ICE Invasion Brings US To Brink
PDS Published 01/13/2026
-
The FBI is investigating Renee Good’s “possible connections to activist groups.”
But the Justice Department is refusing to investigate the border patrol agent who shot and killed her in broad daylight.
And now several attorneys in the department’s civil rights division, which has already been gutted by the Trump administration, are resigning in protest.
And all this as the situation in Minneapolis may be about to get even more volatile.
With 1,000 US Customs and Border Protection agents now in the process of deploying to the city – in addition to the roughly 2,000 federal agents DHS announced would be deployed to the area last week, just a day before Good’s death.
Although, notably, there’s now a chance that a federal judge could get in the way.
And that’s because the state of Minnesota – along with the cities of Minneapolis and St. Paul – is suing the Trump administration.
With the named defendants including Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem, acting ICE director Todd Lyons, and CBP Commander Gregory Bovino.
The lawsuit asks a federal court to issue a temporary restraining order to halting or at least limiting the federal government’s operation in the state – arguing that the operation is “a federal invasion of the Twin Cities” []
Also alleging that the federal government is unlawfully commandeering state resources and violating Minnesota law and city ordinances.
And arguing that this isn’t really about immigration enforcement but is an unconstitutional act of political retaliation – noting:
"Minneapolis and Saint Paul are now the latest of the cities widely considered to be Democratic cities with elected leaders who do not politically align with Trump to be flooded with federal agents." []
And with that, the lawsuit also claims that these federal agents flooding the city have used “unlawful tactics” that “undermine public trust in state and local law enforcement.” []
Providing several examples – including the arrest and chokehold of a Somali American way back one week after the operation was first announced in December (BROLL).
And the use of pepper spray and other heavy-handed tactics outside a high school just hours after Renee Good was killed (BROLL)
Although, to be clear, the list of incidents? It’s much longer than that and it seems like there’s several more that could be added to it every day.
But also, notably, what’s happening goes beyond allegations of brutality and excessive force.
It’s also about rights potentially being violated in other ways.
For example, the lawsuit refers to an edited video posted to social media of a border patrol agent telling a man they had pulled over that he is under suspicion because of his accent – this was on the day Renee Good was killed.
And since then one video making the rounds is filmed by someone identifying herself as a citizen, confronting an agent who repeatedly asked her: “Where were you born?” (BROLL)
Another video seems to show federal officers ramming the door of a home, entering, and arresting the man inside – all just minutes after pepper spraying protesters outside who had confronted the heavily armed agents.
With a woman then coming out of the house with the document that federal agents presented to arrest the man – and which appeared to be what’s known as an “administrative warrant” rather than a judicial warrant.
Which is important because if it was signed by an immigration officer and not a judge, the warrant doesn’t authorize forced entry into a private residence.
It only authorizes arrest in a public area. []
And with that, Illinois and Chicago have actually just filed a somewhat similar lawsuit against the administration.
Accusing agents of “unlawful” and “dangerous” tactics including and arresting people without warrants or probable cause – as well as things like swapping and altering license plates and using tear gas and other chemical weapons on bystanders.
And arguing that Border Patrol and ICE agents "have acted as occupiers rather than officers of the law.” []
Of course, the Trump administration has denied any wrongdoing.
With a White House spokesperson saying in response to the Illinois lawsuit:
"This reads like a far-left manifesto, not a serious lawsuit” – and adding:
”Chicago's lawsuit uses aggressive rhetoric meant to smear law enforcement officers and incite violence against them."
A DHS spokesperson was similarly dismissive about the Minnesota lawsuit – actually accusing the state’s Attorney General Keith Ellison of "prioritizing politics over public safety."
Although, notably, that’s a statement many – including Minneapolis police chief Brian O’Hara – would probably disagree with.
With him telling the New York Times’s The Daily podcast that the city has “gotten a pretty dramatic increase in 911 calls from people in the community related to a lot of the street enforcement that’s happening.”
“And I mean it’s everything from People are being arrested, and their cars are left — sometimes left in the roadway, sometimes blocking the street, and in one case left when it wasn’t even placed in park and was rolling down the road.” (8:48-9:04)
We had another time where there was a dog in the car, and they left the dog in car. I mean, even this morning, we've gotten calls for individuals who were pepper-sprayed by ICE. It’s just a variety of calls that we then have to manage and triage that were not happening before.” (9:11-9:27)
O’Hara also affirmed that American citizens are being stopped by ICE, but added:
“...they’re not stopping family members of folks who are Norwegian or Irish. That’s not happening.” (30:35-30:41)
But with that, he also questioned whether ICE agents are well enough trained to handle the kinds of encounters we’ve been seeing,
And while he didn’t take an explicit stand regarding Renee Good’s killing, he did say this:
“The No. 1 is you don’t place yourself in the path of the vehicle. That’s like Traffic Stop 101. You don’t do that.” (20:16-20:23).
But with that, neither he nor any state or local official has any say in the handling of this case.
Right, the Justice Department has blocked Minnesotans authorities from participating in what initially was meant to be a joint FBI and state criminal investigation.
And that’s as some senior administration officials immediately labeled Good a “domestic terrorist” after she was killed — even though investigators barely had time to collect and assess the facts about the case.
And now, the DOJ’s assistant attorney general for civil rights has decided his division won’t investigate Good’s killing at all – which is usually the case for a shooting involving law enforcement.
And you’ve actually had at least four senior officials resigning from the division – from which more than 250 attorneys have already left over the course of Trump’s second term.
Now, all that said, it’s not like there’s not an investigation taking place.
But notably, at least one focus of the investigation is Good’s possible connections to activist groups protesting the administration’s immigration crackdown.
Including those who took part in the type of neighborhood watch activities Good may have been involved in – with DOJ officials reportedly believing they might be “instigators” of the shooting. []
And even though Trump administration officials have repeatedly vowed to crack down on left-wing activists in the past, this stands out because it has the potential to involve people not accused of committing any violence.
And former department officials have reportedly warned that such a wide-ranging inquiry raises the chances that forms of political protests could be criminalized. []
And, of course, that’s as these protests might only be gaining steam, as recent polling we talked about yesterday shows that ICE has become very unpopular.
And we’ve seen Democrats trying to tie this all together with other issues that might prove important to voters.
With Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, for example, recently telling reporters:
“I want everybody to understand that the cuts to your health care are what’s paying for this.”
“A trillion dollars in health care was taken out and given to ICE. So understand how these dots connect. You get screwed over to pay a bunch of thugs in the street that are shooting mothers in the face. That’s what this administration is doing. That’s what the Republican party did.” (BYTE: 0:35-0:41, 0:55-1:15)
Ilhan Omar, the representative for Minnesota's 5th Congressional District, which includes the entire city of Minneapolis, made a similar argument on X, adding:
“ICE isn’t making us safer — it’s terrorizing our communities.”
And you’ve also had her taking on the world’s richest man Elon Musk as he’s pushed misinformation about her state.
Right, for example, you had Musk suggesting on X yesterday that Omar, who was born in Somalia, is only in office because of undocumented Somali immigrants.
Which is problematic for a few reasons – one of which Omar pointed out herself , writing in response:
“You are one of the dumbest people on earth, my district is literally a majority white district. Your conspiracy theories are laughable and should have no place in a society that cares about facts.”
But with that, on the topic of Elon Musk, we also need to talk about the international battle brewing over his AI chatbot Grok right now.
-
On the topic of Elon Musk, we also need to talk about the international battle brewing over his AI chatbot Grok right now.
With the US currently doing their damnedest to protect and enable pedophilia.
Right, there have been growing concerns around the world surrounding AI-generated sexual images of people - especially children.
And front and center of that conversation has been Grok AI - especially after it began allowing users to edit images with text prompts in late December.
Which, shocker, led to a flood of nonconsensual AI-generated photos of women in their underwear on X.
As well as sexual images of children.
We even saw popular creators like Twitch Streamer Sweet Anita speak out about it - telling Dexerto,
“As an onlooker and a target of the Grok bikini trend, I can’t help but feel as though our bodies are being used to bolster usage statistics just to impress investors, all while we pay the price.” []
“These deepfakes of unclothed women and children are still getting posted every single second. I don’t know how the people running X could, in good conscience, choose to profit from that. At this point, it looks so intentional to me. I’m disgusted. It makes me sick that Twitter has been turned into such a dark place.“ []
In response to all the backlash, xAI limited image generation and editing to paying subscribers and promised to take action against any images like this generated of children. []
Saying they respond to any material like that by removing it, permanently suspending accounts, and working with local governments and law enforcement.
But for many - including Sweet Anita and international leaders - that’s not anywhere near good enough.
In fact, this whole thing has led to Grok access being blocked in Indonesia and Malaysia - with Indonesia’s minister of communications and digital affairs saying in a statement,
“The government views the practice of non-consensual sexual deepfakes as a serious violation of human rights, dignity and the security of citizens in the digital space.” []
Leaders in the UK have also taken serious issue - with Britain’s Prime Minister Keir Starmer’s spokesperson saying that just limiting image generation to subscribers is, quote, “not a solution” and is “insulting” to victims of sexual violence. []
And now the UK’s communications watchdog OFCOM has launched an investigation into X itself. []
With OFCOM saying the use of Grok to create and share images of people undressed without their consent, quote, “may amount to intimate image abuse or pornography.”
Adding that sexualized images of children “may amount to child sexual abuse material.” []
Specifically, OFCOM is investigating whether X has failed to comply with the UK’s Online Safety Act.
Which requires platforms to keep users safe from illegal content online.
With UK technology secretary Liz Kendall saying,
“ It is vital that Ofcom complete this investigation swiftly because the public – and most importantly the victims – will not accept any delay.” []
And if OFCOM determines that X did break the law, they can force the platform to take steps to get into compliance or remedy any harm they’ve caused.
As well as potentially imposing fines.
Or maybe even getting a court order to block X from functioning in the UK. []
But the Trump administration has taken serious issue with international threats against X and Grok. []
With the State Department’s Sarah Rogers accusing the British government of wanting, quote, "the ability to curate a public square, to suppress political viewpoints it dislikes.” []
And adding,
“Let's wait and see what Ofcom does and we'll see what America does in response.”
“Nothing is off the table when it comes to free speech.” []
In the House of Commons yesterday, Kendall pushed back against the State Department’s accusations - saying,
“This is not, as some would claim, about restricting freedom of speech, which is something that I and the whole Government hold very dear. It is about tackling violence against women and girls. It is about upholding basic British values of decency and respect, and ensuring that the standards that we expect offline are upheld online. It is about exercising our sovereign power and responsibility to uphold the laws of this land.” []
But it’s not just about X being a platform that leans conservative these days - the Trump administration is all-in on Grok.
Secretary of War Crimes Pete Hegseth actually just announced that Grok is going to be operating inside the Pentagon network along with Google’s generative AI engine. []
With Hegseth saying,
"Very soon we will have the world's leading AI models on every unclassified and classified network throughout our department.” []
And that’s even more concerning that it sounds!
Right, in his speech about this, Hegeseth went on to say that his vision for AI military systems means that they operate, quote, "without ideological constraints that limit lawful military applications.” []
Before he expressly added that the Pentagon’s AI, quote, “will not be woke."
But on an international scale, the conversation about the risk of social media goes beyond Grok or even just AI.
Back in December, Australia’s new law requiring social media companies to stop kids under 16 from having accounts on their platforms went into effect.
And that has resulted in Meta alone reportedly blocking more than half a million accounts on their platforms. []
Including some 300,000 Instagram accounts and 170,000 Facebook accounts.
But in a new blog post, Meta has pushed back hard - saying.
"We call on the Australian government to engage with industry constructively to find a better way forward, such as incentivising all of industry to raise the standard in providing safe, privacy-preserving, age appropriate experiences online, instead of blanket bans.” []
Again making the argument that age verification should happen at the app store - saying it’s the only way to ensure, quote, “consistent, industry-wide protections for young people.” []
Now, this law - from the beginning to its passing to now - has been closely watched by several governments.
Including the EU and the state of Florida.
Because this is the most firm set of restrictions we’ve seen on teenage social media use so far. []
Right, in this policy there is no exemption for parental approval - either you can have an account or not.
But we’ve already seen teenagers find some workarounds - like going to platforms that aren’t banned yet or using their parents’ accounts or even using a VPN. []
We’ve even seen Reddit arguing the law is ineffective in their lawsuit - adding that it also will isolate teens, quote, “from the ability to engage in age-appropriate community experiences.”
So the question that arises here is how do we make these laws effective to keep kids safe?
Especially from dangerous AI-generated content like we’ve seen from the Hegseth-approved Grok on X?
That is the question I’m going to pass off to you.
Let me know your thoughts about this in the comments down below.
Go to ZipRecruiter to hire smarter.
-
[But getting back into the news,] the war over the future of the Democratic Party is raging right now in California.
With the party’s progressive wing pushing for an unprecedented wealth tax on billionaires, and moderates vigorously pushing back.
And for context, I’m sure y’all are aware how much wealth inequality America’s steeped in right now.
Right, as of 2022, the top 10% of families held nearly 70% of all wealth, while the bottom 50% of families held just 3%. [Quote, find “69”]
It’s so bad that historians often compare it to the Gilded Age of the late nineteenth, early twentieth century.
And California, while being the least affordable state and suffering from a widening budget deficit, is also home to more billionaires than any other state.
So that’s led some people to go, hey, why don’t we take some of that wealth and use it to fix some of our problems?
Hence this proposal, which would make anyone with a net worth above $1 billion pay a one-time tax equal to 5% of their assets. [Quote, find “due in 2027”]
With that applying retroactively to anyone living in the state as of the new year, and the payment would be due in 2027. [Same quote]
Though there would be the option of paying it in installments over five years, but then you’d have to pay more in total. [Same quote]
Also, real estate, pensions, and retirement accounts would be excluded. [Same quote]
Now if you caught wind of this story from right-wing media, you’d probably get the impression that this policy’s being pushed by radical left Governor Gavin Newsom.
[Clip, 01:48 - 01:53] Caption: “Why would a Newsom, the governor of California, even think about this idea?”
[Clip, 01:47 - 01:51] Caption: “Gavin Newsom of course wants a wealth tax.”
[Clip, 01:44 - 01:47, 01:50 - 01:55] Caption: “And that’s sort of what Gavin Newsom is doing. … You, all of you, need to pay more taxes, but not pointing any fingers at himself.”
But the reality is that Newsom passionately opposes this tax, because he claims it will drive billionaires out of the state and hurt California’s economy.
In fact, he’s smothered previous wealth tax proposals in their cribs before, promising to veto any such bill that reached his desk.
But this latest proposal is different, because it comes from a healthcare workers union, not state lawmakers.
So rather than going through the legislature, they’re trying to pass it as a ballot initiative this November.
And reportedly they’ve already begun collecting the nearly 900,000 signatures they need to get it there.
But still, Newsom told The New York Times yesterday that he has been relentlessly working behind the scenes to snuff out the proposal, and that he would fight the measure if it reached the ballot. [Quote, find “relentlessly”]
[Clip, 02:45 - 03:03] Caption: [Andrew Ross Sorkin:] “So there is a wealth tax proposed in California that I think you are adamantly against.” [Gavin Newsom:] “Yes I am.” [Andrew Ross Sorkin:] “And we have a mayor that’s coming here in New York who would like to have a wealth tax if he could. You couldn’t be more diametrically opposed.” [Gavin Newsom:] “Yeah, well I want to be a big tent party. It’s about addition, not subtraction.”
But here’s where the war over the party’s future’s happening, because others disagree with that “big tent” idea.
Like for example, Senator Elizabeth Warren, who argued in a speech to the National Press Club yesterday that Democrats need to become more progressive, not less. [Lead B roll into clip]
[Clip, 04:57 - 05:12, 05:30 - 05:48] Caption: “Revising our economic agenda to tiptoe around that conclusion might appeal to the wealthy, but it will not help Democrats build a bigger tent, and it definitely will not help Democrats win elections. … By definition, the top one-tenth of one percent of the economic ladder doesn’t have a lot of votes. So when the question is raised whether Democrats should build our tent by sucking up to the rich, it’s sure not about attracting their votes. It’s about attracting their money.”
But Newsom’s like, nah man, ideological diversity is our strength, not our weakness; different Democrats appeal to different constituencies. [Lead B roll into clip]
[Clip, 03:18 - 03:31, 03:37 - 03:49] Caption: “We recognize it’s important to focus on growth but also focus on inclusion. We have predistribution Democrats, we have redistribution Democrats. And therein lies the dialectic and therein lies the debate within the Democratic Party. … So much punditry’s been done about, well, is the future of the party Mamdani? At the same election that occurred, well is the future, hold on, Virginia? Is the future New Jersey?”
But Warren’s like, nope, there ain’t enough room in this tent for all that. [Lead B roll into clip]
[Clip, 13:44 - 14:12] Caption: “The Democratic Party cannot pursue both visions at the same time. Either we politely nibble around the edges of change, or we throw ourselves into the fight. Either we carefully craft policies to ensure that the rich keep right on getting richer, or we build a party that ferociously and unapologetically serves the needs of working people.”
Now Newsom concedes that he might feel differently about a national wealth tax, but he argues that a state-level one just in California is simply impractical. [Lead B roll into clip]
[Clip, 06:25 - 06:37] Caption: “You can’t isolate yourself from the forty-nine others. We’re in a competitive environment. People have this simple luxury, people of that status, they already have two or three homes outside the state. It’s a simple issue.”
Now at least anecdotally, we’ve seen some billionaires making moves to relocate to states like Florida and Texas before the January 1 deadline, supposedly to evade the tax just in case it passes.
With those including the likes of Google co-founders Larry Page and Sergey Brin, venture capitalist Peter Thiel, and possibly Oracle founder Larry Ellison. [Image, image, image]
In fact, Thiel donated three million dollars to a committee opposing the tax, and that’s expected to be the first of several major contributions from Silicon Valley leaders hoping to quash it. [Headline/image]
With some sources telling The Times they estimate more than 75 million dollars will ultimately go toward that effort. [Quote same link, find “75”]
Hell, others are even thinking about putting their own tax-related initiatives on the ballot just to confuse voters. [Quote same link, find “confuse”]
But there are also others in his class who don’t seem to care so much, including Nvidia’s CEO Jensen Huang, who’s now one of the wealthiest men on Earth. [Lead B roll into clip]
[Clip, 20:38 - 20:44, 21:00 - 21:10] Caption: “We work in Silicon Valley because that’s where the talent pool is. … Whatever taxes they would like to apply, so be it. I’m perfectly fine with it.”
Now in the middle, California’s nonpartisan legislative analyst and the governor’s Department of Finance said the tax could result in hundreds of millions of dollars in losses from income tax revenue per year if wealthy residents leave. [Quote, find “hundreds of millions”]
But they also estimated that the tax itself would probably deliver tens of billions of dollars in one-time money for California, so it’s a short-term versus long-term thing. [Quote same link, find “tens of billions”]
So you have the healthcare worker union’s chief of staff telling The Times the concern is overblown, saying:
“The overwhelming majority of billionaires have chosen to stay in California past the Jan. 1 deadline. Only a very small percentage left before the deadline, despite weeks of Chicken Little talking points claiming a modest tax would trigger a mass departure.” [Quote and B roll, 01:37]
With her arguing that Donald Trump’s cuts to Medicaid, food assistance and Affordable Care Act subsidies made a wealth tax definitely necessary, if it wasn’t already. [B roll, 00:37]
So under the proposal, 90% of the revenue from the tax would go toward healthcare, with the rest going to food assistance and education. [Quote, find “90 percent”]
But Newsom tells The Times, “This will be defeated — there’s no question in my mind,” and adding: “I’ll do what I have to do to protect the state.” [Quote]
So we’ll have to see if he’s right, but it’s not just him versus the union in this upcoming fight.
Because Representative Ro Khanna, who, like Newsom, is considered a potential 2028 presidential candidate, has thrown his support behind the tax.
With him writing in a viral post recently: “I echo what FDR said with sarcasm of economic royalists when they threatened to leave, "I will miss them very much.” [Post]
“My district is $18 trillion, nearly 1/3 of US stock market in a 50 mile radius. We have 5 companies with a market cap over a trillion dollar companies. If I can stand up for a billionaire tax, this is not a hard position for 434 other members or 100 Senators. … AI was created with our tax dollars. ImageNet was created by Fei-Fei Li [Fay fay lee] at Stanford using NSF money. This was a visual database. Hinton presented at an ImageNet conference his famous paper. The seminal innovation in tech is done by thousands often with public funds. NSF, DARPA, Stanford, Berkley, San Jose State, Santa Clara and the UCs are the foundation for what has made Silicon Valley a powerhouse. It's why we won 5 Nobel Prizes this year in the UC system. … We cannot have a nation with extreme concentration of wealth in a few places but where 70 percent of Americans believe the American dream is dead and healthcare, childcare, housing, education is unaffordable. What will stifle American innovation, what will make us fall behind China, is if we see further political dysfunction and social unrest, if we fail to cultivate the talent in every American and in every city and town. … So yes a billionaire tax is good for American innovation which depends on a strong and thriving American democracy.” [Post]
But reportedly a loose collection of Silicon Valley executives are now mobilizing on WhatsApp chats and conference calls to oust Khanna just because of his support for this tax. [Quote, find “mobilizing”]
Though that does seem like a longshot; right, he easily won his last election and is currently sitting on a very comfy, 15-million-dollar campaign cushion.
Plus the executives’ effort could backfire, since now he can play the ‘billionaires are trying to take me down’ card.
In fact, he already appears to be doing that in a recent fund-raising email. [Quote same link, find “email”]
But whether it’s about Khanna, Newsom, Warren, California politics or the Democratic Party in general, I’d love to hear your thoughts and opinions down below.
-
[And in more news you need to know], this could be the biggest labor showdown that New York City’s healthcare industry has seen in decades.
Right, yesterday, nearly 15,000 nurses at some of the city’s top hospitals went on strike.
And according to the union that represents the nurses, they are demanding more robust staffing levels for patients, higher wages, and protections against violence on the job.
With the union accusing management of refusing to agree to safe staffing levels for patients and threatening to discontinue or cut the nurses’ health benefits.
And alleging that major hospitals are trying to walk back staffing protections that nurses won during a strike in 2023.
Right, at that time, nurses also secured significant raises, increasing minimum pay nearly 20% over three years and boosting starting pay well above $100,000.
And specifically, with these new strikes, you have nurses walking out of NewYork-Presbyterian/Columbia, Montefiore (Mon-Te-Fure) Medical Center, and the main campus of Mount Sinai (Sigh-Nigh) Hospital, as well as two other major hospitals within the Mount Sinai (Sigh-Nigh) system.
All of which are among the leading hospitals in New York City.
Right, and this is an absolutely massive deal both on its own and because it could impact so many other people.
Hell, late last week, ahead of the anticipated strike, you even had New York Gov. Kathy Hochul declaring a state of emergency.
Saying that a “disaster is imminent” and warning that a strike could “impact the availability and delivery of care, threatening public health and safety.”
With the order specifically noting that the strike comes as the city’s hospital system is already under strain from “record-high” flu cases and hospitalizations.
But, despite the warnings, it does appear that the system was prepared for these strikes.
Right, according to reports, hospital executives had been preparing for weeks to make sure their facilities continue running in the event of a strike.
With a hospital trade group saying they have been securing contracts for travel nurses and reserving hotel rooms for them.
Additionally, New York’s Department of Health instructed hospitals not impacted by the strike to be prepared to receive patients from medical centers that are affected.
With the agency saying in a letter that hospitals where nurses are striking have the ability to freely transfer patients, even against the patients’ will.
Now, that said, there have been direct impacts on the hospitals where the nurses are striking.
Right, some of those hospitals did cancel scheduled surgeries and accelerate discharges during the weekend to reduce patients, while also planning to transfer infants out of neonatal intensive care units.
But leaders at the affected hospitals said that their facilities will remain open and that they are prepared to provide safe patient care — even if the strike drags on.
And to that point, it’s currently unclear when and how this will end.
Right, so far, the impacted hospitals have widely rejected the nurses' demands, with many specifically taking issue with the demands for increased wages, with some noting that the nurses in these institutions are already highly paid.
You also had the president of the Greater New York Hospital Association saying the nurses’ demands were “so outrageous that there is no way they can concede to what the union is asking for.”
And adding “The health care system is under siege financially.”
Now, to that point, it is true that the current state of the country does complicate their demands — right, as The New York Times explains:
“Hospitals are expecting lean years ahead, as many New Yorkers lose health insurance and billions of dollars in federal care health funding to the state start to dry up, the result of the domestic policy law President Trump signed in July.”
But the nurses' union has hit back on the hospitals’ claims that they don’t have the money to pay their nursing staff, noting that hospital executives collect multimillion-dollar salaries.
For example, records show that the head of NewYork-Presbyterian received more than $26 million in compensation in 2024.
And it does seem like some major players in the city are on their side.
Right, you had New York AG Tish James issuing a statement of support for the strike.
And yesterday, Mayor Mamdani himself showed up to a large gathering of striking nurses outside NewYork-Presbyterian/Columbia Hospital, where he delivered a few remarks and cheered on the strikers.
With Mamdani saying that the value of nurses is not “negotiable,” and adding:
“New York City will do everything in our power to ensure the sick and injured can receive high quality care, while refusing to abandon those who have time and again refused to abandon us.”
-
Then, next up, we have a few quick updates about Iran we need to talk about.
Starting with the news that Iranian authorities have provided death tolls for the first time since the protests broke out, and it’s MUCH higher than previously reported.
Right, today, you had an unnamed Iranian official telling Reuters that the total number of people who have been killed in the protests is 2,000, including security personnel.
But the official didn’t give a breakdown of who had been killed.
Now, with that, there are plenty of reasons to be skeptical of the death toll given by Iranian officials.
BUT, very notably here, you also had Human Rights Activists in Iran — a US-based monitoring group that has been accurate in the past — updating their data today and reporting the same figure, saying at least 2,000 have died.
Far higher than the roughly 500 the group estimated yesterday.
That is just a horrifying, devastating figure, and, as the Associated Press reported, the number of dead “dwarfs that in any other round of protest or unrest in Iran in decades and recalls the chaos surrounding the country’s 1979 Islamic Revolution.”
What’s more, you also had HRA reporting in an earlier update that at least 10,721 people have been arrested.
And that’s also relevant when it comes to the death toll, because today, human rights groups are now reporting that Iran is set to execute the first protester tied to the latest wave of unrest.
According to the group Iran Human Rights, the man in question is 26-year-old Erfan Soltani (Er-Fawn Soul-Tawny), and he is set to be sentenced to death by hanging tomorrow.
And you have U.S. outlets reporting that the protester has been charged with “waging war against God,” which is a real crime punishable by death in Iran.
With another rights group calling for international support to stop the hanging, claiming that the demonstrators’ “only crime is calling for freedom for Iran.”
But, unfortunately and horrifically, this will likely be the first of many such executions.
Right, as we mentioned yesterday, even before the protests, Iran dramatically escalated executions over the last year.
And while all of that’s going on in Iran, there are a few important updates here in the U.S. we need to touch on.
Right, yesterday, Trump announced on Truth Social that he was imposing a 25% tariff on “any Country doing business” with Iran “effective immediately.”
But, like so many official announcements made on Truth Social, the post lacked any real details.
You know, little things like which countries would be affected, whether or not the new tariff will be imposed in addition to existing import taxes, or what exactly he meant by “doing business.”
Also, another minor detail: the president didn’t provide the legal authority he was using to impose the tariffs.
Though experts speculate he’s likely relying on the same act he’s used to impose other sweeping tariffs — but, notably, legal challenges to those measures are currently before the Supreme Court.
And, at least as of recording, the Trump Administration hasn’t issued any kind of statement clarifying any of those essential questions about tariffs that are supposedly already in effect…
But, beyond all that, the fact that these tariffs are set to go into effect immediately is also incredibly significant here.
Right, normally when tariffs are imposed, they’re delayed with a built-in lag time so importers have enough time to change their plans and avoid the new harsh fees.
And experts say immediate tariffs would be INCREDIBLY disruptive to international trade because goods from many of the impacted countries are already en-route to the U.S.
With a former chief economist for the International Monetary Fund explaining that the policy is, quote:
“profoundly self-harming for the U.S., and [it] will not change the Iranians’ behavior one iota.”
Now, as far as which countries will be impacted here, there are a good number.
But the nation that will be most significantly affected is China, which is Iran’s largest trade partner by far, with exports totalling $22 billion in 2022.
And a large chunk of those exports is oil — this is actually a super crazy fact — China buys 90% of ALL of Iran’s oil exports.
That’s nearly $2 billion a MONTH and at least 5% of Iran’s ENTIRE economic output.
So, as a result, it’s unsurprising that China has fiercely opposed the new tariffs, with a spokesman for the Chinese Embassy in Washington describing the taxes as “illicit.”
Adding that the country “will take all necessary measures to safeguard its legitimate rights and interests.”[]
But, of course, it’s not just China that will be impacted.
India is also a big importer of Iranian goods, and other major trading partners include Turkey, Iraq, and the United Arab Emirates.
But the tariff announcement is not the only important message Trump has delivered in a super cryptic Truth Social post over the last 24ish hours.
You also had the president writing:
“Iranian Patriots, KEEP PROTESTING - TAKE OVER YOUR INSTITUTIONS!!! Save the names of the killers and abusers. They will pay a big price. I have cancelled all meetings with Iranian Officials until the senseless killing of protesters STOPS. HELP IS ON ITS WAY. MIGA (Make Iran Great Again)!!!”
Okay, so, again, not totally clear what all this means in the grand scheme of things.
What the fuck does he mean by “They will pay a big price” and “HELP IS ON ITS WAY”? Does that indicate he’s leaning toward military intervention?
Right, as we mentioned yesterday, Trump and White House officials have said they are leaving the door open for that option, but want to pursue diplomacy first.
So how does the fact that he’s cancelled meetings with Iranian officials until they stop killing protestors play into that?
I mean, it’s Trump we’re talking about — he literally ran as the “no wars” president but keeps taking aggressive offensive actions.
But, at the same time, he also constantly flip-flops on everything, and each day you don’t know how he’s going to feel — it’s so dependent on whose around him.
So for now, we’re just going to continue to keep a close eye on this whole situation.
