'Hero' policeman died saving lives, say NYC officials after skyscraper shooting
Full story: Four dead in shooting at New York City office building
Suspected lone gunman Shane Tamura, a 27-year-old from Nevada, also died from a self-inflicted gunshot wound, officials said. He had a "documented mental health history", and his potential motive is unknown. Tamura is believed to have shot Islam dead first as he entered the skyscraper at 345 Park Avenue. He went on to attack others, ascending to the building's 33rd floor before turning his gun on himself.A post on the New York Police Department (NYPD) account on X said Islam "represented the very best of our department", and said "he was protecting New Yorkers from danger when his life was tragically cut short today".In a press conference on Monday, the city's Police Commissioner Jessica Tisch said the late officer served in the NYPD's 47th District, in the Bronx.She said: "He was doing the job that we asked him to do. He put himself in harm's way. He made the ultimate sacrifice." Tisch continued: "He died as he lived - a hero."During the conference, Adams said the late officer was "a true-blue New Yorker, not only in a uniform he wore but in his spirit and energy of loving this city". The mayor said he had met Islam's family after the attack, and had expressed his admiration for the late officer, who had served in his job for more than three years. "This was his dad's only son," the mayor reflected. "I think about Jordan, my child, and it is unimaginable to experience a loss of this magnitude."Members of Islam's Bangladeshi community in the Bronx spent Monday evening visiting the late officer's home, which he shared with his family and parents, the New York Times reported.They described to the newspaper how Islam had migrated to the US and provided security for a school before becoming a policeman. They said their friend had been an active member of his mosque who had mentored young men in the area.One of Islam's mentees, Marjanul Karim, explained why Islam had moved from the school to work in a profession that was seen as less safe. "He wanted to leave behind a legacy for his family, something they could be proud of," Mr Karim said.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Telegraph
29 minutes ago
- Telegraph
Trump is wrong to pick a fight with Powell – but is right about interest rates
Visiting Scotland last week, Donald Trump used a joint press conference to mock Keir Starmer. He castigated Labour's policies on immigration, energy and much else. The Prime Minister sat awkwardly, sporting his trademark rictus grin. Trump has lately dished out plenty of public humiliation – not least aimed at Jerome Powell, chairman of the Federal Reserve. The president has put huge pressure on the Fed to lower interest rates, to boost US growth and ease interest payments on America's massive $36trn (£27.6trn) national debt. This jars badly with the conventional wisdom that central banks should be independent, allowing technocrat economists to set interest rates to bear down on inflation. That's far better for the economy in the long-run, but this precious independence is jeopardised when vote-hungry politicians seek to keep borrowing costs too low. Such independence has become an almost sacred policy concept over the last half century. And no central bank matters more than the Fed, which sets the course for monetary policy across the globe. Yet Trump, astonishingly, has lately called Powell a 'numbskull', a 'stubborn mule' and worse. On a recent Fed visit, he rebuked him over the cost of a refurbishment project – a potential pretext to sack Powell, which may not be legally possible, but which Trump often floats regardless. Between September and December last year, the Fed's committee of twelve rate-setters voted to lower the US benchmark interest rate three times from its post-Covid-peak of 5.25pc-5.5pc, in increments down to 4.25pc-4.5pc. But much to the president's frustration, rates have since stayed put. The Bank of England, meanwhile, has cut rates four times since last summer, including as recently as May, while the European Central Bank has enacted no less than eight eurozone rate reductions over the same period, the latest in June. Having held rates since the start of 2025, the Fed just did so again when governors met last Wednesday (although two Trump-appointees voted against, the biggest intra-Fed rate disagreement in thirty years). Fed policymakers are rightly worried about price pressures, with headline inflation hitting 3.7pc during the year to June, up from 2.4pc the previous month and well above the 2pc target. And Trump's era-defining slew of tariffs – taxes on imports into the US – means we could see a lot more inflation yet. With the President's three-month moratorium expiring this weekend, and tariffs now set to bite on some of America's largest trading partners, the Fed is understandably concerned. Powell insists the US economy is strong enough for the Fed to wait before further rate cuts, as we see if Trump's tariffs really do aggravate inflation. And last week's GDP numbers – a 3pc expansion from April to June – was certainly way above consensus forecasts, reversing a 0.5pc contraction during the first three months of the year, the worst quarterly performance since early 2022. This January to March shrinkage, though, was largely due to the huge rise in US imports as buyers sought to get ahead of Trump's expected tariff onslaught. And since 'liberation day' in April, when the President unveiled his tariffs on the White House lawn, imports into the US have plunged. This artificially boosted April to June GDP growth as the first-quarter trend unwound. Yes, consumer spending rose 1.4pc during the second quarter, outpacing the 0.5pc increase over the previous three months, supporting Powell's argument the economy is coping without further rate cuts. But 'final sales to private domestic purchasers', a key demand metric that the Fed watches closely, grew just 1.2pc over the latest quarter, slower than the 1.9pc increase between January and March. High mortgage rates are also holding back the housing market and related construction, as Trump relentlessly points out, with residential investment down 4.6pc during the second quarter. But that's part of a broader investment slump as business leaders look to see how the president's tariffs play out. For now, the market consensus is that the US economy is showing resilience, but more rate cuts may be justified as long as inflation isn't further provoked. So Trump's attacks on Powell are based on legitimate economic analysis. Yet his language is way over the top. Some say the president is picking headline-grabbing fights with the Fed chair to detract from mounting criticism over his handling of the Epstein files. I suspect he simply wants lower rates and, for now at least, Powell stands in his way. Ironically, it was Trump who appointed Powell in 2017. But having repeatedly called for him to resign, the president seems certain to replace him when Powell's term expires next May. In the meantime, Trump's ceaseless undermining of central bank independence is deeply damaging. Yes, the Fed has a 'dual mandate' to pursue both price stability and full employment, unlike the solely inflation-focussed aims of most other central banks. But while Trump's arguments may be technically valid, it should absolutely not be him making them, nor anyone else near the top of government. Given the tone he has set, though, Powell's successor will be seen as the president's lackey. And with US and global inflation far from tamed, that could end up being a serious problem. My general view is that central bank independence is far more important than any individual central banker. Andrew Bailey, for instance, has shown seriously bad judgement at the Bank of England – endlessly insisting post-Covid inflation would be 'transitory', for instance, while deriding those of us who correctly predicted otherwise. His appointment was a mistake, but he should stay, free from the threat politicians might remove him, until his term expires in March 2028. The same applies to Powell and far more so – he should serve his full term.
Daily Mail
an hour ago
- Daily Mail
Donald Trump tells Chuck Schumer to 'go to hell' as tensions escalate in senate nominee deal funding
President Donald Trump detonated a high-stakes Senate negotiation with an outburst on social media on Saturday night telling Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer to 'GO TO HELL' and abruptly ending talks over dozens of pending nominee confirmations. The president's Truth Social tirade came just hours before lawmakers were expected to strike a deal and depart for their month-long recess. Instead, the Senate adjourned in chaos after voting on only seven of the more than 60 nominees in limbo. 'Tell Schumer, who is under tremendous political pressure from within his own party, the Radical Left Lunatics, to GO TO HELL!' Trump wrote. 'Do not accept the offer, go home and explain to your constituents what bad people the Democrats are, and what a great job the Republicans are doing, and have done, for our Country. Have a great RECESS and, MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN!!!' The outburst from the president came just as Senate leaders thought they were closing in on a long-sought agreement to confirm the nominees before the August break. Instead, the Senate rapidly voted through just seven names before adjourning until September. One nominee did break through the gridlock however, Jeanine Pirro, the former Fox News personality and New York judge, was confirmed 50-45 as the US Attorney for the District of Columbia. The president's Truth Social tirade came just hours before lawmakers were expected to strike a deal and depart for their monthlong recess The high-profile appointment that drew fierce opposition from Democrats. Pirro has been serving in the role in an acting capacity since May but her appointment drew sharp criticism from House Democrats, who warned she would be a 'partisan tool' for the White House. 'Over the past decade, Ms. Pirro has consistently demonstrated that her loyalty lies with Donald Trump the person, not with the Constitution or the rule of law,' Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-MD) wrote in a letter to Senate leadership. Trump accused Schumer of demanding 'over One Billion Dollars' in return for advancing a limited slate of bipartisan nominees - a claim Schumer did not directly address but which derailed the fragile progress. The now-collapsed deal had been the product of marathon talks between Senate Majority Leader John Thune (R-SD), Schumer, and the White House. Both parties hoped to finalize a package that would greenlight Trump's nominees in exchange for Democrats' demands on National Institutes of Health (NIH) and foreign aid funding. The Senate held a rare weekend session as the two parties tried to work out the final details of a deal. But it was clear that there would be no agreement when Trump launched his attack on Schumer and told Republicans to pack it up and go home. Lawmakers had been expected to strike a deal before departing for their monthlong recess but the negotiations fell apart after Trump's online outburst Trump's Truth Social post blindsided negotiators and threw the entire Senate into disarray. 'This demand is egregious and unprecedented,' Trump wrote. 'It is political extortion, by any other name.' Schumer, speaking on the Senate floor hours later while flanked by a poster-sized copy of Trump's post, declared the negotiations dead and blamed the president directly. 'He took his ball, he went home, leaving Democrats and Republicans alike wondering what the hell happened,' Schumer said. 'Trump's all-caps tweet said it all. In a fit of rage, Trump threw in the towel.' Although Republicans and Democrats traded blame all weekend, there had been broad consensus that a deal was within reach. 'There were several different times where I think either or both sides maybe thought there was a deal,' said Thune. 'But in the end, we never got to a place where we had both sides agree to lock it in.' Democrats insisted their offer never changed, while Republicans claimed Schumer kept escalating his demands, especially by tying nominee confirmations to reversals of Trump's proposed spending claw backs. 'We've had three different deals since last night,' said Sen. Markwayne Mullin (R-OK). 'And every time it's been, every time it's 'I want more.' According to Mullin, Trump's dramatic post didn't catch the GOP off guard - the White House had been heavily involved in the negotiations from the start. 'They want to go out and say the President's being unrealistic,' Mullin said. 'But this was never about making a deal.' With the Senate now gone until September, Republican leaders are already threatening to change Senate rules to break the logjam when they return. 'I think they're desperately in need of change,' Thune said of Senate rules following the breakdown of negotiations. 'I think that the last six months have demonstrated that this process, nominations is broken. And so I expect there will be some good robust conversations about that.' Schumer responded sharply, warning that Republicans will need Democratic votes to fund the government this fall and that any unilateral rule changes would be a 'huge mistake'. 'Donald Trump tried to bully us, go around us, threaten us, call us names, but he got nothing,' Schumer said. It's the first time in recent history that the minority party hasn't allowed at least some quick confirmations. Thune has already kept the Senate in session for more days, and with longer hours, this year to try and confirm as many of Trump's nominees as possible. This latest standoff is only the most recent escalation in the decades-long battle over judicial and executive branch confirmations. But Democrats had little desire to give in without the spending cut reversals or some other incentive, even though they too were eager to skip town after several long months of work and bitter partisan fights over legislation. Since 2013, both parties have changed Senate rules to erode the 60-vote threshold for nominees. In 2013, Democrats changed Senate rules for lower court judicial nominees to remove the 60-vote threshold for confirmations as Republicans blocked President Barack Obama's judicial picks. In 2017, Republicans did the same for Supreme Court nominees as Democrats tried to block Trump's nomination of Justice Neil Gorsuch. With Republicans unable to secure unanimous consent for Trump's nominees, each confirmation vote has required full roll calls, a grueling process that can take hours or days for each nominee. 'We have never seen nominees as flawed, as compromised, as unqualified as we have right now,' Schumer said. Trump has been demanding for weeks that Republicans cancel recess and grind through the nominations, but his fury seems to have undone whatever deal was on the table. Democrats say they remain open to resuming talks in September.
The Guardian
2 hours ago
- The Guardian
Republicans slam Trump's firing of Bureau of Labor Statistics chief
Senior Republican lawmakers are condemning the decision of their party leader, Donald Trump, to fire the leading US labor market statistician after a report that showed the national economy added just 73,000 jobs – far fewer than expected – in July. The disappointing figures – coupled with a downward revision of the two previous months amounting to 258,000 fewer jobs and data showing that economic output and consumer spending slowed in the first half of the year – point to an overall economic deterioration in the US. Trump defended his decision to fire US Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) commissioner Erika McEntarfer. Without evidence to back his claims, the president wrote on social media that were numbers were 'RIGGED in order to make the Republicans, and ME, look bad' and the US economy was, in fact, 'BOOMING' on his watch. But the firing of McEntarfer, who had been confirmed to her role in January 2024 during Joe Biden's presidency, has alarmed members of Trump's own party. 'If the president is firing the statistician because he doesn't like the numbers but they are accurate, then that's a problem,' said Wyoming Republican senator Cynthia Lummis. 'It's not the statistician's fault if the numbers are accurate and that they're not what the president had hoped for.' Lummis added that if the numbers are unreliable, the public should be told – but firing McEntarfer was 'kind of impetuous'. North Carolina senator Thom Tillis, a Republican, said: 'If she was just fired because the president or whoever decided to fire the director just … because they didn't like the numbers, they ought to grow up.' Kentucky senator Rand Paul, another Republican, questioned whether McEntarfer's firing was an effective way of improving the numbers. 'We have to look somewhere for objective statistics,' he said. 'When the people providing the statistics are fired, it makes it much harder to make judgments that you know, the statistics won't be politicized.' According to NBC News, Paul said his 'first impression' was that 'you can't really make the numbers different or better by firing the people doing the counting'. Tillis and Paul were both opponents of Trump's recent economic legislative package, which the president dubbed the 'big, beautiful bill'. But Alaska senator Lisa Murkowski, a Republican who supported the legislation after winning substantial economic support for her state, remarked that the jobs numbers could not be trusted – and 'that's the problem'. 'And when you fire people, then it makes people trust them even less,' she said. William Beach, a former BLS commissioner appointed by Trump in his first presidency, posted on X that McEntarfer's firing was 'totally groundless'. He added that the dismissal set a dangerous precedent and undermined the BLS's statistical mission. Sign up to This Week in Trumpland A deep dive into the policies, controversies and oddities surrounding the Trump administration after newsletter promotion Beach also co-signed a letter by 'the Friends of the Bureau of Labor Statistics' that went further, accusing Trump of seeking to blame someone for bad news and calling the rationale for McEntarfer's firing 'without merit'. The letter asserted that the dismissal 'undermines the credibility of federal economic statistics that are a cornerstone of intelligent economic decision-making by businesses, families and policymakers'. The letter pointed out that the jobs tabulation process 'is decentralized by design to avoid opportunities for interference', adding that US official statistics 'are the gold standard globally'. 'When leaders of other nations have politicized economic data, it has destroyed public trust in all official statistics and in government science,' the letter said. Democrats have also hit out at Trump's decision. Vermont senator Bernie Sanders described it as 'the sign of an authoritarian type', and he said the decision would make it harder for the American people 'to believe the information that comes out of the government'. Paul Schroeder, executive director of the Council of Professional Associations on Federal Statistics, described the president's allegation against McEntarfer as 'very damaging and outrageous'. He said: 'Not only does it undermine the integrity of federal economic statistics, but it also politicizes data which need to remain independent and trustworthy. This action is a grave error by the administration and one that will have ramifications for years to come.'
