Brazil Investigates Alleged Insider Trading Tied to Trump Tariff News
Justice Alexandre de Moraes issued the order on Monday in response to a request from Brazil's attorney general based on local media reports of significant foreign exchange transactions shortly before and after the official tariffs announcement on July 9. The attorney general said the currency movements suggested 'possible use of privileged information (insider trading) by individuals or legal entities.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
NBC News
22 minutes ago
- NBC News
EPA moves to repeal finding that underpins current limits on greenhouse gas pollution from cars, factories, power plants
President Donald Trump's administration on Tuesday proposed revoking a scientific finding that has long been the central basis for U.S. action to regulate greenhouse gas emissions and fight climate change. The proposed Environmental Protection Agency rule rescinds a 2009 declaration that determined that carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases endanger public health and welfare. The 'endangerment finding' is the legal underpinning of a host of climate regulations under the Clean Air Act for motor vehicles, power plants and other pollution sources that are heating the planet. EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin announced the proposed rule change on a podcast ahead of an official announcement set for Tuesday in Indiana. Repealing the endangerment finding 'will be the largest deregulatory action in the history of America,' Zeldin said on the Ruthless podcast. Zeldin called for a rewrite of the endangerment finding in March as part of a series of environmental rollbacks announced at the same time in what Zeldin said was 'the greatest day of deregulation in American history.'' A total of 31 key environmental rules on topics from clean air to clean water and climate change would be rolled back or repealed under Zeldin's plan. He singled out the endangerment finding as 'the Holy Grail of the climate change religion' and said he was thrilled to end it 'as the EPA does its part to usher in the Golden Age of American success.'' Tailpipe emission limits also targeted The EPA also called for rescinding limits on tailpipe emissions that were designed to encourage automakers to build and sell more electric vehicles. The transportation sector is the largest source of greenhouse gas emissions in the United States. Three former EPA leaders have criticized Zeldin, saying his March proposal would endanger the lives of millions of Americans and abandon the agency's dual mission to protect the environment and human health. 'If there's an endangerment finding to be found anywhere, it should be found on this administration because what they're doing is so contrary to what the Environmental Protection Agency is about,' Christine Todd Whitman, who led EPA under Republican President George W. Bush, said after Zeldin's plan was made public. The EPA proposal follows an executive order from Trump that directed the agency to submit a report 'on the legality and continuing applicability' of the endangerment finding. Conservatives and some congressional Republicans hailed the initial plan, calling it a way to undo economically damaging rules to regulate greenhouse gases. But environmental groups, legal experts and Democrats said any attempt to repeal or roll back the endangerment finding would be an uphill task with slim chance of success. The finding came two years after a 2007 Supreme Court ruling holding that the EPA has authority to regulate greenhouse gases as air pollutants under the Clean Air Act. A 'kill shot' to invalidate all climate regulations David Doniger, a climate expert at the Natural Resources Defense Council, an environmental group, said it was virtually 'impossible to think that the EPA could develop a contradictory finding (to the 2009 standard) that would stand up in court.' Doniger and other critics accused Trump's Republican administration of using potential repeal of the endangerment finding as a 'kill shot'' that would allow him to make all climate regulations invalid. If finalized, repeal of the endangerment finding would erase current limits on greenhouse gas pollution from cars, factories, power plants and other sources and could prevent future administrations from proposing rules to tackle climate change. 'The Endangerment Finding is the legal foundation that underpins vital protections for millions of people from the severe threats of climate change, and the Clean Car and Truck Standards are among the most important and effective protections to address the largest U.S. source of climate-causing pollution,'' said Peter Zalzal, associate vice president of the Environmental Defense Fund. 'Attacking these safeguards is manifestly inconsistent with EPA's responsibility to protect Americans' health and well-being,'' he said. 'It is callous, dangerous and a breach of our government's responsibility to protect the American people from this devastating pollution.'
an hour ago
EPA moves to repeal landmark finding that allows climate regulation
WASHINGTON -- President Donald Trump's administration on Tuesday proposed revoking a scientific finding that has long been the central basis for U.S. action to regulate greenhouse gas emissions and fight climate change. The proposed Environmental Protection Agency rule rescinds a 2009 declaration that determined that carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases endanger public health and welfare. The 'endangerment finding' is the legal underpinning of a host of climate regulations under the Clean Air Act for motor vehicles, power plants and other pollution sources that are heating the planet. EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin called for a rewrite of the endangerment finding in March as part of a series of environmental rollbacks announced at the same time in what Zeldin said was "the greatest day of deregulation in American history.'' A total of 31 key environmental rules on topics from clean air to clean water and climate change would be rolled back or repealed under Zeldin's plan. He singled out the endangerment finding as 'the Holy Grail of the climate change religion' and said he was thrilled to end it 'as the EPA does its part to usher in the Golden Age of American success.'' The EPA also called for rescinding limits on tailpipe emissions that were designed to encourage automakers to build and sell more electric vehicles. The transportation sector is the largest source of greenhouse gas emissions in the United States. Three former EPA leaders have criticized Zeldin, saying his March proposal would endanger the lives of millions of Americans and abandon the agency's dual mission to protect the environment and human health. 'If there's an endangerment finding to be found anywhere, it should be found on this administration because what they're doing is so contrary to what the Environmental Protection Agency is about,' Christine Todd Whitman, who led EPA under Republican President George W. Bush, said after Zeldin's plan was made public. The EPA proposal follows an executive order from Trump that directed the agency to submit a report 'on the legality and continuing applicability' of the endangerment finding. Conservatives and some congressional Republicans hailed the initial plan, calling it a way to undo economically damaging rules to regulate greenhouse gases. But environmental groups, legal experts and Democrats said any attempt to repeal or roll back the endangerment finding would be an uphill task with slim chance of success. The finding came two years after a 2007 Supreme Court ruling holding that the EPA has authority to regulate greenhouse gases as air pollutants under the Clean Air Act. David Doniger, a climate expert at the Natural Resources Defense Council, an environmental group, said it was virtually 'impossible to think that the EPA could develop a contradictory finding (to the 2009 standard) that would stand up in court.' Doniger and other critics accused Trump's Republican administration of using potential repeal of the endangerment finding as a 'kill shot'' that would allow him to make all climate regulations invalid. If finalized, repeal of the endangerment finding would erase current limits on greenhouse gas pollution from cars, factories, power plants and other sources and could prevent future administrations from proposing rules to tackle climate change. "The Endangerment Finding is the legal foundation that underpins vital protections for millions of people from the severe threats of climate change, and the Clean Car and Truck Standards are among the most important and effective protections to address the largest U.S. source of climate-causing pollution,'' said Peter Zalzal, associate vice president of the Environmental Defense Fund. 'Attacking these safeguards is manifestly inconsistent with EPA's responsibility to protect Americans' health and well-being,'' he said. 'It is callous, dangerous and a breach of our government's responsibility to protect the American people from this devastating pollution."
Forbes
an hour ago
- Forbes
Abortion and the 2026 Elections
On the third anniversary of the Supreme Court Dobbs' decision that returned abortion to the states, news outlets provided summaries of new developments, and Gallup, among other pollsters, helpfully updated its attitudinal trends. Much of the coverage was muted and missed a salient point. But first, let's look at what has changed since the decision was handed down in June 2022. According to a new #WeCount report, the number of abortions was higher in 2024 than 2023 or 2022. One in four of these was provided through telehealth services. Many state ballot measures protecting or enshrining abortion legality in state constitutions have passed, but there have been exceptions. In 2024, broadening abortion rights did not meet the high 60% threshold for passage in Florida, and in two other states, Nebraska and South Dakota, these measures failed. In 31 states and Washington, DC, abortion is broadly legal. Abortion is not the top issue in recent major polls, lagging significantly behind people's concerns about the economy, foreign policy, and the Trump presidency. Democrats themselves, who generally strongly support abortion rights, are also placing other issues than abortion at the forefront. Recent critical New York Times and Wall Street Journal pieces on troubling internal politics at Planned Parenthood may diminish the support of a reliable election ally for Democrats. Court cases challenging Medicaid-related cuts to Planned Parenthood clinics are also unlikely to generate significant national interest. Attitudes at the state level significantly vary, as PRRI (formerly the Public Religion Research Institute) found. Eighty percent in Vermont, for example, said abortion should be legal in all or most cases, while only 43% in Louisiana echoed that response. Opinion on abortion rights expansion is generally supportive but far from unanimous, as Gallup shows in its recent updates on abortion attitudes. It is also politically important that Donald Trump has muddied the waters on abortion nationally with his ambivalent and sometimes contradictory positions. Taken together, these factors suggest that abortion won't be a top-tier national issue next year. The highly regarded Democratic pollster Celinda Lake hinted at what I think was missing in much of the coverage of the Dobbs anniversary when she told the Washington Post: 'Despite a lot of efforts, the economy became nationalized and abortion became localized, and that was a bad situation for the Democrats.' Lake and other pollsters know that it is difficult to sustain the intensity that an issue like abortion had immediately after the Court's Dobbs' is especially true when issues such as the economy take center stage. When an issue is 'localized' as Lake suggests, it gets significant local coverage, but absent broader developments, it is unlikely to animate the whole country. The issue recedes as a national flashpoint. This is federalism at work. Recent abortion policy cases in South Carolina and West Virginia and several other states are unlikely to capture national attention. The FDA's review of the latest data on mifepristone may become a potential national flashpoint, but most other cases have more of a local impact. So what does this mean for 2026 and beyond? The margin in the House of Representatives is very narrow and the Democrats could take control. Abortion will no doubt play a role in some races, especially in states with measures on the ballot. At this early point, Ballotpedia finds that there are two on the ballot (Missouri and Nevada). Women are more likely than men to be engaged on the issue, but it is too early to tell how important it will be for most of them. In Gallup's May survey, 61% of women compared to 41% of men identify themselves as pro-choice and 56% of them compared to 41% of men say it should be legal in any or most circumstances. Partisanship plays a strong role here, too. Far more Democrats, 81%, believe abortion should be legal in any or most circumstances compared to 20% of Republicans. As Gallup noted, the groups that were most supportive of abortion legality before Dobbs are even more supportive today. As we get closer to the election next year, pollsters will likely update a question that asks people whether abortion will be the most important issue in casting their vote, one of many important issues, or not central to their vote. The 'most important' response has risen in Gallup's data from 13% in 1992 to 32% in 2024 among registered voters. These responses indicate people's feelings about the issue, and they don't necessarily translate into a vote decision. The action in 2026 will be in the states, and the issue will be muted nationally.
