downplay the whole ordeal.

“If there was a ‘smoking gun’ on Epstein, why didn’t the Dems, who controlled the ‘files’ for four years, and had Garland and Comey in charge, use it? BECAUSE THEY HAD NOTHING!!!” Trump wrote on Truth Social on Friday morning, echoing his previous attempts to pin blame for the lack of information in the case on Democrats.

Trump on Thursday vehemently denied writing the suggestive letter to Epstein, which reportedly included lines of typewritten text and a doodle of a naked woman with Trump’s signature below her waist. The president slammed the letter’s publication Thursday as a “fake” and vowed to sue the newspaper in an angry Truth Social post.

POLITICO has not independently verified the existence of the letter.

Trump continued to attack the news outlet Friday, writing in a separate Truth Social post: “I look forward to getting Rupert Murdoch to testify in my lawsuit against him and his ‘pile of garbage’ newspaper,” adding that it “will be an interesting experience!!!”

The Wall Street Journal declined to comment on the legal threat.

Many MAGA figures were quick to jump to the president’s defense after the WSJ report — including several voices who have been critical of his administration’s handling of the case, like right-wing activist Laura Loomer and onetime Trump confidante Elon Musk.

House Speaker Mike Johnson, who had previously split with Trump on Tuesday, calling for the DOJ to release all information in the Epstein files in the name of “transparency,” decried the existence of the letter in an appearance on CNBC’s “Squawk Box” on Friday morning after he said he spoke with the president.

“The president and I talked about that ridiculous allegation this morning. He said it’s patently absurd. He’s never drawn such a picture. He’s never thought of drawing such a picture. And he said, ‘Did you see the language of this bogus supposed communication?’” Johnson said, adding that the president is “so frustrated by it.”

Trump has attempted to brush off scrutiny on the Epstein case by claiming the entire situation was a “hoax” pushed by Democrats, as outcry from within MAGA circles has mounted over his administration’s handling of information around the Epstein case.

Many of Trump’s supporters who had long nursed theories that evidence of a broader government conspiracy lay hidden in a “client list” among the so-called Epstein files were not convinced after an FBI-Department of Justice joint report said there was no evidence of such a list last week.

But while the White House and Bondi have repeatedly said there was no new information to release on Epstein, Trump — less than an hour after the WSJ report — ordered the attorney general to begin unsealing grand jury testimony in his case, a process that is set to face significant obstacles, as courts are often averse to lifting the strict secrecy rules that apply.

Epstein grand jury

Trump acknowledges release of Epstein grand jury records may not please everyone

The DOJ asked a court to make public some records stemming from Jeffrey Epstein's prosecution

By Ben Johansen

President Donald Trump acknowledged Saturday morning that his administration’s move to make public grand jury records from the prosecution of disgraced financier and convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein may not satisfy everyone.

”I have asked the Justice Department to release all Grand Jury testimony with respect to Jeffrey Epstein, subject only to Court Approval,” Trump wrote on TruthSocial. “With that being said, and even if the Court gave its full and unwavering approval, nothing will be good enough for the troublemakers and radical left lunatics making the request. It will always be more, more, more. MAGA!”

Trump’s acknowledgment that the release may not satisfy everyone is a notable admission after the DOJ told courts Friday that it would not only make redactions of victim information, but “other personal identifying information” as well.

Attorney General Pam Bondi and Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche, who submitted the requests, did not elaborate on what “other” information they would shield.

The Justice Department’s move came amid pressure not just from the left, but from some Republicans who in recent days have pushed for the release of the records. Reps. Thomas Massie (R-Ky.), Lauren Boebert (R-Colo.) and Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-Ga.) joined Democrats, signing on as co-sponsors to legislation to force a vote on releasing the records.

It came after a Wall Street Journal report that described evidence that Trump, a then-real estate tycoon in New York, sent a racy letter to Epstein in 2003. It said the letter was part of a book of messages organized by Epstein’s friend, Ghislaine Maxwell, for his 50th birthday.

POLITICO has not independently verified the authenticity of the letter, which Trump claims is fake. On Friday, Trump sued the newspaper, as well as its parent company, News Corp., for defamation, seeking at least $20 billion.

Shit talking

The Just-Saying-Stuff Presidency

Much of what Donald Trump says is not serious. The rest is history.

Opinion by Dan Brooks

By the time President Donald Trump told Kristen Welker on Meet the Press in May that he would not “rule out” using military force to annex Greenland, I was pretty sure that I’d been had. He first outraged me with his Greenland plan six years ago and has brought it up at intervals ever since, periodically stirring up the Danish prime minister and domestic critics by, for example, posting an image of the Trump Tower Las Vegas photoshopped into a frozen village. “I don’t say I’m going to do it, but I don’t rule out anything,” he told Welker, inadvertently describing his whole approach to political communication as a practice of toying with the general American electorate, if not specifically me.

At this point I can admit he played me on Greenland, although even now I hesitate to say so in print. For all I know he could invade tomorrow, and in this regard, he plays me still. In defense of those of us who were fooled, though, Trump has spent the last decade training us to accept remarks more outlandish than that. Whatever else might be said of him, he has solved the problem of public speaking, in roughly the same way “Woolly Bully” solved the problem of song lyrics: by saying all sorts of things but meaning very little.

If American politicians have historically spoken in ways that seem wooden or uncandid, it is because their speech is at once necessary and dangerous. One cannot seek office without addressing the people, but to address the people is to invite disaster. Known gaffe machine Joe Biden confronted this hazard throughout his career, transcending it by misspeaking so often that misspeaking became part of his personal brand — a strategy that worked right up until it didn’t in the first debate of the 2024 election. Other national figures have kept their microphone time brief and anodyne, speaking only when necessary and avoiding firm language when they do.

Our president has taken the opposite approach. From the moment he descended the escalator at Trump Tower to announce his candidacy and wound up calling Mexican immigrants “rapists,” he established a pattern of calumny, hyperbole, name-calling, speculation and nonsense that made it clear nothing he said could be taken at face value, except the stuff he meant. Identifying that stuff amid his spray of unserious remarks requires a knowledge of his mental state that no one else has. It’s impossible to know when Trump is joking, when he’s off on a rant and when he might actually mean what he says.

His weaponization of this just-saying-stuff strategy is Trump’s major contribution to electoral politics. At this point in his improbably long career as a guy who either is or could be president, he has opened up space to lie, reverse course or simply screw up in ways no previous American leader has managed, freeing himself from nearly all consequences for his own speech. This freedom is not just negative. Trump’s commitment to loose talk has given him unprecedented leeway to act on his words without criticism or debate, before people have even decided whether he’s serious.

Trump’s unserious remarks run the gamut of rhetorical modes. He is probably the most sarcastic president in history. He speculates into microphones and cameras with no particular concern for facts, rants to visiting dignitaries and stadium crowds alike and routinely issues threats he never follows through on, interspersing them with public acts of revenge. Does he contradict himself? Reader, he contains multitudes, though none of it seems to stay contained for long. His recent about-face on Jeffrey Epstein reflects his willingness to weigh in on controversial issues with no firm commitment to his own position: In 2019, Trump demanded a “full investigation” of the financier’s death and purported client list, but now he frames questions about them as a conspiracy concocted by Democrats.

The confused, exhausted state in which we find ourselves after 10 years of continuously trying to guess when Trump means what he is saying feels, two presidencies in, like a chronic neurological condition. It began in 2015, with the problem of when and how to say that he was joking.

Trump does sometimes just joke. “He’s going to be fantastic. He’s going to bring home the bacon,” he said while signing an order to make Mike Huckabee ambassador to Israel. “Even though bacon isn’t too big in Israel.” This remark was a down-the-middle jest, and anyone who tried to make a scandal of it would embarrass themselves — a trap Democrats repeatedly fell into in the early years of Trump’s political career.

In significant part, the experience of spending the last 10 years watching Trump run for president, be president or monetize his past presidency has been the experience of watching other people make the mistake of taking his frivolous remarks at face value. Feeling superior to such people is basically the core of his appeal, if your taxable income is less than $400,000 a year. Trump’s ability to consistently deliver proof that people widely regarded as smart didn’t get it was his main advantage during the 2016 election, when his irresponsible, hateful or simply dishonest statements became occasions for him and his supporters to look authentic compared to a stodgy and pretentious establishment.

From there, the problem of how to interpret Trump only became more vexing, particularly for those outside his base. The growing national realization that Trump should be taken “seriously but not literally,” as journalist Salena Zito put it in 2016, laid the groundwork for a second kind of experience, in which the president says something most observers assume is a joke that turns out to be sincere. His talk of mass deportations, for example, seemed like mere rhetoric for several years (deportations during the first Trump administration did not exceed levels under President Barack Obama) and then abruptly became real during his second term, when social media was flooded with videos of masked ICE agents pulling people into unmarked vans.

Knowing that this kind of thing can happen keeps the first-order Trump experience — that of mistaking his loose talk for genuine policy proposals — maddeningly fresh. His plan to take control of Gaza, expel its Palestinian population and redevelop the area as a resort property appeared to be one such surprise-I-meant-it statement, at least for a while. No one thought his idea for a real-estate deal based on ethnic cleansing was serious, and then we experienced a few days of queasy reevaluation when he was posting videos about it and treating it as an actual plan. Then he never talked about it again.

The Gaza Riviera situation provided a test case for another disorienting experience, in which Trump himself seems not to have made up his mind, implying he is caught in the same will-he-or-won’t-he uncertainty he regularly inflicts on the rest of us.

Earlier this year, we got this third variety of Trump speech experience in his promise to enact massive tariffs on nearly every other country. It sounded like the usual bluster at first, but then he was actually doing it, to the panic of financial markets and neoliberal economists. Some of those tariff threats have since been walked back; others have been redoubled, while a 30-percent tax on goods from China has already gone into effect — a series of false starts and surprise follow-throughs that have made it impossible for investors to guess what conditions might apply to international trade in the future. Perhaps these reversals were a clever ploy to bring complacent partners to the negotiating table, or perhaps Trump genuinely wasn’t sure about his own trade policy. Only he knows for sure.

It is worth noting that this process of saying it, walking it back and then actually doing it materially benefited the president, in that it likely discouraged members of Congress and other interested parties from mounting a legal challenge to his authority to impose tariffs in the first place. After Israel attacked Iran, Trump’s announcement that he would take two weeks to decide how to respond worked in a similar way: Debate over an issue with the potential to split his coalition was forestalled while he (perhaps really, perhaps only ostensibly) waited to make up his mind, and then he acted suddenly, before intra-Republican conflict had a chance to begin in earnest.

I call attention to this phenomenon because I want to rule out the theory that Trump has some kind of personality disorder that prevents him from knowing when he means something and when he doesn’t. A wise clinician once told me that it’s not a disability if it works to your advantage. While I believe that, like Royal Tenenbaum, the president occasionally says something and then realizes it was true, he generally knows when he is lying, joking, bluffing or riffing to see what sticks, as well as when he is speaking sincerely and when he is giving the impression of one but actually doing the other. And his awareness creates an information asymmetry that works to his advantage.

This advantage should be familiar to anyone who has ever been in a bad relationship with someone who was quote-unquote funny. The husband who calls his wife fat and then complains she can’t take a joke is an archetypal instance of this phenomenon. By framing his remarks as a joke, he creates space to say mean things without having to take responsibility for them. If he said sincerely, “I want you to lose weight,” he would open the floor to his wife’s critique of his own appearance, a conversation over which he might rapidly lose control. By making “jokes” that are exaggerated versions of what he actually means, he enjoys the advantages of hassling his wife about her weight while avoiding the costs, or at least deferring them. Eventually she will leave or install Tinder, but until then he can evade the consequences of mistreating her by insisting he was only kidding.

The recently popular “TACO” acronym can be read as one misguided attempt to cope with the psychological fallout of this dynamic. The claim that “Trump Always Chickens Out,” which started as an investment strategy and became a taunt, is seductive but reflects a longing for certainty that is simply not available. It’s no good to assume that nothing the president says will actually happen, because historically some of it has. The false sense of wisdom TACO encourages might simply be the next phase of our training.

Trump has long made his plans for the presidency a kind of state secret. During his third campaign, he told a town hall in Iowa that he wouldn’t be a dictator, “other than day one.” CNN uploaded its video segment on this remark to YouTube with the title “Donald Trump jokes about acting like a ‘dictator.’” Six months into his second term, he has ignored court orders to return residents deported to foreign prisons and remarked that “homegrown” criminals are next.

Now his last election is behind him, maybe. On March 30 he told NBC News he might seek a third term, then told Meet the Press five weeks later that he wouldn’t. Americans who may want to act on or at least think seriously about this information are faced with the daunting task of determining in which case, if either, he was just talking. It is the kind of thing he says, after all. Whether it is the kind of thing he means is beyond what any of us could pretend to know.

People in rural and small towns fucked themselves.........

Republicans’ food aid cuts will hit grocers in many towns that backed Trump

The GOP’s policy megabill could reshape how people in rural and small towns access food.

By Rachel Shin

The deep cuts Republicans made to federal nutrition programs this summer are poised to devastate independent grocery stores that are central to many low-income communities, including those that voted for President Donald Trump.

Food aid recipients often make up the majority of small grocers’ customer base in remote areas and food deserts — places that have limited options for fresh, healthy food.

But a central part of paying for the GOP policy megabill Trump signed on July 4 relied on slashing the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, the nation’s largest anti-hunger initiative.

Even though some provisions in the new law won’t go into effect for another three years, others, like expanded work requirements for SNAP participants, could kick some families out of the program and hit the bottom lines of small grocery stores within months. It’s a chain reaction set off in Washington that’s likely to reshape how people access food in more isolated communities even if they don’t use federal assistance.

“I lean pretty heavily right most of the time, but one of the things that I do lean to the left on is we’re a pretty wealthy country, we can help people out,” said St. Johns, Arizona, Mayor Spence Udall, whose town overwhelmingly supported Trump in 2024.

“The businesses that will be affected most by this are the businesses that are most disadvantaged, that are struggling, and you’re going to find that in the rural markets,” he added.

Udall’s community, which sits halfway between — but still far from — Phoenix and Albuquerque, has one grocery store and one local food bank serving over 3,500 people. If the store shutters due to the food aid cuts, the next closest option for groceries is roughly 30 miles away.

Republicans’ overhaul of the anti-hunger program will lead to thousands of job losses and a drop in revenue across the agriculture, retail grocery and food processing industries, according to a study from the Commonwealth Fund.

Independent grocers said in interviews that they are considering cutting staff or pivoting to e-commerce and delivery services to stave off some of the anticipated profit loss.

“I’d just as soon cut a leg off than have my customers out in the poorest county of the United States go without food. That just isn’t an option in my mind,” said RF Buche, the owner of the only grocery store for the Pine Ridge Indian Reservation in South Dakota. “It is as essential as anything that is in that area.”

Between 60 percent and 80 percent of Buche’s customers rely on SNAP, accounting for nearly half of his revenue. Buche said he’s weighing layoffs in order to keep his doors open.

Republican lawmakers, many of whom represent districts with substantial numbers of food aid recipients, defended their megabill, saying the cuts will ultimately help low-income families and their local communities.

“Grocers are good people, hard-working families, and they only make a 1 to 2 percent margin,” said House Agriculture Chair G.T. Thompson (R-Pa.), a top negotiator in the plan to slash SNAP. “A significant number of people who currently are on SNAP through unemployment will now be climbing a ladder of opportunity, which [means] they’ll be able to have more resources to buy more food. So our grocers are going to do well with this.”

Thompson said grocers have been “the victim of fear mongering by the Democrats” and the benefits restrictions will be a boon to their industry.

Democrats like Rep. Shontel Brown (D-Ohio) disagree and are exploring ways to mitigate the SNAP cuts through upcoming legislation and negotiations.

“We’ll use every tool at our disposal,” said Brown, deputy ranking member of the House Agriculture Committee. “I know there’s been some conversation around a skinny farm bill, and I don’t know, candidly, what that will look like. But if there’s any opportunity to reverse course or to supplement funds, I will certainly do that.”

Several Republican and Democratic state officials have already warned that it will be difficult to backfill the loss of federal dollars. They will need to consider redirecting funds from existing programs, cutting benefits, raising taxes or finding some alternative method to protect their budgets.

“I don’t think any state is going to cut [SNAP benefits],” Thompson said. “If they do, the governors and state legislators that do the cuts are not going to be governors and state legislators for very long.”

Rep. Gabe Vasquez (D-N.M.) said that his state is bracing for “tens of thousands of people” losing access to SNAP.

“The key here is that if we keep enough folks buying at local rural grocery stores, those local rural grocery stores have a higher chance to survive,” Vasquez said. “We have to make sure folks either have money in their pocket and that states can make up the shortfall in SNAP cuts to preserve that access, or for other folks, provide alternate means to be able to feed them.”

Tom Charley owns Charley Family Shop ‘N Save in Greensburg, Pennsylvania, a town about an hour outside of Thompson’s district. Like Buche, Charley is considering reducing his workforce as he braces for the megabill cuts to slice into his store’s already razor-thin profit margin.

“When you’re talking about cutting out that substantial size of funding that goes directly to these customers, it means that there’s going to be less people working in our stores because of it, just from the pure fact that we have to make sure that our budgets are extremely tight because all of the competition,” Charley said.

If a community loses a grocery store, especially a rural community, the economic impact is often broader than the individual store’s revenue loss, said Stephanie Johnson, vice president of government relations for the National Grocers Association.

In many areas, small grocery stores double as community hubs, hardware stores and stock products from local producers. Each SNAP dollar spent in a rural area generates $1.50 in local economic activity during recessions, per USDA data.

NGA is helping grocers seek clarity on how the SNAP cuts will be implemented in their states, according to Johnson.

“The grocery store employs 15 people, maybe more, and if we lose the grocery store, what do those people do?” said Udall, the St. Johns, Arizona, mayor. “It’s not just about people shopping at the grocery store. It has a ripple effect.”