American News
US kills 14 in strikes on four alleged drug boats in Pacific
US forces have killed 14 people in strikes on four alleged drug boats in the Pacific, Defence Secretary Pete Hegseth said.
Mexico’s navy says it is still searching for a lone survivor approximately 400 miles (643km) from the Pacific coastal city of Acapulco.
It is the latest in a series of attacks on boats the US says have been carrying drugs in both the Pacific and Caribbean.
The latest strikes in the eastern Pacific, which Hegseth said happened on Monday at the direction of President Donald Trump, mark an escalation in what it has cast as a campaign to stop narcotics from entering the US.
The strikes have drawn condemnation in the region and experts have questioned their legality. Members of the US Congress, both Democrats and Republicans, have also raised concerns and questioned the president’s authority to order them.
Mexican President Claudia Sheinbaum told her morning press conference “we do not agree with these attacks”. She said she had asked the country’s foreign minister, as well as representatives of the navy, to meet the US ambassador.
“We want all international treaties to be respected,” she added.
At least 57 people have now been killed in the strikes, which has led to increasing tensions between the US and the governments of both Colombia and Venezuela.
Most strikes have taken place off the coast of South America, in the Caribbean, but recently the US has turned its attention to the Pacific Ocean as well.
In a statement on X, Hegseth said the four vessels that were hit on Monday “were known by our intelligence apparatus, transitioning along known narco-trafficking routes and carrying narcotics”.
He added that eight “narco-terrorists” were killed in the first strike. Four and three were killed in the following two strikes.
- ANALYSIS: What is Trump’s endgame in Venezuela?
One person survived the strikes. According to Hegseth, Mexican search-and-rescue authorities “accepted the case and assumed responsibility for coordinating the rescue.”
The condition of the survivor or his current whereabouts are unclear. Mexico’s navy said in a statement that it had dispatched a patrol boat and an aircraft to conduct search operations to “safeguard human life at sea”.
Hegseth’s post included videos that show several vessels catching fire after being struck by US munitions.
“The department has spent over two decades defending other homelands,” he wrote. “Now, we’re defending our own.”
At least four of the strikes have so far taken place in the Pacific, which is a far more significant drug-trafficking corridor, with the rest taking place in the Caribbean.
President Trump has said he has the legal authority to continue bombing boats in international waters, but suggested last week that he may seek approval from Congress if the campaign is expanded to include targets on land.
Trump has said he is “totally prepared” to strike land-based targets, which would mark a significant escalation in the campaign.
The strikes, however, have drawn criticism from international law experts and both the Venezuelan and Colombian governments.
In an interview with the BBC’s Newsday programme last week, Colombian Deputy Foreign Minister Mauricio Jaramillo said the strikes were “disproportionate and outside international law”.
Jaramillo said those on the vessels had “no possibility to defend themselves” and were struck with “no process” and “no judicial order”.
The strikes also come as tensions ratchet up with both governments. The US has placed sanctions on Colombian president Gustavo Petro, accusing him of failing to curb drug trafficking and allowing cartels to “flourish”.
In the Caribbean, the US has deployed troops, aircraft and naval vessels and last week ordered the world’s largest warship – the USS Gerald R Ford – to the area.
Trump has accused Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro of being the leader of a drug-trafficking organisation, which he denies, and there are fears in Venezuela that the US military build-up is aimed at removing the long-time opponent of Trump from power.
The country’s attorney general told the BBC there is “no doubt” that Trump is trying to overthrow the Venezuelan government. He accused the US of hoping to seize the country’s natural resources, including reserves of gold, oil and copper.
The US is among many nations that do not recognise Maduro as Venezuela’s legitimate leader, after the last election in 2024 was widely dismissed as neither free nor fair. Opposition tallies from polling stations showed its candidate had won by a landslide.
American News
Trump celebrates as Democrats face fallout from end of shutdown
After 43 days, the longest US government shutdown in history is coming to an end.
Federal workers will start receiving pay again. National Parks will reopen. Government services that had been curtailed or suspended entirely will resume. Air travel, which had become a nightmare for many Americans, will return to being merely frustrating.
After the dust settles and the ink from President Donald Trump’s signature on the funding bill dries, what has this record-setting shutdown accomplished? And what has it cost?
Senate Democrats, through their use of the parliamentary filibuster, were able to trigger the shutdown despite being a minority in the chamber by refusing to go along with a Republican measure to temporarily fund the government.
They drew a line in the sand, demanding that the Republicans agree to extend health insurance subsidies for low-income Americans that are set to expire at the end of the year.
When a handful of Democrats broke ranks to vote to reopen the government on Sunday, they received next to nothing in return – a promise of a vote in the Senate on the subsidies, but no guarantees of Republican support or even a necessary vote in the House of Representatives.
Since then, members of the party’s left flank have been furious.
They’ve accused Senate Democratic leader Chuck Schumer – who didn’t vote for the funding bill – of being secretly complicit in the reopening plan or simply incompetent. They’ve felt like their party folded even after off-year election success showed they had the upper hand. They feared that the shutdown sacrifices had been for nothing.
Even more mainstream Democrats, like California’s Governor Gavin Newsom, called the shutdown deal “pathetic” and a “surrender”.
“I’m not coming in to punch anybody in the face,” he told the Associated Press, “but I’m not pleased that, in the face of this invasive species that is Donald Trump, who’s completely changed the rules of the game, that we’re still playing by the old rules of the game.”
Newsom has 2028 presidential ambitions and can be a good barometer for the mood of the party. He was a loyal supporter of Joe Biden who turned out to defend the then-president even after his disastrous June debate performance against Trump.
If he is running for the pitchforks, it’s not a good sign for Democratic leaders.
For Trump, in the days since the Senate deadlock broke on Sunday, his mood has gone from cautious optimism to celebration.
On Tuesday, he congratulated congressional Republicans and called the vote to reopen the government “a very big victory”.
“We’re opening up our country,” he said at a Veteran’s Day commemoration at Arlington Cemetery. “It should have never been closed.”
Trump, perhaps sensing the Democratic anger toward Schumer, joined the pile-on during a Fox News interview on Monday night.
“He thought he could break the Republican Party, and the Republicans broke him,” Trump said of the Senate Democrat.
Although there were times when Trump appeared to be buckling – last week he berated Senate Republicans for refusing to scrap the filibuster to reopen the government – he ultimately emerged from the shutdown having made little in the way of substantive concessions.
While his poll numbers have declined over the last 40 days, there’s still a year before Republicans have to face voters in the midterms. And, barring some kind of constitutional rewrite, Trump never has to worry about standing for election again.
With the end of the shutdown, Congress will get back to its regularly scheduled programming. Although the House of Representatives has effectively been on ice for more than a month, Republicans still hope they can pass some substantive legislation before next year’s election cycle kicks in.
While several government departments will be funded until September in the shutdown-ending agreement, Congress will have to approve spending for the rest of the government by the end of January to avoid another shutdown.
Democrats, licking their wounds, may be hankering for another chance to fight.
Meanwhile, the issue they fought over – healthcare subsidies – could become a pressing concern for tens of millions of Americans who will see their insurance costs double or triple at the end of the year. Republicans ignore addressing such voter pain at their own political peril.
And that isn’t the only peril facing Trump and the Republicans. A day that was supposed to be highlighted by the House government-funding vote was spent dwelling on the latest revelations surrounding the late convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein.
Later on Wednesday, Congresswoman Adelita Grijalva was sworn in to her congressional seat and became the 218th and final signatory on a petition that will force the House of Representatives to hold a vote ordering the justice department to release all its files on the Epstein case.
It was enough to prompt Trump to complain, on his Truth Social website, that his government-funding success was being eclipsed.
“The Democrats are trying to bring up the Jeffrey Epstein Hoax again because they’ll do anything at all to deflect on how badly they’ve done on the Shutdown, and so many other subjects,” he wrote.
It was all a very clear reminder that the best-laid plans and political strategies can be derailed in a flash.
American News
BBC faces fresh claim of misleading Trump edit
The BBC was accused of a misleading edit of Donald Trump’s 6 January 2021 speech two years before the Panorama sequence that led to the resignation of the director-general.
The clip aired on Newsnight in 2022, and a guest on the live programme challenged the way it had been cut together, the Daily Telegraph reported.
On Monday the BBC apologised for an “error of judgement” over an edited portion of the same speech that aired last year on Panorama.
The fallout saw the resignations of the BBC’s director-general Tim Davie and head of news Deborah Turness, and a legal threat from the US President.
Lawyers for Trump have written to the BBC saying he will sue for $1bn (£759m) in damages unless the corporation issues a retraction, apologises and compensates him for the Panorama broadcast.
In response to Thursday’s story in the Telegraph, a BBC spokesperson said: “The BBC holds itself to the highest editorial standards. This matter has been brought to our attention and we are now looking into it.”
In Trump’s speech on 6 January 2021, he said: “We’re going to walk down to the Capitol, and we’re going to cheer on our brave senators and congressmen and women.”
More than 50 minutes later in the speech, he said: “And we fight. We fight like hell.”
In the Panorama programme, the clip shows him as saying: “We’re going to walk down to the Capitol… and I’ll be there with you. And we fight. We fight like hell.”
In the Newsnight programme the edit is a little different.
He is shown as saying: “We’re going to walk down to the Capitol. And we’re going to cheer on our brave senators and congressmen and women. And we fight. We fight like hell. And if you don’t fight like hell, you’re not gonna have a country anymore.”
This was followed by a voiceover from presenter Kirsty Wark saying “and fight they did” over footage from the Capitol riots.
Responding to the clip on the same programme, former White House chief of staff Mick Mulvaney, who quit a diplomatic post and became a critic of Trump after describing the 6 January riots as an “attempted coup”, said the video had “spliced together” Trump’s speech.
“That line about ‘we fight and fight like hell’ is actually later in the speech and yet your video makes it look like those two things came together,” he said.
The Telegraph also reported that a whistleblower told the newspaper that a further discussion the following day was also shut down.
Last week, a leaked internal BBC memo claimed Panorama had misled viewers by splicing two parts of Trump’s 6 January 2021 speech together, making it appear as though he was explicitly urging people to attack the US Capitol after his election defeat.
The documentary aired days before the US presidential election in November 2024.
Speaking to Fox News, Trump said his 6 January 2021 speech had been “butchered” and the way it was presented had “defrauded” viewers.
American News
President Donald Trump is asking the US Supreme Court to review the $5m (£3.6m) civil case that found he defamed and sexually abused writer E Jean Carroll.
He has repeatedly claimed that the judge who oversaw the civil trial, Lewis Kaplan, improperly allowed evidence to be presented that hurt how the jury viewed Trump.
A federal appeals court agreed with the jury’s verdict last year and said Kaplan did not make errors that would warrant a new trial.
A New York jury awarded Ms Carroll damages over her civil claim that Trump sexually assaulted her in the 1990s, and then branded the incident a hoax on social media. He denied the allegations.
The Supreme Court is now Trump’s last hope of overturning the unanimous jury’s verdict. Whether the top US court will take the case up is unclear.
A federal appeals court declined to rehear Trump’s challenge to it in June.
Trump’s comments about the jury’s findings in the case led a separate jury to order him to pay Ms Carroll $83m for defaming her. A panel of federal judges denied his appeal of that decision in September, and Trump has now taken the next step in trying to have it overturned by asking the full bench of judges at a federal appeals court to review the case.
In the petition to the Supreme Court, Trump’s lawyers argued Kaplan should not have let jurors see the 2005 Access Hollywood tape that showed the president saying he groped and kissed women.
“There were no eyewitnesses, no video evidence, and no police report or investigation,” they wrote about Ms Carroll’s allegations.
“Instead, Carroll waited more than 20 years to falsely accuse Donald Trump, who she politically opposes, until after he became the 45th president, when she could maximize political injury to him and profit for herself.”
Roberta Kaplan, Ms Carroll’s attorney, told the BBC she had no comment on the Supreme Court appeal.
While Trump was found to have defamed and sexually abused Ms Carroll, the jury rejected her claim of rape as defined in New York’s penal code.
Ms Carroll, a former magazine columnist who is now 81, sued Trump for attacking her in the mid-1990s in a department store dressing room in Manhattan. The defamation stemmed from Trump’s post on his Truth Social platform in 2022 denying her claim.
Trump has said Ms Carroll was “not my type” and that she lied.
-
Europe News9 months agoChaos and unproven theories surround Tates’ release from Romania
-
American News8 months agoTrump Expels Zelensky from the White House
-
American News8 months agoTrump expands exemptions from Canada and Mexico tariffs
-
American News9 months agoZelensky bruised but upbeat after diplomatic whirlwind
-
Art & Culture8 months agoThe Indian film showing the bride’s ‘humiliation’ in arranged marriage
-
Art & Culture8 months agoInternational Agriculture Exhibition held in Paris
-
Politics9 months agoUS cuts send South Africa’s HIV treatment ‘off a cliff’
-
Politics8 months agoWorst violence in Syria since Assad fall as dozens killed in clashes
