Category: Wires

  • Trump’s chaotic governing style is hurting the value of the U.S. dollar

    Trump’s chaotic governing style is hurting the value of the U.S. dollar

    Fallout from the recent Greenland crisis clipped the U.S. dollar, aggravating a yearlong decline that has shaved more than 10% off the greenback’s value since President Donald Trump returned to the White House.

    The dollar is under pressure on multiple fronts. After a long period of U.S. financial market outperformance, many foreign investors are rebalancing their portfolios to reduce excessive exposure to the United States and to capitalize on improving prospects elsewhere. Washington’s failure to address its mounting public debt, including crisis-level annual budget deficits at a time of low unemployment, isn’t helping.

    But perhaps the key to the dollar’s drop is the ripple effect of the president’s erratic policymaking, including abrupt stops and starts with tariffs and military action against a lengthening list of countries. After more than a year of nonstop upheaval emanating from the White House, many foreign investment managers are exhausted.

    “There is a visceral dislike of this kind of policy chaos,” said economist Robin Brooks, a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution. “I think the dollar will fall around 10% [more] this year.”

    One sign of the dollar’s ebbing appeal has been a staggering surge in gold prices, up almost 80% over the past year.

    At the end of January, the dollar rallied — and gold sank — on news that Trump had nominated Kevin Warsh, a former Federal Reserve governor, to be the next chairman of the nation’s central bank.

    But the broader trend of dollar weakness remains in place, several economists and money managers said. The president has pushed repeatedly for the Fed to cut its benchmark 3.75% interest rate to levels far below what mainstream economists say is appropriate, which would be likely to further erode the dollar’s standing.

    “We should have the lowest interest rate anywhere in the world. They should be two points and even three points lower,” the president said on Thursday during a Cabinet meeting.

    The Fed’s policymaking committee left rates unchanged at their January meeting. But financial markets expect cuts to resume in June.

    A weaker dollar will help U.S. exporters by making their products more affordable for foreign customers while boosting companies that earn profits abroad and convert them into dollars. A sagging greenback also should aid the president’s efforts to shrink the trade deficit and attract foreign capital to spur U.S. reindustrialization.

    But by raising the cost of imported goods such as furniture, computers, cars, appliances, and clothing, a softer dollar could hamper the fight to cool inflation. That would be bad news for the president, already struggling to address voter concerns over the cost of living with the midterm congressional elections little more than nine months away.

    The president and his aides have sent mixed signals about the trend. Recently, Trump brushed off currency concerns, telling reporters in Iowa that the dollar “was doing great.” After traders responded by driving it lower, Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent reaffirmed the traditional U.S. stance in favor of a “strong dollar.”

    Doubts about Trump’s position have swirled since the 2024 election. A widely-read paper by Stephen Miran, a Trump economic adviser the president later named to a Fed position, argued for a weaker dollar to help rebalance the global trading system. With a nod to the president’s Florida resort, Miran christened the proposed arrangement “the Mar-a-Lago accord.”

    No such agreement has emerged. But the dollar showed pronounced weakness on two occasions following major Trump initiatives.

    After Trump’s announcement of historic global tariffs last April, U.S. stocks, bonds, and the dollar all sank in an unusual trifecta. While stocks and bonds recovered, the dollar remained depressed — the opposite of what typically happens when a nation imposes new import taxes.

    Some analysts diagnosed a widespread “Sell America” trade sweeping financial markets. Bessent scoffed, and many analysts now acknowledge that assessment was overstated. The S&P 500 index hit an all-time high recently, which hardly supports the idea of a flight from U.S. assets.

    If foreign investors did not abandon the dollar, they did become less confident in it, a change of sentiment that appeared through increased demand for hedges against their currency exposure.

    For a foreign investor, changes in currency values are as important as movements in asset prices.

    If the dollar falls while a foreigner holds U.S. stocks or bonds, their investment gains can be eroded or eliminated. Foreign investors can protect themselves against that risk by effectively selling dollars and buying their home currency, a practice called hedging.

    When the dollar fell after Trump’s tariff announcements, unhedged investors suffered big losses and some began hedging to mitigate the damage. Those transactions served to encourage the dollar decline, according to a detailed June 2025 analysis by economists with the Bank for International Settlements.

    “Global investors have changed their behavior. Even when they want exposure to the U.S. stock market, they now feel that they have to hedge the currency,” said Dario Perkins, an economist with TS Lombard in London.

    Another headwind facing the dollar is the growing attractiveness of financial markets outside the U.S. For years, global investors poured funds into the U.S., drawn by available returns that were larger than in other markets.

    That’s no longer true. The S&P 500’s 14% return over the past year was dwarfed by gains on exchanges in London, Tokyo, Hong Kong, and Toronto. Brazilian stocks are up 44% since this time last year.

    The latest gauges of economic activity also show other economies stirring. Both the United Kingdom and Japan are growing at least as quickly as the U.S., according to January’s flash PMI surveys.

    The uptick in activity is driving up the price of industrial metals. Zinc is up 30% since mid-2025 and iron ore is up 11%.

    “There was this era of U.S. exceptionalism where the U.S. was significantly outperforming the rest of the world. And now we’re seeing more of a broad base. Global growth is picking up,” said Priya Misra, portfolio manager of JPMorgan’s core-plus bond fund.

    Even after its recent decline, the dollar is about as strong, adjusted for inflation, as it was three years ago and remains at a level some analysts call “overvalued.” Many analysts expect a further decline this year. But there seems little reason to anticipate a full-fledged rout.

    In a statement, Joseph Lavorgna, a counselor to the treasury secretary, described the dollar’s dip as unremarkable. The inflation-adjusted dollar “remains higher today than it was during President Trump’s first term, and it is overall at one of its highest levels in the last several decades,” he said.

    Even as foreign investors edge away from the geopolitical chaos enveloping the dollar, it remains the global reserve currency. No viable alternative exists. Global central banks hold more than $7.4 trillion in U.S. currency, by far their largest single holding.

    The U.S. also boasts the largest and most liquid financial markets. Its leading position in artificial intelligence makes it an essential destination, even for investors who are skeptical of Trump’s governing style.

    “The U.S. economy is one of the strongest, most dynamic in the world. Investors should be careful about declaring the dollar is dead,” said Daniel Ivascyn, chief investment officer for Pimco in Newport Beach, Calif.

    Foreign central banks also would be expected to push back against any rapid dollar plunge, according to economists at Bank of America. The flip side of a sinking dollar, by definition, is the appreciation of other currencies, a particular problem for exporting nations and a “recessionary shock” for the world outside the U.S., they said in a client note recently.

    One wild card is the situation in Japan, where a long era of ultralow borrowing costs appears to have ended. That suggests the Japanese economy may have decisively emerged from its long-term funk. But rising interest rates threaten a popular strategy long used by global investors.

    When Japanese interest rates hovered near zero, global investors could borrow yen cheaply and then invest it in U.S. and other markets, earning sizable returns via a strategy known as the “carry trade.”

    Japanese investors hold nearly $5 trillion in overseas securities, with most of that amount in the U.S. With the gap narrowing between yields in Japan and those in other developed markets, some analysts expect Japanese investors to bring a portion of that money home.

    Last week, Michael Burry, the famed investor known for “The Big Short,” posted several Japanese financial charts on X under the terse heading: “Repatriation pending.”

    So far, there has been no sign of any Japanese exit, and some analysts think the concern is overblown.

    “Japanese interest rates have been going up for some time now, and I’m not seeing any evidence that the Japanese are keeping their money at home,” said Marc Chandler, chief market strategist at Bannockburn Capital Markets in New York.

    If that changes, it would only add to the downdrafts buffeting the dollar.

  • Washington Post publisher Will Lewis says he’s stepping down, days after big layoffs at the paper

    Washington Post publisher Will Lewis says he’s stepping down, days after big layoffs at the paper

    Washington Post publisher Will Lewis said Saturday that he’s stepping down, ending a troubled tenure three days after the newspaper said that it was laying off one-third of its staff.

    Lewis announced his departure in a two-paragraph email to the newspaper’s staff, saying that after two years of transformation, “now is the right time for me to step aside.” The Post’s chief financial officer, Jeff D’Onofrio, was appointed temporary publisher.

    Neither Lewis nor the newspaper’s billionaire owner, Jeff Bezos, participated in the meeting with staff members announcing the layoffs on Wednesday. While anticipated, the cutbacks were deeper than expected, resulting in the shutdown of the Post’s renowned sports section, the elimination of its photography staff, and sharp reductions in personnel responsible for coverage of metropolitan Washington and overseas.

    They came on top of widespread talent defections in recent years at the newspaper, which lost tens of thousands of subscribers following Bezos’ order late in the 2024 presidential campaign pulling back from a planned endorsement of Kamala Harris, and a subsequent reorienting of its opinion section in a more conservative direction.

    Martin Baron, the Post’s first editor under Bezos, condemned his former boss last week for attempting to curry favor with President Donald Trump and called what has happened at the newspaper “a case study in near-instant, self-inflicted brand destruction.”

    The British-born Lewis was a former top executive at the Wall Street Journal before taking over at the Post in January 2024. His tenure has been rocky from the start, marked by layoffs and a failed reorganization plan that led to the departure of former top editor Sally Buzbee.

    His initial choice to take over for Buzbee, Robert Winnett, withdrew from the job after ethical questions were raised about both he and Lewis’ actions while working in England. They include paying for information that produced major stories, actions that would be considered unethical in American journalism. The current executive editor, Matt Murray, took over shortly thereafter.

    Lewis didn’t endear himself to Washington Post journalists with blunt talk about their work, at one point saying in a staff meeting that they needed to make changes because not enough people were reading their work.

    This week’s layoffs have led to some calls for Bezos to either increase his investment in the Post or sell it to someone who will take a more active role. Lewis, in his note, praised Bezos: “The institution could not have had a better owner,” he said.

    “During my tenure, difficult decisions have been taken in order to ensure the sustainable future of The Post so it can for many years ahead publish high-quality nonpartisan news to millions of customers each day,” Lewis said.

    The Washington Post Guild, the union representing staff members, called Lewis’ exit long overdue.

    “His legacy will be the attempted destruction of a great American journalism institution,” the Guild said in a statement. “But it’s not too late to save The Post. Jeff Bezos must immediately rescind these layoffs or sell the paper to someone willing to invest in its future.”

    Bezos did not mention Lewis in a statement saying D’Onofrio and his team are positioned to lead the Post into “an exciting and thriving next chapter.”

    “The Post has an essential journalistic mission and an extraordinary opportunity,” Bezos said. “Each and every day our readers give us a roadmap to success. The data tells us what is valuable and where to focus.”

    D’Onofrio, who joined the paper last June after jobs at the digital ad management company Raptive, Google, Zagat, and Major League Baseball, said in a note to staff that “we are ending a hard week of change with more change.

    “This is a challenging time across all media organizations, and The Post is unfortunately no exception,” he wrote. “I’ve had the privilege of helping chart the course of disrupters and cultural stalwarts alike. All faced economic headwinds in changing industry landscapes, and we rose to meet those moments. I have no doubt we will do just that, together.”

  • ‘We will pay,’ Savannah Guthrie says in desperate video plea to potential kidnappers of her mother

    ‘We will pay,’ Savannah Guthrie says in desperate video plea to potential kidnappers of her mother

    TUCSON, Ariz. — Savannah Guthrie told the potential kidnappers of her mother, Nancy Guthrie, on Saturday that the family is prepared to pay for her safe return.

    “We received your message, and we understand. We beg you now to return our mother to us so that we can celebrate with her,” Guthrie said in the video, flanked by her siblings. “This is the only way we will have peace. This is very valuable to us, and we will pay.”

    It was not immediately clear if Guthrie was referring to a new message from someone who might have kidnapped Nancy Guthrie. The Associated Press reached out to the Pima County Sheriff’s department seeking additional details.

    The frantic search for the 84-year-old Nancy Guthrie has entered a seventh day. Authorities have not identified any suspects or ruled anyone out, Sheriff Chris Nanos said this week.

    Authorities think she was taken against her will from her home just outside Tucson over the weekend. DNA tests showed blood on Guthrie’s front porch was a match to her, Nanos said.

  • Appeals court affirms Trump policy of jailing immigrants without bond

    Appeals court affirms Trump policy of jailing immigrants without bond

    President Donald Trump’s administration can continue to detain immigrants without bond, marking a major legal victory for the federal immigration agenda and countering a slew of recent lower court decisions across the country that argued the practice is illegal.

    A panel of judges on the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled on Friday evening that the Department of Homeland Security’s decision to deny bond hearings to immigrants arrested across the country is consistent with the constitution and federal immigration law.

    Specifically, circuit judge Edith H. Jones wrote in the 2-1 majority opinion that the government correctly interpreted the Immigration and Nationality Act by asserting that “unadmitted aliens apprehended anywhere in the United States are ineligible for release on bond, regardless of how long they have resided inside the United States.”

    Under past administrations, most noncitizens with no criminal record who were arrested away from the border had an opportunity to request a bond hearing while their cases wound through immigration court. Historically, bond was often granted to those without criminal convictions who were not flight risks, and mandatory detention was limited to recent border crossers.

    “That prior Administrations decided to use less than their full enforcement authority under” the law “does not mean they lacked the authority to do more,” Jones wrote.

    The plaintiffs in the two separate cases filed last year against the Trump administration were Mexican nationals who had both lived in the United States for over 10 years and weren’t flight risks, their attorneys argued. Neither man had a criminal record, and both were jailed for months last year before a lower Texas court granted them bond in October.

    The Trump White House reversed that policy in favor of mandatory detention in July, reversing almost 30 years of precedent under both Democratic and Republican administrations.

    Friday’s ruling also bucks a November district court decision in California, which granted detained immigrants with no criminal history the opportunity to request a bond hearing and had implications for noncitizens held in detention nationwide.

    Circuit Judge Dana M. Douglas wrote the lone dissent in Friday’s decision.

    The elected congress members who passed the Immigration and Nationality Act “would be surprised to learn it had also required the detention without bond of two million people,” Douglas wrote, adding that many of the people detained are “the spouses, mothers, fathers, and grandparents of American citizens.”

    She went on to argue that the federal government was overriding the lawmaking process with DHS’ new immigration detention policy that denies detained immigrants bond.

    “Because I would reject the government’s invitation to rubber stamp its proposed legislation by executive fiat, I dissent,” Douglas wrote.

    Douglas’ opinion echoed widespread tensions between the Trump administration and federal judges around the country, who have increasingly accused the administration of flouting court orders.

    U.S. Attorney General Pam Bondi celebrated the decision as “a significant blow against activist judges who have been undermining our efforts to make America safe again at every turn.”

    “We will continue vindicating President Trump’s law and order agenda in courtrooms across the country,” Bondi wrote on the social media platform X.

  • Pentagon cuts academic ties with ‘woke’ Harvard to focus on training ‘warriors’

    Pentagon cuts academic ties with ‘woke’ Harvard to focus on training ‘warriors’

    Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth said his department will cut academic ties with Harvard University, claiming it is no longer the right place to develop military personnel, in the latest flash point in the Trump administration’s long-running battle with the Ivy League institution.

    “For too long, this department has sent our best and brightest officers to Harvard, hoping the university would better understand and appreciate our warrior class,” Hegseth said in a statement Friday. “Instead, too many of our officers came back looking too much like Harvard — heads full of globalist and radical ideologies that do not improve our fighting ranks.”

    The Pentagon will end graduate-level professional military education, fellowships, and certificate programs at the school in the 2026-2027 school year, Hegseth said. Those who are currently attending courses would be able to finish them, he added.

    The Pentagon would also review all graduate programs for active-duty service members at Ivy League and other civilian universities.

    “The goal is to determine whether or not they actually deliver cost-effective strategic education for future senior leaders when compared to, say, public universities and our military graduate programs,” he said.

    Hegseth’s announcement mentioned graduate programs and students but not Harvard College, the university’s undergraduate program. A department official declined to respond to a question Saturday about whether undergraduates in the Reserve Officers’ Training Corps would be affected, saying the department had nothing to add beyond the secretary’s video at this time. Harvard declined to comment on Hegseth’s remarks Saturday.

    Harvard has a long history with the military, with people connected to the school serving in militias more than 100 years before the country’s founding. In 1776, students were sent home early, the campus was given over to the Continental Army, and 1,600 soldiers moved into the school’s five buildings. Later, more than 1,600 soldiers with ties to Harvard fought in the Civil War; the campus hosted the first Army ROTC in the country starting in 1916; and the U.S. Navy Reserve began training officers at Harvard during World War II.

    Some Harvard students also protested the school’s military ties during the Vietnam War.

    As of September 2025, Harvard had more than 100 cadets and midshipmen enrolled, as well as 78 veterans, according to the university. This summer, Harvard Kennedy School announced a fellowship providing a scholarship for at least 50 military veterans or public servants to attend a fully funded one-year master’s degree program.

    Friday’s move is the latest rupture in the Trump administration’s relations with universities and Harvard in particular. President Donald Trump ran on a platform of making colleges and universities “sane,” alleging antisemitism in response to pro-Palestinian campus protests over the Israel-Gaza war. Since he took office, the government has used federal funding as leverage in an attempt to force changes on issues such as admissions, campus protests, and diversity, equity, and inclusion initiatives.

    Ties with Harvard have been particularly fraught, with the government threatening to withhold billions in federal grants and contracts, ordering sweeping changes and opening numerous investigations into the nation’s oldest university.

    Harvard has rejected allegations of antisemitism and sued the Trump administration over the funding freeze and, separately, actions to block international students from enrolling at Harvard. In September, a judge ruled the Trump administration violated the Constitution by blocking more than $2 billion in research grants, and funding has now been restored, though the final outcome is far from clear. Both cases have been appealed by the Trump administration.

    Last week, Trump said on social media that Harvard must pay $1 billion and that the administration wanted nothing more to do with the university, escalating tensions further.

    Hegseth highlighted the military’s long-standing relationship with Harvard in his statement, saying “there are more recipients of our nation’s Medal of Honor who went to Harvard than any other civilian institution in the United States.” But he also accused Harvard of becoming “one of the red-hot centers of ‘hate America’ activism … all while charging enormous tuition. It’s not worth it.”

    “We train warriors, not wokesters,” he said. “Harvard, good riddance.”

    Hegseth went to Harvard himself, earning a master’s in public policy in 2013 from the Harvard Kennedy School. In a segment on Fox News in 2022, where he worked as co-host at the time, he repudiated the degree, scribbling “return to sender” on his diploma.

    Since becoming defense secretary over a year ago, Hegseth has purged the military of DEI programs and “woke” student courses, and pushed out transgender service members. This week, the Pentagon warned Scouting America that it risks losing its partnership with the military unless it institutes “core value reforms” that have not been made public.

  • Zelensky says U.S. is readying huge economic deals with Russia

    Zelensky says U.S. is readying huge economic deals with Russia

    KYIV — Days after negotiations to halt Russia’s war in Ukraine ended inconclusively in Abu Dhabi, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky said that Russia and the United States were discussing bilateral economic agreements worth some $12 trillion, including deals that would affect Ukraine.

    Zelensky said intelligence sources showed him documents that laid out a framework for U.S.-Russian economic cooperation that he called the “Dmitriev package” — named for Kirill Dmitriev, the head of Russia’s sovereign wealth fund and a close ally of Russian President Vladimir Putin who has been a central figure in negotiations over a potential ceasefire.

    President Donald Trump previously has dangled the possibility of sanctions relief and renewed economic cooperation with Russia as inducements for Moscow to agree to halt the war. Putin, however, has insisted that Russia would achieve its objectives in Ukraine one way or another.

    Dmitriev drafted a 28-point peace plan with Trump’s envoy to the talks, Steve Witkoff, and Trump’s son-in-law Jared Kushner — first revealed by Axios last November — which included sections for gradually lifting sanctions and creating long-term economic development projects between Russia and Ukraine.

    However, Zelensky, backed by European leaders and some members of Congress, has insisted that the sanctions regime against Russia must instead be tightened, to starve the Russian war machine of revenue and Western technological components.

    “We are not aware of all their bilateral economic or business agreements, but we are receiving some information on the matter,” Zelensky said during a briefing with journalists Friday, according to a transcript released Saturday.

    “There are also various signals, both in the media and elsewhere, that some of these agreements could also involve issues related to Ukraine — for example, our sovereignty or Ukraine’s security,” Zelensky said. “We are making it clear that Ukraine will not support any such even potential agreements about us that are made without us.”

    Zelensky’s concerns were made public as Moscow launched another major airstrike on Ukraine’s energy sector, plunging large portions of the country into darkness and cold Saturday. The attack also caused Ukraine’s nuclear power plants to reduce their power output as the “military activity affected electrical substations and disconnected some power lines,” the International Atomic Energy Agency wrote on X.

    Dmitriev apparently presented the package while meeting with American officials in the U.S., but Zelensky did not say when.

    Zelensky’s remarks come as talks to halt Russia’s war increasingly appear to be at an impasse, in particular over the question of who will control Ukraine’s eastern Donetsk region.

    The U.S. has proposed creating a free economic zone in Donetsk, while Putin has demanded that Ukraine surrender the entire region, including areas Russia has failed to capture militarily even as it nears the fourth anniversary of its full-scale invasion.

    Zelensky, according to the transcript, said that Washington had proposed bringing the war in Ukraine to an end “by June” and that he expected that “they will probably pressure the parties according to this timeline.”

    The main concern for the Americans, Zelensky said, was the midterm congressional elections later this year.

    “We understand that they will devote all of their time to domestic processes — elections, a shift in the attitudes of their society,” Zelensky said. “The elections are, for them, definitely more important. Let’s not be naive. They say they want to achieve everything by June, and they will do everything possible to ensure the war ends that way.”

    Separately, U.S. and Ukrainian officials have discussed a goal of March for reaching a deal, with national elections and a referendum on the proposed peace agreement taking place in May, Reuters reported, citing unnamed sources.

    “The Americans are in a hurry,” Reuters quoted one of its sources as saying, adding that U.S. negotiators had warned that Trump will shift his focus to the elections.

    U.S., Ukrainian, and Russian officials have met in Abu Dhabi twice in recent weeks to try to forge an agreement, but there has been no breakthrough. Still, Ukrainian negotiators say that the tone and substance of the talks have markedly improved.

    Zelensky said that Washington proposed that the parties meet in a week for the first time in the U.S. — “likely in Miami.”

    “We have confirmed our participation,” he said.

    Meanwhile, Russia’s strikes overnight Friday into Saturday marked a continuation of its relentless aerial onslaught against Ukraine’s power plants and electrical grid.

    Ukraine’s air force said that Russia had launched 29 missiles and 408 attack drones at locations across the country — and that 13 missiles and 21 drones struck in 19 locations.

    Russia’s Defense Ministry said in a statement Saturday that its armed forces had carried out a “massive strike using precision-guided sea and air-launched long-range weapons” at energy and transport facilities “used in the Ukrainian Armed Forces’ interests” and “defense industry enterprises.”

    However, the barrage left large swaths of the civilian population without light and heat as temperatures remained well below freezing — a regular occurrence this winter as Russia has targeted the energy infrastructure supplying the entire country.

    Ukraine’s state energy grid operator, Ukrenergo, in a post on social media said that the assault was the second major attack on the entire energy system since the beginning of the year and that “energy facilities in eight regions” were struck.

    Power outages occurred across the country, Ukrenergo said.

    Zelensky, posting on X, said that the bombardment “deliberately targeted … energy facilities on which depends the operation of Ukrainian nuclear power plants.”

    “This puts at risk not only our security in Ukraine, but also the shared regional and European security,” he wrote. “We believe that partners in America, in Europe, and in other states who want peace must view this with a clear head and act accordingly.”

  • Gaza’s Rafah border crossing has reopened but few people get through

    Gaza’s Rafah border crossing has reopened but few people get through

    KHAN YOUNIS, Gaza Strip — When the Rafah border crossing between Gaza and Egypt finally reopened this week, Palestinian officials heralded it as a “window of hope” after two years of war as a fragile ceasefire deal moves forward.

    But that hope has been sidetracked by disagreements over who should be allowed through, hourslong delays, and Palestinian travelers’ reports of being handcuffed and interrogated by Israeli soldiers.

    Far fewer people than expected have crossed in both directions. Restrictions negotiated by Israeli, Egyptian, Palestinian, and international officials meant that only 50 people would be allowed to return to Gaza each day and 50 medical patients — along with two companions for each — would be allowed to leave.

    But over the first four days of operations, just 36 Palestinians requiring medical care were allowed to leave for Egypt, plus 62 companions, according to United Nations data. Palestinian officials say nearly 20,000 people in Gaza are seeking to leave for medical care that they say is not available in the war-shattered territory.

    Amid confusion around the reopening, the Rafah crossing was closed Friday and Saturday.

    Hours of questioning

    The Rafah crossing is a lifeline for Gaza, providing the only link to the outside world not controlled by Israel. Israel seized it in May 2024, though traffic through the crossing was heavily restricted even before that.

    Several women who managed to return to Gaza after its reopening recounted to the Associated Press harsh treatment by Israeli authorities and an Israeli-backed Palestinian armed group, Abu Shabab. A European Union mission and Palestinian officials run the border crossing, and Israel has its screening facility some distance away.

    Rana al-Louh, anxious to return two years after fleeing to Egypt with her wounded sister, said Israeli screeners asked multiple times why she wanted to go back to Gaza during questioning that lasted more than six hours. She said she was blindfolded and handcuffed, an allegation made by others.

    “I told them I returned to Palestine because my husband and kids are there,” al-Louh said. Interrogators told her Gaza belonged to Israel and that “the war would return, that Hamas won’t give up its weapons. I told him I didn’t care, I wanted to return.”

    Asked about such reports, Israel’s military replied that “no incidents of inappropriate conduct, mistreatment, apprehensions or confiscation of property by the Israeli security establishment are known.”

    The Shin Bet intelligence agency and COGAT, the Israeli military body that handles Palestinian civilian affairs and coordinates the crossings, did not respond to questions about the allegations.

    The long questioning Wednesday delayed the return to Gaza of al-Louh and others until nearly 2 a.m. Thursday.

    Later that day, U.N. human rights officials noted a “consistent pattern of ill-treatment, abuse and humiliation by Israeli military forces.”

    “After two years of utter devastation, being able to return to their families and what remains of their homes in safety and dignity is the bare minimum,” Ajith Sunghay, the agency’s human rights chief for the occupied Palestinian territories, said in a statement.

    Numbers below targets

    Officials who negotiated the Rafah reopening were clear that the early days of operation would be a pilot. If successful, the number of people crossing could increase.

    Challenges quickly emerged. On the first day, Monday, Israeli officials said 71 patients and companions were approved to leave Gaza, with 46 Palestinians approved to enter. Inside Gaza, however, organizers with the World Health Organization were able to arrange transportation for only 12 people that day, so other patients stayed behind, according to a person briefed on the operations who spoke on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to speak to the media.

    Israeli officials insisted that no Palestinians would be allowed to enter Gaza until all the departures were complete. Then they said that since only 12 people had left Gaza, only 12 could enter, leaving the rest to wait on the Egyptian side of the border overnight, according to the person briefed on the operations.

    Crossings picked up on the second day, when 40 people were allowed to leave Gaza and 40 to enter. But delays mounted as many returning travelers had more luggage than set out in the agreement reached by negotiators and items that were forbidden, including cigarettes and water and other liquids like perfume. Each traveler is allowed to carry one mobile phone and a small amount of money if they submit a declaration 24 hours ahead of travel.

    Each time a Palestinian was admitted to Egypt, Israeli authorities allowed one more into Gaza, drawing out the process.

    The problems continued Wednesday and Thursday, with the numbers allowed to cross declining. The bus carrying Wednesday’s returnees from the crossing did not reach its drop-off location in Gaza until 1:40 a.m. Thursday.

    Still, some Palestinians said they were grateful to have made the journey.

    As Siham Omran’s return to Gaza stretched into early Thursday, she steadied herself with thoughts of her children and husband, whom she had not seen for 20 months. She said she was exhausted, and stunned by Gaza’s devastation.

    “This is a journey of suffering. Being away from home is difficult,” she said. “Thank God we have returned to our country, our homes, and our homeland.”

    Now she shares a tent with 15 family members, using her blouse for a pillow.

  • Judge orders Trump administration to restore funding for rail tunnel between New York, New Jersey

    Judge orders Trump administration to restore funding for rail tunnel between New York, New Jersey

    NEW YORK — A federal judge ordered the Trump administration to restore funding to a new rail tunnel between New York and New Jersey on Friday, ruling just as construction was set to shut down on the massive infrastructure project.

    The decision came months after the administration announced it was halting $16 billion in support for the project, citing the then-government shutdown and what a top federal budget official said were concerns about unconstitutional spending around diversity, equity, and inclusion principles.

    U.S. District Judge Jeannette A. Vargas in Manhattan approved a request by New York and New Jersey for a temporary restraining order barring the administration from withholding the funds while the states seek a preliminary injunction that would keep the money flowing while their lawsuit plays out in court.

    “The Court is also persuaded that Plaintiffs would suffer irreparable harm in the absence of an injunction,” the judge wrote. “Plaintiffs have adequately shown that the public interest would be harmed by a delay in a critical infrastructure project.”

    The White House and U.S. Department of Transportation did not immediately respond to emails seeking comment Friday night.

    New York Attorney General Letitia James called the ruling “a critical victory for workers and commuters in New York and New Jersey.”

    “I am grateful the court acted quickly to block this senseless funding freeze, which threatened to derail a project our entire region depends on,” James said in a statement. “The Hudson Tunnel Project is one of the most important infrastructure projects in the nation, and we will keep fighting to ensure construction can continue without unnecessary federal interference.”

    The panel overseeing the project, the Gateway Development Commission, had said work would stop late Friday afternoon because of the federal funding freeze, resulting in the immediate loss of about 1,000 jobs as well as thousands of additional jobs in the future.

    It was not immediately clear when work would resume. In a nighttime statement, the commission said: “As soon as funds are released, we will work quickly to restart site operations and get our workers back on the job.”

    The new tunnel is meant to ease strain on an existing tunnel that is more than 110 years old that connects New York and New Jersey for Amtrak and commuter trains, where delays can lead to backups up and down the East Coast.

    New York and New Jersey sued over the funding pause this week, as did the Gateway Development Commission, moving to restore the Trump administration’s support.

    The suspension was seen as a way for the Trump administration to put pressure on Democratic Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer of New York, whom the White House was blaming for a government shutdown last year. The shutdown was resolved a few weeks later.

    Speaking to the media on Air Force One, Trump was asked about reports that he would unfreeze funding for the tunnel project if Schumer would agree to a plan to rename Penn Station in New York and Dulles International Airport in Virginia after Trump.

    “Chuck Schumer suggested that to me, about changing the name of Penn Station to Trump Station. Dulles Airport is really separate,” Trump responded.

    Schumer responded on social media: “Absolute lie. He knows it. Everyone knows it. Only one man can restart the project and he can restart it with the snap of his fingers.”

    At a hearing in the states’ lawsuit earlier in Manhattan, Shankar Duraiswamy, of the New Jersey attorney general’s office, told the judge that the states need “urgent relief” because of the harm and costs that will occur if the project is stopped.

    “There is literally a massive hole in the earth in North Bergen,” he said, referring to the New Jersey city and claiming that abandoning the sites, even temporarily, “would pose a substantial safety and public health threat.”

    Duraiswamy said the problem with shutting down now is that even a short stoppage would cause longer delays because workers will be laid off and go to other jobs and it’ll be hard to quickly remobilize if funding becomes available. And, he added, “any long-term suspension of funding could torpedo the project.”

    Tara Schwartz, an assistant U.S. attorney arguing for the government, disagreed with the “parade of horribles” described by attorneys for the states.

    She noted that the states had not even made clear how long the sites could be maintained by the Gateway Development Commission. So the judge asked Duraiswamy, and he said they could maintain the sites for a few weeks and possibly a few months, but that the states would continue to suffer irreparable harm because trains would continue to run late because they rely on an outdated tunnel.

  • Epstein revelations have toppled top figures in Europe while U.S. fallout is more muted

    Epstein revelations have toppled top figures in Europe while U.S. fallout is more muted

    LONDON — A prince, an ambassador, senior diplomats, top politicians. All brought down by the Jeffrey Epstein files. And all in Europe, rather than the United States.

    The huge trove of Epstein documents released by the U.S. Department of Justice has sent shock waves through Europe’s political, economic, and social elites — dominating headlines, ending careers, and spurring political and criminal investigations.

    Former U.K. Ambassador to Washington Peter Mandelson was fired and could go to prison. British Prime Minister Keir Starmer faces a leadership crisis over the Mandelson appointment. Senior figures have fallen in Norway, Sweden, and Slovakia. And, even before the latest batch of files, Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor, brother of King Charles III, lost his honors, princely title, and taxpayer-funded mansion.

    Apart from the former Prince Andrew, none of them faces claims of sexual wrongdoing. They have been toppled for maintaining friendly relationships with Epstein after he became a convicted sex offender.

    “Epstein collected powerful people the way others collect frequent flyer points,” said Mark Stephens, a specialist in international and human rights law at Howard Kennedy in London. “But the receipts are now in public, and some might wish they’d traveled less.”

    The documents were published after a public frenzy over Epstein became a crisis for President Donald Trump’s administration and led to a rare bipartisan effort to force the government to open its investigative files. But in the U.S., the long-sought publication has not brought the same public reckoning with Epstein’s associates — at least so far.

    Rob Ford, a professor of political science at the University of Manchester, said that in Britain, “if you’re in those files, it’s immediately a big story.”

    “It suggests to me we have a more functional media, we have a more functional accountability structure, that there is still a degree of shame in politics, in terms of people will say: ‘This is just not acceptable, this is just not done,’” he said.

    British repercussions

    U.K. figures felled by their ties to Epstein include the former Prince Andrew — who paid millions to settle a lawsuit with one of Epstein’s victims and is facing pressure to testify in the U.S. — and his ex-wife Sarah Ferguson, whose charity shut down this week.

    Like others now ensnared, veteran politician Mandelson long downplayed his relationship with Epstein, despite calling him “my best pal” in 2003. The new files reveal contact continued for years after the financier’s 2008 prison term for sexual offenses involving a minor. In a July 2009 message, Mandelson appeared to refer to Epstein’s release from prison as “liberation day.”

    Starmer fired Mandelson in September over earlier revelations about his Epstein ties. Now British police are investigating whether Mandelson committed misconduct in public office by passing on sensitive government information to Epstein.

    Starmer has apologized to Epstein’s victims and pledged to release public documents that will show Mandelson lied when he was being vetted for the ambassador’s job. That may not be enough to stop furious lawmakers trying to eject the prime minister from office over his failure of judgment.

    American associates

    Experts caution that Britain shouldn’t be too quick to pat itself on the back over its rapid reckoning with Mandelson. The U.S. has a better record than the U.K. when it comes to declassifying and publishing information.

    But Alex Thomas, executive director of the Institute for Government think tank, said, “There is something about parliamentary democracy,” with its need for a prime minister to retain the confidence of Parliament to stay in office, “that I think does help drive accountability.”

    A few high-profile Americans have faced repercussions over their friendly ties with Epstein. Most prominent is former U.S. Treasury Secretary Larry Summers, who went on leave from academic positions at Harvard University late last year.

    Brad Karp quit last week as chairperson of top U.S. law firm Paul Weiss after revelations in the latest batch of documents, and the National Football League said it would investigate Epstein’s relationship with New York Giants co-owner Steve Tisch, who exchanged sometimes crude emails with Epstein about potential dates with adult women.

    Other U.S. Epstein associates have not yet faced severe sanction, including former Trump strategist Steve Bannon, who exchanged hundreds of texts with Epstein; Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick, who accepted an invitation to visit Epstein’s private island; and tech billionaire Elon Musk, who discussed visiting the island in emails, but says he never made the trip.

    Former President Bill Clinton has been compelled by Republicans to testify before Congress about his friendship with Epstein. Trump, too, has repeatedly faced questions about his ties to Epstein. Neither he nor Clinton has ever been accused of wrongdoing by Epstein’s victims.

    European investigations

    The Epstein files reveal the global network of royals, political leaders, billionaires, bankers, and academics that the wealthy financier built around him.

    Across Europe, officials have had to resign or face censure after the Epstein files revealed relationships that were more extensive than previously disclosed.

    Joanna Rubinstein, a Swedish U.N. official, quit after the revelation of a 2012 visit to Epstein’s Caribbean island. Miroslav Lajcak, national security adviser to Slovakia’s prime minister, quit over his communications with Epstein, which included the pair discussing “gorgeous” girls.

    Latvia, Lithuania, and Poland have set up wide-ranging official investigations into the documents. Poland’s Prime Minister Donald Tusk said a team would scour the files for potential Polish victims, and any links between Epstein and Russian secret services.

    Epstein took an interest in European politics, in one email exchange with billionaire Peter Thiel calling Britain’s 2016 vote to leave the European Union “just the beginning” and part of a return to “tribalism.”

    Grégoire Roos, director of the Europe program at the think tank Chatham House, said the files uncover Epstein’s “far-reaching” network of contacts in Europe, “and the level of access among not just those who were already in power, but those who were getting there.

    “It will be interesting to see whether in the correspondence he had an influence in policymaking,” Roos said.

    Norwegian revelations

    Few countries have been as roiled by the Epstein revelations as Norway, a Scandinavian nation with a population of less than 6 million.

    The country’s economic crimes unit has opened a corruption investigation into former Prime Minister Thorbjørn Jagland — who also once headed the committee that hands out the Nobel Peace Prize — over his ties with Epstein. His lawyer said Jagland would cooperate with the probe.

    Also ensnared are high-profile Norwegian diplomat couple Terje Rød-Larsen and Mona Juul, key players in the 1990s Israeli-Palestinian peace efforts. Juul has been suspended as Norway’s ambassador to Jordan after revelations including the fact that Epstein left the couple’s children $10 million in a will drawn up shortly before his death by suicide in a New York prison in 2019.

    Norwegians’ respect for their royal family has been dented by new details about Epstein’s friendship with Crown Princess Mette-Marit, who is married to the heir to the throne, Prince Haakon. The files include jokey exchanges and emails planning visits to Epstein properties, teeth-whitening appointments, and shopping trips.

    The princess apologized Friday “to all of you whom I have disappointed.”

    The disclosures came as her son from a previous relationship, Marius Borg Høiby, stands trial in Oslo on rape charges, which he denies.

  • Private equity’s giant software bet has been upended by AI

    Private equity’s giant software bet has been upended by AI

    Apollo Global Management’s John Zito left the audience of investors stunned.

    Addressing a gathering in Toronto last fall, he said that the real threat for private capital markets wasn’t tariffs, inflation, or a prolonged period of elevated interest rates. Rather, he said, “the real risk is — is software dead?”

    Zito’s comments, being reported for the first time, marked a forthright challenge to one of private equity’s most entrenched assumptions. For years, investors have funneled hundreds of billions into software businesses, banking on steady growth and resilient, recurring revenues. But the artificial-intelligence revolution is now testing that foundation.

    As worries mount, firms including Arcmont Asset Management and Hayfin Capital Management have hired consultants to check their portfolios for businesses that could be vulnerable, according to people with knowledge of the matter. Apollo cut its direct lending funds’ software exposure almost by half in 2025, from about 20% at the start of the year.

    The uncertainty about the eventual winners and losers is roiling multiple markets. On Tuesday, stocks seen as vulnerable to AI dropped after Anthropic released a new tool, exacerbating worries about disruption to businesses. In recent days, Blue Owl Capital Inc. revealed huge outflows from a tech-focused fund, and two European software firms put loan deals on ice.

    While various business models are threatened, software-as-a-service is particularly vulnerable. AI-native firms can often offer quicker and cheaper solutions, meaning companies that once operated in a defensible sector are now at risk of competition from new players.

    Anthropic’s Claude Code and other “vibe-coding” start-ups are disrupting traditional SaaS by allowing users with no coding experience to build software. That’s dramatically lowering the programming skill barrier and undermining rigid, one-size-fits-all products.

    “Technology private equity, in its current form, is dead,” Isaac Kim, a partner at venture capital firm Lightspeed who previously led Elliott Investment Management’s tech private equity business, said in a recent LinkedIn post.

    The sector has been a hugely popular target for buyout firms and their private credit cousins. From 2015 to 2025, more than 1,900 software companies were taken over by private equity buyers in transactions valued at more than $440 billion, according to data compiled by Bloomberg.

    Deals were easily waved through most investment committees because the model was simple. Revenues are “sticky” because the tech is embedded into businesses, helping with everything from payroll to HR, and the subscription fee model meant predictable cash flows.

    But now, lenders are zeroing in on how prospective borrowers are dealing with the new technology challengers, according to people familiar with the matter. It’s the first question software bosses are being asked during meetings about borrowing, they said.

    Buying a software business, improving margins, and adding leverage “assumes the underlying product remains relevant long enough for financial engineering to work,” Kim said in the post. “AI has changed that assumption.”

    Last year, two outsourcing companies, KronosNet and Foundever, fell into difficulty amid increased investor scrutiny around AI. The debt of both is now trading at distressed levels. Bond prices on other software names, including McAfee and ION Platform Investment Group, have tumbled.

    Also in 2025, CVC Capital Partners’ credit unit took the keys of a contact center support business called Sabio Group after its previous owner struggled to find a buyer.

    “Everyone’s focused on these bubble risks, I think the biggest risk is actually the disruption risk,” Blackstone’s Jon Gray said on Bloomberg TV. “What happens when industries change overnight, like what we saw to the Yellow Pages back in the nineties when the internet came along.”

    In private markets, debt-laden firms have sought forbearance on borrowings, and big-name lenders have slashed valuations on loans to software companies such as Edmentum and Foundever, some to distressed levels.

    Credit exposure

    Sentiment in the equity market has grown increasingly bearish. The S&P North American software index fell 15% in January, its biggest monthly decline since October 2008.

    Private credit’s exposure to software may be much higher than some figures suggest. Barclays estimates so-called business development companies — investment funds that lend directly to firms — have around 20% of their portfolios tied up with the sector, but others say it’s substantially more.

    “If your software business is in healthcare, the fund classifies it as a healthcare exposure,” said Robert Dodd, an analyst at Raymond James. “The software exposure is meaningfully higher than it looks.”

    An additional worry is the software industry’s asset-light model. With less physical infrastructure to seize to try recoup money, that can mean bigger losses.

    Zito’s recent comments represent a change in how the AI threat is being assessed.

    Back in 2022, shortly before Hellman & Friedman and Permira paid just over $10 billion to buy Zendesk Inc., the software firm’s board of directors set out the risks the firm was facing.

    They cited a potential recession, persistently high inflation, and economic headwinds. Not mentioned: AI.

    Just over a week after the sale closed in November 2022, ChatGPT launched.

    But firms under threat aren’t just sitting back. Many have harnessed the technology themselves, and for those that do it effectively, AI could be a boon. Annual recurring revenue from Zendesk’s in-house AI offering, for example, now exceeds $200 million, amounting to 10% of revenue, a person with knowledge of the matter said. Some firms expect AI will help them to reduce costs.

    Brian Ruder, co-CEO of Permira, says there are risks, but the concern has been overdone.

    “If you look back at previous platform shifts in technology, history tells us there will be winners and losers on both sides of the AI-native and incumbent SaaS equation,” he said.

    In the boom times, star businesses such as Coupa Software and Cloudera traded at almost 60 times earnings, according to data from Pitchbook.

    In 2025, software-as-a-service firms were bought by private equity at an average multiple of 18 times, down from 24 the previous year.

    The software industry’s “halo of invulnerability” has been inappropriate for some time, said Robin Doumar, founder of private credit manager Park Square, adding that metrics like huge earnings multiples “defy financial logic.”

    “That chapter I hope has come to a close.”