Category Archives: News

Worldwide news. News is information about current events. This may be provided through many different media: word of mouth, printing, postal systems, broadcasting, electronic communication, or through the testimony of observers and witnesses to events. News is sometimes called “hard news” to differentiate it from soft media

Sanders Kicks Fight Against Trump Into High Gear

U.S. Senator Bernie Sanders on Sunday called on California Democrats to unite against Donald Trump, kicking the 2020 presidential campaign into high gear with jabs against the Republican president and a veiled swipe at Democratic rival Joe Biden.

Sanders called Trump “a racist, a sexist, a homophobe and a religious bigot” in a speech capping off a state Democratic convention that drew fourteen of the 24 candidates to make their case before 5,000 delegates, guests and press in the most populous – and most heavily Democratic – U.S. state.

“Together we are going to defeat a president who has the most corrupt administration in history,” Sanders said, “and a president who knows nothing about real American values.”

The San Francisco convention became a window into the forces at work in the Democratic Party as it seeks to recover from Trump’s populist-fueled victory in 2016.

The party’s left-leaning delegates greeted Sanders and liberal U.S. Senator Elizabeth Warren like rock stars.

Former Colorado Governor John Hickenlooper drew boos when he said socialist policies would not propel the party to victory, and other moderates were booed for rejecting the idea of a universal public health care system, or Medicare for All.

Former vice president Joe Biden, who leads Sanders in polls for the Democratic nomination in California and nationwide, did not attend the convention, drawing barely veiled criticism from Sanders.

Sanders noted that the fourteen candidates who addressed the convention, as well as some who had “chosen for whatever reason not to be in this room,” offer a variety of ways to approach a campaign against Trump. But Sanders rejected the centrist approach favored by Biden and some other candidates.

On issues like health care, pharmaceutical prices and climate change wracking the country, “there is no middle ground,” Sanders said.

Addressing concerns among some Democrats that a moderate would be more electable than a fiery progressive, Sanders said such an approach would not generate the enthusiasm needed to defeat Trump.

“We will not defeat Donald Trump unless we bring excitement and energy into the campaign and unless we give millions of working people and young people a reason to vote and a reason to believe that politics is relevant to their lives,” Sanders said.

California, which will send nearly 500 delegates to the party’s nominating convention next year, took on new heft for the 2020 campaign after moving its nominating election to March from June. Democrats hold all statewide elective offices in the state, and dominate both houses of the legislature.

U.S. Senator Kamala Harris, a native daughter who has been eclipsed in early polling in California by Biden and Sanders, made clear she was not taking her home state for granted.

On Saturday, supporters with signs bearing her name and shouting “Kamala! Kamala!” formed a gauntlet that Sanders was forced to walk through on his way into a labor union breakfast.

“I am here to earn everyone’s support, and I’m going to fight to earn it,” Harris said at a breakfast held by the party’s women’s caucus.

 

 

Trump: ‘America Has Had Enough With Mexico’

President Donald Trump said Sunday that “America has had enough with Mexico,” contending that it is an “abuser” of the United States by not stopping the surge of Central American migrants headed north to seek asylum in the U.S.

Trump, who is threatening to impose a 5 percent tariff on Mexican exports sent to the U.S. unless it blocks the migrants short of the U.S. border, accused Mexico of “taking but never giving. It has been this way for decades.”

On Twitter, Trump said, “Either they stop the invasion of our Country by Drug Dealers, Cartels, Human Traffickers, Coyotes and Illegal Immigrants, which they can do very easily, or our many companies and jobs that have been foolishly allowed to move South of the Border, will be brought back into the United States through taxation (Tariffs).”

 

Trump’s attacks on Mexico came a day after Mexican President Andres Manual Lopez Obrador suggested his country could clamp down on migration. He said he thinks the United States is ready to discuss its threat to impose the tariff, effective June 10, as a means to combat illegal migration from Central America.

“There is willingness on the part of U.S. government officials to establish dialogue and reach agreement and compromises,” the Mexican leader said.

Mexican Foreign Minister Marcelo Ebrard said he had spoken to U.S. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo by phone and said face-to-face talks between the two would take place on Wednesday in Washington.

“We will be firm and defend the dignity of Mexico,” Ebrard said.

Lopez Obrador called for “dialogue” rather than “coercive measures” and said he expects “good results” from the Washington talks.

Trump set off the dispute last week, posting a policy statement on Twitter.

“On June 10, the United States will impose a 5% Tariff on all goods coming into our Country from Mexico, until such time as illegal migrants coming through Mexico, and into our Country, STOP,” Trump tweeted. Until “the illegal immigration problem is remedied” tariffs will continue to rise monthly, going as high as 25% by October 1.

U.S. border agents have apprehended an increasing number of people, largely from Guatemala, Honduras and El Salvador, who crossed the southern U.S. border in recent months, many of them hoping to win asylum to stay in the U.S.

In contrast to previous spikes in arrivals, recent groups have included a large number of children, prompting U.S. officials to scramble to support families and children traveling without parents.

The tariff dispute is occurring as Trump is seeking congressional approval for a new U.S.-Canada-Mexico trade deal. Some Washington analysts have suggested that if Trump imposes the tariff on imports from Mexico, it would imperil passage of the trade pact, but acting White House chief of staff Mick Mulvaney dismissed such concerns, saying the two issues are not connected.

“This is an immigration matter, not a trade issue,” Mulvaney told Fox News Sunday.

He said Trump threatened to impose the tariff “to put pressure on Mexico. Congress will not help us fix the border, so we turned to Mexico.”

Trump: ‘America Has Had Enough With Mexico’

President Donald Trump said Sunday that “America has had enough with Mexico,” contending that it is an “abuser” of the United States by not stopping the surge of Central American migrants headed north to seek asylum in the U.S.

Trump, who is threatening to impose a 5 percent tariff on Mexican exports sent to the U.S. unless it blocks the migrants short of the U.S. border, accused Mexico of “taking but never giving. It has been this way for decades.”

On Twitter, Trump said, “Either they stop the invasion of our Country by Drug Dealers, Cartels, Human Traffickers, Coyotes and Illegal Immigrants, which they can do very easily, or our many companies and jobs that have been foolishly allowed to move South of the Border, will be brought back into the United States through taxation (Tariffs).”

 

Trump’s attacks on Mexico came a day after Mexican President Andres Manual Lopez Obrador suggested his country could clamp down on migration. He said he thinks the United States is ready to discuss its threat to impose the tariff, effective June 10, as a means to combat illegal migration from Central America.

“There is willingness on the part of U.S. government officials to establish dialogue and reach agreement and compromises,” the Mexican leader said.

Mexican Foreign Minister Marcelo Ebrard said he had spoken to U.S. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo by phone and said face-to-face talks between the two would take place on Wednesday in Washington.

“We will be firm and defend the dignity of Mexico,” Ebrard said.

Lopez Obrador called for “dialogue” rather than “coercive measures” and said he expects “good results” from the Washington talks.

Trump set off the dispute last week, posting a policy statement on Twitter.

“On June 10, the United States will impose a 5% Tariff on all goods coming into our Country from Mexico, until such time as illegal migrants coming through Mexico, and into our Country, STOP,” Trump tweeted. Until “the illegal immigration problem is remedied” tariffs will continue to rise monthly, going as high as 25% by October 1.

U.S. border agents have apprehended an increasing number of people, largely from Guatemala, Honduras and El Salvador, who crossed the southern U.S. border in recent months, many of them hoping to win asylum to stay in the U.S.

In contrast to previous spikes in arrivals, recent groups have included a large number of children, prompting U.S. officials to scramble to support families and children traveling without parents.

The tariff dispute is occurring as Trump is seeking congressional approval for a new U.S.-Canada-Mexico trade deal. Some Washington analysts have suggested that if Trump imposes the tariff on imports from Mexico, it would imperil passage of the trade pact, but acting White House chief of staff Mick Mulvaney dismissed such concerns, saying the two issues are not connected.

“This is an immigration matter, not a trade issue,” Mulvaney told Fox News Sunday.

He said Trump threatened to impose the tariff “to put pressure on Mexico. Congress will not help us fix the border, so we turned to Mexico.”

Pentagon Tells White House Not to Politicize Military

The Pentagon has told the White House to keep the military out of politics, after someone from the White House directed the Navy to keep the warship USS John S. McCain “out of sight” when President Donald Trump visited Japan.

“On Friday, May 31, Secretary Shanahan directed his Chief of Staff to speak with the White House Military Office and reaffirm his mandate that the Department of Defense will not be politicized,”  Shanahan’s spokesman Army Lt. Col. Joe Buccino said Sunday.

Eric Chewning, Shanahan’s chief of staff, told the defense secretary that he had reinforced this message to the White House, according to Buccino.

“There’s no room for politicizing the military,” Shanahan told reporters aboard a U.S. military aircraft en route to Seoul. “We take these things seriously, and my office and others will deal with it directly.”

The directive to hide the USS John S. McCain from Trump was first reported by the Wall Street Journal.

An email seen by VOA showed discussions about the warship between the White House Military Office and an officer with the U.S. Navy’s 7th Fleet ahead of Trump’s trip.

“USS John McCain needs to be out of sight,” reads the email’s third bullet-pointed request.

“Please confirm #3 will be satisfied,” the email emphasized.

Shanahan confirmed Sunday that the White House Military Office gave the directive that the warship should be hidden from view “directly” to the Navy’s Seventh Fleet, which manages naval operations in the Western Pacific.

“The directive was not carried out,” Shanahan added.

According to Shanahan, officials have told him that a white tarp was placed over the ship’s stern on the days preceding the visit, but the tarp was for “hull preservation” and was removed prior to the president’s visit.

A paint barge was moved the day prior to Trump’s visit “to support ongoing maintenance,” but the barge “did not obscure the view of the ship during the visit,” said Shanahan.

Sailors with the USS John S. McCain and the USS Stethem were on a 96-hour Memorial Day weekend liberty unrelated to the visit and did not participate in the Trump event, he confirmed.

VOA had previously reported these details provided by a U.S. Navy official, who spoke on condition of anonymity.

Shanahan said he had called the late Senator John McCain’s wife “a couple days ago” after news of the incident broke, but declined to discuss the “private conversation.

On Thursday, Shanahan said he did not authorize and was not aware of the White House directive to hide the USS John S. McCain from Trump.

“I would never dishonor the memory of a great American patriot like Senator [John] McCain,” Shanahan told reporters traveling with him. “I’d never disrespect the young men and women who crew that ship.”

Trump tweeted Thursday that he was not informed about the controversy surrounding the USS John S. McCain during his visit to Japan.

The president later told reporters outside the White House that whoever was involved in the move was “well meaning” but that he was unaware of the decision to hide the warship.

“I don’t know what happened. I wasn’t involved. I would not have done that,” he said, adding, “I was not a big fan of John McCain in any way, shape or form.”

Trump frequently feuded with longtime Republican senator and 2008 Republican presidential candidate John McCain, who died last year.

The USS McCain was originally named for the senator’s father and grandfather, both Navy admirals, and now honors all three men.

Pentagon Tells White House Not to Politicize Military

The Pentagon has told the White House to keep the military out of politics, after someone from the White House directed the Navy to keep the warship USS John S. McCain “out of sight” when President Donald Trump visited Japan.

“On Friday, May 31, Secretary Shanahan directed his Chief of Staff to speak with the White House Military Office and reaffirm his mandate that the Department of Defense will not be politicized,”  Shanahan’s spokesman Army Lt. Col. Joe Buccino said Sunday.

Eric Chewning, Shanahan’s chief of staff, told the defense secretary that he had reinforced this message to the White House, according to Buccino.

“There’s no room for politicizing the military,” Shanahan told reporters aboard a U.S. military aircraft en route to Seoul. “We take these things seriously, and my office and others will deal with it directly.”

The directive to hide the USS John S. McCain from Trump was first reported by the Wall Street Journal.

An email seen by VOA showed discussions about the warship between the White House Military Office and an officer with the U.S. Navy’s 7th Fleet ahead of Trump’s trip.

“USS John McCain needs to be out of sight,” reads the email’s third bullet-pointed request.

“Please confirm #3 will be satisfied,” the email emphasized.

Shanahan confirmed Sunday that the White House Military Office gave the directive that the warship should be hidden from view “directly” to the Navy’s Seventh Fleet, which manages naval operations in the Western Pacific.

“The directive was not carried out,” Shanahan added.

According to Shanahan, officials have told him that a white tarp was placed over the ship’s stern on the days preceding the visit, but the tarp was for “hull preservation” and was removed prior to the president’s visit.

A paint barge was moved the day prior to Trump’s visit “to support ongoing maintenance,” but the barge “did not obscure the view of the ship during the visit,” said Shanahan.

Sailors with the USS John S. McCain and the USS Stethem were on a 96-hour Memorial Day weekend liberty unrelated to the visit and did not participate in the Trump event, he confirmed.

VOA had previously reported these details provided by a U.S. Navy official, who spoke on condition of anonymity.

Shanahan said he had called the late Senator John McCain’s wife “a couple days ago” after news of the incident broke, but declined to discuss the “private conversation.

On Thursday, Shanahan said he did not authorize and was not aware of the White House directive to hide the USS John S. McCain from Trump.

“I would never dishonor the memory of a great American patriot like Senator [John] McCain,” Shanahan told reporters traveling with him. “I’d never disrespect the young men and women who crew that ship.”

Trump tweeted Thursday that he was not informed about the controversy surrounding the USS John S. McCain during his visit to Japan.

The president later told reporters outside the White House that whoever was involved in the move was “well meaning” but that he was unaware of the decision to hide the warship.

“I don’t know what happened. I wasn’t involved. I would not have done that,” he said, adding, “I was not a big fan of John McCain in any way, shape or form.”

Trump frequently feuded with longtime Republican senator and 2008 Republican presidential candidate John McCain, who died last year.

The USS McCain was originally named for the senator’s father and grandfather, both Navy admirals, and now honors all three men.

China Blames Washington for Trade Talks Breakdown

Joyce Huang contributed to this report.

China says Washington bears the “sole and entire responsibility” for the breakdown in trade talks earlier this month and that Beijing won’t back down on matters of principle. In a defiant rebuttal of who is to blame, China released a white paper Sunday, arguing that it is the United States that has backtracked in the talks and that tariffs will not resolve the two country’s trade issues.

Since talks broke down earlier this month, Beijing has doubled-down, issuing its own tit-for-tat tariffs in response to Washington’s increase to 25% of a tax on $200 billion in Chinese goods. Beijing has also been stepping up anti-American propaganda through state media. On Friday, China’s Commerce Ministry announced the establishment of a “non-reliable entity list.”

That move was a response to Washington’s ban on the sale of American made goods to Huawei and 68 of its affiliates. The ban is expected to go into effect in less than 90-days.

Speaking at a press conference on Sunday, China’s vice minister of commerce Wang Shouwen said it was Washington, not Beijing that was backpedaling.

“If the U.S. side wants to use extreme pressure, to escalate trade friction, to force China to submit and make concessions, this is absolutely impossible,” he said. Wang is a member of China’s trade negotiating team.

Speaking to reporters, he said that by announcing a decision to raise tariffs earlier this month while talks were ongoing and then later launching procedures for tariffs to cover $300 billion more in Chinese goods, Washington had broken an agreement reached by President Donald Trump and Xi Jinping late last year in Argentina.

“During the consultations, China has overcome many difficulties and put forward pragmatic solutions. However, the U.S. has backtracked, and when you give them an inch, they want a yard,” he said.

In Argentina, Xi and Trump agreed to a temporary truce on raising tariffs. But there was no agreement to take that option off the table. Trump originally agreed to 90 days and later extended that period in early March citing progress in talks.

In early May, however, Trump Tweeted that talks were moving too slowly and accused Chinese negotiators of trying to renegotiate the text of the agreement.

That was one instance where the white paper argues that Washington backtracked, it also gives two other examples.

The white paper also said American negotiators “insisted on mandatory requirements concerning China’s sovereign affairs in the deal.” It was not clear what that refers to, but earlier reports have suggested that having an enforcement mechanism as part of a trade agreement between the two sides has long been a tough pill for Beijing to swallow.

In an April interview with CNBC, Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin said that the countries had “pretty much agreed” on an enforcement mechanism, adding that both sides would set up “trade offices.”

It is unclear when the two sides may be able to resume talks, if at all. President Trump has said he is willing to meet with Xi later this month on the sidelines of Group of 20 Nations summit in Japan. China has yet to confirm the meeting.

When asked about it on Sunday, Wang said he did not have any information to provide.

One thing that is clear from the white paper is that China cares a lot about tariffs. The white paper said that one prerequisite for a trade deal is that the U.S. should remove all additional tariffs imposed on Chinese exports and keep demands for Beijing’s purchase of goods “realistic.”

The paper gave several examples of how tariffs are having an impact on the United States and not good for either country or the global economy, but those critiques have all been part of the robust debate that is ongoing in the United States and elsewhere.

In China, however, as Beijing struggles with a slowing economy, concerns about jobs and ballooning debt, authorities have clamped down on any reporting about the trade war that strays from the communist party’s narrative.

China has also stepped up anti-American propaganda, airing decades old movies about the Korean War, which Beijing fought alongside the North against international forces led by the United States.

The Global Times claims the trade dispute “reminds Chinese of the military struggles between China and the U.S. during the Korean War.” Some state media have called the trade war a “people’s war” and there have been suggestions Chinese consumers should boycott American goods. But the effort to stir up nationalist fervor is a risky one for Beijing, analysts note.

Too much public backlash could have an impact on stability and hurt investment as well, said Liu Meng-chun, director of the Chung-Hua Institution of Economic Research’s mainland China division in Taiwan.

“The reason why there are arising calls or nationalistic sentiment is because China is to a certain degree trying to reach a consensus in society and rally support behind the government so that the country can shoulder the consequences of the breakdown of the trade talks,” Liu said.

 

Trump’s Europe Visit Includes Britain, Ireland, France

U.S. President Donald Trump and first lady Melania Trump will be on a state visit to the Britain June 3 to June 5.

What to know for the visit?

It’s not Trump’s first visit to Britain.

What’s so special this time?

 

Trump was in Britain in July 2018 on a working visit, which involved much less pomp and pageantry than a state visit. On a working visit, the visiting country and not the host country covers the bill.

 

A state visit is a formal visit by a head of state and is normally done at the invitation of the queen on the advice of her government. Queen Elizabeth II, as the current head of state, will act as Trump’s official host for the duration of the visit.

An invitation for a state visit was extended soon after Trump took office in 2017, but a number of concerns, including security have been hampering plans.

 

The White House said the upcoming trip would reaffirm the “steadfast and special relationship between the United States and the United Kingdom.”

Twelve U.S. presidents have visited Britain, though only two were there on state visits: George W. Bush in 2003 and Barack Obama in 2011.

What’s on the agenda?

 

In addition to a private lunch and a state banquet hosted by the queen, the president and the first lady also will attend cultural engagements with other members of the royal family.

 

They will participate in events to commemorate the 75th anniversary of the D-Day invasion during World War II, including a visit to Portsmouth, a launch site for the offensive that led to the liberation of Europe. Other countries’ representatives are expected to attend.

 

Trump will hold a business round table at St. James’s Palace, and he’ll attend a bilateral meeting at 10 Downing Street, the residence and home of British Prime Minister Theresa May, who is resigning after failing to achieve an agreement on Britain’s departure from the European Union. May has said she will resign on June 7, two days after Trump is scheduled to leave.

Trump, who has supported Brexit since his 2016 presidential campaign, has criticized May’s handling of the issue. Responding to a reporter’s question on Thursday, Trump said he might meet with Boris Johnson and Nigel Farage — pro-Brexit politicians who are seeking to replace May. Trump said they both were his friends, “very good guys, very interesting people.”

In an interview Friday with British tabloid The Sun, Trump said Boris Johnson would be an “excellent” choice for the Conservative Party leadership. “I think Boris would do a very good job,” he said, adding that his endorsement “could help anybody.”

 

After his three-day visit to Britain, Trump will fly to Shannon, Ireland, for a bilateral with Prime Minister Leo Varadkar. Trump said he will stay overnight in Doonbeg, the luxury golf resort in County Clare that he bought in 2014.

On June 6, Trump will head to France where he will observe the D-Day anniversary in Normandy, alongside French President Emmanuel Macron.

Who else is coming and who are they meeting?

 

Other than the president and the first lady, the White House has confirmed the president’s adult children also will be on the trip.

 

They will meet members of the royal family, including Prince Charles and his wife, Camilla Parker Bowles; Prince William and his wife, Kate Middleton; and Prince Harry. The Trumps will not be meeting Prince Harry’s wife, Meghan Markle, nor their new baby, Archie. Markle, who is American, is still on maternity leave.

 

Additionally, Trump will attend a reception at the U.S. Embassy to meet staff and their families.

Where are they staying?

 

State visitors usually stay with Queen Elizabeth at either Buckingham Palace or Windsor Castle. President George W. Bush and President Obama both stayed at Buckingham Palace. A spokesperson for the royal household said the Trumps will not be staying with the queen, however, due to renovation work that is being carried out at the royal residence.

 

Buckingham Palace is currently undergoing a 10-year, $477 million renovation, including major electrical and plumbing work.

Will there be protests?

 

During Trump’s visit last July, more than 100,000 people protested on the streets of London, according to police. This year, protest organizers say they expect similar numbers.

The main protest, “Together Against Trump,” will take place in London on Tuesday, June 4. Smaller protests are planned elsewhere in Britain.

The protests are organized in general opposition to Trump’s views and policies on issues such as immigration and climate change. The campaign group Stop Trump said, “We will make it clear to the British government that it’s not OK to normalize Trump’s agenda and fear it has sparked.”

The “Trump Baby” — a 6-meter balloon by artist Matt Bonner depicting the president as an infant in a diaper holding a cellphone — is expected to appear, as it did during Trump’s 2018 visit to Britain and during his visits to France and Argentina.

Trump’s Europe Visit Includes Britain, Ireland, France

U.S. President Donald Trump and first lady Melania Trump will be on a state visit to the Britain June 3 to June 5.

What to know for the visit?

It’s not Trump’s first visit to Britain.

What’s so special this time?

 

Trump was in Britain in July 2018 on a working visit, which involved much less pomp and pageantry than a state visit. On a working visit, the visiting country and not the host country covers the bill.

 

A state visit is a formal visit by a head of state and is normally done at the invitation of the queen on the advice of her government. Queen Elizabeth II, as the current head of state, will act as Trump’s official host for the duration of the visit.

An invitation for a state visit was extended soon after Trump took office in 2017, but a number of concerns, including security have been hampering plans.

 

The White House said the upcoming trip would reaffirm the “steadfast and special relationship between the United States and the United Kingdom.”

Twelve U.S. presidents have visited Britain, though only two were there on state visits: George W. Bush in 2003 and Barack Obama in 2011.

What’s on the agenda?

 

In addition to a private lunch and a state banquet hosted by the queen, the president and the first lady also will attend cultural engagements with other members of the royal family.

 

They will participate in events to commemorate the 75th anniversary of the D-Day invasion during World War II, including a visit to Portsmouth, a launch site for the offensive that led to the liberation of Europe. Other countries’ representatives are expected to attend.

 

Trump will hold a business round table at St. James’s Palace, and he’ll attend a bilateral meeting at 10 Downing Street, the residence and home of British Prime Minister Theresa May, who is resigning after failing to achieve an agreement on Britain’s departure from the European Union. May has said she will resign on June 7, two days after Trump is scheduled to leave.

Trump, who has supported Brexit since his 2016 presidential campaign, has criticized May’s handling of the issue. Responding to a reporter’s question on Thursday, Trump said he might meet with Boris Johnson and Nigel Farage — pro-Brexit politicians who are seeking to replace May. Trump said they both were his friends, “very good guys, very interesting people.”

In an interview Friday with British tabloid The Sun, Trump said Boris Johnson would be an “excellent” choice for the Conservative Party leadership. “I think Boris would do a very good job,” he said, adding that his endorsement “could help anybody.”

 

After his three-day visit to Britain, Trump will fly to Shannon, Ireland, for a bilateral with Prime Minister Leo Varadkar. Trump said he will stay overnight in Doonbeg, the luxury golf resort in County Clare that he bought in 2014.

On June 6, Trump will head to France where he will observe the D-Day anniversary in Normandy, alongside French President Emmanuel Macron.

Who else is coming and who are they meeting?

 

Other than the president and the first lady, the White House has confirmed the president’s adult children also will be on the trip.

 

They will meet members of the royal family, including Prince Charles and his wife, Camilla Parker Bowles; Prince William and his wife, Kate Middleton; and Prince Harry. The Trumps will not be meeting Prince Harry’s wife, Meghan Markle, nor their new baby, Archie. Markle, who is American, is still on maternity leave.

 

Additionally, Trump will attend a reception at the U.S. Embassy to meet staff and their families.

Where are they staying?

 

State visitors usually stay with Queen Elizabeth at either Buckingham Palace or Windsor Castle. President George W. Bush and President Obama both stayed at Buckingham Palace. A spokesperson for the royal household said the Trumps will not be staying with the queen, however, due to renovation work that is being carried out at the royal residence.

 

Buckingham Palace is currently undergoing a 10-year, $477 million renovation, including major electrical and plumbing work.

Will there be protests?

 

During Trump’s visit last July, more than 100,000 people protested on the streets of London, according to police. This year, protest organizers say they expect similar numbers.

The main protest, “Together Against Trump,” will take place in London on Tuesday, June 4. Smaller protests are planned elsewhere in Britain.

The protests are organized in general opposition to Trump’s views and policies on issues such as immigration and climate change. The campaign group Stop Trump said, “We will make it clear to the British government that it’s not OK to normalize Trump’s agenda and fear it has sparked.”

The “Trump Baby” — a 6-meter balloon by artist Matt Bonner depicting the president as an infant in a diaper holding a cellphone — is expected to appear, as it did during Trump’s 2018 visit to Britain and during his visits to France and Argentina.

Report: US Regulators Divide up Scrutiny of Google, Amazon

U.S. antitrust regulators have divided oversight of Amazon.com Inc. and Alphabet Inc.’s Google, putting Amazon under the watch of the Federal Trade Commission and Google under the Justice Department, the Washington Post said Saturday.

Amazon could face heightened antitrust scrutiny under a new agreement between U.S. regulators that puts the e-commerce giant under the watch of the trade commission, the newspaper reported, citing people familiar with the matter.

The development is the result of the FTC and Justice Department quietly dividing up competition oversight on both of the American tech giants, Amazon and Google, the newspaper said, adding that the FTC’s plans for Amazon and the Justice Department’s interest in Google were not immediately clear.

The news comes after Reuters and other media reported Friday that the Justice Department is preparing an investigation into Google in order to ascertain whether the company broke antitrust law in operating its online businesses.

Google said it had no comment on the report, while Amazon, the FTC and Justice Department did not immediately respond to requests for comment on the report.

Report: US Regulators Divide up Scrutiny of Google, Amazon

U.S. antitrust regulators have divided oversight of Amazon.com Inc. and Alphabet Inc.’s Google, putting Amazon under the watch of the Federal Trade Commission and Google under the Justice Department, the Washington Post said Saturday.

Amazon could face heightened antitrust scrutiny under a new agreement between U.S. regulators that puts the e-commerce giant under the watch of the trade commission, the newspaper reported, citing people familiar with the matter.

The development is the result of the FTC and Justice Department quietly dividing up competition oversight on both of the American tech giants, Amazon and Google, the newspaper said, adding that the FTC’s plans for Amazon and the Justice Department’s interest in Google were not immediately clear.

The news comes after Reuters and other media reported Friday that the Justice Department is preparing an investigation into Google in order to ascertain whether the company broke antitrust law in operating its online businesses.

Google said it had no comment on the report, while Amazon, the FTC and Justice Department did not immediately respond to requests for comment on the report.

Momentum Toward Trade Deal Hits Trump Turbulence

The Trump administration had taken steps in recent weeks to work with Democratic and Republican lawmakers to address concerns about the proposed United States-Mexico-Canada trade agreement — and then came the threat of a new tariff.

President Donald Trump said this past week that he would put a 5% tariff on Mexican imports unless America’s southern neighbor cracked down on Central American migrants’ efforts to cross the U.S. border.  

  

His recent decision to remove U.S. tariffs on steel and aluminum imports from Canada and Mexico had appeased mostly Republicans who were using their trade votes as leverage to do away with those penalties. 

 

The administration also had committed to meeting with a group of House Democrats to allay their concerns. That gesture created goodwill, and as House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., described it, put Democrats “on a path to yes.” 

 

Now it’s unclear where that path may lead. 

​Jobs at stake

 

Influential business groups fear that Trump’s threat against Mexico could derail the proposed trade agreement. 

 

“The last thing we want to do is put that landmark deal — and the 2 million manufacturing jobs that depend on North American trade — in jeopardy,” said Jay Timmons, president and CEO of the National Association of Manufacturers. 

 

The U.S. Chamber of Commerce said it was considering legal action to block the tariffs from going into effect.  

  

Some GOP senators are rankled, too, most notably Charles Grassley of Iowa, chairman of the Senate Finance Committee. 

 

“This is a misuse of presidential tariff authority and counter to congressional intent,” Grassley said. 

 

Congressional aides from both parties said that it’s too soon to say whether Trump’s proposal will derail the agreement. But it does make it harder for lawmakers to assess how the agreement would improve the economic landscape if the tariffs on Mexico go into place.  

  

Democrats seem mostly concerned with other breaking developments. 

 

Hours before Trump announced his tariff plan, his administration tried to set up the agreement for a possible congressional vote before the August recess. The administration completed the formal steps necessary to start the clock for submitting legislation to Congress.   

​Not ‘positive’

  

Pelosi said that was not a positive step'' andindicates a lack of knowledge on the part of the administration on the policy and process to pass a trade agreement.” 

 

Democrats want to strengthen enforcement of labor and environmental standards in Mexico.  They have pushed for Mexico to change labor laws that have encouraged wages as low as $1 or $2 per hour at some plants, giving U.S. companies a strong incentive to move operations south of the U.S.-Mexico border. 

 

Mexico lawmakers have approved a law that requires secret-ballot union votes and proof of workers’ consent for contracts. Democrats in Washington want to ensure follow-through, and Pelosi still holds the final say in determining when, or whether, the agreement comes up for a vote. 

 

Pelosi also joined several Republican senators in slamming Trump’s tariff threat, saying it is “not rooted in wise trade policy but has more to do with bad immigration policy on his part.” 

 

“Yet again, the president is sowing chaos over the border instead of delivering solutions for American workers and for American consumers,” Pelosi said. 

 

White House counselor Kellyanne Conway said the tariffs should not jeopardize passage of the trade pact and that the president simply wants Mexico to do more to stem the flow of migrants. 

 

She said the White House is confident it would pass the Democratic-run House, if Pelosi put it to a vote. 

​Investors unhappy

 

Trump said he had the authority to impose a 5 percent levy on all goods imported from Mexico and pledged to increase those duties to as high as 25 percent if Mexico did not dramatically reduce the number of migrants crossing the border. 

 

Investors have responded negatively, with the Dow Jones industrial average closing Friday down roughly 355 points, or 1.4%. 

 

Still, Conway told reporters that “tariffs are a good way to get a trading partner’s attention, and apparently it did.” 

 

Mexico’s foreign relations secretary, Marcelo Ebrard, announced that he and Secretary of State Mike Pompeo would lead talks Wednesday in Washington, a move seen as potentially easing tensions and avoiding retaliatory tariffs.  

  

Both Mexico and Canada are moving ahead with steps toward ratifying the trade agreement. 

 

Canada’s foreign minister, Chrystia Freeland, indicated that it’s up to the U.S. and Mexico to work out their dispute. “This is a bilateral issue,” she said. 

Momentum Toward Trade Deal Hits Trump Turbulence

The Trump administration had taken steps in recent weeks to work with Democratic and Republican lawmakers to address concerns about the proposed United States-Mexico-Canada trade agreement — and then came the threat of a new tariff.

President Donald Trump said this past week that he would put a 5% tariff on Mexican imports unless America’s southern neighbor cracked down on Central American migrants’ efforts to cross the U.S. border.  

  

His recent decision to remove U.S. tariffs on steel and aluminum imports from Canada and Mexico had appeased mostly Republicans who were using their trade votes as leverage to do away with those penalties. 

 

The administration also had committed to meeting with a group of House Democrats to allay their concerns. That gesture created goodwill, and as House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., described it, put Democrats “on a path to yes.” 

 

Now it’s unclear where that path may lead. 

​Jobs at stake

 

Influential business groups fear that Trump’s threat against Mexico could derail the proposed trade agreement. 

 

“The last thing we want to do is put that landmark deal — and the 2 million manufacturing jobs that depend on North American trade — in jeopardy,” said Jay Timmons, president and CEO of the National Association of Manufacturers. 

 

The U.S. Chamber of Commerce said it was considering legal action to block the tariffs from going into effect.  

  

Some GOP senators are rankled, too, most notably Charles Grassley of Iowa, chairman of the Senate Finance Committee. 

 

“This is a misuse of presidential tariff authority and counter to congressional intent,” Grassley said. 

 

Congressional aides from both parties said that it’s too soon to say whether Trump’s proposal will derail the agreement. But it does make it harder for lawmakers to assess how the agreement would improve the economic landscape if the tariffs on Mexico go into place.  

  

Democrats seem mostly concerned with other breaking developments. 

 

Hours before Trump announced his tariff plan, his administration tried to set up the agreement for a possible congressional vote before the August recess. The administration completed the formal steps necessary to start the clock for submitting legislation to Congress.   

​Not ‘positive’

  

Pelosi said that was not a positive step'' andindicates a lack of knowledge on the part of the administration on the policy and process to pass a trade agreement.” 

 

Democrats want to strengthen enforcement of labor and environmental standards in Mexico.  They have pushed for Mexico to change labor laws that have encouraged wages as low as $1 or $2 per hour at some plants, giving U.S. companies a strong incentive to move operations south of the U.S.-Mexico border. 

 

Mexico lawmakers have approved a law that requires secret-ballot union votes and proof of workers’ consent for contracts. Democrats in Washington want to ensure follow-through, and Pelosi still holds the final say in determining when, or whether, the agreement comes up for a vote. 

 

Pelosi also joined several Republican senators in slamming Trump’s tariff threat, saying it is “not rooted in wise trade policy but has more to do with bad immigration policy on his part.” 

 

“Yet again, the president is sowing chaos over the border instead of delivering solutions for American workers and for American consumers,” Pelosi said. 

 

White House counselor Kellyanne Conway said the tariffs should not jeopardize passage of the trade pact and that the president simply wants Mexico to do more to stem the flow of migrants. 

 

She said the White House is confident it would pass the Democratic-run House, if Pelosi put it to a vote. 

​Investors unhappy

 

Trump said he had the authority to impose a 5 percent levy on all goods imported from Mexico and pledged to increase those duties to as high as 25 percent if Mexico did not dramatically reduce the number of migrants crossing the border. 

 

Investors have responded negatively, with the Dow Jones industrial average closing Friday down roughly 355 points, or 1.4%. 

 

Still, Conway told reporters that “tariffs are a good way to get a trading partner’s attention, and apparently it did.” 

 

Mexico’s foreign relations secretary, Marcelo Ebrard, announced that he and Secretary of State Mike Pompeo would lead talks Wednesday in Washington, a move seen as potentially easing tensions and avoiding retaliatory tariffs.  

  

Both Mexico and Canada are moving ahead with steps toward ratifying the trade agreement. 

 

Canada’s foreign minister, Chrystia Freeland, indicated that it’s up to the U.S. and Mexico to work out their dispute. “This is a bilateral issue,” she said. 

US States Weighed Variety of Voting Changes This Year

The vast majority of U.S. state voting legislation introduced this year was intended to expand voting access rather than impose restrictions.

Lawmakers in 45 states have been debating at least 647 bills that would expand voting access, according to the Brennan Center for Justice at New York University’s School of Law. That’s compared with lawmakers in 28 states that have considered at least 82 bills to restrict access.

Voting-related topics under consideration in legislatures this year:

Early voting

Most states and the District of Columbia allow registered voters to cast ballots in person before Election Day. This year, lawmakers in New York and Delaware approved early voting in those states. An effort to allow voters in Connecticut to decide whether that state should have early voting did not receive enough support from legislators to make the ballot next year.

Bills that would allow early voting or put the question before voters also were introduced in Maine, Minnesota, Missouri and Virginia.

No-excuse absentee voting

While absentee ballots are available in every state, 19 states require a voter to provide a reason for requesting one. This year, bills that would allow some form of no-excuse absentee voting or put the question before voters were introduced in Connecticut, Delaware, Maine, Missouri, New Hampshire and New York.

​Same-day and Election Day registration

A growing number of states allow people to register and vote on the same day. In most cases, this applies to the early voting period as well as Election Day. Proof of residency and identification are required. States check whether a voter has already cast a ballot and have criminal penalties to deter fraud. 

 

This year, bills that would allow for same-day voter registration or to put the question before voters were introduced in Connecticut, Delaware, Kansas, Maryland, Nevada, New Mexico and New York.

Automatic voter registration

Seventeen states and the District of Columbia have started or have plans to implement a system in which residents are automatically registered to vote when they have contact with the state, typically at the state’s motor vehicle agency, unless they decline.

This year, bills that would implement automatic voter registration were introduced in Louisiana, Minnesota, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska and New Hampshire.

Registration assistance

Republicans in some states have expressed concerns about the actions of third-party voter registration groups, specifically pointing to the burden on local election officials when the groups submit forms that are incomplete or contain false information.

In Tennessee, this prompted a law signed recently by Republican Gov. Bill Lee that allows for fines for 100 or more incomplete registration forms in a year. A similar measure was introduced in Arizona.

​Voter identification

Seven states have what has been described as “strict” photo identification requirements, meaning a voter must show a photo ID prior to casting a ballot. In those states, people who do not have an acceptable form of photo ID are directed to cast a provisional ballot that will be counted only if the voter visits the appropriate election office to present an ID within a certain number of days.

Ten other states have “non-strict” photo identification requirements. Depending on the state, some voters may have the option to sign an affidavit, or poll workers can vouch for their identity. In other cases, voters are directed to cast a provisional ballot, and then election officials determine eligibility without further action required of the voter.

Efforts to implement photo ID requirements in Montana and Wyoming failed this year.

Sources: National Conference of State Legislatures and the Brennan Center for Justice at NYU’s School of Law

US States Weighed Variety of Voting Changes This Year

The vast majority of U.S. state voting legislation introduced this year was intended to expand voting access rather than impose restrictions.

Lawmakers in 45 states have been debating at least 647 bills that would expand voting access, according to the Brennan Center for Justice at New York University’s School of Law. That’s compared with lawmakers in 28 states that have considered at least 82 bills to restrict access.

Voting-related topics under consideration in legislatures this year:

Early voting

Most states and the District of Columbia allow registered voters to cast ballots in person before Election Day. This year, lawmakers in New York and Delaware approved early voting in those states. An effort to allow voters in Connecticut to decide whether that state should have early voting did not receive enough support from legislators to make the ballot next year.

Bills that would allow early voting or put the question before voters also were introduced in Maine, Minnesota, Missouri and Virginia.

No-excuse absentee voting

While absentee ballots are available in every state, 19 states require a voter to provide a reason for requesting one. This year, bills that would allow some form of no-excuse absentee voting or put the question before voters were introduced in Connecticut, Delaware, Maine, Missouri, New Hampshire and New York.

​Same-day and Election Day registration

A growing number of states allow people to register and vote on the same day. In most cases, this applies to the early voting period as well as Election Day. Proof of residency and identification are required. States check whether a voter has already cast a ballot and have criminal penalties to deter fraud. 

 

This year, bills that would allow for same-day voter registration or to put the question before voters were introduced in Connecticut, Delaware, Kansas, Maryland, Nevada, New Mexico and New York.

Automatic voter registration

Seventeen states and the District of Columbia have started or have plans to implement a system in which residents are automatically registered to vote when they have contact with the state, typically at the state’s motor vehicle agency, unless they decline.

This year, bills that would implement automatic voter registration were introduced in Louisiana, Minnesota, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska and New Hampshire.

Registration assistance

Republicans in some states have expressed concerns about the actions of third-party voter registration groups, specifically pointing to the burden on local election officials when the groups submit forms that are incomplete or contain false information.

In Tennessee, this prompted a law signed recently by Republican Gov. Bill Lee that allows for fines for 100 or more incomplete registration forms in a year. A similar measure was introduced in Arizona.

​Voter identification

Seven states have what has been described as “strict” photo identification requirements, meaning a voter must show a photo ID prior to casting a ballot. In those states, people who do not have an acceptable form of photo ID are directed to cast a provisional ballot that will be counted only if the voter visits the appropriate election office to present an ID within a certain number of days.

Ten other states have “non-strict” photo identification requirements. Depending on the state, some voters may have the option to sign an affidavit, or poll workers can vouch for their identity. In other cases, voters are directed to cast a provisional ballot, and then election officials determine eligibility without further action required of the voter.

Efforts to implement photo ID requirements in Montana and Wyoming failed this year.

Sources: National Conference of State Legislatures and the Brennan Center for Justice at NYU’s School of Law

Mexico’s President Hints Migration Controls Could Be Tightened

VOA News Center associate producer Jesusemen Oni contributed reporting from Washington. 

Mexico’s president suggested Saturday that his country could clamp down on migration, and he said he thought the United States was ready to discuss its threatened use of tariffs as a means to combat illegal migration from Central America.

President Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador said at a Mexico City news conference that “there is willingness on the part of U.S. government officials to establish dialogue and reach agreement and compromises.”

His comments came ahead of talks in Washington next week, and Obrador said he said he expected “good results.” He added that Mexico was willing to “reinforce” existing “measures without violating human rights.”

Mexican Foreign Minister Marcelo Ebrard said Friday that he began negotiating with U.S. officials after U.S. President Donald Trump threatened to impose tariffs on Mexican products related to the migrant surge at the border.

Ebrard said on Twitter that he had spoken to U.S. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo by phone and said face-to-face talks between the two would take place Wednesday in Washington.

“We will be firm and defend the dignity of Mexico” at the talks, Ebrard said.

Obrador also responded Friday to the U.S. tariff threats with caution, urging “dialogue” over “coercive measures.” 

 

“I want to reiterate that we are not going to fall into any provocation. But we are going to be prudent, and we are going to respect the authorities of the United States and President Donald Trump,” Obrador said.  

That statement followed a two-page letter to Trump made public late Thursday, similar in tone, responding to Trump’s announcement on Twitter earlier in the day that the United States would begin imposing an escalating tax on imports from Mexico. 

 

“On June 10, the United States will impose a 5% Tariff on all goods coming into our Country from Mexico, until such time as illegal migrants coming through Mexico, and into our Country, STOP,” Trump tweeted. Until “the illegal immigration problem is remedied,” tariffs will continue to rise monthly, going as high as 25% by Oct. 1. 

 

U.S. border agents have apprehended an increasing number of people, largely from Central America, who crossed the southern U.S. border without authorization in recent months. 

 

In contrast to previous spikes in arrivals, recent groups have included a large number of children, prompting U.S. officials to scramble to support families and children traveling without parents — some of whom are seeking asylum.  

In an indication of the pressing demands at the border, U.S. Customs and Border Protection solicited bids for the purchase of tens of thousands of diapers, baby wipes and bottles this past week, according to documents reviewed by VOA on a government contracting website.

 

Trump’s announcement of the new tariffs came on the same day Mexico began the formal process of ratifying the United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement (USMCA) on trade. 

 

Mexico’s deputy foreign minister for North America, Jesus Seade, said such tariffs would be disastrous, expressing more alarm than the Mexican president. 

 

“If this threat is carried out, it would be extremely serious,” he told reporters. “If this is put in place, we must respond vigorously.” 

 

For one trade expert, who previously served as Mexico’s ambassador to China — a top trading partner for that country and the U.S. — the timing of Trump’s tariff statement raised questions about the future of the USMCA. 

 

“By mixing two things — immigration and now, just lately, drug flow, with trade — I think it confuses the issue,” said Jorge Guajardo, a senior director at the Washington-based international trade consulting firm McLarty Associates.  

The trade deal “was a triumph for all three countries, and now of course, that all comes into doubt,” Guajardo added. 

 

Some Republican members of Congress but no Democrats were consulted about White House plan, according to acting White House Chief of Staff Mick Mulvaney. 

 

Asked in a hastily arranged conference call with reporters about benchmarks Mexico would need to achieve to have the tariffs lifted, Mulvaney said there needed to be significant and substantial reductions in arrivals from Central America crossing into the United States. 

 

“We’re going to take this and look at it on a day-to-day and week-to-week basis,” said Mulvaney. “We are interested in seeing the Mexican government act tonight, tomorrow.” 

 

Trump has repeatedly accused Mexico of not doing enough to stop Central American migrants from traveling through the country on their way to the United States. 

 

The U.S. system, however, is not infallible. While the country has increased its apprehension rate at the border in recent years, U.S. border agents stop an estimated 65% to 80% of people crossing into the country without authorization, according to a 2018 DHS report.

Mexico’s President Hints Migration Controls Could Be Tightened

VOA News Center associate producer Jesusemen Oni contributed reporting from Washington. 

Mexico’s president suggested Saturday that his country could clamp down on migration, and he said he thought the United States was ready to discuss its threatened use of tariffs as a means to combat illegal migration from Central America.

President Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador said at a Mexico City news conference that “there is willingness on the part of U.S. government officials to establish dialogue and reach agreement and compromises.”

His comments came ahead of talks in Washington next week, and Obrador said he said he expected “good results.” He added that Mexico was willing to “reinforce” existing “measures without violating human rights.”

Mexican Foreign Minister Marcelo Ebrard said Friday that he began negotiating with U.S. officials after U.S. President Donald Trump threatened to impose tariffs on Mexican products related to the migrant surge at the border.

Ebrard said on Twitter that he had spoken to U.S. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo by phone and said face-to-face talks between the two would take place Wednesday in Washington.

“We will be firm and defend the dignity of Mexico” at the talks, Ebrard said.

Obrador also responded Friday to the U.S. tariff threats with caution, urging “dialogue” over “coercive measures.” 

 

“I want to reiterate that we are not going to fall into any provocation. But we are going to be prudent, and we are going to respect the authorities of the United States and President Donald Trump,” Obrador said.  

That statement followed a two-page letter to Trump made public late Thursday, similar in tone, responding to Trump’s announcement on Twitter earlier in the day that the United States would begin imposing an escalating tax on imports from Mexico. 

 

“On June 10, the United States will impose a 5% Tariff on all goods coming into our Country from Mexico, until such time as illegal migrants coming through Mexico, and into our Country, STOP,” Trump tweeted. Until “the illegal immigration problem is remedied,” tariffs will continue to rise monthly, going as high as 25% by Oct. 1. 

 

U.S. border agents have apprehended an increasing number of people, largely from Central America, who crossed the southern U.S. border without authorization in recent months. 

 

In contrast to previous spikes in arrivals, recent groups have included a large number of children, prompting U.S. officials to scramble to support families and children traveling without parents — some of whom are seeking asylum.  

In an indication of the pressing demands at the border, U.S. Customs and Border Protection solicited bids for the purchase of tens of thousands of diapers, baby wipes and bottles this past week, according to documents reviewed by VOA on a government contracting website.

 

Trump’s announcement of the new tariffs came on the same day Mexico began the formal process of ratifying the United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement (USMCA) on trade. 

 

Mexico’s deputy foreign minister for North America, Jesus Seade, said such tariffs would be disastrous, expressing more alarm than the Mexican president. 

 

“If this threat is carried out, it would be extremely serious,” he told reporters. “If this is put in place, we must respond vigorously.” 

 

For one trade expert, who previously served as Mexico’s ambassador to China — a top trading partner for that country and the U.S. — the timing of Trump’s tariff statement raised questions about the future of the USMCA. 

 

“By mixing two things — immigration and now, just lately, drug flow, with trade — I think it confuses the issue,” said Jorge Guajardo, a senior director at the Washington-based international trade consulting firm McLarty Associates.  

The trade deal “was a triumph for all three countries, and now of course, that all comes into doubt,” Guajardo added. 

 

Some Republican members of Congress but no Democrats were consulted about White House plan, according to acting White House Chief of Staff Mick Mulvaney. 

 

Asked in a hastily arranged conference call with reporters about benchmarks Mexico would need to achieve to have the tariffs lifted, Mulvaney said there needed to be significant and substantial reductions in arrivals from Central America crossing into the United States. 

 

“We’re going to take this and look at it on a day-to-day and week-to-week basis,” said Mulvaney. “We are interested in seeing the Mexican government act tonight, tomorrow.” 

 

Trump has repeatedly accused Mexico of not doing enough to stop Central American migrants from traveling through the country on their way to the United States. 

 

The U.S. system, however, is not infallible. While the country has increased its apprehension rate at the border in recent years, U.S. border agents stop an estimated 65% to 80% of people crossing into the country without authorization, according to a 2018 DHS report.

2020 Hopeful Gillibrand Unveils Plan to Protect LGBTQ Rights

Democratic presidential candidate Kirsten Gillibrand has unveiled a comprehensive plan to protect the rights of LGBTQ people to mark the start of Pride Month.

 

If elected, the New York senator says she’d direct the Justice Department to consider gender identity and sexual orientation a protected class. She would also ban discrimination against transgender members of the military and federally recognize a third gender in identification documents, denoted by an “X” on ID cards.

 

In a platform announced Saturday, Gillibrand said she’d prohibit gay conversion therapy nationwide and direct public schools to allow transgender students to use bathrooms and locker rooms matching their identity.

 

Her proposal would further require health insurance plans to cover hormone therapy for transgender patients, and it would recognize U.S. asylum claims for LGBTQ people fleeing persecution in their home countries.

 

 

Acting US Defense Chief Criticizes China’s Bad Behavior

VOA Mandarin service’s Libo Lui contributed to this report

SINGAPORE – Since the first week acting U.S. Defense Secretary Pat Shanahan took the reins at the Pentagon, he’s said his top concern is “China, China, China.”

On Saturday, Shanahan told an audience at the annual Shangri-La defense forum that the U.S. would not ignore Chinese behavior, which he says has threatened prosperity in the region.

“It’s not about conflict. It’s not about building walls. This is about security,” Shanahan said.

China is infamous for its theft of other nations’ military and civilian technology, and the U.S. secretary said he took issue with Beijing’s cyber attacks and state-sponsored stealing of intellectual property.

Experts say China has used this theft to narrow the gap between some critical American and Chinese military abilities.

“The kind of advantage that we had against China and the western Pacific during the Cold War is gone for good,” Michael O’Hanlon, a senior defense expert with the Brookings Institution, told VOA.

China also has continued to project more military power beyond its borders, most notably by constructing artificial islands in the South China Sea and placing heavy weapons on them to support territorial claims not recognized under international law.

Speaking to reporters Friday, Shanahan called the moves “excessive,” saying that while the Chinese “argue that it’s defensive, it looks like it’s a bit overkill.”

Recently, the U.S. has pushed for more international patrols in the South China Sea, including one last month with Japan, India and the Philippines.

Bradley Bowman, of the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, said working with allies to combat Chinese aggression in the region will bolster the U.S. position of protecting international waterways key to global trade.

“I think we need to characterize this conflict for what it is. It’s not a conflict between China and the US. It’s a conflict with China and the world,” he said.

Speaking to VOA at the conference, Rep. Adam Smith, the chairman of the House Armed Services Committee, said China has to some extent “overplayed their hand.”

“They are seen as a bully in the region by a lot of people. They encroached on people’s territory in a variety of disputes…and in doing that, those countries have turned to the U.S.,” Smith said.

 In his speech Saturday, Shanahan stressed that the U.S. doesn’t want any nation in the region to have to choose positive relations with one partner over another, but, he said, the world deserved a fair playing field.

U.S. allies at the conference expressed anxiety over rising tensions between the two powers, and as one leader pointed out, many believe that if China and the U.S. won’t work together, they risk upending the global system.

 

 

Report: US to Launch Google Antitrust Inquiry

The U.S. Justice Department is preparing an investigation of Alphabet Inc.’s Google to determine whether the tech giant broke antitrust law in operating its sprawling online businesses, two sources familiar with the matter said.

Officials from the Justice Department’s Antitrust Division and Federal Trade Commission, which both enforce antitrust law, met in recent weeks to give Justice jurisdiction over Google, said the sources, who sought anonymity because they were not authorized to speak on the record.

The potential investigation represents the latest attack on a tech company by the administration of U.S. President Donald Trump, who has accused social media companies and Google of suppressing conservative voices on their platforms online.

One source said the potential investigation, first reported by the Wall Street Journal, focused on accusations that Google gave preference to its own businesses in searches.

A spokesman for the Justice Department said he could not confirm or deny that an investigation was being considered.

Google declined comment.

​FTC investigation

Early in 2013, the FTC closed a long-running investigation of Google, giving it a slap on the wrist. Under FTC pressure, Google agreed to end the practice of “scraping” reviews and other data from rivals’ websites for its own products, and to let advertisers export data to independently assess campaigns.

Google’s search, YouTube, reviews, maps and other businesses, which are largely free to consumers but financed through advertising, have catapulted it from a startup to one of the world’s richest companies in just two decades.

Along the way, it has made enemies in both the tech world, who have complained to law enforcers about its market dominance, and in Washington, where lawmakers have complained about issues from its alleged political bias to its plans for China.

Some welcome news 

TripAdvisor chief executive and co-founder Stephen Kaufer welcomed news that Google could face Justice Department antitrust scrutiny.

“TripAdvisor remains concerned about Google’s practices in the United States, the EU and throughout the world,” Kaufer said in a statement. “For the good of consumers and competition on the internet, we welcome any renewed interest by U.S. regulators into Google’s anticompetitive behavior.”

Democratic presidential candidate Elizabeth Warren has pushed for action to break up Google, as well as other big tech companies. Senator Kamala Harris, who is also running for president on the Democratic ticket, has agreed.

“This is very big news, and overdue,” Sen. Josh Hawley, a Republican Google critic, said Twitter, regarding the investigation.

Google has faced a plethora of overseas probes.

Europe’s competition authority, for one, hit Google with a 2.4-billion-euro ($2.7-billion) EU fine two years ago for unfairly promoting its own comparison shopping service.

Google has since offered to allow competitors to bid for advertising space at the top of a search page, giving them the chance to compete on equal terms.

Pompeo Seeks Common Ground on Iran, Huawei in Europe

On a trip to Germany, Switzerland, the Netherlands and Britain, U.S. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo is seeking common ground with European allies, despite fundamental differences over the United States’ withdrawal from the Iran nuclear deal and doing business with Chinese telecommunications giant Huawei. VOA’s Diplomatic Correspondent Cindy Saine has more from Washington, as talks between Pompeo and German Chancellor Angela Merkel wrapped Friday.

A Look at Mexican Efforts to Stem Tide of Migrants 

President Donald Trump says he’s imposing tariffs on all goods from Mexico until the country stops the flow of undocumented migrants from Central America who cross its territory and enter the United States. Trump tweeted Friday that Mexico “can easily fix this problem. Time for them to finally do what must be done!” Here’s a look at what Mexico has done so far: 

 

The problem 

 

In the first three months of 2019, as many as 300,000 migrants — mostly from Honduras, Guatemala and El Salvador — crossed through Mexico to reach the United States. Many were families with children, who cannot be detained for long in the United States.

​How did Mexico’s new president look at immigration?

Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador took office on Dec. 1, intending to reduce migration by addressing its root causes: joblessness, poverty and violence in such countries as Honduras, El Salvador and Guatemala. He proposed creating a plan to develop the economies of Central America and southern Mexico, while creating humanitarian and work visas so that Central American migrants could stay in Mexico instead of heading to the U.S.

Did that cause a spike in migration?

The biggest drivers of the migrant exodus were in place before Lopez Obrador took office, and the first massive caravan of migrants formed last year, months before he took office. The caravans came about after tens of thousands of poor Central Americans decided they were a safer option than paying smugglers. New immigration routes for Cubans, Haitians and people from Africa also had opened up through Central America. Lopez Obrador’s offers of visas may have made it easier or safer to cross Mexico, but probably didn’t play a key role in most people’s decision to leave their home countries. 

What changed in Mexico?

A first huge caravan of migrants crossed Mexico headed for the U.S. border in November, before Lopez Obrador took office. The arrival of over 10,000 migrants taxed border facilities and angered Mexicans living in border cities. In January, another caravan crossed Mexico. By the time the third formed in April, it was clear that Mexico could no longer maintain an open-door policy.

In April, the United States began slowing border crossings by reassigning border inspection personnel to deal with the influx of migrants already inside the United States. That started hurting Mexico’s economy, especially as time-sensitive shipments were held up at the border. Separately, migrants began forcing their way across the border with Guatemala, overwhelming border forces and sometimes refusing to register once they arrived. 

​Did U.S. pressure affect Mexican policy?

The border crossing slowdown in April and repeated threats by Trump to close the border or impose tariffs have played a role in changing Mexico’s policies. But Mexicans’ attitudes are also shifting. Increasingly, many Mexicans see large-scale movement of migrants across their country as a threat to their own safety and economy.

Has Mexico helped the U.S. at all?

Mexico is only bound to take in its own citizens when the U.S. expels people at border crossings, and has traditionally refused to take in people from other countries. But starting in late January, Mexico has allowed the United States to return over 6,748 Central Americans to Mexican border cities as they wait to hear about their U.S. asylum claims. The Remain in Mexico policy, as it is known, is meant to reduce the attractiveness of U.S. asylum requests that in the past had allowed claimants to remain in the United States for years as their cases wound their way through the courts.

Has Mexico done more to limit migration?

Mexico staged one of its first large-scale raids on a migrant caravan in April, detaining 371 people on a highway in the southern state of Chiapas. At the same time, Mexico announced that it would no longer grant humanitarian visas at the border with Guatemala after 15,000 people applied in the course of a few weeks. Instead, Mexico encouraged potential migrants to apply for such visas at Mexican consulates in Honduras, El Salvador and Guatemala.

Humanitarian visas are still being issued for migrants already in Mexico, but at a very slow pace. Work visas are now limited to only a few southern border states in Mexico where wages are low and few migrants want to stay. When migrants began to hop freight trains toward the U.S. border, as they did in past decades, Mexico started police raids on the train. When Lopez Obrador took office, detentions of migrants were relatively low, with 5,884 migrants deported in January. By the end of May, the figure had risen to 15,654.

​Why don’t migrants ask for asylum in Mexico?

Some do. There have been over 18,000 requests for asylum filed in Mexico in the first four months of 2019, several times the levels of a few years ago. But many migrants say they either don’t feel safe in Mexico, or they want to join relatives already in the United States. Many want to earn more money than is possible in Mexico.

Has Mexico yielded to U.S. immigration pressure in the past?

During a previous surge in unaccompanied minors at the U.S. border in 2014, Mexico’s president at the time, Enrique Pena Nieto, tightened security at Mexico’s porous southern border, including immigration checkpoints and raids on freight trains used by the migrants. 

What’s an Immigration ‘Czar’?

The Trump administration is creating a new position aimed at overhauling America’s immigration system amid an accelerating surge of Central American migrants and asylum-seekers arriving at the U.S.-Mexico border.  

 

The person most likely to hold the job: former Virginia Attorney General Kenneth Cuccinelli, a conservative lawmaker known for hawkish immigration views.

Why a ‘czar’? 

 

“Usually, when the president creates a czar, it’s because he feels that there’s not enough interagency coordination going on. And it is true that in the area of dealing with people at the southwest border, while the Department of Homeland Security has the lead, there are other important actors at the border,” said Elaine Kamarck, senior fellow at Washington-based think tank Brookings Institution. 

 

Previous “czars” appointed by the White House over the years have focused on coordinating policy across different agencies to combat illegal recreational drugs or domestic violence.  

 

Kamarck, an expert on the U.S. government, sees Cuccinelli’s role as helping the administration try to get past the legal challenges that have blocked some of its immigration policies.    

 

“As a [former] attorney general, he will be more sensitive to the legal problems,” she said.   

Though the White House has not explained what Cuccinelli would oversee, a senior White House official told VOA, “He is expected to take a senior position at DHS where he will work on issues involving immigration.” 

 

Cuccinelli is an outspoken immigration hardliner. Political observers interviewed by VOA said his views largely align with President Donald Trump’s outlook.  

 

Cuccinelli has supported denying citizenship to American-born children of parents living in the U.S. illegally. As attorney general he allowed American workers to file lawsuits when an employer knowingly hired someone living in the country illegally. He also restricted who qualifies for in-state tuition at public universities to citizens or legal residents. 

 

Administration role 

 

The Washington Post reported Trump would prefer to appoint Cuccinelli to the position of director of U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS), the agency that administers the country’s legal immigration system. 

 

The current USCIS director, L. Francis Cissna, communicated to his staff he is expected to leave the post on June 1. 

 

Kevin Appleby, senior director of international migration policy for the Center for Migration Studies and an outspoken critic of the administration’s hardline policies, said there is “real concern” about having Cuccinelli as USCIS director. 

 

“He thinks we have too many immigrants as it is,” Appleby said. As USCIS director, where he would have authority over who gets legal permanent resident status and who gets citizenship, he could “do a lot of damage to people who have followed the law.”  

Trump also supports drastically reducing the number of immigrants coming to the United States, telling his supporters at a rally in May, “The country is full. We don’t want people coming up here.” 

 

Appleby said Cuccinelli could try to further restrict immigration by extending the processing time it takes for immigrants to become citizens, effectively making it much more difficult for those who are waiting in legal limbo.  

 

“He could turn back immigrants, refugees, who may legally have a right to come to the country,” Appleby said.

The Trump administration has argued that many people who come to the United States and declare themselves refugees do not in fact qualify for such status.  

 

Virginia attorney general

As Virginia attorney general in 2010 under former Republican Gov. Robert McDonnell, Cuccinelli issued an opinion stating that Virginia law enforcement officials had the authority to question individuals about their immigration status during a stop or arrest. 

 

The American Civil Liberties Union at the time sent a letter to Virginia police chiefs and sheriffs urging them not to follow the opinion from Cuccinelli because it was “legally faulty and would lead to adverse public safety consequences.” 

“Because most police officers have not been trained to enforce immigration law, allowing them to question individuals about immigration status is an invitation for racial profiling and potential equal protection violations,” the letter said.

 

A U.S. Supreme Court ruling in 2012 and a settlement with plaintiffs in 2016 have since erased most of a law in Arizona that gave police similar authority.  

 

Kamarck said given Cuccinelli’s history as a “very tough and very conservative attorney general of the state of Virginia,” he might be able to help the president carry out his more restrictive immigration policies, despite the court challenges.  

 

Trump administration officials “really have had a hard time implementing the things that they say [they would do.] So I suspect Cuccinelli … has enough government experience and enough legal experience to be a help to them if, in fact, the president will listen to him,” Kamarck said.  

 

Cuccinelli’s position in the Trump administration is expected to be announced soon.