Posts

mta

MTA Chair Rejects Amtrak Partnership Offer on Penn Station Redesign

/in /by

The MTA is signaling that it could become a major obstacle to the Trump administration’s effort to overhaul Penn Station, with Chair Janno Lieber warning that the Long Island Rail Road’s longstanding rights inside the Manhattan train hub give the authority significant leverage over any reconstruction plans.

Read more
health insurance

8% Of Americans Didn’t Have Health Insurance In 2025, That Number Could Rise 

/in , /by

According to new data from the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 8% of the American population went without health insurance in 2025. 

The national survey was released last week, and showed that the all-ages uninsured rate had remained significantly down from where it was several years ago, according to reports from AP. However, the number of uninsured Americans is expected to rise as the Trump administration’s changes to the nation’s healthcare industry begin to take effect. 

Embed from Getty Images

For example, according to estimates from the Congressional Budget Office, major changes to Medicaid passed into law last year could result in 10 million more Americans going without insurance over the next 10 years. Medicaid is the government’s safety-net health program for low-income Americans. 

Another contribution to the percentage is the expiration of certain Affordable Care Act subsidies that helped offset premium costs. Healthcare research nonprofit KFF stated that about 5 million fewer people are expected to enroll in those specific programs throughout 2026 when compared to 2025. 

The government itself utilizes multiple programs to track Americans’ insurance status. Many researchers consider the US Census Bureau to “be the official scorekeeper,” according to David Howard, a health policy and management professor. However, the CDC survey results track closely with the Bureau and offer complete data from all of 2025. 

The survey showed that the number of insured and uninsured citizens stayed roughly the same in 2025 as 2024, however, the number of uninsured did grow by about 800,000. 300,000 of that growth are children, and the overall increase in the US population partially explains that. 

The results also suggested a possible increase among Hispanic Americans, according to AP, which could parallel the impact of the Trump administration’s immigration enforcement. 

Most Americans 65 and older have health insurance through the federal Medicare program, and younger Americans are mainly covered through public and private insurance programs. 

Embed from Getty Images

The percentage of Americans under 65 who were uninsured has actually increased consistently throughout the 1980s, 1990s, and early 2000s. In 1980 the percentage sat at 12% and increased to 18% by 2010 following the passage of the Affordable Care Act. 

In 2016, the percentage dropped to 10% before increasing to 12% during Trump’s first administration, according to data from the CDC’s National Center for Health Statistics.

The Covid-19 pandemic actually had more people insured due to government policies that were put in place so citizens could maintain their coverage. A long term impact of this was having the rate hit an all-time low in 2023 which was below 9%. 

While we can’t exactly predict how the uninsured percentage will increase in the coming year, all experts agree that we will see a rise due to the changes made to the Affordable Care Act and Medicaid. 

“The decisions being made now — in Congress, state legislatures and state Medicaid agencies — will determine what happens next,” said Nancy Brown, chief executive officer of the American Heart Association.

“Policymakers should act immediately to protect and expand access to affordable coverage, strengthen Medicaid and maintain pathways that make coverage and care accessible,” she said. 

“Without deliberate action, including reversing dramatic cuts to coverage, uninsured rates will continue to rise, putting quality health care further out of reach.”

iran

Trump-appointed Intelligence Chief Resigns Over Iran War, Citing Lack of “Imminent Threat”

/in /by

A top US intelligence official appointed by President Donald Trump resigned Tuesday, publicly breaking with the administration over its decision to go to war with Iran and intensifying scrutiny of the intelligence used to justify the conflict.

“After much reflection, I have decided to resign from my position as Director of the National Counterterrorism Center, effective today,” Joe Kent wrote in a post on X.

In a resignation letter attached to the post, Kent sharply criticized the rationale for the war.

“I cannot in good conscience support the ongoing war in Iran. Iran posed no imminent threat to our nation, and it is clear that we started this war due to pressure from Israel and its powerful American lobby,” he wrote.

Kent’s departure marks the first major resignation of Trump’s second term tied directly to a policy dispute, and it comes as lawmakers and analysts question whether the administration overstated the threat posed by Iran.

The administration has maintained that military action was necessary to counter an “imminent threat.” Trump cited that justification following the initial strikes, and officials said the US acted to prevent potential Iranian attacks on American forces in the region.

However, those claims have been challenged. In briefings to Capitol Hill, Pentagon officials said Iran was not planning to strike unless it was attacked first. Kent echoed that skepticism in his resignation letter, accusing Israeli officials and media narratives of shaping a misleading picture.

“This echo chamber was used to deceive you into believing that Iran posed an imminent threat to the United States, and that should you strike now, there was a clear path to victory. This was a lie and is the same tactic the Israelis used to draw us into the disastrous Iraq war that cost our nation the lives of thousands of our best men and women. We cannot make this mistake again.”

Embed from Getty Images

Trump responded dismissively to Kent’s resignation, framing it as a matter of national security judgment.

“When somebody is working with us that says they didn’t think Iran was a threat, we don’t want those people,” Trump said from the Oval Office. “They’re not smart people, or they’re not savvy people.”

He added that Kent stepping down was a “good thing” and described him as “very weak on security.”

The war has exposed fractures within Trump’s political base.

Several prominent conservative figures, including Megyn Kelly and Tucker Carlson, have criticized the administration’s approach to Iran and its close alignment with Israel. Influential podcast hosts such as Joe Rogan, Theo Von and Tim Dillon, all credited with helping energize Trump’s 2024 campaign, have also voiced skepticism.

Despite that backlash, polling suggests most Republican voters support the war. An NBC News survey conducted after the conflict began found that 77% of Republicans  and 90% of self-identified MAGA Republicans backed the strikes on Iran.

The same poll showed 69% of Republicans sympathized more with Israelis than Palestinians. Still, favorable views of Israel among Republicans have declined, dropping to 54% from 63% in 2023.

Sen. Mark Warner of Virginia, the top Democrat on the Senate Intelligence Committee, criticized Kent’s broader record but agreed with his assessment of the intelligence.

“I strongly disagree with many of the positions he has espoused over the years, particularly those that risk politicizing our intelligence community. But on this point, he is right: there was no credible evidence of an imminent threat from Iran that would justify rushing the United States into another war of choice in the Middle East.”

Kent’s exit also draws renewed attention to his contentious record in government.

Embed from Getty Images

Before leading the National Counterterrorism Center, he served as a senior aide to Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard. He rose in prominence as a vocal supporter of Trump’s false claims about the 2020 election.

His tenure was marked by clashes with other officials. Last year, FBI Director Kash Patel and Justice Department leaders rebuked Kent after he attempted to access FBI systems to investigate the assassination of conservative activist Charlie Kirk, pursuing theories of possible foreign involvement.

Officials warned that such access could jeopardize the prosecution of Tyler Robinson, the Utah man charged in the killing.

Kent also faced scrutiny during his 2022 congressional campaign over past interactions with extremist figures. He repeatedly distanced himself from Nazi sympathizer Greyson Arnold and Holocaust denier Nick Fuentes, saying he was unfamiliar with Fuentes and did not seek his endorsement.

At his confirmation hearing, Sen. Patty Murray described him as a “conspiracy theorist who espouses white supremacist views and is patently unqualified for this important role in just about every way imaginable.” He was ultimately confirmed by a 52-44 vote in the Senate.

Despite the controversies, Kent brought extensive national security experience to the role. He served 11 combat tours during a 20-year Army career before becoming a CIA officer.

He is also a Gold Star spouse. His first wife, Shannon, a Navy cryptologist, was killed in a 2019 suicide bombing in Syria.

The administration’s rationale for the conflict has evolved over time.

Trump has variously framed the war as a response to threats of Iranian military action, an effort to curb nuclear and missile development, and a broader push to weaken a regime that has supported attacks on Americans. He has also expressed support for Iranian protesters seeking political change, even as officials insist the war is not aimed at regime change.

Kent’s resignation now adds a high-profile internal challenge to those shifting justifications and is likely to deepen questions about how the US entered the conflict in the first place.

protest

Protests In US Have Massively Increased Since Trump’s First Term 

/in , /by

After the first year of Donald Trump retaking office, the number of protests in the United States have increased greatly when compared to the same point in his first administration. The Crowd Counting Consortium, an open-source project collaboration with Harvard University’s Kennedy School and the University of Connecticut, reported that there were more than 10,700 protests in 2025. 

Embed from Getty Images

This marks a 133% increase from the 4,588 recorded back in 2017 during the first year of Trump’s first term. 

According to the data from Crown Counting Consortium, a large majority of US counties have had at least one protest since he was placed back in office last year; this includes the 42% of counties that voted for Trump in the 2024 election. 

“It is a very historic time, in the sense that people are mobilizing where they live in ways that I don’t think I have seen before in my lifetime,” said Erica Chenoweth, a political scientist and co-director of the Crowd Counting Consortium.

Some of the most prominent protests have had to do with the main headlines to come out for the Trump Administration from his first year in office. There has been multiple coverage of protests for trans youth healthcare, the US’s support of Israel in Gaza, Elon Musk’s involvement in government, and anti-ICE movements as federal agents raid a multitude of US cities.

Chenoweth stated that more protests have not just occurred, but have been highly coordinated, organized, and scheduled, especially the No Kings and Hands Off protests. 

The project stated normally flash points of protests have been “localized to big cities or a march on Washington, and we’re not seeing that, we’re seeing very diffused protest mobilization all around the country.” 

What’s also significant is where these protests are occurring. Many notable movements have been occurring in red and rural pockets of the US that voted for Trump.

“It definitely cuts against the narrative that protest is confined to major cities, to the coasts, and to predominantly liberal areas where it doesn’t change anybody’s mind.”

Embed from Getty Images

Looking back at Trump’s first term, there were a few major spikes in protests such as the 2018 student walkouts after the Parkland high school shooting, the summer 2018 protests regarding immigrant family separations, and the 2020 Black Lives Matter movements and protests following the killing of George Floyd. 

Most recently, protesting has been occurring throughout nearly the entirety of 2025 and into 2026 over ICE deployments in multiple states and major cities throughout the country. In Minneapolis, many are protesting following the killing of Renee Good during and ICE interaction on January 7th. 

“What’s really notable now is how much grassroots, improvised and then organized response there is to ICE operations,” said Chenoweth. 

“The defining feature of [the Minneapolis ICE] protests is absolutely focused on that issue and sense of outrage, and just finding unbearable and intolerable, the way the administration is approaching this.”

Cheneweth stated that the US is at an “inflection point” when it comes to the growth in nonviolent protesting, and these movements help to give citizens a real sense of agency in wake of feeling powerless and hopeless. 

“This is a very important thing for people to feel and internalize when the more dominant narrative is otherwise.”

flag

‘The US Refugee Program Changed My Life, Now Its Future Is Uncertain’

/in , /by

“Despite these troubling political developments, I still love my country and wouldn’t want to live anywhere else. Historically, generosity, welcoming and caring for people fleeing violence, war and persecution have been America’s core values.”

Read more
cdc

Hundreds Of Fired CDC Staff By Trump Administration Have Been Reinstated 

/in , /by

Hundreds of staff members that were fired by the Trump Administration from the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention have been reinstated.

Read more
ice

Apple and Google Remove Apps That Track ICE Agents After Federal Pressure

/in /by

What began as a niche tool for community safety has erupted into a national flashpoint over technology, free speech, and government power. Apple and Google have pulled a series of apps that crowdsource sightings of U.S. immigration enforcement officers, sparking outrage from developers, civil rights advocates, and immigration organizations that say the move represents corporate capitulation to the Trump administration’s political agenda.

Read more
troops

Federal Judge Blocks Trump’s Attempt to Send Out-of-State Troops to Oregon

/in /by

A federal judge in Oregon accused the Trump administration of directly defying her court order Sunday night after the White House continued mobilizing National Guard troops from multiple states for deployment in Democratic-led cities.

Judge Karin Immergut of the U.S. District Court in Oregon, who is herself a Trump appointee, had issued a restraining order just a day earlier, blocking the federal government from deploying out-of-state Guard members to Oregon. Yet within 24 hours, the administration began rerouting hundreds of troops from California and Texas, prompting an emergency hearing and an expansion of the judge’s order.

Immergut’s revised ruling now bars “the relocation, federalization, or deployment of members of the National Guard of any state or the District of Columbia in the state of Oregon.” During the hearing, she told Justice Department lawyers that the president’s actions were “in direct contravention” of her directive.

The president’s efforts to tap Guard units from Texas, California, and elsewhere have triggered chaos among governors and the courts alike. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth confirmed Sunday that up to 400 Texas National Guard members were being prepared for “federal protection missions” in Portland, Chicago, and other cities.

In Illinois, Democratic Gov. J.B. Pritzker condemned the move outright. “We must now start calling this what it is: Trump’s invasion,” he said.

“It started with federal agents. It will soon include deploying federalized members of the Illinois National Guard against our wishes, and it will now involve sending in another state’s military troops.”

Embed from Getty Images

Texas Gov. Greg Abbott, a Republican, voiced full support on social media, saying his state’s Guard could out-train any in the nation.

“You can either fully enforce protection for federal employees or get out of the way and let the Texas Guard do it. No Guard can match the training, skill, and expertise of the Texas National Guard.”

The president justified the deployments as a response to protests at Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) facilities in Portland and suburban Chicago. But Judge Immergut’s Saturday order noted that Portland’s demonstrations were “not significantly violent or disruptive,” adding that the president appeared to have exceeded his constitutional authority.

The weekend’s legal scramble followed a separate decision to redirect 200 California National Guard members, previously federalized for duty in Los Angeles, to Oregon.

“I am certainly troubled by now hearing that both California and Texas are being sent to Oregon, which does appear to be in direct contradiction of my order,” Immergut said.

That move, criticized as an end-run around the court’s ban, drew sharp objections from both Gov. Gavin Newsom of California and Gov. Tina Kotek of Oregon.

“The rule of law has prevailed — and California’s National Guard will be heading home,” Newsom said after the court reaffirmed its injunction Sunday night.

“President Trump’s actions are an effort to occupy and incite cities and states that don’t share his politics,” Gov. Tina Kotek said in a statement, “and I believe that we should expect him to continue to push the limits of his authority.”

“This is a continuation and escalation of the President’s dangerous, un-American misuse of states’ National Guard members and hard-earned taxpayer dollars.”

Oregon’s attorney general, Dan Rayfield, warned that the situation still fell far short of any condition justifying federal military intervention.

“What was unlawful yesterday is unlawful today,” he said.

Embed from Getty Images

The controversy spotlights a murky legal question: can the president federalize one state’s National Guard and send those troops into another state that objects?

Elizabeth Goitein, a national security law expert at NYU’s Brennan Center for Justice, said the California troops were technically part of the federal armed forces once “federalized.” Still, she added that Judge Immergut’s reasoning likely rendered such a deployment unlawful.

The relevant statute, Section 12406 of Title 10 of the U.S. Code, allows the president to take control of state Guards only under specific conditions, which Immergut found were “not present in Portland.”

Representative Adam Smith of Washington, the ranking Democrat on the House Armed Services Committee, said he could not recall another instance where one state’s National Guard had been sent into another state over both governors’ objections.

Despite the administration’s insistence that Portland was “under siege,” Immergut’s order cited local police reports describing protests as small and largely peaceful. On Sunday morning, the city’s streets were calm — marathon runners, brunch lines, and dog walkers replaced the chaotic imagery depicted by the White House.

Outside the ICE facility that prompted the federal response, roughly 70 protesters gathered peacefully, barbecuing and handing out bottled water. “There are more people filming each other than rabble-rousers,” said Alex Knots, 58, who joined the demonstration.

Still, local officials fear that continued federal intervention could inflame tensions. Portland Mayor Keith Wilson warned that “this is an aggressive approach trying to inflame a situation that has otherwise been peaceful.”

In recent days, federal agents at the ICE facility escalated crowd control tactics, using tear gas, flash-bang grenades, and pepper balls to disperse demonstrators several blocks from the building.

California Attorney General Rob Bonta accused the president of abusing his powers for political theater:

“It’s our National Guard — not Trump’s Royal Guard, as he seems to think.”

Both Oregon and California have secured temporary relief in court, but Guard deployments to Illinois and other states remained pending. With multiple lawsuits and appeals underway, the clash over presidential authority and the boundaries of federal power appears to be far from over.

nbc

Jimmy Kimmel And Stephen Colbert Join Forces Amid Mutual Cancellations 

/in , /by

Late night TV hosts Jimmy Kimmel and Stephen Colbert were both guests on each other’s shows this week. The two traded stories over their recent cancellations, which was temporary for Kimmel and permanent for Colbert, and discussed the state of modern journalism and free speech in America’s current political climate.

Read more
disney

Michael Eisner Accuses Disney of Caving to Political Threats After Kimmel Show Pulled

/in /by

Michael Eisner, the man who led Disney through its renaissance era as its former CEO, is now publicly condemning the company he once ran for what he sees as a dangerous act of capitulation—the suspension of “Jimmy Kimmel Live!” after political threats from Washington.

Eisner, 83, spent 21 years at the helm of Disney, from 1984 to 2005, transforming it into the media powerhouse it is today. But on Thursday, he took to X to criticize Disney executives, saying corporate America has a duty to defend free expression even when political winds turn hostile.

“Where has all the leadership gone? If not for university presidents, law firm managing partners, and corporate chief executives standing up against bullies, who then will step up for the First Amendment?”

Although Eisner did not name names, it was Bob Iger, Disney’s current CEO at age 74, who signed off on Kimmel’s suspension alongside Dana Walden, the co-chairman of Disney Entertainment and the executive with direct oversight of ABC.

The decision came just days after FCC Chairman Brendan Carr threatened to revoke ABC’s broadcasting license following comments Kimmel made about Republican reactions to the Sept. 10 assassination of conservative activist Charlie Kirk.

Kimmel’s show was pulled on Wednesday, only two days after he accused the MAGA movement of scrambling to spin the tragedy for political gain.

Embed from Getty Images

“We hit some new lows over the weekend with the MAGA gang desperately trying to characterize this kid who murdered Charlie Kirk as anything other than one of them and doing everything they can to score political points from it,” Kimmel said.

Carr, however, accused Kimmel of spreading “intentional misinformation” about the alleged killer’s political motives, a claim critics say was baseless.

Eisner, who once endorsed Iger’s return to Disney after Bob Chapek’s short-lived and rocky tenure, appeared stunned by what he viewed as a surrender to coercion.

“The ‘suspending indefinitely’ of Jimmy Kimmel immediately after the Chairman of the FCC’s aggressive yet hollow threatening of the Disney Company is yet another example of out-of-control intimidation,” he wrote.

“Maybe the Constitution should have said, ‘Congress shall make no law abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press, except in one’s political or financial self-interest.’ By the way, for the record, this ex-CEO finds Jimmy Kimmel very talented and funny.”

The backlash over Kimmel’s removal has been swift and loud. Celebrities, including Jason Bateman and Mark Ruffalo, have criticized Disney’s decision. At the same time, former and current late-night hosts, including David Letterman, Jay Leno, and Seth Meyers, have all condemned what they see as corporate cowardice. Even former President Barack Obama weighed in, reminding Americans of the constitutional protections for speech, even unpopular speech.

Embed from Getty Images

Sports commentator Dan Le Batard, the former ESPN host, didn’t mince words either. On his show, he compared Disney’s move to state-controlled media, accusing Iger of bowing to political threats at the expense of journalistic freedom.

“Seeing Jimmy Kimmel not have the protection of something as powerful as Disney because corporate interests in media are filled with such cowardice that you have a situation where not even Bob Iger has the money or the power to stand up to the threat that is presently upon the shores of everyone in media because of how compromised they are by a series of mergers and money interests,” he said on his Thursday show.

“And to see Bob Iger show this kind of cowardice and bend the knee again, again with Trump, not the first time, because what happens here is once you’re a coward who’s extorted, the bully is going to keep extorting the coward.”

This marks a dramatic break in the usually polite relationship between Eisner and Iger. Until now, Eisner had publicly supported his successor, even backing Iger’s return to Disney leadership in 2024 after the turbulent Chapek era. That era of civility appears to be over as the company faces mounting criticism for prioritizing political expediency over free expression.