Category: Associated Press

  • First of 30 oil lease sales planned for Gulf of Mexico draws $279 million

    First of 30 oil lease sales planned for Gulf of Mexico draws $279 million

    WASHINGTON — Oil companies offered $279 million for drilling rights in the Gulf of Mexico on Wednesday in the first of 30 sales planned for the region under Republican efforts to ramp up U.S. fossil fuel production.

    The sale came after President Donald Trump’s administration recently announced plans to allow new drilling off Florida and California for the first time in decades. That’s drawn pushback including from Republicans worried about impacts to tourism.

    Wednesday’s sale was mandated by the sweeping tax-and-spending bill approved by Republicans over the summer. Under that legislation, companies will pay a 12.5% royalty on oil produced from the leases. That’s the lowest royalty level for deep-water drilling since 2007.

    Thirty companies submitted bids, including industry giants Chevron, Shell and BP, federal officials said. The total amount of high bids was down by more than $100 million from the previous lease sale in the Gulf of Mexico, under former Democratic President Joe Biden, in December 2023.

    “This sale reflects a significant step in the federal government’s efforts to restore U.S. energy dominance and advance responsible offshore energy development,” said Laura Robbins, acting director of the Gulf region for the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management, which is part of the Interior Department.

    The administration’s promotion of fossil fuels contrasts sharply with its hostility to renewable energy, particularly offshore wind. A judge on Monday struck down an executive order from Trump blocking wind energy projects, saying it violated U.S. law.

    Environmentalists said the fossil fuel sales would put wildlife in the Gulf at an higher risk of dying in oil spills. Spills occur regularly in the region and have included the 2010 Deepwater Horizon tragedy that killed 11 workers in an oil rig explosion and unleashed a massive spill.

    “The Gulf is already overwhelmed with thousands of oil rigs and pipelines, and oil companies are doing a terrible job of cleaning up after themselves,” said Rachel Matthews with the Center for Biological Diversity.

    Erik Milito with the National Ocean Industries Association, an industry group, said the takeaway from Wednesday’s sale was that the Gulf “is open.”

    While results of individual lease sales may fluctuate, Milito added, “the real success is the resumption of a regular leasing cadence.”

    “Knowing that (another lease sale) is coming in March 2026 allows companies to plan, study, and refine their bids, rather than being forced to respond to the uncertainty of a politically-driven multiyear pause,” he said.

    At least two lease sales annually are mandated through 2039 and one in 2040.

    The sales support an executive order by Trump that directs federal agencies to accelerate offshore oil and gas development, Interior Secretary Doug Burgum said in a statement. He said it would unlock investment, strengthen U.S. energy security and create jobs.

    But Earthjustice attorney George Torgun said the Trump administration conducted the sale without analyzing how it would expose the entire Gulf region to oil spills, how communities could be harmed by pollution and how it could devastate vulnerable marine life such as the endangered Rice’s whale, which numbers only in the dozens and lives in the Gulf of Mexico.

    The environmental group has asked a federal judge to ensure that the lease sale and future oil sales better protect Gulf communities.

    Only a small portion of parcels offered for sale typically receive bids, in areas where companies want to expand their existing drilling activities or where they foresee future development potential. It can be years before drilling occurs.

    The drilling leases sold in December 2023 and during another sale in March 2023 are held up by litigation, according to Robbins. A federal court ruled this spring that Interior officials did not adequately account for impacts to planet-warming greenhouse gas emissions and the Rice’s whale.

  • Trump says the U.S. has seized an oil tanker off the coast of Venezuela

    Trump says the U.S. has seized an oil tanker off the coast of Venezuela

    President Donald Trump said Wednesday that the United States has seized an oil tanker off the coast of Venezuela as tensions mount with the government of President Nicolás Maduro.

    Using U.S. forces to seize an oil tanker is incredibly unusual and marks the Trump administration’s latest push to increase pressure on Maduro, who has been charged with narcoterrorism in the United States. The U.S. has built up the largest military presence in the region in decades and launched a series of deadly strikes on alleged drug-smuggling boats in the Caribbean Sea and eastern Pacific Ocean. The campaign is facing growing scrutiny from Congress.

    “We’ve just seized a tanker on the coast of Venezuela, a large tanker, very large, largest one ever seized, actually,” Trump told reporters at the White House, later adding that “it was seized for a very good reason.”

    Trump did not offer additional details. When asked what would happen to the oil aboard the tanker, Trump said, “Well, we keep it, I guess.”

    The seizure was led by the U.S. Coast Guard and supported by the Navy, according to a U.S. official who was not authorized to comment publicly and spoke on the condition of anonymity. The official added that the seizure was conducted under U.S. law enforcement authority.

    The Coast Guard members were taken to that ship by helicopter from the aircraft carrier USS Gerald R. Ford, the official said. The Ford is in the Caribbean Sea after arriving last month in a major show of force, joining a fleet of other warships that have been increasing pressure on Maduro.

    Video posted online by Attorney General Pam Bondi shows people fast-roping from one of the helicopters involved in the operation as it hovers just feet from the deck.

    The Coast Guard members can be seen in later shots of the video moving throughout the superstructure of the ship with their weapons drawn.

    Bondi wrote that “for multiple years, the oil tanker has been sanctioned by the United States due to its involvement in an illicit oil shipping network supporting foreign terrorist organizations.”

    Half of ship’s oil is tied to Cuban importer

    The U.S. official identified the seized tanker as the Skipper.

    The ship departed Venezuela around Dec. 2 with about 2 million barrels of heavy crude, roughly half of it belonging to a Cuban state-run oil importer, according to documents from the state-owned company Petróleos de Venezuela S.A., commonly known as PDVSA, that were provided on the condition of anonymity because the person did not have permission to share them.

    The Skipper was previously known as the M/T Adisa, according to ship tracking data. The Adisa was sanctioned by the U.S. in 2022 over accusations of belonging to a sophisticated network of shadow tankers that smuggled crude oil on behalf of Iran’s Revolutionary Guard and Lebanon’s Hezbollah militant group.

    The network was reportedly run by a Switzerland-based Ukrainian oil trader, the U.S. Treasury Departmeny said at the time.

    Hitting Venezuela’s sanctioned oil business

    Venezuela has the world’s largest proven oil reserves and produces about 1 million barrels a day. Locked out of global oil markets by U.S. sanctions, the state-owned oil company sells most of its output at a steep discount to refiners in China.

    The transactions usually involve a complex network of shadowy intermediaries, as sanctions have scared away more established traders. Many are shell companies, registered in jurisdictions known for secrecy. The buyers deploy so-called ghost tankers that hide their location and hand off their valuable cargoes in the middle of the ocean before they reach their final destination.

    Maduro did not address the seizure during a speech before a ruling-party organized demonstration in Caracas, Venezuela’s capital. But he told supporters that the country is “prepared to break the teeth of the North American empire if necessary.”

    Maduro, flanked by senior officials, said only the ruling party can “guarantee peace, stability, and the harmonious development of Venezuela, South America and the Caribbean.”

    During past negotiations, among the concessions the U.S. has made to Maduro was approval for oil giant Chevron Corp. to resume pumping and exporting Venezuelan oil. The corporation’s activities in the South American country resulted in a financial lifeline for Maduro’s government.

    Maduro has insisted the real purpose of the U.S. military operations is to force him from office.

    Democrat says move is about ‘regime change’

    Sen. Chris Van Hollen (D., Md.), a member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, said the U.S. seizing of the oil tanker cast doubt on the administration’s stated reasons for the military buildup and boat strikes in the region.

    “This shows that their whole cover story — that this is about interdicting drugs — is a big lie,” the senator said. “This is just one more piece of evidence that this is really about regime change — by force.”

    The seizure comes a day after the U.S. military flew a pair of fighter jets over the Gulf of Venezuela in what appeared to be the closest that warplanes had come to the South American country’s airspace. Trump has said land attacks are coming soon but has not offered more details.

    The Trump administration is facing increasing scrutiny from lawmakers over the boat-strike campaign, which has killed at least 87 people in 22 known strikes since early September, including a follow-up strike that killed two survivors clinging to the wreckage of a boat after the first hit.

    Some legal experts and Democrats say that action may have violated the laws governing the use of deadly military force.

    Lawmakers are demanding to get unedited video from the strikes, but Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth told congressional leaders Tuesday he was still weighing whether to release it. Hegseth provided a classified briefing for congressional leaders alongside Secretary of State Marco Rubio and CIA Director John Ratcliffe.

    It was not immediately clear Wednesday who owned the tanker or what national flag it was sailing under. The Coast Guard referred a request for comment to the White House.

  • EU enlargement chief: Ukraine’s membership ‘inevitable’

    EU enlargement chief: Ukraine’s membership ‘inevitable’

    KYIV, Ukraine — The European Union’s enlargement chief said Wednesday she is confident Hungary will not derail Ukraine’s path to membership, which she described as “inevitable.”

    “I’m not worried,” Commissioner Marta Kos told reporters while visiting a thermal power plant in Western Ukraine that was badly damaged by Russia’s campaign against civilian infrastructure. “I would be worried if there were real concerns.”

    “On EU membership of Ukraine — which is inevitable — I see this as a political anchor of security guarantees,” she said, noting that “There has never been a war on the territory of the European Union.”

    Ukraine hopes to join the bloc by the end of the decade and remains frustrated that its path to NATO membership looks uncertain.

    Kyiv applied for EU membership in 2022 shortly after Russia’s full-scale invasion. Now, Commissioner Kos is convening an informal meeting of European affairs ministers Thursday to prepare for the next stage of accession talks.

    Kos hinted that the process could move even faster, saying “The quicker the reforms which are needed will be done, the quicker the process can be.”

    Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán has opposed launching membership talks while the war continues. Yet, Kos dismissed his objections saying “We do not need Orbán to do the reforms which are necessary for Ukraine to become a member of the EU.”

    The Slovenian diplomat toured the heavily damaged power plant, where heavy machinery was blackened, control panels melted and a giant hole gaped in the roof of one of the main buildings.

    Andrii, a turbine operator on duty during a recent attack, described the chaos that followed.

    “The first thing you feel is a huge rush of adrenaline. There’s heavy smoke, loud noise, pressure — you can’t hear your colleagues,” he said. “Damaged equipment means escaping steam and high-temperature feedwater. At first it’s very difficult to orient yourself in the smoke.”

    Company officials asked that the plant’s location and the full names of employees not be published for security reasons.

    The thermal power plant is one of six operated by private utility DTEK that have sustained major damage from relentless Russian drone and missile attacks in recent weeks.

    Kos praised the resilience of power workers and Ukrainians in general.

    “There is no other more resistant nation in the world which I know than the Ukrainians,” she said, recalling Russian President Vladimir Putin’s expectation of a quick victory. “Putin said it would take one week. But here we are and it’s been nearly four years, so you are already the winners.”

  • Ukraine to give revised peace plans to U.S. as Kyiv readies for more talks with its coalition partners

    Ukraine to give revised peace plans to U.S. as Kyiv readies for more talks with its coalition partners

    KYIV, Ukraine — Ukraine is expected to give its latest peace proposals to U.S. negotiators this week, President Volodymyr Zelensky said, ahead of his urgent talks with leaders and officials from about 30 other countries supporting Kyiv’s effort to end the war with Russia on acceptable terms.

    As tension builds around a U.S. push for a settlement, German Chancellor Friedrich Merz, British Prime Minister Keir Starmer and French President Emmanuel Macron spoke to President Donald Trump by phone Wednesday, according to officials.

    Negotiations are at “a critical moment,” the European leaders said in official statements.

    Trump said the men discussed Ukraine “in pretty strong terms.” He also said Zelensky “has to be realistic” about the war and that European leaders would like a meeting this coming weekend with both the U.S. and Ukraine.

    “We’ll make a determination depending on what they come back with,” the president told reporters during a question-and-answer session at the White House.

    Washington’s goal of a swift compromise to stop the fighting that followed Russia’s full-scale invasion in 2022 is reducing Kyiv’s room for maneuvering. Zelensky is walking a tightrope between defending Ukrainian interests and showing Trump he is willing to compromise, even as Moscow shows no public sign of budging from its demands.

    Ukraine’s European allies are backing Zelensky’s effort to ensure that any settlement is fair and deters future Russian attacks, as well as accommodating Europe’s defense interests.

    The French government said Ukraine’s allies — dubbed the “Coalition of the Willing” — will discuss the negotiations Thursday by video. Zelensky said it would include those countries’ leaders.

    “We need to bring together 30 colleagues very quickly. And it’s not easy, but nevertheless we will do it,” he said late Tuesday.

    Zelensky said discussions with the U.S. were scheduled later Wednesday to focus on a document detailing plans for Ukraine’s postwar reconstruction and economic development. Also, Ukraine is finalizing work on a separate, 20-point framework for ending the war. Zelensky said Kyiv expects to submit that document to Washington soon.

    Zelensky says he’s ready for an election

    After Trump called for a presidential election in Ukraine, Zelensky said his country would be ready for such a vote within three months if partners can guarantee safe balloting during wartime and if its electoral law can be altered.

    Zelensky’s openness to an election was a response to comments by Trump in which he questioned Ukraine’s democracy and suggested the Ukrainian leader was using the war as an excuse not to stand before voters. Those comments echo similar remarks often made by Russian President Vladimir Putin.

    Zelensky said late Tuesday he is “ready” for an election but needs help from the U.S. and possibly Europe to ensure its security. He suggested Ukraine could hold balloting in 60 to 90 days if that proviso is met.

    “To hold elections, two issues must be addressed: primarily, security — how to conduct them, how to do it under strikes, under missile attacks; and a question regarding our military — how they would vote,” Zelensky said. “And the second issue is the legislative framework required to ensure the legitimacy of elections.”

    Zelensky pointed out previously that balloting can’t legally happen while martial law — imposed due to Russia’s invasion — is in place. He has also asked how a vote could occur when civilian areas of Ukraine are being bombarded and almost 20% of the country is under Russian occupation.

    Zelensky said he has asked lawmakers from his party to draw up legislative proposals allowing for an election while Ukraine is under martial law.

    Ukrainians have on the whole supported Zelensky’s arguments, and have not clamored for an election. Under the law that is in force, Zelensky’s rule is legitimate.

    Putin has repeatedly complained that Zelensky can’t legitimately negotiate a peace settlement because his five-year term that began in 2019 has expired.

    U.S. seeks closer ties with Russia

    A new U.S. national security strategy released Dec. 5 made clear that Trump wants to improve Washington’s relationship with Moscow and “reestablish strategic stability with Russia.” The document also portrays European allies as weak.

    Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov praised Trump’s role in the Ukraine peace effort, telling the upper house of parliament that Moscow appreciates his “commitment to dialogue.” Trump, Lavrov said, is “the only Western leader” who shows “an understanding of the reasons that made war in Ukraine inevitable.”

    Trump’s peace efforts have run into sharply conflicting demands from Moscow and Kyiv.

    The initial U.S. proposal was heavily slanted toward Russia’s demands. To counter that, Zelensky has turned to his European supporters.

    Zelensky met this week with the leaders of Britain, Germany, and France in London, the heads of NATO and the European Union in Brussels, and then went to Rome to meet the Italian premier and Pope Leo XIV.

    Military aid for Ukraine declines

    Europe’s support is uneven, however, and that has meant a decrease in military aid since the Trump administration this year cut off supplies to Kyiv unless they were paid for by other NATO countries.

    Foreign military help for Ukraine fell sharply over the summer, and that trend continued through September and October, a German body that tracks international help for Ukraine said Wednesday.

    Average annual aid, mostly provided by the U.S. and Europe, was about 41.6 billion euros ($48.4 billion) between 2022–24. But so far this year Ukraine has received just 32.5 billion euros ($37.8 billion), the Kiel Institute said.

    This year, Denmark, Finland, Norway, and Sweden have substantially increased their help for Ukraine, while Germany nearly tripled its average monthly allocations and France and the U.K. both more than doubled their contributions, the Kiel Institute said.

    On the other hand, it said, Spain recorded no new military aid for Kyiv in 2025 while Italy reduced its low contributions by 15% compared with 2022–2024.

  • Trump’s crackdown on immigration is taking a toll on childcare workers

    Trump’s crackdown on immigration is taking a toll on childcare workers

    WASHINGTON — Not long after President Donald Trump took office in January, staff at CentroNía bilingual preschool began rehearsing what to do if Immigration and Customs Enforcement officials came to the door. As ICE became a regular presence in their historically Latino neighborhood this summer, teachers stopped taking children to nearby parks, libraries, and playgrounds that had once been considered an extension of the classroom.

    And in October, the school scrapped its beloved Hispanic Heritage Month parade, when immigrant parents typically dressed their children in costumes and soccer jerseys from their home countries. ICE had begun stopping staff members, all of whom have legal status, and school officials worried about drawing more unwelcome attention.

    All of this transpired before ICE officials arrested a teacher inside a Spanish immersion preschool in Chicago in October. The event left immigrants who work in childcare, along with the families who rely on them, feeling frightened and vulnerable.

    Trump’s push for the largest mass deportation in history has had an outsized impact on the childcare field, which is heavily reliant on immigrants and already strained by a worker shortage. Immigrant childcare workers and preschool teachers, the majority of whom are working and living in the U.S. legally, say they are wracked by anxiety over possible encounters with ICE officials. Some have left the field, and others have been forced out by changes to immigration policy.

    At CentroNía, CEO Myrna Peralta said all staff must have legal status and work authorization. But ICE’s presence and the fear it generates have changed how the school operates.

    “That really dominates all of our decision making,” Peralta said.

    Instead of taking children on walks through the neighborhood, staff members push children on strollers around the hallways. And staff converted a classroom into a miniature library when the school scrapped a partnership with a local library.

    The childcare industry depends on immigrants

    Schools and childcare centers were once off limits to ICE officials, in part to keep children out of harm’s way. But those rules were scrapped not long after Trump’s inauguration. Instead, ICE officials are urged to exercise “common sense.”

    Tricia McLaughlin, spokesperson for the Department of Homeland Security, defended ICE officials’ decision to enter the Chicago preschool. She said the teacher, who had a work permit and was later released, was a passenger in a car that was being pursued by ICE officials. She got out of the car and ran into the preschool, McLaughlin said, emphasizing the teacher was “arrested in the vestibule, not in the school.” The man who had been driving went inside the preschool, where officials arrested him.

    About one-fifth of America’s childcare workers were born outside the United States and one-fifth are Latino. The proportion of immigrants in some places, particularly large cities, is much higher: In the District of Columbia, California, and New York, around 40% of the childcare workforce is foreign-born, according to UC Berkeley’s Center for the Study of Child Care Employment.

    Immigrants in the field tend to be better educated than those born in the United States. Those from Latin America help satisfy the growing demand for Spanish-language preschools, such as CentroNía, where some parents enroll their kids to give them a head start learning another language.

    The American Immigration Council estimated in 2021 that more than three-quarters of immigrants working in early care and education were living and working in the U.S. legally. Preschools like CentroNía conduct rigorous background checks, including verifying employees have work authorization.

    There is evidence the toll on the workforce is mounting. Since January, the number of immigrants working in childcare has dropped by 39,000, according to a report published Wednesday by New America, a left-leaning think tank. This, in turn, made it more challenging for U.S.-born mothers of children under 6 to work. The researchers estimate there are 79,000 fewer of them in the workforce because of the increase in ICE arrests.

    Beyond the deportation efforts, the Trump administration in recent months has stripped legal status from hundreds of thousands of immigrants. Many of them had fled violence, poverty or natural disasters in their homes and received Temporary Protected Status, which allowed them to live and work legally in the U.S. But Trump ended those programs, forcing many out of their jobs — and the country. Just last month, 300,000 immigrants from Venezuela lost their protected status.

    CentroNía lost two employees when they lost their TPS, Peralta said, and a Nicaraguan immigrant working as a teacher left on his own. Tierra Encantada, which runs Spanish immersion preschools in several states, had a dozen teachers leave when they lost their TPS.

    Fear is affecting even those in the U.S. legally

    At CentroNía, one staff member was detained by ICE while walking down the street and held for several hours, all the while unable to contact colleagues to let them know where she was. She was released that evening, said the school’s site director, Joangelee Hernández-Figueroa.

    Another staff member, teacher Edelmira Kitchen, said she was pulled over by ICE on her way to work in September. Officials demanded she get out of her car so they could question her. Kitchen, a U.S. citizen who immigrated from the Dominican Republic as a child, said she refused and they eventually let her go.

    “I felt violated of my rights,” Kitchen said.

    Hernández-Figueroa said ICE’s heightened presence during the federal intervention in the city, has taken a toll on employees’ mental health. Some have gone to the hospital with panic attacks in the middle of the school day.

    When the city sent mental health consultants to the school earlier this year as part of a partnership with the Department of Behavioral Health, school leadership had them work with teachers rather than students, worried their anguish would spill over to the classroom.

    “If the teachers aren’t good,” Hernández-Figueroa said, “the kids won’t be good either.”

    It’s not just adults who are feeling more anxious. At a Guidepost Montessori School in Portland, Ore., teachers observed preschoolers change in the weeks after an ICE arrest near the school in July. After pulling over a father who was driving his child to the school, officials encountered him in the school parking lot and tried to arrest him. In the ensuing commotion, the school went into lockdown: Children were pulled off the playground, and teachers played loud music and had children sing along to drown out the yelling.

    Amy Lomanto, who heads the school, said teachers noticed more outbursts among students, and more students retreating to what the school calls “the regulation station,” an area in the main office with fidget toys kids can use to calm themselves.

    She said what unfolded at her school underscored that even wealthy communities, like the one the school serves, are not immune from exposure to these kinds of events.

    “With the current situation, more and more of us are likely to experience this kind of trauma,” she said. “That level of fear now is permeating a lot more throughout our society.”

  • WTF? Embracing profanity is one thing both political parties seem to agree on

    WTF? Embracing profanity is one thing both political parties seem to agree on

    WASHINGTON — As he shook President Barack Obama’s hand and pulled him in for what he thought was a private aside, Vice President Joe Biden delivered an explicit message: “This is a big f— deal.” The remark, overheard on live microphones at a 2010 ceremony for the Affordable Care Act, caused a sensation because open profanity from a national leader was unusual at the time.

    More than 15 years later, vulgarity is now in vogue.

    During a political rally Tuesday night in Pennsylvania that was intended to focus on tackling inflation, President Donald Trump used profanity at least four times. At one point, he even admitted to disparaging Haiti and African nations as “shithole countries” during a private 2018 meeting, a comment he denied at the time. And before a bank of cameras during a lengthy cabinet meeting last week, the Republican president referred to alleged drug smugglers as “sons of bitches.”

    While the Biden incident was accidental, the frequency, sharpness, and public nature of Trump’s comments are intentional. They build on his project to combat what he sees as pervasive political correctness. Leaders in both parties are seemingly in a race now to the verbal gutter.

    Vice President JD Vance called a podcast host a “dips—” in September. In Thanksgiving remarks before troops, Vance joked that anyone who said they liked turkey was “full of s—.” After one National Guard member was killed in a shooting in Washington last month and a second was critically injured, top Trump aide Steven Cheung told a reporter on social media to “shut the f— up” when she wrote that the deployment of troops in the nation’s capital was “for political show.”

    Among Democrats, former Vice President Kamala Harris earned a roar of approval from her audience in September when she condemned the Trump administration by saying “these motherf— are crazy.” After Trump called for the execution of several Democratic members of Congress last month, Sen. Chris Murphy (D., Conn.) said it was time for people with influence to “pick a f— side.” Senate Democratic leader Chuck Schumer of New York said the administration cannot “f— around” with the release of the Jeffrey Epstein files. Democratic Rep. Jasmine Crockett, who on Monday announced her Senate campaign in Texas, did not hold back earlier this year when asked what she would tell Elon Musk if given the chance: “F— off.”

    The volley of vulgarities underscore an ever-coarsening political environment that often plays out on social media or other digital platforms where the posts or video clips that evoke the strongest emotions are rewarded with the most engagement.

    “If you want to be angry at someone, be angry at the social media companies,” Utah Gov. Spencer Cox, a Republican, said Tuesday night at Washington National Cathedral, where he spoke at an event focused on political civility. “It’s not a fair fight. They’ve hijacked our brains. They understand these dopamine hits. Outrage sells.”

    Cox, whose national profile rose after calling for civility in the wake of conservative activist Charlie Kirk’s assassination in his state, approved an overhaul of social media laws meant to protect children. A federal judge has temporarily blocked the state law.

    Tough political talk is nothing new

    Tough talk is nothing new in politics, but leaders long avoided flaunting it.

    Recordings from Democrat Lyndon B. Johnson’s administration, for instance, revealed a crude, profane side of his personality that was largely kept private. Republican Richard Nixon bemoaned the fact that the foul language he used in the Oval Office was captured on tape. “Since neither I nor most other Presidents had ever used profanity in public, millions were shocked,” Nixon wrote in his book In the Arena.

    “Politicians have always sworn, just behind closed doors,” said Benjamin Bergen, a professor at the University of California-San Diego’s Department of Cognitive Science and the author of What the F: What swearing reveals about our language, our brains, and ourselves. “The big change is in the past 10 years or so, it’s been much more public.”

    As both parties prepare for the 2026 midterm elections and the 2028 presidential campaign, the question is whether this language will become increasingly mainstream. Republicans who simply try to imitate Trump’s brash style do not always succeed with voters. Democrats who turn to vulgarities risk appearing inauthentic if their words feel forced.

    For some, it is just a distraction.

    “It’s not necessary,” said GOP Rep. Don Bacon of Nebraska, who is retiring next year after winning five elections in one of the most competitive House districts. “If that’s what it takes to get your point across, you’re not a good communicator.”

    There are risks of overusing profanity

    There also is a risk that if such language becomes overused, its utility as a way to shock and connect with audiences could be dulled. Comedian Jerry Seinfeld has talked about this problem, noting that he used swear words in his early routines but dropped them as his career progressed because he felt profanity yielded only cheap laughs.

    “I felt like well I just got a laugh because I said f— in there,” he said in a 2020 interview on the WTF podcast with fellow comedian Marc Maron. “You didn’t find the gold.”

    White House spokesperson Liz Huston said Trump “doesn’t care about being politically correct, he cares about making America great again. The American people love how authentic, transparent, and effective the President is.”

    But for Trump, the words that have generated the most controversy are often less centered in traditional profanity than slurs that can be interpreted as hurtful. The final weeks of his 2016 campaign were rocked when a tape emerged of him discussing grabbing women by their genitals, language he minimized as “locker room talk.” His “shithole” remark in 2018 was widely condemned as racist.

    More recently, Trump called Bloomberg reporter Catherine Lucey “piggy,” comments that his press secretary, Karoline Leavitt, defended as evidence of a president who is “very frank and honest.” Trump’s use of a slur about disabled people prompted an Indiana Republican whose child has Down syndrome to come out in opposition to the president’s push to redraw the state’s congressional districts.

    On rare occasions, politicians express contrition for their choice of words. In an interview with The Atlantic published last week, Pennsylvania Gov. Josh Shapiro, a Democrat, dismissed Harris’ depiction of him in her book about last year’s presidential campaign by saying she was “trying to sell books and cover her a—.”

    He seemed to catch himself quickly.

    “I shouldn’t say ‘cover her a—,” he said. “I think that’s not appropriate.”

  • The White House says the midterms are all about Trump. Democrats aren’t so sure

    The White House says the midterms are all about Trump. Democrats aren’t so sure

    WASHINGTON — A Dallas congresswoman opened her Senate campaign by telling voters that she “has gone toe to toe with Donald Trump.” Her Democratic primary opponent insisted that Americans are tired of “politics as a blood sport.”

    The divergent approach highlights how U.S. Rep. Jasmine Crockett and State Rep. James Talarico are navigating a race where Democrats hope to break a three-decade losing streak in Texas. It also reflects a broader divide within the party, with some candidates continuing to focus on Trump while others barely mention his name.

    Figuring out the best approach will be critical for Democrats who are grasping for a path back to power in the 2026 midterm elections that will determine control of Congress and are already maneuvering for the 2028 presidential race.

    Republicans, by contrast, have been crystal clear.

    Susie Wiles, the White House chief of staff, said in a recent podcast interview that the Republican president will campaign aggressively next year and the party will “put him on the ballot.”

    “He is the greatest vote energizer in the history of politics,” said Neil Newhouse, a veteran Republican pollster. “But the challenge is that he does it as much for Democrats as he does for Republicans.”

    Crockett takes on Trump

    In her campaign launch video, Crockett was silent as audio of Trump’s insults played, including multiple times that he has called her a “very low-IQ person.” At the end of the video, she breaks out into a smile.

    On Monday, she addressed the president more directly.

    “Trump, I know you’re watching, so let me tell you directly,” Crockett said. “You’re not entitled to a damn thing in Texas. You better get to work because I’m coming for you.”

    Trump responded the next day, telling reporters aboard Air Force One that her candidacy is “a gift to Republicans” and “I can’t even believe she’s a politician, actually.”

    For nearly a decade, Democrats have used their criticism of Trump to draw attention and fuel fundraising. Governors who are considered potential 2028 presidential contenders, including California’s Gavin Newsom and Illinois’ JB Pritzker, saw their profiles rise as they positioned themselves as staunch Trump opponents.

    U.S. Sen. Mark Kelly (D., Ariz.) recently participated in a video telling service members that they should not follow “illegal orders.” Trump responded by accusing him of “seditious behavior” that’s “punishable by death.”

    Kelly started a national media tour and sent out a flurry of fundraising emails, both for himself and other Democrats. He said Trump has bullied everyone in his career, “but not now, because I won’t let it happen.”

    When it comes to running for office, “Trump is the red meat that drives donors,” said John Anzalone, a longtime Democratic pollster.

    “There are clearly some candidates that are playing towards the donor world that don’t actually make a great argument for winning races. But it’s great for clicks and making money. And money is the first primary that you need to win.”

    Talarico charts a different course

    Talarico has built a following with a less combative style. The former schoolteacher who is working toward a master’s degree in divinity at Austin Presbyterian Theological Seminary gained attention by posting viral social media content challenging Republicans’ claims to Christian values. He has focused less on Trump or other politicians.

    “The biggest divide in our country is not left versus right. It’s top versus bottom,” Talarico said in the video launching his campaign.

    There are echoes of other Democratic successes this year, such as when candidates for governor won in New Jersey and Virginia by focusing on affordability concerns.

    Voters in those states were much likelier to say they were voting to oppose Trump than to support him, according to the AP Voter Poll. For example, 71% of voters for Democrat Mikie Sherrill in New Jersey said their decision in the governor’s race was motivated at least partially by opposition to Trump.

    But Sherrill recently said that it is not enough for Democrats to rely solely on anti-Trump fervor.

    “Trump makes a difference. He’s a forcing mechanism to coalesce the party,” Sherrill said. “But to really turn out the vote in a really strong manner, you have got to run a really sharp campaign.”

    When Democrats talk about Trump, they have to connect his actions to voters’ everyday lives, she said.

    “You can’t just say, oh, I’m so upset that Trump demolished the East Wing of the White House,” she said. “You have to say, look, there’s a tariff regime that is being run that is enriching the president to the tune of $3 billion, and you’re paying more for everything from your cup of coffee in the morning to the groceries that you’re buying to cook your family dinner at night.”

    It is an approach that could have more staying power in the coming years.

    “In the not-too-distant future, Trump will not be on the ballot and that will be a challenge for both parties,” said Austin Cook, a senior aide for Democrat Elissa Slotkin’s successful U.S. Senate campaign in Michigan last year. “He is a starting gun for Democratic enthusiasm. But soon we won’t have him as a foil.”

    Republicans need Trump to turn out voters

    Republicans have little choice but to enlist Trump’s help, considering his enduring support among voters who are less likely to turn out during the midterms.

    “They need to energize Republican voters and the only real way to energize Republican voters and get them out to vote is by enlisting Trump in the campaign,” said Newhouse, who is advising some of the party’s U.S. Senate candidates.

    He warned that Trump’s popularity does not necessarily transfer to candidates he supports, “but there isn’t an alternative.”

    “What they are trying to do here is basically wrap themselves up in him, hope that his approval and the economic numbers improve and get their voters out to the polls to match the Democrats’ intensity,” Newhouse said.

    The White House has said that Trump will be on the road more in the coming months. He hosted his first rally in a while in Pennsylvania on Tuesday evening, where he blamed Democrats for inflation.

    “They gave you high prices,” he said, adding that “we’re bringing those prices down rapidly.”

  • Source: Orioles agree to $155 million, 5-year deal with Pete Alonso

    Source: Orioles agree to $155 million, 5-year deal with Pete Alonso

    BALTIMORE — The Baltimore Orioles agreed to a $155 million, five-year deal with slugger Pete Alonso, a person with knowledge of the agreement told The Associated Press on Wednesday.

    The person spoke to the AP on condition of anonymity because the deal was pending a physical.

    It’s a major move for a Baltimore team that vowed to be aggressive following a last-place finish. Alonso hit .272 with 38 home runs and 126 RBIs this year for the New York Mets, posting an .871 OPS that was his highest since he hit 53 home runs as a rookie in 2019.

    Alonso, who turned 31 on Sunday, hit 264 homers over seven seasons with the Mets. He’s earned All-Star honors five times, including each of the past four years.

    Nicknamed the Polar Bear, Alonso became a Citi Field fan favorite as a home-grown member of the Mets. He was NL Rookie of the Year in 2019, when he hit .260 with a major league-high 53 homers — a rookie record — and 120 RBIs. He had a career-high 131 RBIs in 2022.

    Alonso batted a career-low .217 in 2023 while hitting 46 homers and driving in 118 runs and hit .240 with 34 homers and 88 RBIs in 2024.

    After a slow free agent market last winter, Alonso signed a $54 million, two-year contract to stay with the Mets, but he opted out of the final year of the deal.

  • Judge orders Trump to end California National Guard troop deployment in Los Angeles

    Judge orders Trump to end California National Guard troop deployment in Los Angeles

    The Trump administration must stop deploying the California National Guard in Los Angeles and return control of the troops to the state, a federal judge ordered Wednesday in an emphatic ruling.

    U.S. District Judge Charles Breyer in San Francisco granted a preliminary injunction sought by California officials, but also put the decision on hold until Monday, presumably to give the administration a chance to appeal.

    In an extraordinary move, President Donald Trump called up more than 4,000 California National Guard troops in June without Gov. Gavin Newsom’s approval to further the Trump administration’s immigration enforcement efforts. The number had dropped to several hundred by late October, but California remained steadfast in its opposition to Trump’s command of the troops.

    White House spokeswoman Abigail Jackson suggested in a statement that the administration would appeal Breyer’s ruling, saying it looked forward to “ultimate victory on the issue.”

    “President Trump exercised his lawful authority to deploy National Guard troops to support federal officers and assets following violent riots that local leaders like Newscum refused to stop,” she said, using a pejorative moniker Trump has used to refer to the Democratic governor.

    California Attorney General Rob Bonta said the ruling was a victory for democracy and the rule of law, and he accused the administration of playing “political games” with the troops.

    “But the President is not king,” he said in a statement. “And he cannot federalize the National Guard whenever, wherever, and for however long he wants, without justification.”

    Breyer rejected the administration’s arguments that he could not review extensions of a Guard deployment and that it still needed Guard troops in Los Angeles to protect federal personnel and property, saying the first claim was “shocking” and the second one bordered on “misrepresentation.”

    “The Founders designed our government to be a system of checks and balances,” added Breyer, a nominee of President Bill Clinton, a Democrat. “Defendants, however, make clear that the only check they want is a blank one.”

    The 100 or so California troops that remain in Los Angeles are guarding federal buildings or staying at a nearby base and are not on the streets with immigration enforcement officers, according to U.S. Northern Command.

    California argued that conditions in Los Angeles had changed since Trump first deployed the troops following clashes between federal immigration officers and people protesting his stepped-up enforcement of immigration laws. During one demonstration, protesters threw rocks at Border Patrol vehicles. One man later pleaded guilty to throwing a Molotov cocktail.

    The Republican administration has extended the deployment until February while also trying to use California Guard members in Portland, Ore. as part of its effort to send the military into Democratic-run cities over the objections of mayors and governors. It also sent some California National Guard troops to Illinois.

    In his ruling, Breyer accused the Trump administration of “effectively creating a national police force made up of state troops.”

    The idea that risks from demonstrations in the Los Angeles area could not be managed today without the National Guard defied “common sense,” the judge wrote.

    “After all, local law enforcement like the LAPD, the LASD, and the California Highway Patrol (“CHP”) have not only been willing to manage the protests, but have capably done so since June,” he wrote.

    The June call-up was the first time in decades that a state’s national guard was activated without a request from its governor and marked a significant escalation in the administration’s efforts to carry out its mass deportation policy. The troops were stationed outside a federal detention center in downtown Los Angeles where protesters gathered and later sent on the streets to protect immigration officers as they made arrests.

    California sued, arguing that the president was using Guard members as his personal police force in violation of a law limiting the use of the military in domestic affairs. The administration said courts could not second-guess the president’s decision that violence during the protests made it impossible for him to execute U.S. laws with regular forces and reflected a rebellion, or danger of rebellion.

    Breyer said in Wednesday’s decision the suggestion there was danger of rebellion was even more “farfetched” when the administration extended the deployment than it was in June.

    Breyer initally issued a temporary restraining order that required the administration to return control of the Guard members to California, but an appeals court panel put that decision on hold.

    After a trial, Breyer ruled in September that the deployment violated the law.

    Other judges have blocked the administration from deploying National Guard troops to Portland, Oregon, and Chicago.

  • Justice Department can unseal records from Epstein’s 2019 sex trafficking case, judge says

    Justice Department can unseal records from Epstein’s 2019 sex trafficking case, judge says

    NEW YORK — Secret grand jury transcripts from Jeffrey Epstein’s 2019 sex trafficking case can be made public, a judge ruled Wednesday, joining two other judges in granting the Justice Department’s requests to unseal material from investigations into the late financier’s sexual abuse.

    U.S. District Judge Richard Berman reversed his earlier decision to keep the material under wraps, citing a new law that requires the government to open its files on Epstein and his longtime confidant Ghislaine Maxwell. The judge previously cautioned that the 70 or so pages of grand jury materials slated for release are hardly revelatory and “merely a hearsay snippet” of Epstein’s conduct.

    On Tuesday, another Manhattan federal judge ordered the release of records from Maxwell’s 2021 sex trafficking case. Last week, a judge in Florida approved the unsealing of transcripts from an abandoned Epstein federal grand jury investigation in the 2000s.

    The Justice Department asked the judges to lift secrecy orders after the Epstein Files Transparency Act, passed by Congress and signed into law by President Donald Trump last month, created a narrow exception to rules that normally keep grand jury proceedings confidential. The law requires that the Justice Department disclose Epstein-related material to the public by Dec. 19.

    The court records cleared for release are just a sliver of the government’s trove — a collection of potentially tens of thousands of pages of documents including FBI notes and reports; transcripts of witness interviews, photographs, videos and other evidence; Epstein’s autopsy report; flight logs and travel records.

    While lawyers for Epstein’s estate told Berman in a letter last week that the estate took no position on the Justice Department’s unsealing request, some Epstein victims backed it.

    “Release to the public of Epstein-related materials is good, so long as the victims are protected in the process,” said Brad Edwards, a lawyer for some victims. “With that said, the grand jury receives only the most basic information, so, relatively speaking, these particular materials are insignificant.”

    Questions about the government’s Epstein files have dominated the first year of Trump’s second term, with pressure on the Republican intensifying after he reneged on a campaign promise to release the files. His administration released some material, most of it already public, disappointing critics and some allies.

    Berman was matter of fact in his ruling Wednesday, writing that the transparency law “unequivocally intends to make public Epstein grand jury materials and discovery materials” that had previously been covered by secrecy orders. The law “supersedes the otherwise secret grand jury materials,” he wrote.

    The judge, who was appointed by President Bill Clinton, a Democrat, implored the Justice Department to carefully follow the law’s privacy provisions to ensure that victims’ names and identifying information are redacted, or blacked out. Victim safety and privacy “are paramount,” he wrote.

    In court filings, the Justice Department informed Berman that the only witness to testify before the Epstein grand jury was an FBI agent who, the judge noted, “had no direct knowledge of the facts of the case and whose testimony was mostly hearsay.”

    The agent testified over two days, on June 18, 2019, and July 2, 2019. The rest of the grand jury presentation consisted of a PowerPoint slideshow and four pages of call logs. The July 2 session ended with grand jurors voting to indict Epstein.

    Epstein, a millionaire money manager known for socializing with celebrities, politicians, billionaires and the academic elite, killed himself in jail a month after his 2019 arrest. Maxwell was convicted in 2021 by a federal jury of sex trafficking for helping recruit some of Epstein’s underage victims and participating in some of the abuse. She is serving a 20-year prison sentence.

    Maxwell’s lawyer told a judge last week that unsealing records from her case “would create undue prejudice” and could spoil her plans to file a habeas petition, a legal filing seeking to overturn her conviction. The Supreme Court in October declined to hear Maxwell’s appeal.

    Maxwell’s grand jury records include testimony from the same FBI agent and a New York Police Department detective.

    Judge Paul A. Engelmayer sought to temper expectations as he approved their release on Tuesday, writing that the materials “do not identify any person other than Epstein and Maxwell as having had sexual contact with a minor.”

    “They do not discuss or identify any client of Epstein’s or Maxwell’s,” wrote Engelmayer, an appointee of President Barack Obama, a Democrat. “They do not reveal any heretofore unknown means or methods of Epstein’s or Maxwell’s crimes.”