Category: USA News

  • Mayor Eric Adams Urges Americans to Stand Together Against Antisemitism at 2025 Mayors Summit

    Mayor Eric Adams Urges Americans to Stand Together Against Antisemitism at 2025 Mayors Summit

    At CAM’s 2025 North American Mayors Summit Against Antisemitism, Mayor Eric Adams gave a powerful speech asking people to stop “outrunning the lion” of hate and instead work together to remove it from our communities. He said that while many groups face hate and injustice, this moment is focused on fighting antisemitism, especially in New York City where Jews are a small part of the population but suffer more than half of all hate crimes. Adams urged everyone—teachers, faith leaders, and community organizations—to “play their position” by pushing back against antisemitism, misinformation, and the radicalization of young people. He announced an executive order against BDS and confirmed that New York City will keep investing pension funds in Israeli companies. Adams also reminded people of the long history of Jewish support for Black civil rights and called on Jewish communities to stand proudly and openly as Jews. He ended by saying he is willing to “leave everything on the ice” in the fight against hate and asked everyone to “lace up their skates” and join him.

    New York Adams forum against antisemitism 2025

    Transcript: Mayor Adams Delivers Remarks at CAM’s 2025 North American Mayors Summit Against Antisemitism Closing Gala Dinner

    Mayor Eric Adams: Thank you so much, mayor. Throughout this afternoon, you shared something that resonated with me, and I’m hoping people didn’t miss it. A good friend of mine, Rabbi Potasnik, told me a joke about two lions. Two hunters in a jungle, hunting for big game, they came up against a lion. One hunter looked at the other and said, “Let’s run, let’s get out of here.” The other hunter replied, “What’s wrong with you, we can’t outrun a lion.” The hunter replied, “I don’t have to outrun the lion, I have to outrun you.” 

    And when Rabbi Potasnik told me the story, I laughed, and he had this look on his face. He said, “That’s the problem. We’re trying to outrun each other.” Yes, the lion of foreclosure took your home, but I have my home, I outran that lion. The lion of crime may have taken your child, but I outran that lion. The lion of poverty, the lion of domestic violence, the lion of hatred. As long as I outrun that lion, I’m alright. 

    But what the hunter did not understand is, that if you don’t take the lion out of the jungle after he devours one hunter, he’s going to devour you. You were so right. The goal is not to outrun each other. The goal is to remove the lion of hatred from our community. That’s the goal. 

    If you go back to what Lyndon B. Johnson did in 1964 when he signed the Civil Rights Act, there were Jewish brothers and sisters that didn’t say, “Well, that had nothing to do with me.” When you look in 2013 and the Black Lives Matter movement took place after we saw the devastation, murder of a young man in Florida, and people used to say to Black folks who said Black lives matter, they said, well, all lives matter. Well, right now we’re not talking about all lives, we’re talking about Black lives. 

    And so, when we come to a conference and talk about combating antisemitism, don’t start telling me about other issues. Right now, we’re talking about antisemitism. And talking about a specific incident during a time does not dismiss the other incidents. Yes, we know we have other issues, but right now the focus is on antisemitism. That’s what it’s on. 

    And we can engage in other conversations. I’m going to continue to lift up my Asian brothers and sisters that are dealing with Asian violence. I’m going to continue to lift up the overproliferation of abuse in young African American males and the incarceration of them. I’m going to continue to lift up what’s happening with men and women of the LGBTQ+ community. We’re going to continue to do that. 

    But right now we’re in this stadium talking about antisemitism. And we need to be focused on what is happening, particularly in New York City, where you have a numerical minority of the community from the Jewish community and over 50 percent of the victims are Jewish people of hate crimes. That’s a real issue. And what we must focus on is to be laser focused on that. Because when we marry talking about this issue and bridging it with the other issues that we’re facing, we will raise the standard of who we are as human beings. 

    But how do we do it? That’s why I grabbed the football. This is a team sport, folks. If I’m the quarterback, you should not be the running back standing behind the center. Get your ass out of the way. Each player, play your position. We all got to play our positions. 

    If you are a teacher, you need to be in our public school system pushing back on the radicalization of our young people who not only hate Israel, they hate America because they were taught to hate America. That’s what we saw on the Columbia campus when the protests took place. We saw flyers that said hatred for Israel and hatred for America. Now, I don’t know who’s in this room, but I think you are Americans, right? 

    So, my educators must play their role. My faith-based leaders, play your position. You’re not the mayor. Be the rabbi, be the preacher, be the monk, be a Sikh leader. Play your position. And to my organizations, play your positions. Play your roles. And stand outside your comfort zones. Because if all we do all the time is speak to the same people, the choir heard the song, folks. It’s time to sing to those who are singing off-key so they can learn the lyrics and chorus of ending hate in our city and in our country. 

    And then let’s be honest with ourselves. Folks have been hating Jews for a long time. Our Jewish brothers and sisters have been fleeing and running from the days of Moses to when Columbus left Spain and Jews had to get out because of the edict, to being in Rome and watching the Jewish quarter. You can go over and over and over again to see how Jewish people have fled and ran from particular places. 

    And I’m saying to my Jewish brothers and sisters, your legacy in this generation is to say we run no more. We stand and fight. We don’t live in fear hoping that it goes away. We don’t allow certain groups to take to the streets and determine that you should be eradicated. And you’re sitting back contemplating what block you take off your yarmulke or what morning you remove your star of David. If you want to win this fight, then you need to stand up, stand firm, and say, “I am Jewish and there’s not a darn thing you can do about it.” 

    And you need to be strong in your faith and your belief. And people should see it in your presence and in your posture and in your stance. And that’s what we must do as a team. And then you need to lift up those who stand with you and let them know you support them. Because many of these mayors in this room will lose their races because they’re standing tall with you and not with the numerical loud minority that have hijacked the narrative. 

    They will be targeted, they will be focused, and they will go after them one at a time. That’s the hate that has swept our entire country and globe. You are being targeted. And we have to be as intelligent and as focused, as strategic as possible. That’s why we put the IHRA definition in place in New York City. 

    That’s why I am signing an executive order today to deal with BDS so we can stop the madness that we should not invest in Israel. That is why we’re going to sign an executive order stating that our pension funds will invest in Israeli companies because we’re getting a high return on our investment because they’re doing the right thing. 

    But Israel and Jews must tell their story. When I talk about ending antisemitism, you know what I talk about to that young African American man that’s in Brownsville? I tell him about the device that was discovered in Israel that helped his mother deal with a medical condition that she’s facing. 

    When I talk about ending hatred, you go look at who has the highest number of Nobel Peace Prize winners. Go look at the technology that’s coming out of Israel today because of the partnership that we have with New York City and Israel that is saving the lives of people from communities across the globe. 

    So, when you eradicate Israel and when you put them on an island and don’t allow their companies to go to trade shows and don’t allow their companies to participate in innovation, it is impacting us directly because it impacts us every day and the health and welfare of our communities. That’s what we have to do today. Don’t just talk about stopping antisemitism because it stops attacks on Jewish people. Stop antisemitism because we are all connected together and we’re all involved in this together. 

    I was sitting in a restaurant, as I conclude. It must have been October 10th. I’m sitting down at the table having a meal and a young African American woman walked in with a Howard University shirt on. She looked at me and said, “You’re one of those Zionist lovers. We know what you’re about. I just came from the march. We know what you are about.” 

    And while she’s saying that, I’m on my phone. I’m Googling Howard University. And I handed her my phone. And she looked at the founder of Howard University, Julius Rosenwald. And I told her, “Read on.” And she read on and she looked at the fact that almost 40 percent of the children in the Deep South were educated in schools that he opened, a Jewish philanthropist. 

    When segregation was the norm in the Deep South, he was opening schools so Black and Brown children could go to school and become teachers and educators to go into the Black and Brown communities and deal with segregation. And I said, “Read on.” And she saw how he was one of the original co-founders of the NAACP. 

    And I said, let’s go talk about the two Jewish young men who were down in Mississippi and lost their lives. But let’s not stop there. Let’s talk about when young white students went to the Deep South, 51 percent of them were Jewish, putting their lives on the line. And so yes, call me a Zionist. But what you can’t call me is mis-educated. And if you are going to denounce what gave birth to the college that you’re in right now, then they’re not educating you. 

    So, the next time you go in the street to celebrate October 7th, buy a plane ticket and go see what happened there. The next time you believe that you should eradicate from the river to the sea, first know where on the map you’re talking about. The next time you want to align yourself with groups who are proliferating hatred and talking about genocide, go look at what’s happening in Sudan and the thousands of lives that are being lost. 

    Lift up your educational understanding so you can properly fight a fight on the right side of the issue. That’s where we are missing this. They have indoctrinated and radicalized our children in the social media generation that is taking them down the road of devastation, of not knowing who their allies and brothers and sisters have historically been. 

    And you’re right, mayor. You are our cousins. You marched with us for Dr. King. You committed and volunteered your lives throughout the generations to stand side by side. But now your story can no longer be a tree that falls in a forest where no one hears a sound. It’s time for you to tell your story. Because if you don’t tell your story, people will distort your story. 

    So, I’m going to play my position. I may not be the best at it, but I’m going to do everything possible. We had a hockey player called Wayne Gretzky. They called him the ‘Great One.’ I loved his story. Wayne lost his first Stanley Cup. That’s a championship for hockey players. And he went into his locker room and all his teammates were pointing the finger at each other. “Who missed the puck? Who didn’t do their job?” 

    And then Wayne, being the gentleman that he is, walked down the hall to the opposing team’s locker room. It was quiet. He thought they went home. He peeked his head inside. They were laid out on the benches, bloody and bruised. They left everything they had on the ice. He knew then, that’s how you win. 

    And I don’t know what’s going to happen in the future. But I’m going to fight hate. And I’m going to be battered, I’m going to be bruised. I’m going to leave everything I have on the ice. And all I’m asking all of you, lace up your skates and get on this ice with me. And let’s win. 

    December 3, 2025 Manhattan, New York

    Sources: NYC.gov , Big New York news BigNY.com
    Midtown Tribune News

    Midtown Tribune Independent USA news from New York

  • Why Gen Z Is Renting Everything From Clothes to Strollers Instead of Owning (Video)

    Why Gen Z Is Renting Everything From Clothes to Strollers Instead of Owning (Video)

    Gen Z is driving a major shift away from traditional ownership and toward a rental-first lifestyle, according to a Fox Business discussion on the growing “rental boom.” Young consumers are now renting everything from clothes and kids’ strollers to glassware, treating access as more important than possession. What older generations might see as a financial red flag, many Gen Zers now see as a smart, flexible way to live—one that allows them to enjoy variety and convenience without long-term commitment or big upfront costs.

    USA news Z Rental Boom

    The panel highlighted that this rental trend has both lifestyle and environmental benefits. Renting fashion and children’s toys, for example, keeps items in circulation longer and reduces waste compared to fast fashion that ends up in landfills after just a few wears. At the same time, there’s still tension between the pride and responsibility that comes with owning assets and the ease of simply renting what you need, when you need it. The guests cautioned against calling things like clothes or shoes “assets,” noting that most people don’t recoup much value when they try to resell them.

    Technology is the backbone of this new rental economy. Subscription platforms and apps now make it easy to rent clothes, accessories, and even household items on demand, in much the same way services like Uber and Airbnb reshaped transportation and travel. Companies such as Nuuly, FashionPass, and rental programs by major brands leverage cloud-based technology to manage inventory, logistics, and customer preferences at scale. The result is a fast-growing business model where Gen Z can constantly refresh their lifestyle—wardrobes, baby gear, and more—without needing to own it all.

    Sources: Midtown Tribune news , Video Fox Business

    Midtown Tribune Independent USA news from New York

  • Donald Trump and Venezuela: ‘Pinpoint Attacks’ on Drug Boats and Possible Ground Strikes

    Donald Trump and Venezuela: ‘Pinpoint Attacks’ on Drug Boats and Possible Ground Strikes

    In this segment, President Trump reaffirms his support for U.S. strikes on alleged drug trafficking boats and pointedly leaves the door open for potential land operations in Venezuela. He highlights that, in his view, more than 90% of narcotics arriving by sea have been stopped and frames the maritime campaign as a series of “pinpoint attacks” that are “saving hundreds of thousands of lives.” The messaging clearly positions these actions as part of a broader strategy to increase pressure on Nicolás Maduro’s regime and to treat the narcotics flow as a direct national security threat.

    The report then focuses on the controversy surrounding a two-strike incident on a suspected drug vessel in September. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth states he watched only the first strike live before leaving the room, after which operational control rested with Admiral Frank Bradley. According to U.S. officials cited by Fox News, Bradley authorized the second strike to fully sink the vessel, arguing it could have posed a threat to other ships or allowed survivors to call for armed backup. Hegseth references the “fog of war,” noting that fire, explosions, and smoke made it impossible to clearly see survivors in real time.

    Finally, the piece highlights the growing political and legal scrutiny in Washington. Both Democrats and some Republicans are questioning whether the second strike could qualify as a war crime under international law and U.S. rules of engagement. Lawmakers on the House and Senate Armed Services Committees are expected to press Admiral Bradley for detailed explanations in upcoming briefings. As a result, the Venezuela pressure campaign and anti-drug operations in the Caribbean are becoming not only a foreign and security policy issue, but also a test case for how far U.S. military force can be used in counter-narcotics missions without crossing legal and ethical red lines.

    Midtown Tribune Independent USA news from New York

  • Reuters NEXT New York: Global Leaders Converge to Debate the World’s Most Urgent Questions

    Reuters NEXT New York: Global Leaders Converge to Debate the World’s Most Urgent Questions

    Reuters NEXT New York 2025

    New York, December 3–4, 2025 – As the world struggles to navigate geopolitical fracture, AI upheaval, and a fragile economy, Reuters NEXT returns to New York this week, assembling a heavyweight roster of policymakers, CEOs and creators to ask a simple but urgent question: what kind of future are we building?

    Over two days in the global financial hub, more than 700 leaders from business, government and civil society will take the stage across multiple tracks, tackling themes that range from war and peace to streaming wars, central bank policy to luxury retail.


    A summit of power brokers

    This year’s speaker lineup underlines the ambition of the summit. According to Reuters, confirmed speakers include:

    • António Guterres, Secretary-General of the United Nations
    • Christian Klein, CEO of SAP
    • Naomi Gleit, Head of Product, Meta
    • Jimmy Wales, Founder of Wikipedia
    • Sarah Jessica Parker, executive producer and entrepreneur
    • Shari Redstone, Chair of Sipur Studios
    • Aidan Gomez, Co-Founder & CEO of AI firm Cohere
    • Stéphane de La Faverie, President & CEO, The Estée Lauder Companies
    • Pearlena Igbokwe, Chairman, Television Studios & Peacock Scripted, NBCUniversal
    • Ilario Corna, CIO & CTO, International Olympic Committee
    • Joanne Crevoiserat, CEO of Tapestry
    • Rick Wurster, CEO of Charles Schwab
    • Senior leaders from Google, Cisco, Moderna and others

    They are joined by central bank governors, including representatives from Libya and Syria, underscoring how monetary policy and financial stability have become central to discussions about global risk and rebuilding trust in institutions. Reuters Agency

    Reuters Editor-in-Chief Alessandra Galloni will lead interviews and discussions, supported by a team of senior journalists, as they press speakers on the decisions they are making now—and the consequences those choices will have for 2026 and beyond.


    Six themes, one turbulent world

    The official agenda is built around six core themes that reflect the fault lines of 2025:

    1. Geopolitics – Panels will explore an era of “growing geopolitical fragmentation,” as alliances are tested by regional conflicts, resource competition and shifting power centers.
    2. Economy & Markets – With investors nervously eyeing the outlook for 2026, speakers from banks, asset managers and major corporates will debate interest-rate paths, capital flows and the resilience of the global financial system.
    3. Banking & Finance – From regulatory scrutiny to fintech disruption, executives will drill into how financial institutions can stay profitable while financing the energy transition and safeguarding against systemic shocks.
    4. AI & Technology – Having moved from “AI experimentation to accountability,” the program delves into governance, transparency and the real business impact of generative AI, with leaders from Cohere, Google, Cisco and others.
    5. Climate & Sustainability – With pressure mounting after a year of record temperatures, CEOs and policymakers will look at how to fund decarbonization, reform supply chains and meet mounting disclosure demands.
    6. Business Leadership – Sessions will focus on leadership in an “increasingly contested information ecosystem,” where trust, internal communications and public credibility can make or break an organization.

    Beyond the headlines: AI, energy and attention

    What sets Reuters NEXT apart from many other executive gatherings is its framing as a live journalism experience. Interviews are run with the same rigor as a newsroom grilling: short on platitudes, long on specifics.

    Some of the most closely watched conversations are expected to orbit three clusters of issues:

    • AI disruption and accountability
      • Tech leaders will be asked how they intend to govern powerful AI models, reduce bias, and protect jobs—while still chasing growth.
      • Policy-makers and regulators in attendance are expected to push for clearer guardrails and more transparency on training data, safety testing and risk management.
    • Financing the energy transition
      • With trillions of dollars in investment needed, financial institutions and corporates will debate which models actually work, from green bonds to blended finance.
      • Executives in energy, heavy industry and consumer goods will be pressed on supply-chain emissions, reporting standards and how they balance shareholder pressure with long-term climate commitments.
    • The battle for attention – from streaming to social
      • Media, entertainment and tech executives—including leaders from NBCUniversal, Meta and the IOC—will explore how audiences are fragmenting across platforms and what that means for business models built on advertising and subscriptions.

    Why New York, why now

    New York—still one of the world’s dominant hubs for finance, media and diplomacy—offers a symbolic backdrop. The city has been at the center of debates on inequality, climate resilience, and the future of work, making it a fitting stage for conversations about reshaping global systems.

    The 2025 edition arrives at a moment when:

    • Markets are trying to price in a new interest-rate regime and adjust to slower, more uneven growth.
    • Governments are wrestling with how to regulate fast-moving technologies without stifling innovation.
    • Public trust in institutions—from banks to newsrooms to international bodies—remains fragile.

    In a statement ahead of the summit, Galloni framed the objective as cutting through the noise: Reuters NEXT is meant to “go beyond the headlines” and give decision-makers the “clarity, connections and action plans” they need to navigate the next few years.


    What to watch for

    While the full speaker page is hosted on the Reuters Events site and may feature additional names and sessions that aren’t publicly detailed elsewhere, a few flashpoints are already emerging from the published lineup and themes:

    • How blunt will leaders be? Will CEOs and policymakers speak candidly about geopolitical risks, or stick to carefully scripted talking points?
    • Concrete AI commitments. Will any firms announce new principles, partnerships or oversight mechanisms for AI deployment?
    • Climate credibility. Expect close attention to what companies say about measurable progress toward net-zero goals rather than generic pledges.
    • Media and misinformation. With Wikipedia’s Jimmy Wales, major broadcasters and platform leaders in the mix, discussions on information integrity and audience trust could become some of the most lively sessions.

    A forum under pressure to deliver

    Expectations for high-level summits like Reuters NEXT are rising. Critics often accuse elite gatherings of generating lofty rhetoric but little follow-through. Organizers, for their part, are positioning the New York summit as a working forum—where deals are sketched out in side rooms, cross-sector coalitions emerge, and some of the world’s most powerful decision-makers are forced to defend their strategies in public.

    Whether the 2025 edition ultimately shapes policy, markets or boardroom agendas will only become clear in the months ahead. For now, the arrival of this year’s speakers in New York signals at least one thing: amid uncertainty and upheaval, the conversation about “what comes next” is very much underway.

    Sources: Midtown Tribune , Reuters Agency+1

    Midtown Tribune Independent USA news from New York

  • Ukraine Aid in November 2025: What Congress Funded and What Trump Could (Not) Do

    Ukraine Aid in November 2025: What Congress Funded and What Trump Could (Not) Do

    1. Who actually “allocates” money for Ukraine?

    Congress

    Under U.S. law, only Congress can appropriate federal money – set the legal dollar amounts and what they can be used for. This flows from the Appropriations Clause (“No Money shall be drawn from the Treasury, but in Consequence of Appropriations made by Law…”) and is implemented through appropriations acts.

    Congressional Research Service (CRS) – the nonpartisan research arm of Congress – notes that Congress has passed five emergency supplemental funding measures for Ukraine since 2022, plus regular annual appropriations that also contain Ukraine-related money. Congress.gov+1

    A CRS brief on “U.S. Direct Financial Support for Ukraine” (IF12305, hosted on Congress.gov) lists those five Ukraine supplemental laws and states that as of January 2025 Congress had appropriated nearly $174.2 billion in Ukraine-related supplemental funding for FY2022–FY2024. Congress.gov

    The official UkraineOversight.gov “Funding” page (run by the Special Inspector General for Operation Atlantic Resolve) summarizes the same story in even plainer language:

    “Congress appropriated $174.2 billion through the five Ukraine supplemental appropriation acts enacted FY 2022 through FY 2024…” Ukraine Oversight

    So in law:

    • Congress writes and passes the bills that set the amounts and purposes (appropriations).
    • These include both the five Ukraine emergency supplementals and relevant pieces of annual spending bills.

    The President / Administration (now Trump)

    Once Congress has made money legally available, the executive branch controls how it’s used within those legal limits.

    CRS’s long report “Supplemental Funding for Ukraine” (R47275) walks through how Ukraine laws expanded the President’s authority to transfer or “draw down” defense articles and to reprogram some funds, but always within caps and conditions set by statute. Congress.gov

    The UkraineOversight.gov glossary (built from DoD’s Financial Management Regulation) explains the key concepts: Ukraine Oversight

    • Appropriation – Congress’s law that authorizes agencies to incur obligations and make payments for specified purposes.
    • Apportionment – how the Office of Management and Budget (in the Executive Office of the President) parcels out that appropriated money over time or categories.
    • Reprogramming / transfers – limited authority to shift money within or between accounts, as allowed by law.

    Putting that together, Trump (or any President) can:

    • Propose budgets and supplemental Ukraine requests (or choose not to request more).
    • Sign or veto what Congress passes.
    • Control implementation of already-appropriated funds:
      • which weapons go in which Presidential Drawdown Authority (PDA) package,
      • how quickly funds are obligated and disbursed,
      • and some reprogramming within the rules Congress set in the Ukraine supplementals and other appropriations. Congress.gov+1

    He cannot, on his own, create new Ukraine money that Congress hasn’t appropriated.

    Political reality right now (no non-gov sources)

    On top of the legal rules, there’s the politics:

    • A significant share of Members in the current Congress are openly skeptical about further, large Ukraine packages, often citing corruption and oversight concerns.
    • If Trump demanded a big new Ukraine supplemental that leadership and the base didn’t want, he would risk burning political capital with his own majority.

    Legally, he can ask; practically, he’s constrained by what Congress is willing to vote for.


    2. What did Congress budget for Ukraine in November 2025?

    Short answer using only U.S. government sources:

    • In November 2025, Congress passed H.R. 5371, the Continuing Appropriations, Agriculture, Legislative Branch, Military Construction and Veterans Affairs, and Extensions Act, 2026.
    • It is a continuing resolution (CR) that:
      • Ends the October–November 2025 government shutdown, and
      • Extends FY2026 “continuing appropriations” for most federal agencies through January 30, 2026, generally at FY2025 levels. Congress.gov
    • The official House Appropriations Committee press release describes this as a “clean funding extension” that extends funding “until January 30” and notes the shutdown “lasted 43 days.” House Appropriations GOP

    What exactly does H.R. 5371 do?

    The Congress.gov CRS summary (for H.R. 5371, now Public Law 119-37) states: Congress.gov

    “This bill ends the government shutdown by providing FY2026 continuing appropriations for most federal agencies through January 30, 2026…”

    and

    “The CR funds most programs and activities at the FY2025 levels with several exceptions…”

    Key implications:

    • It is not a Ukraine-specific law.
    • It continues existing accounts (including those that can be used for Ukraine) at about FY2025 levels for a short period.
    • It does not create a new, headline Ukraine supplemental title the way the five earlier Ukraine emergency laws did.

    From the House Appropriations Committee’s official November 12, 2025 press release, we see the same points in political language:

    • Shutdown “lasted 43 days”.
    • The CR is a “clean and straightforward short-term CR … [that] simply extends funding until January 30.” House Appropriations GOP

    Nothing in that official material indicates a brand-new, separate Ukraine aid package passed in November 2025.

    So, if someone says, “In November 2025 Trump budgeted $X more for Ukraine,” the government’s own documents show:

    November 2025 = general stopgap for the whole government, not a separate Ukraine supplemental.


    3. What Ukraine money was already on the books by then?

    By the time you reach November 2025, Ukraine funding mostly comes from:

    a) The five Ukraine supplemental laws (2022–2024)

    CRS’s IF12305 “U.S. Direct Financial Support for Ukraine” (on Congress.gov) lists the five emergency supplemental measures specifically responding to Russia’s invasion of Ukraine: Congress.gov

    1. Ukraine Supplemental Appropriations Act, 2022 – P.L. 117-103, Div. N
    2. Additional Ukraine Supplemental Appropriations Act, 2022 – P.L. 117-128
    3. Ukraine Supplemental Appropriations Act, 2023 – P.L. 117-180, Div. B
    4. Additional Ukraine Supplemental Appropriations Act, 2023 – P.L. 117-328, Div. M
    5. Ukraine Security Supplemental Appropriations Act, 2024 (USSAA) – P.L. 118-50, Div. B

    CRS then states:

    “As of January 2025, Congress has appropriated a total of nearly $174.2 billion from FY2022 through FY2024 in supplemental appropriations in response to Russia’s war against Ukraine.” Congress.gov

    The official UkraineOversight.gov Funding page uses essentially the same number and breaks it out: Ukraine Oversight

    • $174.2 billion from the five Ukraine supplementals (FY2022–FY2024),
    • plus $22.3 billion from annual agency appropriations,
    • plus $1.1 billion from other supplemental acts,

    for a total of about $187 billion in appropriations related to Operation Atlantic Resolve and the Ukraine response.

    That’s all money that Congress has already appropriated before the November 2025 CR.

    b) Ongoing defense and security authorities

    CRS’s R47275 “Supplemental Funding for Ukraine” details how these laws: Congress.gov

    • Raised the cap on Presidential Drawdown Authority for defense articles,
    • Created and funded the Ukraine Security Assistance Initiative (USAI),
    • Expanded and adjusted transfer and reprogramming authorities for Ukraine-related support.

    Later, the FY2026 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA), in the Senate Armed Services Committee executive summary, notes that it extends USAI through 2028 and increases its authorized funding to $500 million (authorization, not appropriation, but still part of the Ukraine toolkit available once Congress supplies appropriations). Armed Services Committee

    Again, that’s not a November-2025 thing; it’s part of the broader FY2026 defense legislation.


    4. So how do you answer “Trump just allocated $X for Ukraine in November 2025”?

    Using only U.S. government documents, you can say:

    1. Congress, not Trump, legally allocates the money.
      • Congress has enacted five Ukraine supplemental appropriation acts plus related annual appropriations, totaling about $174.2 billion in Ukraine supplementals and $187 billion overall for the Ukraine response by early 2025. Congress.gov+1
    2. In November 2025, Congress did not pass a new, standalone Ukraine aid law.
      • It passed H.R. 5371 (P.L. 119-37), a continuing resolution that:
        • Ended the 43-day shutdown and
        • Extended most funding at FY2025 levels through January 30, 2026. Congress.gov+1
      • Nothing in the official CRS summary or House Appropriations release suggests a separate, new Ukraine-only tranche in November 2025.
    3. Trump’s actual role is:
      • He signs or vetoes what Congress sends him (H.R. 5371 became law on Nov. 12, 2025). Congress.gov
      • He chooses whether to request more Ukraine money in future supplementals. Congress.gov
      • Through OMB apportionment and statutory authorities (drawdown, reprogramming, etc.), his administration controls the pace and form in which already-appropriated Ukraine funds are used. Congress.gov+1

    Sources: Midtown Tribune news ,

    Midtown Tribune Independent USA news from New York

  • NYC’s COPA Bill Explained: How a ‘First Right to Buy’ Could Reshape the Housing Market

    NYC’s COPA Bill Explained: How a ‘First Right to Buy’ Could Reshape the Housing Market

    New York City news City Council pushing NYC into ‘Communist dystopia’ with affordable-housing bill dictating property sales

    New York City is debating a housing bill that sounds technical but could seriously change how multifamily buildings are bought and sold.

    It’s called the Community Opportunity to Purchase Act, or COPA, and it’s City Council bill Intro 902. New York City Council+1

    Supporters say it’s a crucial tool to save affordable housing. Critics say it’s a slow-motion takeover of the housing market by City Hall and politically connected nonprofits. Let’s walk through what the bill actually does, how it would work in practice, and what we can realistically expect if it passes.


    1. What COPA Would Do in One Sentence

    COPA would give qualified nonprofits and community land trusts the first chance to buy most multifamily buildings (3+ units) when an owner decides to sell, plus extra time to match any private buyer’s offer — with fines up to $30,000 if owners don’t follow the rules. New York City Council+1

    That’s it in plain English. The entire fight is really about who gets first shot at buying a building, and how much red tape comes with that.


    2. How the COPA Process Would Work, Step by Step

    Here’s the basic workflow, based on the bill text on the Council’s Legistar site and summary pages. New York City Council+2Intro NYC+2

    1. Owner decides to sell a building with 3 or more apartments.
      This can be a small walk-up, a mid-size rental, or a larger property — as long as it has at least three residential units (with some technical exceptions).
    2. Mandatory notice to the city and nonprofits.
      Before accepting offers, the owner must send a “notice of sale” to:
      • the Department of Housing Preservation and Development (HPD), and
      • a city-maintained list of “qualified entities” (nonprofits, community land trusts, etc.).
    3. Nonprofits get the “first opportunity to purchase.”
      • They have 60 days to say they’re interested.
      • Then up to 120 days to submit an offer.
      • During this window, the owner is not allowed to accept other offers. New York City Council
    4. If a private buyer appears, nonprofits can still match.
      Suppose a private investor makes a “bona fide” offer later in the process. The owner has to notify HPD and the nonprofits again. Under COPA, the nonprofits get another window (up to 120 days) to come in and match the same price and terms. New York City Council+1
    5. Penalties for skipping the process.
      If an owner just tries to sell quietly and ignore COPA, the city can seek:
      • civil penalties up to $30,000, and
      • a court order to unwind or block the sale. New York Post+1

    So in practice, COPA doesn’t let nonprofits buy buildings at a discount — they still have to pay market prices — but it reorders the line so they get:

    • first look,
    • first offer,
    • and a last-minute right to match.

    3. Where the Idea Comes From: D.C. and San Francisco

    Supporters are very open about the fact COPA is modeled on similar laws elsewhere:

    • Washington, D.C. – TOPA (Tenant Opportunity to Purchase Act)
      TOPA gives tenants (or developers they partner with) the chance to buy their building or assign that right when the landlord sells. Studies funded by D.C. and advocacy groups estimate over 16,000 affordable units were preserved or created between 2006 and 2020 under TOPA. Housing Alliance of Pennsylvania+1
    • San Francisco – COPA
      Since 2019, San Francisco has given nonprofits a first right of offer and first refusal to buy most multifamily buildings (3+ units). The goal is to prevent displacement and keep buildings permanently affordable. City and County of San Francisco+2SFMOHCD+2

    New York’s bill is explicitly pitched as doing the same thing: letting mission-driven nonprofits buy at-risk buildings before “speculators swoop in.” City & State New York+1


    4. Who’s Pushing COPA, and What They Say It Will Do

    The main political sponsor is Council Member Sandy Nurse, who introduced Intro 902 in May 2024. New York City Council+1

    Key advocacy groups backing COPA include New Economy Project, the NYC Community Land Initiative, and a broader “Community Land Act” coalition:

    • They argue that as soon as buildings go on the market, private equity funds and large investors often outbid everyone else, then:
    • COPA, in their view, would:
      • “level the playing field” so nonprofits can compete for buildings;
      • help preserve existing affordable units rather than just building new ones;
      • create more tenant- and community-controlled housing via land trusts and co-ops. New Economy NYC+2New Economy NYC+2

    By November 2025, New Economy Project said COPA had reached supermajority support in the Council, enough to potentially override a mayoral veto if everyone stayed on board. New Economy NYC


    5. Why Critics Are Alarmed

    Opposition is coming from small landlord groups, real-estate trade associations, and several law firms that advise owners and lenders. Their concerns fall into a few buckets.

    a) Time and uncertainty

    Legal memos from firms like Belkin Burden Goldman and Holland & Knight highlight how COPA could stretch a normal sale into a 6–12-month saga of notices, waiting periods, and possible nonprofit match offers. Belkin · Burden · Goldman, LLP+1

    Their arguments:

    • Financing windows can close. Lenders don’t like deals that might sit for half a year without clarity.
    • 1031 exchanges become risky. Owners relying on time-sensitive tax-deferred exchanges may not be able to meet federal deadlines if they’re stuck waiting out COPA timelines. Holland & Knight
    • Buyers may just give up on NYC. If investors fear their offer will be used as free price discovery for nonprofits that can later match it, they may look to other markets.

    b) Impact on values and tax revenue

    Some analyses warn that if buildings are harder to sell, their market value will fall — not necessarily because nonprofits pay less, but because:

    Holland & Knight, for example, argues Intro 902 could “dramatically decrease sales of multifamily buildings” and reduce the billions NYC collects in property and mortgage recording taxes, with little evidence it will create new units. Holland & Knight

    c) Tilt toward politically connected nonprofits

    Critics also point out that COPA doesn’t give tenants themselves the first right — it gives it to “qualified entities” certified by the city, mostly nonprofits and land trusts. New York City Council+1

    That raises questions:

    • Who gets on the list and who doesn’t?
    • Will the organizations with better political connections see more deals?
    • Do these entities have the capacity and funding to close purchases at scale, or will many buildings just sit in limbo?

    The New York Post, in a highly charged editorial, goes much further — calling COPA a step toward “communist dystopia” and “Stalinesque” control over private sales. New York Post+1

    That’s clearly rhetorical overkill, but it reflects a real anxiety in parts of the landlord and business community: that City Hall is inserting itself directly into who gets to buy what, and when.


    6. What We Can Learn from D.C. and San Francisco

    The honest answer is that both sides can point to evidence.

    Evidence that these laws do preserve housing

    • In Washington, D.C., research funded by the city and summarized by PolicyLink and others estimates that 16,000+ affordable units were created or preserved through TOPA between 2006 and 2020, plus thousands more units where tenants used TOPA negotiations to secure repairs and affordability guarantees even if they didn’t buy. PolicyLink+2LISC+2
    • In San Francisco, COPA has helped nonprofits acquire and preserve hundreds of units since 2019, using a similar first-right-of-offer structure for 3+ unit buildings. Shelterforce+2Housing Alliance of Pennsylvania+2

    So, if your only question is “Can these laws preserve some buildings as permanently affordable?” the answer is yes — they can.

    Evidence that these laws create friction and backlash

    At the same time:

    • D.C. is now scaling back TOPA rights for small properties (2–4 units), after years of complaints from small landlords that the process was too complicated and open to abuse. The Washington Post+2The Washington Post+2
    • Legal and industry commentary in both cities is full of examples where deals fell apart, financing was delayed, or owners avoided selling because they didn’t want to navigate the process. K&L Gates+2Hanson Bridgett LLP+2

    So, the track record suggests something like this:

    These laws do help preserve some affordable housing stock —
    but they also slow and complicate transactions, and over time, politicians feel pressure to tweak or partially roll them back.

    NYC is essentially jumping into a policy experiment that has already shown both benefits and costs elsewhere.


    7. Likely Real-World Effects in New York

    Putting it all together, what’s most likely to happen if COPA passes in roughly its current form?

    1. More power for City Hall–approved nonprofits.
      They will get a pipeline of potential acquisitions, often with public subsidy behind them. That’s by design.
    2. Slower, more complex deals for multifamily buildings.
      Sellers and buyers will need lawyers who understand COPA, and timelines will stretch. Some deals that would have happened simply won’t.
    3. Upward pressure on prices for “clean” assets, and discounting on COPA-constrained assets.
      • Buildings not covered by COPA (or where obligations are waived) could become more attractive, bidding prices up.
      • Buildings squarely under COPA may trade at a discount to compensate for extra risk and time — or not trade at all.
    4. Uneven impact by size and sophistication of owner.
      • Large institutional players may treat COPA as just another compliance cost.
      • Small landlords and families who own one or two buildings are the most likely to feel overwhelmed or pushed out.
    5. Real, but limited, gains in nonprofit-owned affordable housing.
      If D.C. and San Francisco are any guide, COPA will help nonprofits save some buildings — but not remotely enough to “solve” the housing crisis on its own. Shelterforce+2PolicyLink+2

    8. The Bottom Line

    COPA is not literally a ban on private property, and it doesn’t let nonprofits seize buildings at cut-rate prices. It’s a procedural power shift:

    • away from fast, bilateral deals between owner and buyer,
    • toward a system where city-approved nonprofits get the first and last word on many sales.

    Whether you see that as necessary protection in an overheated market or a dangerous politicization of transactions depends on your starting values:

    • Do you think the housing crisis is mainly a failure of markets, or a failure of public policy and supply?
    • Do you trust nonprofits, backed by City Hall, to manage a growing chunk of the housing stock better than private owners?
    • And how much extra bureaucracy are you willing to tolerate in exchange for preserving some buildings as permanently affordable?

    What’s clear from the evidence is that COPA-type laws are not cost-free. They can preserve units and empower community buyers — but they also bring delay, compliance costs, and the risk that only those nonprofits and intermediaries with the best political connections will really benefit.

    New York City is now deciding if that trade-off is worth it.

    Midtown Tribune Independent USA news from New York

  • White House Launches “Media Offenders” List to Call Out Anti-Trump Spin

    White House Launches “Media Offenders” List to Call Out Anti-Trump Spin

    usa news truimp wh madia biased exposed

    MEDIA BIASES EXPOSED

    WASHINGTON, D.C. — The White House has rolled out a new “Media Offenders” page on WhiteHouse.gov, branding it a running ledger of what it calls misleading, biased, and distorted coverage of President Donald J. Trump.
    Under the banner “Misleading. Biased. Exposed.”(), the feature names outlets, reporters, and specific stories, and then places them in categories like Misrepresentation, Bias, Lie, and Omission of context. The marquee case this week targets CBS News, The Boston Globe, and The Independent, accusing them of twisting President Trump’s call for accountability into a sensational — and false — story that he demanded “execution” for Democrats in Congress.

    According to the White House page, the controversy began after several Democratic officials appeared in a video urging U.S. service members to resist “illegal orders,” a message the site says was clearly aimed at President Trump and designed to suggest he was prepared to break the law. In response, Trump blasted the move as seditious, arguing that elected officials have no business encouraging insubordination in the ranks. The “Media Offender of the Week” entry says the press then jumped to an extreme narrative — claiming Trump had called for executions — instead of reporting his actual demand: that Members of Congress who incite sedition should be held responsible for their actions.

    Beyond the headline case, the “Offender Hall of Shame” reads like a searchable database of what the site calls “false and misleading stories flagged by The White House.” Readers can scroll through claims, select publications such as ABC News, MSNBC, The Washington Post, or The New York Times, and filter by categories like Bias, Left-wing lunacy, Lie, and more. A “Leaderboard” highlights repeat offenders in what is described as a “race to the bottom,” and visitors are invited to sign up for weekly “Offender Alerts” to get new entries in their inbox.

    Sources: The White House – “Media Offenders” page , Midtown Tribune news

    Midtown Tribune Independent USA news from New York

  • Trump Cancels Biden Autopen Orders, Pauses 3rd-World Immigration & Ukraine Peace Efforts Led by “Unsung Hero”

    Trump Cancels Biden Autopen Orders, Pauses 3rd-World Immigration & Ukraine Peace Efforts Led by “Unsung Hero”

    In this episode of Front Page with Scott Goulet, the host opens with President Trump’s sweeping announcement that he is rescinding and terminating all Biden-era executive actions signed via autopen, calling them legally void because they were not personally approved by Biden.
    Trump also responds to the Washington, D.C. shooting of two West Virginia National Guard members by vowing to permanently pause migration from all third-world countries, cut off federal benefits and subsidies for non-citizens, and deport foreign nationals deemed security risks, public burdens, or “incompatible with Western civilization.”
    The segment highlights the death of Guardsman Sarah Beckram, the suspect’s background as an Afghan national admitted under Operation Allies Welcome, and the push to treat the case as terrorism with the possibility of the death penalty.

    Goulet then covers the major legal development in Georgia, where the 2020 election interference case against Trump and his allies was dismissed in its entirety due to insufficient evidence and problems with the racketeering theory and jurisdiction. With this, Trump no longer faces open criminal cases and celebrates the ruling as a victory for law and justice. The show also addresses a New York Times article questioning Trump’s age, stamina, and schedule; Trump fires back on Truth Social, listing his economic and political achievements, insisting he is in excellent physical and cognitive health, and branding the paper an “enemy of the people” engaged in deliberate smears.

    The final part of the episode shifts to the war in Ukraine and global fallout. Goulet profiles Dan Driscoll, the 39-year-old Secretary of the Army and Trump ally, as an “unsung hero” behind a U.S.-backed peace plan that Putin now says could be the basis for ending the conflict. Driscoll’s background as a veteran, Yale-trained lawyer, and close friend of Vice President JD Vance is traced, along with his role as “Trump’s drone guy” and his quiet shuttle diplomacy with Kyiv.
    The episode closes with an investigation into a Czech shell company allegedly re-selling Chinese drones to Ukraine at huge markups and funneling profits back to China, raising questions about war profiteering, tax evasion, and who in the Ukrainian system approved such deals.

    Video : Front Page with Scott Goulet

    Midtown Tribune Independent USA news from New York

  • New York. 70 NYCHA Employees Convicted in Massive Bribery and Corruption Scheme

    New York. 70 NYCHA Employees Convicted in Massive Bribery and Corruption Scheme

    New York news. criminal NYC Bribery Case in NYCHA 70

    Federal prosecutors have announced the conviction of 70 current and former New York City Housing Authority (NYCHA) employees in a sweeping bribery and corruption case involving “micro-purchase” construction and repair contracts. Investigators found that staff routinely demanded cash kickbacks from contractors in exchange for awarding or speeding up small housing projects, diverting millions of dollars and further undermining public trust in New York City’s public housing system.

    All 70 NYCHA Employees Charged In February 2024 Sweep Convicted Of Bribery, Fraud, Or Extortion Offenses

    Less Than 22 Months After the Arrests—Which Were the Largest Number of Federal Bribery Charges on a Single Day in Department of Justice History—All 70 Charged Defendants Have Pled Guilty or Were Convicted at Trial for Accepting Cash Payments

    New York news crime NYCHA 70

    United States Attorney for the Southern District of New York, Jay Clayton, Commissioner of the New York City Department of Investigation (“DOI”), Jocelyn E. Strauber, Acting Inspector General of the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, Office of Inspector General (“HUD-OIG”), Brian D. Harrison, Special Agent in Charge of the New York Field Office of Homeland Security Investigations (“HSI”), Ricky J. Patel, Special Agent in Charge of the Northeast Region of the U.S. Department of Labor, Office of Inspector General (“DOL-OIG”), Jonathan Mellone, and Special Agent in Charge of the New York Field Office of Internal Revenue Service – Criminal Investigation (“IRS-CI”), Harry T. Chavis, announced that all 70 employees of the New York City Housing Authority (“NYCHA”) who were arrested and charged in February 2024 have now been convicted of bribery, fraud, or extortion offenses. 

    Of the 70 defendants charged in February 2024 with accepting bribes in exchange for awarding NYCHA repair contracts, three defendants were convicted after jury trials, 56 defendants pled guilty to felony offenses, and 11 defendants pled guilty to misdemeanor offenses.  Sentencings are ongoing, but sentences imposed to date range up to 48 months in prison.  The defendants were collectively responsible for accepting over $2.1 million in bribes in exchange for awarding NYCHA contracts worth over $15 million.  As a result of the convictions, the defendants will collectively pay over $2.1 million in restitution to NYCHA and will forfeit over $2 million in criminal proceeds.        

    “Today’s plea of the 70th and final NYCHA pay-for-play contracting scheme defendant marks an important milestone in one of the largest single-day corruption cases in the history of the Justice Department,” said U.S. Attorney Jay Clayton.  “All 70 charged defendants have now been convicted for attempting to criminally leverage the contracting process of work for affordable housing for New Yorkers to line their own pockets.  NYCHA residents deserve better.  New Yorkers deserve better.  This broad and swift action demonstrates our Office’s commitment to combatting corruption in our nation’s largest public housing authority—home to 1 in every 17 New York City residents.”            

    “Today, the last of the 70 NYCHA employees charged with bribery and extortion in connection with the awarding of micro-purchase contracts pled guilty, closing the chapter on an investigation in which DOI and our federal partners exposed widespread corruption that touched almost one-third of NYCHA’s 365 developments in each of the five boroughs,” said DOI Commissioner Jocelyn E. Strauber.  “All the defendants, many of them supervisors, now have taken responsibility for separate schemes that, in total, involved more than $15 million in no-bid contracts, awarded in exchange for the payment of more than $2.1 million in bribes to employees who chose to serve themselves instead of the residents of NYCHA, driving up costs of maintenance and improvements in a public housing system dependent on scarce resources.  To date, approximately $2 million in restitution to NYCHA and nearly $2 million in forfeiture has been ordered.  Equally important, DOI’s 14 recommendations to improve controls with respect to NYCHA’s micro-purchase contracting have been implemented – three of which were similar to DOI’s 2021 recommendations that were rejected by NYCHA.  I thank the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Southern District of New York and our federal law enforcement partners for their commitment to thwart corruption that drains public housing resources, and NYCHA for the implementation of much-needed contracting reforms.”

    “Today’s final guilty plea is an important milestone in bringing to an end the egregious pay-to-play bribery scheme that wasted millions of dollars that should have benefited HUD tenants in New York and raised serious questions about the integrity of NYCHA operations,” said HUD-OIG Acting Inspector General Brian D. Harrison.  “All 70 of the NYCHA employees who failed to uphold the basic duty of not stealing from public housing have now admitted guilt or been found guilty at trial within two years of indictment, a testament to the investigative excellence of HUD OIG and its law enforcement partners.  We are grateful to the U.S. Attorney’s Office for its support and prosecutions in this case and know that this sends a clear signal to corrupt public officials that they will be held accountable.”

    “Nearly two years ago, HSI New York and our law enforcement partners announced a sweeping investigation that uncovered a brazen corruption and extortion scheme that marked the largest number of federal bribery charges in a single day in history,” said HSI Special Agent in Charge Ricky J. Patel.  “Today’s guilty plea is the latest step in exposing a scheme that exploited NYCHA’s operations, shortchanged its communities, and siphoned trust and resources from NYCHA residents—New Yorkers who deserve better.  Working in lockstep with our federal, state, and local law enforcement counterparts, HSI will keep pressing forward to protect New Yorkers and ensure that anyone who attempts to jeopardize their well-being faces decisive consequences.”

    “An important part of the mission of DOL-OIG is to investigate fraud and other federal crimes involving matters within the jurisdiction of the Office of Inspector General,” said DOL-OIG Special Agent in Charge Jonathan Mellone.  “The seventy convictions obtained in this investigation send a clear message that public corruption will not be tolerated.  We are committed to working closely with our law enforcement partners to investigate those who exploit governmental programs and the American workers.”

    “IRS-CI will continually use its unique expertise in tax and finance to find leverage in assisting with complex investigations,” said IRS-CI Special Agent in Charge Harry T. Chavis.  “We are proud to build on our law enforcement partnerships to continue to bring criminals to justice.”

    According to information contained in court filings and public court proceedings, including as proven at trial:

    NYCHA is the largest public housing authority in the country, providing housing to 1 in 17 New Yorkers in 335 developments across the City and receiving over $1.5 billion in federal funding from the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development every year.  When repairs or construction work require the use of outside contractors, services must typically be purchased via a bidding process.  However, at all times relevant to the cases referenced above, when the value of a contract was under a certain threshold (up to $10,000), designated staff at NYCHA developments could hire a contractor of their choosing without soliciting multiple bids.  This “no-bid” process was faster than the general NYCHA procurement process, and selection of the contractor required approval of only the designated staff at the development where the work was to be performed.

    The defendants, all of whom were NYCHA employees during the time of the relevant conduct, demanded and received cash in exchange for NYCHA contracts by either requiring contractors to pay up front in order to be awarded the contracts or requiring payment after the contractor finished the work and needed a NYCHA employee to sign off on the completed job so the contractor could receive payment from NYCHA.  The defendants typically demanded approximately 10% to 20% of the contract value—between $500 and $2,000 depending on the size of the contract—but some defendants demanded even higher amounts.

    *                *                *

    Mr. Clayton praised the outstanding investigative work of DOI, HUD-OIG, HSI, DOL-OIG, and IRS-CI, which work together collaboratively as part of the HSI Document and Benefit Fraud Task Force, as well as the special agents and task force officers of the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Southern District of New York.  Mr. Clayton also expressed appreciation for the cooperation and support of NYCHA’s senior executive leadership.

    These cases are handled by the Office’s Public Corruption Unit. Assistant U.S. Attorneys Jerry J. Fang, Jacob R. Fiddelman, Meredith Foster, Catherine Ghosh, and Justin Horton are in charge of the prosecutions, and Assistant U.S. Attorneys Emily Deininger, Jane Kim, Benjamin Burkett, Matthew J. King, and Amanda C. Weingarten also handled individual cases.

    Contact

    Nicholas Biase, Shelby Wratchford
    (212) 637-2600

    U.S. Attorney’s Office, Southern District of New York
    Public Corruption Press Release Number: 25-244

    Sources: Justice.gov , Big New York news BigNY.com
    Midtown Tribune News


    #NYCHA #BriberyCase #NewYorkCity

    Midtown Tribune Independent USA news from New York

  • Trump DOJ Moves to Strike Down Biden’s 2024 EPA Particulate Matter Rule in D.C. Circuit Court

    Trump DOJ Moves to Strike Down Biden’s 2024 EPA Particulate Matter Rule in D.C. Circuit Court

    USA news EPA

    On November 26, 2025, the Justice Department’s Environment and Natural Resources Division filed a brief with the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit conceding that the EPA’s 2024 air quality standard for particulate matter—issued under the Biden administration—violated the Clean Air Act by bypassing the required thorough scientific review and using an unlawful regulatory shortcut. The Trump administration argues that vacating the costly and restrictive rule will restore legal compliance, protect Americans from burdensome regulations that may cause more economic harm than environmental benefit, and reaffirm the EPA’s obligation to base air-quality decisions on complete science rather than expedited procedures.

    Justice Department’s Environment and Natural Resources Division Highlights
    to D.C. Appeals Court the Illegality of 2024 EPA RuleShare right caret

    For Immediate Release

    Earlier this week, the Justice Department’s Environment and Natural Resources Division (ENRD) urged the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit to void the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)’s 2024 air quality standard for particulate matter, because EPA recognizes that it took an unlawful regulatory shortcut in imposing the rule.

    The Clean Air Act requires the EPA to conduct a thorough review of the underlying science before revising an air quality standard. Under the previous administration, the EPA decided it could not be bothered to do the science, so it took an illegal regulatory shortcut to adopt a stifling and costly national air quality standard for particulate matter through a truncated reconsideration process.

    Under President Donald J. Trump’s Administration, the EPA has renewed its commitment to following the law. ENRD’s filing this week concedes the illegality of the 2024 rule. During the Biden Administration, EPA violated the Clean Air Act by issuing its rule without a thorough review of the science and without considering the costs of its shortcut. Discarding the rule would bring EPA back into compliance with the Clean Air Act and protect Americans from burdensome environmental standards that may ultimately do more harm than good. 

    November 26, 2025 Office of Public Affairs


    Environment and Natural Resources Division

    Press Release Number: 25-1118

    Sources: Justice.gov , Midtown Tribune News

    Midtown Tribune Independent USA news from New York