Congress plans to release Epstein files to public after it gets them on Friday: report
At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.
The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.
Your support makes all the difference.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Auto Blog
an hour ago
- Auto Blog
40% of Americans Say They'd Buy a Chinese Car — But Tariffs Block the Way
By signing up I agree to the Terms of Use and acknowledge that I have read the Privacy Policy . You may unsubscribe from email communication at anytime. View post: This 800-HP Hatchback Hits 62 MPH in 2 Seconds — But You Can Only Drive It in Gran Turismo But They Won't Be Able To Anytime Soon Some Chinese automakers have expressed interest in selling cars in the United States—GAC has even made occasional appearances at the Detroit auto show—but aside from the odd China-assembled Volvo or Buick, we haven't seen a Chinese car on sale in the U.S. Trade policies hostile to imported vehicles—especially those from China—will keep it that way for the time being. But many Americans are ready to consider Chinese cars, and dealers still anticipate a Chinese brand entering the U.S. market despite tariffs. Those are some of the takeaways from a new report by the David Cantin Group (DCG) and Kaiser Associates. The report surveyed car buyers and found that 40% would consider buying a Chinese-made vehicle. Disconnect Between Demand And Political Reality It's unlikely that American consumers will have the opportunity to buy Chinese cars, though. Remarkably, 75% of dealers surveyed expected a Chinese brand to begin selling cars in the U.S. within a year. As the report notes, that's unlikely in the current political climate. Cars have been a major target of the Trump Administration's trade war, with even vehicles produced in countries friendly to the U.S.—such as Canada, Japan, and the European nations—subjected to heavy tariffs or tariff threats. Relations with China are much cooler, and protectionist policies targeting Chinese cars were already in place under the Biden Administration, which quadrupled tariffs on them to over 100%. The Biden policies were intended to head off an encroachment of the Chinese auto industry that's already underway in Europe. As the report notes, Chinese brands doubled their European Union market share in the first half of 2025, with sales up 91% year-over year. BYD also outsold Tesla in Europe this spring. The report called Trump's re-election a 'major blow' to Chinese automakers, but added that a 'controlled rollout' of Chinese-made vehicles under the current administration was 'plausible.' It's unclear what conditions would set that rollout in motion, given the Trump Administration's hostility to foreign trade. Even importing cars from Mexico, which once seemed like a potential workaround for Chinese automakers under Biden, is likely no longer viable given Trump's trade spat with that country. Autoblog Newsletter Autoblog brings you car news; expert reviews and exciting pictures and video. Research and compare vehicles, too. Sign up or sign in with Google Facebook Microsoft Apple By signing up I agree to the Terms of Use and acknowledge that I have read the Privacy Policy . You may unsubscribe from email communication at anytime. What's The Appeal? American consumers' interest in Chinese cars is tried to concerns about affordability, the report indicated. 'Affordability is reshaping purchase decisions, driving interest in cheaper Chinese vehicles, and making any manufacturer decision to pass on tariff costs to consumers virtually impossible without the risk of losing market share,' DCG president Brian Gordon told Autoweek. And while Chinese brands, benefitting from subsidies, have released affordable EVs like the BYD Seagull, American automakers are still focused on expensive pickup trucks even as consumer demand shifts. 'We've reached peak truck, as consumers finally push back and demand more vehicle options, particularly sedans, that are more affordable, leaving some dealers struggling with their product mix,' the report says. While some relief is in sight in the form of the 2026 Nissan Leaf and returning Chevrolet Bolt EV, it will take some time to undo the damage of truck-centric product plans at the Detroit Three. About the Author Stephen Edelstein View Profile
Reuters
an hour ago
- Reuters
Trump administration not eyeing equity in companies that are increasing US investment, WSJ reports
Aug 21 (Reuters) - The Trump administration is considering taking equity stakes in companies receiving funds from the 2022 CHIPS Act but has no plans to seek shares in bigger semiconductor firms that are increasing their U.S. investments, the Wall Street Journal reported on Thursday, citing a government official. The development follows comments made by U.S. Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick, who on Tuesday said the government is continuing to work on the possibility of taking a 10% stake in troubled chipmaker Intel (INTC.O), opens new tab. However, the administration does not intend to take equity stakes in companies like TSMC ( opens new tab, which are ramping up investment, the official told the Journal. Businesses not increasing their commitments may need to offer equity to the government in exchange for subsidies. "The Commerce Department is not looking to take equity from TSMC and Micron," the official told WSJ. TSMC executives have already had discussions about giving back their subsidies if the administration asks to become a shareholder, according to the report. The White House and TSMC did not immediately respond to Reuters' requests for comment. TSMC, which counts Nvidia (NVDA.O), opens new tab and Apple (AAPL.O), opens new tab as key clients, announced plans for a $100 billion investment in the United States during an event with President Donald Trump at the White House in March. This investment is in addition to $65 billion committed for three manufacturing facilities in the state of Arizona. The U.S. Commerce Department, which oversees the $52.7 billion CHIPS Act, formally known as the CHIPS and Science Act, late last year finalized subsidies of $6.6 billion for TSMC to produce semiconductors in the United States. Besides Intel, Micron (MU.O), opens new tab, TSMC and Samsung ( opens new tab were among the biggest recipients of CHIPS Act funding. In the past, the U.S. government has taken stakes in companies during periods of economic uncertainty to provide financial support and restore confidence.
The Guardian
an hour ago
- The Guardian
Supreme court allows Trump officials to cut research millions in anti-DEI push
The Trump administration can slash hundreds of millions of dollars' worth of research funding in its push to cut federal diversity, equity and inclusion efforts, the supreme court decided on Thursday. The split court lifted a judge's order blocking $783m worth of cuts made by the National Institutes of Health to align with Donald Trump's priorities. The court split 5-4 on the decision. Chief Justice John Roberts was among those who would not have allowed the cuts, along with the court's three liberal justices. The high court did keep the Trump administration anti-DEI guidance on future funding blocked with a key vote from Justice Amy Coney Barrett, however. The decision marks the latest supreme court win for Trump and allows the administration to forge ahead with canceling hundreds of grants while the lawsuit continues to unfold. The plaintiffs, including states and public-health advocacy groups, have argued that the cuts will inflict 'incalculable losses in public health and human life'. The justice department, meanwhile, has said funding decisions should not be 'subject to judicial second-guessing' and efforts to promote policies referred to as DEI can 'conceal insidious racial discrimination'. The lawsuit addresses only part of the estimated $12bn of NIH research projects that have been cut, but in its emergency appeal, the Trump administration also took aim at nearly two dozen other times judges have stood in the way of its funding cuts. Solicitor general D John Sauer said judges shouldn't be considering those cases under an earlier supreme court decision that cleared the way for teacher-training program cuts that the administration also linked to DEI. He says they should go to federal claims court instead. Five conservative justices agreed, and Justice Neil Gorsuch wrote a short opinion in which he criticized lower-court judges for not adhering to earlier high court orders. 'All these interventions should have been unnecessary,' Gorsuch wrote. The plaintiffs, 16 Democratic state attorneys general and public-health advocacy groups had unsuccessfully argued that research grants are fundamentally different from the teacher-training contracts and could not be sent to claims court. They said that defunding studies midway though halts research, ruins data already collected and ultimately harms the country's potential for scientific breakthroughs by disrupting scientists' work in the middle of their careers. Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson wrote a lengthy dissent in which she criticized both the outcome and her colleagues' willingness to continue allowing the administration to use the court's emergency appeals process. 'This is Calvinball jurisprudence with a twist. Calvinball has only one rule: there are no fixed rules. We seem to have two: that one, and this administration always wins,' she wrote, referring to the fictional game in the comic strip Calvin and Hobbes. In June, US district judge William Young in Massachusetts had ruled that the cancellations were arbitrary and discriminatory. 'I've never seen government racial discrimination like this,' Young, an appointee of Republican president Ronald Reagan, said at a hearing. He later added: 'Have we no shame?' An appeals court had left Young's ruling in place.
