Blog

  • Whatever you do in Russia, don’t talk about the war

    Whatever you do in Russia, don’t talk about the war

    The war in Ukraine is a “Special Military Operation,” even though it’s the biggest conflict in Europe since World War II.

    Across Russia, officials blame fuel shortages on “unscheduled maintenance at refineries” without noting a cause, as Ukrainian drones attack fuel refining facilities in the country.

    And Russia’s central bank governor has talked of the “structural transformation of the economy,” as code for military spending that has spiraled and reoriented the economy around the military-industrial complex.

    For years, President Vladimir Putin has insulated Russian society from the consequences of his war in Ukraine, using euphemisms as a psychological shield. But as the war increasingly comes home, the mismatch between rhetoric and reality is becoming a source of frustration for ordinary Russians.

    For days, Putin didn’t mention the June 18 long-range strikes on Moscow, when Ukraine attacked with nearly 200 drones. He didn’t comment as Ukrainians promised to turn Crimea, the peninsula Russia illegally annexed in 2014, into an island by pounding it with drones and missiles.

    When he appeared June 23 for the first time since the June 18 strikes, which were the largest in the war, he used the moment to blame the West.

    “These drones, strikes on civilian infrastructure — what are they for? To destabilize society, to create uncertainty about the actions of the Russian armed forces,” Putin said. At that time, he did not address the fuel shortages in at least 56 regions, according to Mediazona, an independent Russian news outlet.

    On Sunday, Putin did acknowledge fuel shortages. At a meeting of top executives and officials, he said that “systemic measures that match the scale of current challenges” must be put in place, adding that a task force was working around the clock to ensure supplies, especially for agriculture.

    But Putin has not publicly delegated officials to prepare shelters or early warning systems in case of future strikes.

    In the Moscow suburbs of Kotelniki and Lyubertsy, both of which came under drone attack in mid-June, authorities said they would not disclose the locations of bomb shelters or use sirens because the country was not technically on a war footing. They would make this information public only in case of a “period of mobilization and in wartime.”

    Lyubertsy’s administrator suggested that people consult a PDF that appeared on a government website with practical instructions on what to do in case of a drone attack.

    The head of the Republic of Bashkortostan, a region with 4 million people between the Volga River and the Ural Mountains where Ukraine has attacked refineries, said his administration had decided to not always activate sirens to not stress people out, mentioning a rise in antidepressant use in Russia.

    Downplaying danger and resorting to euphemisms to discuss drone attacks and economic pain is a “performance of obedience” to Putin and his regime, said Aleksandra Arkhipova, a teaching and research fellow in social sciences at the École Normale Supérieure in Paris.

    She has compiled a list of new war-related terms and euphemisms such as “clap” instead of “explosion,” “deprived of life” instead of “killed,” and “air target” instead of “drone.”

    “Russian political authorities right now are all about pictures in the news,” Arkhipova said. They do not want “to create a huge panic which can be shown by local TV and then on the federal news with a lot of crowds crying and running through the streets.”

    On the news, the recent attacks on Moscow barely figured, in keeping with the state’s stance. Channel One, the Kremlin’s primary cultural and political megaphone, ran a short segment the morning of the June 18 attacks and then stayed quiet until Putin commented several days later. During the evening news broadcasts on June 18 on Channel One as well as on Rossiya 1, or NTV, “not a single word” about the attacks was uttered, according to Telegram channel Agentstvo News.

    Officials and state outlets use confusing and sometimes misleading linguistic formulations to describe certain war-related events, Arkhipova said. In the early days of the war, stores that closed as a result of Western sanctions bore signs for months and in some cases years saying they were “closed for technical reasons.”

    Russia’s Federal Air Transport Agency recently announced a “schedule adjustment” at the Krasnodar airport, which is about 150 miles from the front line and in the path of Ukrainian drones. At Sochi airport, authorities don’t write that flights are delayed by incoming drones but instead that the airport is operating according to the “actual schedule” — a confusing term that is meant to distinguish between the two columns on the planned departures and arrivals, “scheduled time” and “actual time.”

    When Moscow’s airports are temporarily closed because of Ukrainian drone attacks, the term used refers to accepting flights “by agreement.” Travelers are told that their flight is delayed because of delays to the incoming flight, rather than because the city is under drone attack.

    Arkhipova calls this linguistic technique “neutralization.” It is about intentional ambiguity, she said, explaining, “People can understand that something is happening, but what exactly is happening is not that clear.”

  • Comcast plans no big change for its 15,000 Philly workers as company splits in two

    Comcast plans no big change for its 15,000 Philly workers as company splits in two

    Comcast, the $125 billion-a-year media and communications giant based in Philadelphia, is planning to split into two publicly traded companies, one based on the NBCUniversal media group, the other focused on broadband and wireless services.

    Comcast’s consumer and business services and NBCUniversal media now face “distinct” opportunities that are best pursued separately, Brian L. Roberts, chief executive since 2002, told investors in a conference call.

    Shares of Comcast, which had recently been trading near a 10-year low, jumped as much as 17% on the news, before closing at $24.22, a 4.5% gain for the day but well below the stock’s highs earlier this year.

    The split reverses major Comcast media acquisitions.

    “We previously believed that scale and diversification benefits warranted operating these businesses as one company; we’ve now simply changed our mind about that,” said Michael Cavanagh, the former chief financial officer of both Comcast and JPMorgan Chase & Co., who became Comcast’s co-CEO last fall.

    “We’ve now concluded that future success for each of our businesses will depend on focus, speed, and strategic flexibility that this separation will unlock,” said Cavanagh, who will head NBCUniversal, based at 30 Rockefeller Center in New York, after the split.

    Comcast will retain the consumer and business services that employ the majority of the company’s 180,000 workers, including most of its 15,000 Philadelphia-area staff and managers.

    Michael Angelakis when he was CFO of Comcast in 2009. He is returning, this time as CEO, as the company divests NBCUniversal and Sky.

    Comcast’s CEO after the split will be Michael Angelakis, a Gladwyne resident, who was Comcast’s chief financial officer from 2007 to 2015 and has since headed tech investment firm Atairos while also advising Comcast.

    Comcast’s acquistion of NBCUniversal, announced in 2011 and financially structured by Angelakis, was “a brilliant success financially” since Comcast got a bargain price as it was the first multibillion-dollar acquisition after the Great Recession, telecommunications analyst Craig Moffett told clients in a report Monday.

    But it didn’t make much sense strategically, Moffett added. While original media and theme parks did little to boost cable sales, the combination turned investors off, depressing the share price.

    Angelakis’ return to Comcast is “the best part” of the “wonderful, overdue” breakup decision, Moffett said. He noted that the two successor companies were themselves unlikely to become takeover targets in the near future as it would endanger the tax-free structure of the spin-off and likely require long, expensive work to persuade national and state regulators.

    Angelakis told investors on the call: “This place was my home for many years. It’s great to be here. It feels familiar and exciting at the same time.”

    The planned move comes after Comcast announced in November 2024 that it was spinning off cable networks such as USA, Oxygen, E!, SYFY and Golf Channel, as well as CNBC and MSNBC into a new company, Versant. Movie ticketing platform Fandango and the Rotten Tomatoes movie rating site were also included. Versant went public in January at around $45 a share; it has lately traded around $36.

    Like other cable companies, Comcast in recent years has shifted its business emphasis away from traditional cable toward streaming and other sources of revenue, such as its movie studio, theme parks and home wireless and internet services.

    Media and entertainment company NBCUniversal includes a theme parks division, Universal film and television studios, NBC and Telemundo networks, Peacock, and Bravo. Its portfolio will now include European media business Sky.

    Comcast will continue providing internet and phone services to residential and business customers.

    Once the transaction is complete, Comcast shareholders will own shares in both Comcast and NBCUniversal. The separation is expected to be completed in about a year. It still needs final approval from Comcast’s board and is subject to regulatory approvals.

    Comcast expects to keep a stake of up to 19.9% ownership position in NBCUniversal for up to one year after the spinoff is complete.

    The Associated Press contributed to this report.

  • D.C. reaches court settlement with man detained while protesting troops’ patrol with Darth Vader song

    D.C. reaches court settlement with man detained while protesting troops’ patrol with Darth Vader song

    WASHINGTON — The District of Columbia has reached a settlement agreement for an undisclosed amount of money with a resident who claims police illegally detained him for following an Ohio National Guard patrol while playing Darth Vader’s theme song from “Star Wars” on his phone — an act of protest against the Trump administration’s federal law-enforcement surge in the nation’s capital.

    A court filing late Thursday says the plaintiff, Sam O’Hara, will drop his lawsuit’s claims against the district and four Metropolitan Police Department officers within three business days of receiving the settlement payment. The filing doesn’t specify a dollar amount for the deal between the district and O’Hara, who is represented by the American Civil Liberties Union of the District of Columbia.

    In an email on Friday, an ACLU spokesperson referred to the settlement’s financial terms as “a significant amount” that O’Hara ”is pleased with” but said they aren’t disclosing the dollar figure to protect his privacy. A spokesperson for D.C. Attorney General Brian Schwalb’s office declined to comment on the settlement.

    O’Hara’s agreement with the district doesn’t resolve his related claims against an Ohio National Guard member. Attorneys for the Guard member, Sgt. Devon Beck, has asked a judge to dismiss O’Hara’s claims against him.

    “He was there because that was his assigned duty,” Beck’s lawyers wrote. “This was not an accidental encounter or a one-time disagreement on a public sidewalk.”

    An earlier court filing, in February, said O’Hara had reached a settlement agreement “in principle” with the district. In response, a judge agreed to suspend the case while they negotiated terms.

    “The government’s efforts to silence me ultimately backfired and brought more attention to the unjust deployment of the National Guard in Washington, D.C.,” O’Hara said in a statement. “This settlement serves as a reminder that constitutional freedoms are worth defending, especially when those in power would prefer we stay quiet.”

    O’Hara sued the district last October, claiming police officers violated his First Amendment rights to free speech and his Fourth Amendment rights against unreasonable seizures and excessive force.

    The ominous orchestral music of “The Imperial March” from the Star Wars movies was the soundtrack for O’Hara’s peaceful protests against President Donald Trump’s ongoing deployment of Guard members in Washington. Millions of TikTok users have viewed O’Hara’s videos of his interactions with troops, according to his lawsuit.

    O’Hara, an artist who works in the hospitality industry, says he didn’t interfere with the Guard troops during their Sept. 11, 2025, encounter on a public street. One of the troops summoned Metropolitan Police Department officers, who stopped O’Hara and kept him handcuffed for 15 to 20 minutes before releasing him without charges, according to the lawsuit.

    “The law might have tolerated government conduct of this sort a long time ago in a galaxy far, far away. But in the here and now, the First Amendment bars government officials from shutting down peaceful protests,” the suit says.

    Trump, a Republican, issued an executive order declaring a crime emergency in Washington last August. Within weeks, hundreds of Guard troops and federal agents were helping police patrol the city. The surge inflamed tensions with residents of the heavily Democratic district. Hundreds of Guard members remain deployed in the district nearly a year later, with no clear end in sight.

  • Left-wing Democratic primary wins pose a test for a Jeffries speakership

    Left-wing Democratic primary wins pose a test for a Jeffries speakership

    As New York Mayor Zohran Mamdani and fellow democratic socialists celebrated a trio of insurgent leftist victories that rocked last week’s House primaries in New York, so did congressional Republicans.

    In the days since, the GOP has gleefully speculated that a potential Democratic majority next year could be just as unruly and restive as its own has been, with an ideological battle between liberals and moderates undermining a possible speakership of Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D., N.Y.).

    “You can call it the Bolshevik Revolution of 2026,” House Speaker Mike Johnson (R., La.) said following the election results, while the National Republican Congressional Committee facetiously sent Jeffries a sympathy card and flowers.

    Jeffries and his Democratic allies have downplayed the tensions, noting that their party held together a broad spectrum of members the last time they were in charge of the House, from 2019 to 2023.

    But there are warning signs for Jeffries, who already faces frustration from the Democratic base that he is not fighting back hard enough against President Donald Trump. If Democrats win only a narrow majority in the heavily gerrymandered chamber in November, it will give each vote outsize importance and Jeffries critics more opportunities to stir up trouble.

    Two of the challengers backed by Mamdani, Darializa Avila Chevalier and Claire Valdez, defeated Democratic incumbents endorsed by Jeffries; only one of the three, Brad Lander, has committed to vote for him as speaker. Those candidates, all of whom are likely to win their heavily Democratic districts in November, and a handful of others who have prevailed against more moderate Democrats in primaries this year are expected to push for more liberal policies, particularly regarding Israel and Gaza, immigration enforcement, and universal healthcare.

    “What I hope will happen is that Democratic leadership will incorporate the lessons that voters are sending into the agenda that we’re going to be fighting for,” Lander said.

    Jeffries, for his part, has projected his typical calm and refused to engage with conjecture about how his leadership could be challenged. His office did not respond to a list of questions from the Washington Post but pointed to a CNN interview on the subject.

    “What’s in front of us right now is we’ve got to do everything to take back control of the House of Representatives,” Jeffries said in that interview Friday, where he steered every question about the New York primary back to a message of Democratic unity. “That’s actually the moment that we’re in.”

    On Saturday, Jeffries congratulated Valdez, Lander, and Avila Chevalier on social media.

    Not everyone in the party is ready yet to rally around Jeffries in return. A viral video from Valdez’s watch party on Tuesday night showed a crowd erupting with chants of “you’re next” when Jeffries appeared in news coverage they were watching.

    “If he continues to ignore what voters, not only in New York City but across the country, are telling him is important to them, he will do so at his own peril,” said Grace Mausser, co-chairperson of the New York City chapter of the Democratic Socialists of America. “It will weaken his power and ability, not only to control his own caucus, but to fight the right wing.”

    It’s not the first time that Democrats have navigated this dynamic.

    The wave that carried the party to the House majority in 2018 elected “the Squad,” a group of left-wing newcomers — Reps. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D., N.Y.), Ayanna Pressley (D., Mass.), Rashida Tlaib (D., Mich.), and Ilhan Omar (D., Minn.) — who were more willing to openly challenge party leadership to achieve their aims. Ocasio-Cortez, who also defeated a high-ranking Democratic incumbent in her first primary, notoriously joined a sit-in in then-Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s office during her freshman orientation.

    But Pelosi (D., Calif.) wrangled the Squad by simultaneously embracing them and diminishing their power. By 2021, she was delivering historic legislative victories for then-President Joe Biden.

    In an interview, Pelosi dismissed the significance of the liberal victories from 2018, which she said “didn’t make that much difference,” and from Tuesday in New York, which she insisted would not be a problem for Jeffries because the Democratic caucus has long maintained ideological diversity.

    “I wouldn’t make so much of it,” she said. “You always have to balance. We have Blue Dogs to Squad, and they represent their districts as they ought to be respected. So he’ll be fine.”

    Since retaking control in 2023, Republican leaders, who lack Pelosi’s decades of experience, have struggled more to contain their antiestablishment wing: the ultraconservative House Freedom Caucus, whose members have a history of withholding votes unless their demands are addressed. Those rebellions cost former speaker Kevin McCarthy (R., Calif.) the gavel after only nine months and have nearly derailed some of Trump’s legislative priorities.

    With a new generation of Democratic leadership confronting a rising populist wing of the party, the Jeffries era could face the same kind of turmoil — a prospect that has Republicans gloating.

    “Democrats had a very bad week,” said Rep. James Comer (R., Ky.). “When you’re Hakeem Jeffries and you’re trying to be the next speaker of the House, and you lose three elections in your hometown, that’s a pretty big slap in the face.”

    This year’s cohort of left-wing challengers, many of whom come from organizing backgrounds, is already connected to strategize about their campaigns and beyond.

    Mai Vang — who finished ahead of Rep. Doris Matsui (D., Calif.) in a primary this month for a Sacramento-area seat — said she regularly speaks with other candidates including Valdez, Avila Chevalier, and Chris Rabb, who won the Democratic primary for a Philadelphia House seat in May.

    Under California’s top-two system, Vang will face Matsui again in a November runoff. If she wins, Vang said, she would decide whether to support Jeffries as leader only after a conversation with the other liberal freshman members.

    “These election wins in the primaries are mandates from the people,” she said. “Right now, the Democratic Party has to reckon with whether they are bold enough to represent the people.”

    Democratic strategist Trip Yang said the disagreement is healthy because it keeps the party more responsive to the public.

    “There will be some discord in the House Democratic caucus. Discord is good,” Yang said. Jeffries “is no stranger to hard, necessary conversations.”

    Some of the more moderate House Democrats are already bracing themselves. Rep. Gregory W. Meeks (D., N.Y.) warned the insurgent candidates who won Tuesday that “they’re going to have to compromise and work together” once they arrive in Congress.

    On social media last week, Rep. Josh Gottheimer (D., N.J.) sounded pessimistic about that prospect.

    “The Democratic-Socialists are bomb throwers, not problem solvers,” he said. “They’ve declared war on common sense Democrats, which will only lead to more deadlock, dysfunction, and hard-working families paying the price.”

    But publicly, most establishment members of the caucus are generally brushing off the idea that the arrival of more liberal colleagues will complicate their agenda should they win control in November. Rep. Jamie Raskin (D., Md.), the top Democrat on the House Judiciary Committee, plans to launch investigations into the Trump administration’s alleged abuse of the justice system.

    “I served opposite James Comer, and I serve opposite Jim Jordan, so I can work with anybody,” Raskin said, citing two of the most conservative members of the House. “There are exciting new generations within the Democratic Party.”

    Ocasio-Cortez called the expectation that the incoming class of left-wing members would pose trouble for Jeffries a “double standard.”

    “Conversation, negotiation, all of that is the business of governance, and it’s the business of Washington,” she said. “There’s this tendency that when a progressive negotiates, that means that they’re bad, but when a moderate negotiates, that means they’re savvy. And that is a myth. We’re all here doing the same job.”

  • After nine-day strike, Sheraton hotel workers have a tentative contract agreement

    After nine-day strike, Sheraton hotel workers have a tentative contract agreement

    Center City hotel workers at the Sheraton Philadelphia Downtown have been on strike since June 21, but they could soon be back at work.

    On Monday afternoon, Unite Here local 274, the union that represents the workers, announced that it had reached a tentative deal for a new contract for roughly 200 employees at the hotel, which includes raises and improvements to benefits.

    Workers were expected to vote Monday on whether to ratify the new deal. If they do, they will be back at their jobs on Tuesday, the union said.

    It’s the second time that this group of workers has gone out on strike in the last year as it negotiates for a new contract. Hotel employees of the Sheraton Philadelphia Downtown last walked off the job for four days in October.

    “When we said we were fighting for $30 an hour at the beginning of this campaign, a lot of people told us we were asking for the impossible,” Shafeek Anderson, a hotel steward, said in a union statement Monday. “With this victory, we have shown the whole industry that nothing is impossible when the workers stick together.”

    The Sheraton Philadelphia Downtown is managed by Aimbridge Hospitality and owned by CL Hotels. These businesses did not respond to a request for comment Monday afternoon.

    Unite Here local 274 has been negotiating new contracts for room attendants, cooks, servers, bartenders, dishwashers, and banquet staff across several Philadelphia hotels for over a year.

    Contracts expired in 2024, and new contracts have since been reached at Hampton Inn Philadelphia Center City-Convention Center, Sonesta Philadelphia Rittenhouse Square, the Sheraton Philadelphia University City Hotel, Hilton Philadelphia at Penn’s Landing, Wyndham Philadelphia Historic District, and Warwick Hotel Rittenhouse Square.

    The standard set in these new union contracts includes raises to $30 an hour by 2028 for non-tipped employees and an increase in employer contributions to worker pensions. The new contracts also cap the number of rooms a worker can be tasked with cleaning to 15 per day.

    The remaining hotel without a new contract is the Hilton Garden Inn Center City.

  • Trump administration quietly removed mentions of slavery from Independence Hall, Thomas Jefferson portrait

    Trump administration quietly removed mentions of slavery from Independence Hall, Thomas Jefferson portrait

    President Donald Trump’s administration has wiped almost all mentions of slavery from a panel accompanying a portrait of Thomas Jefferson at the Second Bank of the United States.

    As the Founding Father who wrote the words “all men are created equal” while enslaving more than 600 people throughout his life, Jefferson embodies the paradox at the heart of the revolutionary era.

    The description under his iconic portrait attempted to grapple with that tension.

    Despite Jefferson’s lifelong pursuit of knowledge, he “never solved the problem of slavery“ and was ”unable to determine how to let go of the notorious system,” the original plaque read.

    But a new panel simply states that Jefferson’s “vision of an informed, self-governing citizenry was central to his belief that education and liberty were the foundations of an ideal government,” among other changes.

    It’s not the only change the administration has made to exhibits around Philadelphia’s Independence National Historical Park ahead of the 250th anniversary.

    A touchscreen with a virtual tour of Independence Hall’s second floor now tells visitors that one of the rooms was used to hold “individuals accused of crimes of the period” before their court hearings.

    Who were these individuals? A previous version stated clearly: “accused fugitives from slavery.”

    A side by side of the original and new descriptions Thomas Jefferson’s portrait at the Second Bank of the United States. The references to slavery have largely been removed by President Donald Trump’s administration.

    The Second Bank and Independence Hall sites — in addition to the President’s House, where slavery exhibits were dismantled by the federal government earlier this year — had been scrutinized by the administration since last summer.

    While the changes are more subtle than those that took place at the President’s House in January — and the new exhibits the government proposed a few months later — they further underscore the Trump administration’s goal to sanitize U.S. history, as signified by his executive order to review or remove content at national parks that “inappropriately disparage Americans past or living.”

    They also show a lack of transparency. The change to the description under Jefferson’s portrait was only acknowledged following a demand by a federal judge in Boston that the National Park Service share a list of all removals the administration undertook to comply with Trump’s “restoring truth and sanity” edict ahead of the country’s 250th celebration.

    In a statement Monday, Avenging the Ancestors Coalition — which has helped lead the efforts to protect the President’s House — said the additional changes were “extremely troubling.”

    “The preservation of history requires ongoing vigilance,” the organization said. “Restoring historical interpretation is only one part of the work; protecting it from future revision or erasure is equally important.”

    Cheryl LaRoche, a historical and archaeological consultant who helped excavate the President’s House during its development in the early 2000s, said the changes were like “somebody committing murder and wiping the murder weapon clean, so that there is no trace.”

    “One of the greatest disappointments of my life, is that we get to the 250th anniversary of this country, and we are still trying to evade the truth of our founding,” LaRoche said.

    Among the most blatant examples of the federal government’s desire to retell history has happened at the President’s House, which opened almost two decades ago to memorialize the nine people George Washington enslaved at his Philadelphia home. It also serves as a symbol of exploring the stark juxtaposition of slavery and liberty during the nation’s founding.

    But the moves at the Second Bank and Independence Hall signify that the administration is not letting any stone go unturned when it comes to ridding or softening even smaller mentions of slavery at Philadelphia’s most iconic historic sites.

    The Department of Interior did not answer repeated questions about the changes.

    “No changes have been made,” a spokesperson said via email, citing the President’s House litigation. When an Inquirer reporter pressed again about changes to Independence Hall and the Second Bank, the government spokesperson repeated that there were no changes to the President’s House during the litigation. The Department of Interior did not respond to further inquiries.

    At the Second Bank, the panel under Jefferson’s iconic portrait also informed visitors about the population of persons enslaved in 1776, that John Dickinson — a member of the Continental Congress — was an enslaver, and about the life of Moses Williams, an artist who was enslaved at birth and later became a free man.

    That’s drastically changed in the new panel.

    Jefferson’s grappling with slavery is no longer present and Dickinson is referred to as a “fellow patriot and influential writer. …” The only mention of slavery remaining is Williams’ story, though it’s reworded.

    And at Independence Hall, the touchscreen kiosk describing the second floor Committee of Assembly Chamber previously outlined the irony of the space being used for ratifying the U.S. constitution and later housing the office “where accused fugitives from slavery were held before their hearings, right above the room where the Declaration of Independence had been signed.”

    A touch screen at the entrance to Independence Hall with photos and descriptions of the building’s second floor. The description of the Committee of the Assembly Chamber has been edited to replace the words “accused fugitives from slavery” to “individuals accused of crimes of the period.”

    But the reference to slavery has been removed, among other rewordings.

    It remains unclear when these changes were made. The Inquirer reported last summer that these items — and an interactive exhibit at the Benjamin Franklin Museum about the Founding Father’s conflicting views on slavery, which is still intact — were flagged for review.

    Earlier this month, a federal judge in Boston ordered the Interior Department and National Park Service to restore before July 4 all the removed exhibits nationwide. The order also required the administration to submit to the court a list of all removed items.

    An appeal court has since paused the judge’s order, all but guaranteeing that visitors on July 4 won’t see the original exhibits.

    In addition to the President’s House exhibits, the list says the administration removed a “portrait description” and cites “disparages Americans past or living” as the reason it is gone.

    No entry in the list corresponds to the change made at Independence Hall, which Philadelphia owns.

    The city did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

    All material changes at Independence Hall should be done after consultation with the city, said Cynthia MacLeod, former superintendent of Independence National Historical Park.

    But the Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit ruled that the administration can make changes to the President’s House, which is owned by the National Park Service.

    “The National Park service has been known for excellent historians and interpreters and its a shame that they are being muzzled now,” MacLeod said. “It’s a shame and a disservice to all the visitors not to have a more complete history told.”

  • House Republicans are looking to get their agenda on track after a chaotic week

    House Republicans are looking to get their agenda on track after a chaotic week

    WASHINGTON — With a social media assist from President Donald Trump, House Speaker Mike Johnson is looking this week to ease the divisions in his Republican ranks and make progress on key legislative priorities before this fall’s elections.

    Johnson sent lawmakers home early last week after tumult in his conference prevented the House from voting on two spending bills and a measure dealing with veterans’ benefits. Meanwhile, the list of legislative priorities only grew with Trump requesting $87.6 billion in new spending, mostly to cover the cost of the war with Iran.

    The week ahead could signal whether Johnson can turn a short summer in Washington into a productive work period that voters will reward in November.

    “We have got a lot more to do. We have got to keep it going,” Johnson told Fox News Channel’s Sunday Morning Futures.

    Johnson, of Louisiana, went to the White House moments after the House wrapped up its abbreviated workweek and returned with a coveted Trump social media post telling Republicans to quit voting down the procedural rules that allow for final votes on their legislative priorities.

    “No more grandstanding, please!” Trump wrote.

    Before Trump’s message, Republican and Democratic lawmakers were openly doubting whether the House would even return this week or just follow the Senate’s lead and break for the July Fourth holiday.

    “I got to have everybody working here on all cylinders, and I’m excited to bring them back,” Johnson said on Fox.

    A promising week quickly turns sour for Republicans

    The House began last week with a legislative victory that speaks to voters’ concerns about affordability, passing bipartisan legislation aimed at lowering the cost of housing. It was the culmination of years of work by members on both sides of the political aisle.

    But Trump abruptly called off the bill signing ceremony, saying he would not act until Congress passed legislation that requires proof of citizenship for those registering to vote. Johnson said he would send the housing bill to Trump on Monday and hopes the Republican president signs it with the “biggest, boldest marker that he has.”

    Hard-liners in the House have also taken up Trump’s demand for the elections bill. More than two dozen of them have signed a letter pledging to vote against any Senate bills unless the elections legislation is attached. Rep. Anna Paulina Luna (R., Fla.) led the blockade that prompted Johnson to send lawmakers home early.

    Democrats seized on the Republican gridlock.

    ”This is the incredibly pathetic Congress,” said Rep. Jim McGovern (D., Mass.). “The fact they can’t get their act together, can’t establish discipline to keep this place running, is stunning. I’ve never seen such incompetence.”

    Republicans also voiced their frustration.

    “I just think it’s a very self-defeating position for anyone to take, that they’re going to shut everything down over one issue,” said Rep. Brian Fitzpatrick (R., Pa.).

    But Rep. Andy Harris (R., Md.) predicted there will be more gridlock ahead unless a bill that includes the elections legislation is sent to Trump. While the House has already passed a version of the measure, it has stalled in the Senate.

    “Yeah, I think everything is going to be held up until we come to an agreement on voter ID and especially confirming the citizenship of Americans before they register to vote,” Harris said.

    Asked if Americans want Congress to be advancing other priorities besides the voting bill, known as the SAVE America Act, Harris replied. “I think they truly believe that this is a very important bill. I’m not sure they believe that a lot of the other things we’re doing here in Washington are very important.”

    The test ahead is on an important defense bill

    Trump’s admonition to House Republicans to quit voting down their own procedural rules will be put to the test this week. Leadership is expected to tee up a vote on an annual defense policy bill, must-pass legislation that calls for some of the increased spending that Trump wants for the Pentagon.

    Luna, a Trump ally, was making no promises about standing down, even after the president’s social media post. She has proposed attaching the elections legislation to the defense bill. Because of the narrow Republican majority, it takes only a few Republican “no” votes to block a bill from advancing to a final vote.

    “If they want my vote, they should entertain it, debate it, and if they block it, then we’ll see. But that’s how you get my vote,” Luna told reporters.

    There’s little time left for top GOP priorities

    The House is scheduled to be in session for only about 28 days before the midterm elections. The lawmakers are out for virtually all of August and October, giving them additional time to campaign back home for reelection.

    In that window, they must pass bills to keep the government running beyond the Sept. 30 end of the budget year. They also aspire to pass a bill on a party-line basis that would include more defense spending, partially paid for by cuts in other programs. Republicans have billed their effort as going after waste and fraud.

    It would be the successor to the big tax and spending cut bill that Republicans passed last year. That measure extended the tax cuts passed in Trump’s first term and expanded tax breaks for those who get income through tips and overtime. The bill also focused on boosting immigration enforcement, paid in part through reduced spending on Medicaid and nutrition assistance.

    Johnson has talked optimistically about being able to pass such a bill before the August recess. He met with members of the House Budget Committee last week as they try to find a path forward. But Republican senators are not counting on it. There are also doubters in the House, given the difficulty of the process that is required to bypass a filibuster in the Senate.

    “I’m just not seeing a path forward on it,” said Republican Rep. David Valadao, who represents a perennial swing district in California’s farm belt.

    But Budget Committee Chairperson Jodey Arrington (R., Texas) said members are close to a framework. He predicted it will be politically rewarded if they are able to address election integrity and curb waste and fraud.

    “We have to energize our base, and we have to address the enthusiasm gap,” Arrington said.

  • John Fetterman says he will open Trump Accounts for his kids, urges others to do the same during rare Philadelphia appearance

    John Fetterman says he will open Trump Accounts for his kids, urges others to do the same during rare Philadelphia appearance

    In a rare public appearance in Philadelphia, Democratic U.S. Sen. John Fetterman joined Republican U.S. Sen. Dave McCormick at a youth basketball camp in Nicetown on Monday to promote Trump Accounts, the new federally backed savings accounts for kids that became law with the president’s signature One Big Beautiful Bill Act.

    Fetterman — who did not vote for the GOP-led initiative last year but has more frequently supported President Donald Trump’s policies since then — said he was urging families in deeply Democratic Philadelphia to look past Trump’s name on the program.

    “Do not fall into that political trap,” Fetterman said. “This isn’t some radical thing. … Do this for your child.”

    The accounts, which launch on July 4, are available to children under 18 — with children born between Jan. 1, 2025 and Dec. 31, 2028 receiving $1,000 in seed money.

    All accounts will also receive $250 because of a $6.25 billion donation from tech CEO Michael Dell and wife Susan Dell. Families, businesses, and nonprofits can add up to $5,000 annually. A portion of the funds may be accessed when the child turns 18, with the rest transferred into an IRA retirement account.

    “Who is excited about getting $200? Put your hands up,” McCormick asked more than 100 kids gathered on one of the indoor courts at Philadelphia Youth Basketball’s summer camp, at the Alan Horwitz “Sixth Man” Center in Nicetown.

    Both McCormick and Fetterman appealed directly to the children during speeches between basketball camp drills.

    Despite being 6-foot-8 and palming a basketball as he posed for pictures, Fetterman said his basketball skills weren’t “worth much.” But he told the kids that he was there because he wanted them all to be millionaires someday. And the Trump accounts — which he said he and his wife, Gisele, would open for all three of their children — were a step in that direction.

    U.S. Senator John Fetterman palms a basketball Monday, June 29, 2026 as he appears with fellow Pennsylvania Sen. Dave McCormick to promote the savings accounts for kids that were a signature piece of President Trump’s Big Beautiful Bill.

    “I am begging your parents to get involved in this,” Fetterman said. “It’s about all of your futures.”

    In a joint interview after the event, the senators described the initiative as a groundbreaking effort to build long-term wealth for individuals who don’t typically have access to it.

    “This is one of many things that we need to do to think about how we address a fundamental problem — which is, we have a growing concentration of wealth in our country,” said McCormick, a former investment firm CEO and millionaire many times over.

    “He was talking almost like a Democrat … a concentration of wealth,” Fetterman quipped, prompting McCormick to laugh.

    The accounts were established as part of Trump’s most significant legislation of his second term, which narrowly passed Congress last year.

    Fetterman, at the time, joined other Democrats by calling the bill a “disaster” for its cuts to Medicaid spending and other programs like the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, or SNAP.

    After voting against the law — or voting “hell no,” as he said at the time — Fetterman has broken with his party to support Trump and Republicans in a number of high-profile moments, and in ways that have deeply frustrated Democratic voters. His appearances at public events in Philadelphia and around Pennsylvania have been extremely rare, and many political observers question whether he will seek re-election in 2028.

    At the same time, Fetterman has developed a close working relationship with McCormick, a Republican elected in 2024. The pair frequently partner on issues in Washington and stress the need for bipartisanship, particularly in a purple state like Pennsylvania.

    “He and I are in this together,” McCormick, who has stopped in Philadelphia frequently, including for meals with Democratic Mayor Cherelle L. Parker, told the crowd Monday.

    Philadelphia Youth Basketball CEO Kenny Holdsman said he had worked with both senators and credited a conversation he had with Fetterman for helping push the organization to keep its doors open for longer hours as safe haven for the 2,400 young people in its programs.

    Holdsman said the Trump Accounts would “really help young people and their families in a big way” — from the financial security that comes with a compounding investment account, to the educational and financial literacy aspect that will come with kids having access to their savings.

    Invest America founder Brad Gerstner, who had pushed for the idea behind Trump Accounts for years and now leads the nonprofit that manages the initiative, showed the children a screenshot of the app that will display the contents of each account.

    “We want kids across the country, when they’re in middle school, to be able to open up this on their phone, so it’s not some abstract notion that I have money. This is the way the teachers in public schools are going to be able to teach them about ownership, compounding, financial literacy, et cetera,” Gerstner said. “It’s hard to teach kids about money when they don’t have any money.”

    Bipartisan groups have said the Trump Accounts do not have the same kind of tax-advantaged structure as other investment accounts, such as 529 plans that are specifically used for education. Cato Institute, a conservative think tank, has also criticized the $1,000 contributions for children born in the years around the program’s founding and called the overall plan “a government welfare program rather than a tax-neutral investment vehicle.”

    Fetterman said he supported 529s but the Trump Accounts were a “much more versatile vehicle” for investing in children’s futures. McCormick said the program’s ability to accept philanthropic donations made it particularly appealing as other individuals and corporations can buoy the accounts on top of families’ investments. Both also stressed convenience.

    “You’re going to share in the prosperity of America,” McCormick said. “It’s easy. You don’t have to overthink it.”

    Sen. Fetterman pauses to fist bump a youngster on his way to the more than 100 children attending a summer basketball day camp at the Alan Horwitz “Sixth Man” Center.
  • Ben Simmons eyes NBA comeback and contemplates a return to the Sixers: ‘Maybe I’ll go back to Philly’

    Ben Simmons eyes NBA comeback and contemplates a return to the Sixers: ‘Maybe I’ll go back to Philly’

    Could Mike Gansey’s first veteran roster addition be the return of an old friend?

    In a new Men’s Health story, Ben Simmons said he’s eyeing an NBA return after a year away.

    “I plan on getting as strong as I can physically, getting my ass on the court, and then the team realizing that my abilities will be needed,” he said.

    Simmons spent his most recent NBA season of 2024-25 with the Nets and later the Clippers, playing 51 games and averaging five points, 5.6 assists and 4.7 rebounds in 22 minutes per game. Simmons has been hampered by various injuries, including a nerve impingement in his back.

    Over the last year, Simmons stepped away from basketball, instead spending some of his time off winning a professional fishing tournament with the South Florida Sails, a team of which he is also part owner.

    But now, feeling healthier, the 29-year-old Simmons hopes to launch an NBA comeback. With his size and basketball IQ, Simmons said coaches told him that if he got healthy there would be plenty of interest from teams.

    “I don’t have a plan on where,” Simmons told Men’s Health, but he had a few spots in mind.

    “Maybe I’ll go back to Philly,” he said. “Miami would be nice. And not because it’s Miami — I like Erik Spoelstra, I like the Heat, I like their organization, I like the culture.”

    Could Ben Simmons (left) and Joel Embiid coexist as members of the Sixers?

    Simmons’ breakup with the Sixers in 2022 was messy. The three-time NBA All-Star refused to play for the team after the second-round playoff loss to the Atlanta Hawks in 2021, and was ultimately traded for James Harden. Would he even be welcomed back?

    Simmons famously feuded with center Joel Embiid before he was dealt to the Nets in the middle of the 2021-22 season.

    “The situation is weird, disappointing, borderline kind of disrespectful to all the guys that are out here fighting for their lives,” Embiid said back in 2021 training camp of Simmons’ refusal to play for the Sixers. “Some guys rely on the team being successful to stay in the league and make money somehow. Because if you’re on a winning team, you’re always going to have a spot in the league, just because you’re on a winning team and you contributed.”

    But it’s been four years, and if Simmons is healthy he could be a depth piece for a capped-out Sixers team in need of help off the bench.

  • Supreme Court rules constitutional privacy protections apply to cellphone users location history

    Supreme Court rules constitutional privacy protections apply to cellphone users location history

    WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court held Monday that constitutional privacy protections extend to cell phone location information, ruling in the case of a bank robber whose identity was discovered through a geofence warrant.

    Justice Elena Kagan wrote for the 6-3 court that people don’t forfeit expectations of privacy even when they opt into Google’s location history.

    “A cellphone user is not to be viewed as sharing private information with third parties — which then can be freely passed on to the government — just by doing the ordinary things cellphone users do,” Kagan wrote.

    Justice Samuel Alito wrote in dissent that Okello Chatrie had no expectation of privacy in information he voluntarily turned over to Google.

    The decision is the court’s latest effort to apply a constitutional provision ratified in 1791 to technology the nation’s founders could not have envisioned.

    Police obtained a geofence warrant after a bank robbery in a suburb of Richmond, Va., and used it to locate cell phones that were near the bank around the time it was robbed in May 2019.

    One of those phones belonged to Chatrie, who had eluded the police until they turned to the powerful technological tool.

    The warrant kick-started the investigation. After determining that Chatrie was among those near the Call Federal Credit Union in Midlothian at the time, police obtained a search warrant for his home. They found nearly $100,000 in cash, including bills wrapped in bands signed by the bank teller.

    Chatrie pleaded guilty to robbing the bank and was sentenced to nearly 12 years in prison. His lawyers argued on appeal that none of the evidence should have been used against him.

    They challenged the warrant as a violation of his privacy because it allowed authorities to gather the location history of people near the bank without having any evidence they had anything to do with the robbery. Prosecutors argued that Chatrie had no expectation of privacy because he voluntarily opted into Google’s location history.

    The Supreme Court did not decide Monday whether the search complied with the Fourth Amendment, which bans unreasonable searches and seizures. It sent the case back to a lower court for more work.

    A federal judge had ruled that the search violated Chatrie’s rights, but allowed the evidence to be used because the officer who applied for the warrant reasonably believed he was acting properly.

    The federal appeals court in Richmond upheld the conviction in a fractured ruling. In a separate case, the federal appeals court in New Orleans ruled that geofence warrants “are general warrants categorically prohibited by the Fourth Amendment.”