Trump Considers Federal Oversight of D.C. After Former DOGE Staffer Attack
'He went through a bad situation, to put it mildly, and there's too much of it. We're going to do something about it,' Trump said, according to NPR. He added that the intervention might involve activating the National Guard 'maybe very quickly, too.'
Trump pointed to the city's crime rate as a reason for possible federal oversight.
'I could show you a chart comparing D.C. to other locations, and you're not going to want to see what it looks like,' he said, according to Fox News.
'We want to have a great, safe capital, and we're going to have it. And that includes cleanliness. And it includes other things. We have a capital that's very unsafe.'
Trump said he is exploring whether Congress could overturn the District of Columbia Home Rule Act, passed in the 1970s, which granted D.C. limited self-governance.
'We have to run D.C. This has to be the best-run place in the country, not the worst-run place in the country,' Trump added.
'And it has so much potential, and we're going to take care of it. You're going to be safe. You're going to be safe walking down streets. You're not going to get mugged.'
Trump's comments come amid rising concerns over public safety in the nation's capital, with some conservative leaders calling for increased federal oversight and accountability in high-crime areas.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
a minute ago
- Yahoo
Europe says US-Russia summit this week cannot decide on Ukraine land swaps
BRUSSELS (AP) — Ukraine and its backers in Europe insist that the United States and Russia cannot decide on land swaps behind their backs at a summit this week, but the Europeans concede that Moscow is unlikely to give up control of Ukrainian land it holds. Ahead of the summit in Alaska on Friday, U.S. President Donald Trump suggested that a peace deal could include 'some swapping of territories,' but the Europeans see no sign that Russia will offer anything to swap. Europeans and Ukrainians so far are not invited to the summit. European Union foreign ministers are meeting on Monday following talks on Ukraine among U.S. and European security advisors over the weekend. They are wary that President Vladimir Putin will try to claim a political victory by portraying Ukraine as inflexible. Concerns have mounted in Europe and Ukraine that Kyiv may be pressured into giving up land or accepting other curbs on its sovereignty. Ukraine and its European allies reject the notion that Putin should lay claim to any territory even before agreeing to a ceasefire. 'As we work towards a sustainable and just peace, international law is clear: All temporarily occupied territories belong to Ukraine,' EU foreign policy chief Kaja Kallas said on the eve of the ministerial meeting. 'A sustainable peace also means that aggression cannot be rewarded,' Kallas said. On Sunday, Chancellor Friedrich Merz said Germany cannot accept that territorial issues in Ukraine would be discussed or decided by Russia and the United States 'over the heads' of Europeans or Ukrainians. Still, it's hard to ignore the reality on the ground. Russia in 2022 illegally annexed the Donetsk and Luhansk regions in Ukraine's east, and Kherson and Zaporizhzhia in the south, even though it doesn't fully control them. It also occupies the Crimean Peninsula, which it seized in 2014. On the 1,000-kilometer (620-mile) front line, Russia's bigger army has made slow but costly progress with its summer offensive. The relentless pounding of urban areas has killed more than 12,000 Ukrainian civilians, according to U.N. estimates. 'In the end, the issue of the fact that the Russians are controlling at this moment, factually, a part of Ukraine has to be on the table" in any peace talks after the Alaska summit, NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte said on CBS on Sunday. Rutte said Ukraine's Western backers 'can never accept that in a legal sense,' but he suggested that they might tacitly acknowledge Russian control. He compared it to the way that the U.S. hosted the diplomatic missions of Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania from 1940 to 1991, 'acknowledging that the Soviet Union was controlling those territories, but never accepting (it) in a legal sense.' Giving up claim to any territory, especially without a ceasefire agreement first, would be almost impossible for Zelenskyy to sell at home after thousands of troops have died defending their land. Ultimately, Putin is seen as being not so much interested in land itself, but rather in a more 'Russia-friendly' Ukraine with a malleable government that would be unlikely to try to join NATO, just as pro-Russian regions in Georgia stymied that country's hopes of becoming a member. Zelenskyy insists that a halt to fighting on the front line should be the starting point for negotiations, and the Europeans back him. They say that any future land swaps should be for Ukraine to decide and not be a precondition for a ceasefire. Claims on land could also be part of negotiations on the kind of security guarantees that Ukraine might receive to ensure another war does not break out. The Europeans believe Kyiv's best defense is strong armed forces to deter Russia from striking again. They insist there should be no restrictions on the size of Ukraine's army and the equipment, arms and ammunition it can possess or sell. Beyond that, they say Ukraine should not be constrained in its choice of joining the EU or being forced to become a neutral country. The Trump administration has already taken Ukraine's membership of NATO off the table for the foreseeable future. ___ Associated Press writer Dasha Litvinova contributed. Solve the daily Crossword
Yahoo
a minute ago
- Yahoo
Apple faces lawsuit over alleged theft of mobile wallet technology for Apple Pay
Apple is currently facing a lawsuit filed in the Northern District of Georgia, Atlanta Division, by Fintiv, which accuses the tech giant of illicitly acquiring mobile wallet technology used to develop its payment service, Apple Pay. Fintiv is has been providing patented digital solutions for merchant payments, cross-border transactions, and digital asset tokenisation, with more than 100 ecosystems deployed in over 35 countries. The legal proceedings, initiated by Kasowitz on behalf of Fintiv, claim that Apple was involved in a pattern of criminal activities, including wire fraud and misappropriation of trade secrets. These actions were allegedly part of a scheme to appropriate Fintiv's mobile wallet technology, which has been a factor in the success and revenue generation of Apple Pay. The lawsuit details that over a decade ago, Apple purportedly sought a business partnership with CorFire, Fintiv's predecessor, under the guise of licencing their mobile wallet technology. During 2011 and 2012, Apple is said to have attended meetings with CorFire, receiving confidential information under NDAs with the intention of forming a licencing agreement. Contrary to this, the lawsuit alleges that Apple used this information for its own benefit, subsequently launching Apple Pay in 2014 with features that Fintiv claims were derived from CorFire's technology. Furthermore, the complaint accuses Apple of creating an enterprise with banks and payment networks to utilise the contested technology in processing Apple Pay transactions, resulting in substantial annual earnings for the involved parties. The complaint alleged: "By modifying Apple Pay for use on four separate categories of its devices, Apple has repeated and compounded its theft by knowingly utilising Fintiv's stolen technology in the hundreds of millions of iPhones, iPads, Apple Watches and MacBooks it has sold worldwide." This legal challenge comes on the heels of a separate case that was dismissed last month, where Apple, Visa, and Mastercard were accused of engaging in anti-competitive payment practices. According to the lawsuit, Apple allegedly received a "cash bribe" from Visa and Mastercard in exchange for not competing with them in the payment industry, resulting in transaction costs. "Apple faces lawsuit over alleged theft of mobile wallet technology for Apple Pay " was originally created and published by Electronic Payments International, a GlobalData owned brand. The information on this site has been included in good faith for general informational purposes only. It is not intended to amount to advice on which you should rely, and we give no representation, warranty or guarantee, whether express or implied as to its accuracy or completeness. You must obtain professional or specialist advice before taking, or refraining from, any action on the basis of the content on our site. Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data
CNBC
2 minutes ago
- CNBC
What Trump's Nvidia and AMD China deal means for the world
Nvidia and AMD have agreed to share some of their revenue from sales to China with the U.S. government, according to several reports, sparking debate about whether the move could impact the chip giants' business and whether Washington might seek out similar deals. In exchange for 15% of revenues from the chip sales, the two semiconductor firms will receive export licenses to sell Nvidia's H20 and AMD's MI308 chips in China, according to the Financial Times. "We follow rules the U.S. government sets for our participation in worldwide markets. While we haven't shipped H20 to China for months, we hope export control rules will let America compete in China and worldwide," Nvidia said in a statement to NBC News. "America cannot repeat 5G and lose telecommunication leadership. America's AI tech stack can be the world's standard if we race." CNBC has reached out to AMD and the White House for comment. The arrangement crafted by U.S. President Donald Trump's administration is "unusual", analysts told CNBC, but underscores the transactional nature of the current White House leader. Meanwhile, investors see the move as broadly positive for both Nvidia and AMD, which once more secure access to the Chinese market. Nvidia's H20 is a chip that has been specifically created to meet export requirements to China. It was previously banned under export curbs but the company last month said that it expected to receive licenses to send the product to China. Also in July, AMD said that it would resume exports of its MI308 chips. At the time, there was no suggestion that the resumption of sales to China would come with conditions or any kind of revenue forfeiture, and the step was celebrated by markets because of the billions of dollars worth of potential sales to China that were back on the table. On Monday, Nvidia and AMD shares traded only slightly lower in premarket trading, highlighting how investors believe the latest development is not a major negative for the companies. "From an investor perspective, it's still a net positive, 85% of the revenue is better than zero," Ben Barringer, global technology analyst at Quilter Cheviot, told CNBC. "The question will be whether Nvidia and AMD adjust their prices by 15% to account for the levy, but ultimately it's better that they can sell into the market rather than hand the market over entirely to Huawei." Huawei is Nvidia and AMD's closest Chinese rival. Uncertainty nevertheless still looms for both U.S. companies over the longer term. "In the short term, the deal gives both companies some certainties for their exports to China. For the long term, we don't know if the U.S. government may want to take a bigger cut from their China business especially if their sales to China keep growing," George Chen, partner and co-chair of the digital practice at The Asia Group, told CNBC. Multiple analysts told CNBC that the deal is "unusual," but almost par for the course for Trump. "It's a good development, albeit a strange one, and feels like the sort of arrangement you might expect from President Trump, who is a deal-maker at heart. He's willing to yield, but only if he gets something in return, and this certainly sets an unusual precedent," Barringer said. Neil Shah, partner at Counterpoint Research, said the revenue cut is equivalent to an "indirect tariff at source". The Futurum Group CEO Daniel Newman also posted on X on Sunday that the move is a "sort of 'tax' for doing business in China." But such deals are unlikely to be cut for other companies. "I don't anticipate it extending to other sectors that are just as important to the U.S. economy like software and services," Nick Patience, practice lead for AI at The Futurum Group, told CNBC. The U.S. sees semiconductors as a strategic technology, given they underpin so many other tools like artificial intelligence, consumer electronics and even military applications. The U.S. has therefore put chips under an export control regime unlike that of any other product. "Semiconductor is a very unique business and the pay-to-play tactic may work for Nvidia and AMD because it's very much about getting export approval from the U.S. gov," The Asia Group's Chen said. "Other business like Apple and Meta can be more complicated when it comes to their business models and services for China." Semiconductors have become a highly sensitive geopolitical topic. Over the last two weeks, China has raised concerns about the security of Nvidia's chips. Late last month, Chinese regulators asked Nvidia to "clarify" reports about potential security vulnerabilities and "backdoors." Nvidia rejected the possibility that its chips have any "backdoors" that would allow anyone to access or control them. On Sunday, Nvidia again denied that its H20 semiconductors have backdoors after accusations from a social media account affiliated with Chinese state media. China's state-run newspaper Global Times slammed Washington's tactics, citing an expert. "This approach means that the US government has repudiated its original security justification to pressure US chip makers to secure export licenses to China through economic leverage," the Global Times article said. The Chinese government is yet to comment on the reported revenue agreement. Trump's deal with Nvidia and AMD will likely stir mixed feelings in China. On the one hand, China will be unhappy with the arrangement. On the other hand, Chinese firms will likely want to get their hands on these chips in order to continue to advance their own AI capabilities. "For China, it is a conundrum as they need those chips to advance their AI ambitions but also the fee to the US government could make it costlier and there is a doubt of US "backdoors" considering US has agreed for chipmakers to supply," Counterpoint Research's Shah said.
