logo
Maine governor comes face to face with Canadian travel fears

Maine governor comes face to face with Canadian travel fears

Yahoo12 hours ago

Maine's governor was confronted on Tuesday with the reality of how fearful some New Brunswickers are about visiting the United States while U.S. President Donald Trump is in the White House.
Janet Mills was in Fredericton for the second day of a tour through Atlantic Canada, hoping to reverse — or at least slow — a steep decline in the number of tourists crossing the border to visit Maine.
She and Premier Susan Holt delivered a joint ode to cross-border connections to a Fredericton Chamber of Commerce audience largely concerned about the impact of tariffs on their businesses.
But two questions from participants brought into sharp relief how immigration raids and the rolling back of trans rights is scaring some Canadians away from U.S. visits.
"A lot of members of the queer community — a lot of Canadians feel unsafe, Canadians who are 2SLGBTQI+ absolutely feel unsafe going there," said Vivian Myers-Jones, a member of the Saint John Pride board.
"It's a terrifying thing going down there right now."
Myers-Jones plans to travel to Bangor this weekend for Pride events there as part of a partnership between organizers in the two cities, but said many other members of the community are afraid to go.
Another member of the audience, business owner David Dennis, said his Venezuelan-born wife vetoed a planned trip to Maine this year despite his attempts to assure her that having Canadian citizenship would protect her at the border.
"Her fellow countrymen had been targeted for deportation and her comment was, 'I'm not going to the States this year,'" he told the two political leaders.
WATCH | 'It's a terrifying thing, going down there': Premier, governor hear concerns:
Even before the question-and-answer session, Holt herself used the U.S. political situation to encourage New Brunswickers to travel within the province this summer — as she has been since the Trump administration first announced tariffs on Canadian exports.
"Lots of people don't feel safe in the U.S. right now and for good reason, and until that changes I think the climate for visitors will be difficult," she said.
Mills said Maine has among the lowest crime rates in the U.S. and Canadians should feel secure hiking, skiing, swimming and shopping there.
"You can do that safely," she said.
She acknowledged as governor she has no control over how the U.S. Border Patrol or Immigration and Customs Enforcement operate in the state.
"But for the most part, they're busy in other places. They know that the relationships between Calais and St. Stephen, Madawaska and Edmundston, are sacred, and I don't think they want to damage those relationships either," she said.
After the 90-minute session wrapped up, Mills approached Dennis while he was speaking to reporters and hugged him.
"Tell your wife we'll keep her safe," she said.
The governor said she could understand Canadian angst "when you hear one or two stories on a 4,000-mile border. It can be scary and people have a right to feel anxiety. But tens of thousands of people are crossing the border every day."
She called New Brunswick's multiple border crossings with Maine "the safest places in the world to cross an international border."
Holt acknowledged that Mills opposes Trump's policies, even challenging them in court.
But she said the governor's assurances that federal immigration crackdowns are happening far from Maine won't persuade everyone.
"Not knowing where they're going to be next makes it a really uncertain environment for anyone who feels they might be targeted [by] ICE," Holt said.
Visits by New Brunswickers to Maine have been down by about one-third this year compared to last year.
Holt is spending this week travelling around New Brunswick with Tourism Minister Isabelle Thériault to promote various destinations within the province.

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Trump lawyer and DOJ enforcer faces confirmation hearing for federal judgeship
Trump lawyer and DOJ enforcer faces confirmation hearing for federal judgeship

CNN

time4 minutes ago

  • CNN

Trump lawyer and DOJ enforcer faces confirmation hearing for federal judgeship

President Donald Trump has nominated several of his personal attorneys to top legal posts in his administration, but his nomination of Emil Bove to the 3rd US Circuit Court of Appeals marks the first time he has selected one of his lawyers to serve on the federal bench. For the past six months, Bove has served as a high-ranking official in the Justice Department. In that short time, he has proven himself to be a reliable ally for the president and also been embroiled in a series of major controversies – including dropping federal charges against New York City Mayor Eric Adams; investigating officials who worked on cases related to January 6, 2021; and pursuing Trump's deportation goals in ways that prompted a whistleblower to allege Bove intended to ignore court orders and mislead federal judges. A Senate Judiciary Committee confirmation hearing Wednesday will be the first time Democratic lawmakers will have the chance to grill the reclusive Bove on his time at the Justice Department and his work for Trump. If confirmed, Bove would be one of roughly a dozen judges with the power to review federal cases being appealed in Pennsylvania, New Jersey, Delaware and the Virgin Islands. Despite his involvement in high-profile cases and controversies, Bove has mostly avoided the limelight. 'He has been right there but kind of in the shadows, he doesn't go on TV, he doesn't talk to the press,' a senior Justice Department official told CNN. 'He is a brilliant lawyer, he is just an amazing writer, critical thinker … he clerked for two rock star judges, he worked at Sullivan and Cromwell. He is a legit genius lawyer, but nobody knows who he is.' Bove graduated from Georgetown Law School in 2008 and then went on to spend a decade working as a federal prosecutor in the Southern District of New York, where he focused on international terrorism and narcotics cases. During that time Bove successfully brought narco-terrorism charges against Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro in 2020. He also prosecuted Ahmad Khan Rahimi, the man responsible for a 2016 pressure cooker bombing in New York that left 30 people injured. Rahimi was convicted and sentenced to life in prison. A former colleague who worked with Bove describes him as an 'a**-kicker … he is whip smart, has a high level of curiosity, is naturally intelligent, and extremely effective.' 'I wouldn't want to be one of his adversaries,' they said. Bove joined Trump's legal team in 2023 and worked on three of Trump's criminal cases over the span of roughly 18 months. He sat second chair, alongside now-Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche, to represent Trump in his New York hush money trial. Trump was ultimately found guilty on 34 counts of falsifying business records in that case, which he is still appealing. He also worked on Trump's federal criminal cases related to alleged mishandling of classified documents and allegations of interfering with the 2020 election. Bove's resume has many of the hallmarks of a federal judge, but he has never served on the bench, and it is unclear how he would rule on major issues. 'He is completely empathic and fair – he is very strategic and thoughtful about applying law to the facts. He is a brilliant writer and critical legal thinker. He will make opinions that come out of the third circuit tighter and better,' the senior Justice Department official said. But some Senate Democrats are not convinced and want to focus Wednesday's hearing on Bove's controversial actions while at the Trump Justice Department. Just hours after Trump took office, Bove was tapped to assume the powerful position of interim deputy attorney general – the No. 2 job at the Justice Department, which had him running the sprawling agency while Attorney General Pam Bondi and Deputy Attorney General Blanche were awaiting confirmation. His brief tenure has earned him many detractors as he tried to reshape the department to align with Trump's vision and clashed with career officials. One of Bove's first actions at the department was to issue a memo threatening to prosecute state and local officials who resist the administration's federal immigration crackdown. 'The administration had a directive to depoliticize the department. He was met with instant resistance from entrenched bureaucrats who are not accustomed to change,' his former colleague told CNN. 'He was there to execute a mission and institute policy – he was not there to make friends.' He then ordered the firing of eight senior officials and sent a memo demanding information about all current and former employees who had any involvement in January 6 investigations. The request became a point of contention between the FBI and DOJ, sparking two lawsuits that aimed to stop the collection or release of any such information, saying that its release would put FBI employees in danger. His most high-profile controversy has been dropping federal corruption charges against Adams. Adams was charged in September 2024 with five federal charges of bribery, wire fraud and conspiracy and soliciting campaign contributions from foreign nationals. In a memo to prosecutors in February, Bove cited two reasons as to why the case should be dropped: It had been tainted by publicity, and it was preventing Adams from doing his job, which included helping Trump with his immigration crackdown. Federal prosecutors at first rebuffed his demand to drop the case, and some quit in protest, including the interim US Attorney in Manhattan, Danielle Sassoon, and the acting chief of the public integrity section of the department. Bove ended up personally arguing for the case to be dismissed. Judge Dale Ho ultimately agreed to do so in April 2025. Bove's handling of the Adams case has been the focus of many of the objections to his judicial nomination. Even the conservative The Wall Street Journal Editorial Board wrote Tuesday, '… his recent handling of the case against New York May Eric Adams doesn't inspire confidence.' Justice Connection, a coalition of former Justice Department officials, released a video on Monday with statements from formal federal prosecutors warning the public of Bove's alleged unlawful practices. Ryan Crosswell, a federal prosecutor for more than a decade, was one of the lawyers who resigned over the case. 'We don't bring charges or dismiss them based on political loyalties. Emil Bove asked us to base a prosecutorial decision not on the facts, not on the law, but on a political calculation,' Crosswell says in the video. 'He took on a hard job the first five weeks of the administration doing what the president was elected to do,' said the senior Justice Department official. 'Whether someone is qualified to be a judge is not determined by what they did over five-to-six-week period of administration.' Bove has also drawn scrutiny for his approach to executing the president's aggressive goals on immigration. On Tuesday, Erez Reuveni, the former acting deputy director for the Office of Immigration Litigation, sent a whistleblower letter to members of Congress and independent investigators in the executive branch regarding Bove's alleged conduct. Reuveni was an immigration attorney who lost his job after working on the case of mistakenly deported Kilmar Abrego Garcia. He complained internally about the department's lack of respect towards the court which ultimately led to him being removed. Reuveni also claims that Bove told prosecutors in a meeting in March that the Justice Department could ignore court orders, and that the department could tell the courts, 'f**k you.' In the wake of these controversies, the Justice Department points to accomplishments that have occurred under Bove's leadership, including securing the transfer of 29 cartel leaders to face charges in the US. Bove was also a part of the Justice Department team that worked with the DEA to execute the largest fentanyl seizure in history. But his former colleague says Bove's varied experience is what makes him perfect for the federal bench. 'He has seen it from both sides – he has worked in a federal prosecutors' office, he has worked at DOJ, and he worked in the private sector and defended people targeted by the federal government,' they said. 'He is attuned to overreach. He is exactly who you would want on federal bench.'

Trump again questions NATO's collective defense guarantee ahead of summit
Trump again questions NATO's collective defense guarantee ahead of summit

Associated Press

time6 minutes ago

  • Associated Press

Trump again questions NATO's collective defense guarantee ahead of summit

THE HAGUE, Netherlands (AP) — President Donald Trump on Wednesday once again raised questions about America's commitment to defend its allies should they come under attack as he prepared to join a NATO summit in the Netherlands. Just as he did during his first term in office, Trump suggested that his backing would depend on whether U.S. allies are spending enough on defense. He's demanded that European allies and Canada dedicate 5% of GDP to their security. On the eve of the meeting in The Hague, Trump told reporters aboard Air Force One that his commitment to Article 5 of NATO's founding treaty – the organization's collective security guarantee – 'depends on your definition.' 'There's numerous definitions of Article 5. You know that, right?' Trump said. 'But I'm committed to being their friends.' He signaled that he would give a more precise definition of what Article 5 means to him once he is at the summit. As a candidate in 2016, Trump suggested that he as president would not necessarily heed the alliance's mutual defense guarantee. In March this year, he expressed uncertainty that NATO would come to the United States' defense if needed. What Article 5 says Article 5 is the foundation stone on which the 32-member North Atlantic Treaty Organization is built. It states that an armed attack against one or more of the members shall be considered an attack against all members. It also states that if such an armed attack occurs, each member would take, individually and in concert with others, 'such action as it deems necessary, including the use of armed force, to restore and maintain the security of the North Atlantic area.'' That security guarantee is the reason previously neutral Finland and Sweden sought to join NATO after Russia launched its full-scale invasion of Ukraine in 2022 and why Ukraine itself and other countries in Europe also want in. When it has been invoked Article 5 was only invoked once, in the wake of the September 11, 2001, terror attacks on the United States, paving the way for NATO's biggest ever operation in Afghanistan. But NATO allies have also taken collective defense measures, including joining the U.S. to fight the Islamic State group in Syria, Iraq and Afghanistan, as well as help keep the peace in the Balkans. The Three Musketeers-like pledge of all for one, one for all, is at the heart of NATO's deterrent effect. To question it too loudly might invite an adversary to test it. European officials have said that Russia is planning to do just that. The impact of Article 5 on Ukraine NATO's credibility hinges on Article 5 and its commitment to offer membership to any European country that can contribute to security in Europe and North America. But Ukraine, currently in the middle of war with Russia, might oblige all 32 member countries to spring to its defense militarily, potentially igniting a wider war with a nuclear-armed country. Trump is vetoing its membership for the foreseeable future. Article 5 becomes problematic when the territory of a member is unclear. For instance, Russian forces entered Georgia in August 2008, a few months after NATO leaders first promised the country it would join, along with Ukraine. Georgia's NATO application is still pending but seems unlikely for many years. Russia continues to occupy large swaths of Ukraine and other parts are contested, meaning that its borders cannot be easily defined.

Trump again questions NATO's collective defense guarantee ahead of summit
Trump again questions NATO's collective defense guarantee ahead of summit

Washington Post

time6 minutes ago

  • Washington Post

Trump again questions NATO's collective defense guarantee ahead of summit

THE HAGUE, Netherlands — President Donald Trump on Wednesday once again raised questions about America's commitment to defend its allies should they come under attack as he prepared to join a NATO summit in the Netherlands. Just as he did during his first term in office, Trump suggested that his backing would depend on whether U.S. allies are spending enough on defense. He's demanded that European allies and Canada dedicate 5% of GDP to their security. On the eve of the meeting in The Hague, Trump told reporters aboard Air Force One that his commitment to Article 5 of NATO's founding treaty – the organization's collective security guarantee – 'depends on your definition.' 'There's numerous definitions of Article 5. You know that, right?' Trump said. 'But I'm committed to being their friends.' He signaled that he would give a more precise definition of what Article 5 means to him once he is at the summit. As a candidate in 2016, Trump suggested that he as president would not necessarily heed the alliance's mutual defense guarantee. In March this year, he expressed uncertainty that NATO would come to the United States' defense if needed. Article 5 is the foundation stone on which the 32-member North Atlantic Treaty Organization is built. It states that an armed attack against one or more of the members shall be considered an attack against all members. It also states that if such an armed attack occurs, each member would take, individually and in concert with others, 'such action as it deems necessary, including the use of armed force, to restore and maintain the security of the North Atlantic area.'' That security guarantee is the reason previously neutral Finland and Sweden sought to join NATO after Russia launched its full-scale invasion of Ukraine in 2022 and why Ukraine itself and other countries in Europe also want in. Article 5 was only invoked once, in the wake of the September 11, 2001, terror attacks on the United States, paving the way for NATO's biggest ever operation in Afghanistan. But NATO allies have also taken collective defense measures, including joining the U.S. to fight the Islamic State group in Syria, Iraq and Afghanistan, as well as help keep the peace in the Balkans. The Three Musketeers-like pledge of all for one, one for all, is at the heart of NATO's deterrent effect. To question it too loudly might invite an adversary to test it. European officials have said that Russia is planning to do just that. NATO's credibility hinges on Article 5 and its commitment to offer membership to any European country that can contribute to security in Europe and North America. But Ukraine, currently in the middle of war with Russia , might oblige all 32 member countries to spring to its defense militarily, potentially igniting a wider war with a nuclear-armed country. Trump is vetoing its membership for the foreseeable future. Article 5 becomes problematic when the territory of a member is unclear. For instance, Russian forces entered Georgia in August 2008, a few months after NATO leaders first promised the country it would join, along with Ukraine. Georgia's NATO application is still pending but seems unlikely for many years. Russia continues to occupy large swaths of Ukraine and other parts are contested, meaning that its borders cannot be easily defined.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store