Oprah Winfrey hits back at claims she 'refused' to open her private road in Hawaii for people to escape following tsunami warnings
Parts of the U.S. and Japan were warned about an incoming tsunami, which was triggered by an 'one of the biggest ever' earthquakes off Russia.
Off the back of the 8.8 megaquake, thousands of residents on Hawaii have been forced to evacuate their homes to find safety.
Residents on the island have claimed that Oprah 'refused' to open her private road, which would help ease congestion for those trying to escape.
Videos posted by people at the scene show gridlocked traffic jams as others claimed there are 'thousands' trying to leave low lying areas.
One person on X wrote: 'Oprah won't open her private road from Wailea to Kula, Hawaii, which would make it much easier for locals to get to higher ground.
'Massive Traffic in Maui with thousands trying to escape the massive Tsunami coming. Open the road Oprah.'
Another claimed: 'Oprah HAS NOT opened her private road from Wailea to Kula, Hawaii, which would allow coastal folks to reach higher ground quickly, locals tell me OPEN THE ROAD, @OPRAH.
'Roads on Maui are GRIDLOCKED as people try to escape the incoming Tsunami.'
However, Oprah's spokesperson has now insisted that these claims are false and that she opened the road as soon as she heard the warnings.
They said: 'As soon as we heard the tsunami warnings, we contacted local law enforcement and FEMA [Federal Emergency Management Agency] to ensure the road was opened. Any reports otherwise are false.
'Local law enforcement are currently on site helping residents through 50 cars at a time to ensure everyone's safety. The road will remain open as long as necessary.'
Residents in Hawaii were forced to evacuate from coastal areas as the entire island chain braced for the impact to strike. Water was seen receding at around 7.40pm local time, or 1.40am EST.
The California and Oregon border is now also under a tsunami warning, while advisories remained in effect for the rest of the West Coast of the United States.
The first tsunami waves hit Hawaii at 8.20pm local time, 2.20am EST. Water levels were above 4 feet in Haleiwa on Oahu's north shore, reaching 5 feet just minutes later and causing floods.
Oahu Emergency Management warned residents: 'Tsunami waves are currently impacting Hawaii. Take action NOW!'
In California, the first waves hit the coast at Crescent City near the Oregon border just after midnight local time, while tsunami waves hit Washington state not long after.
President Donald Trump urged Americans to 'STAY STRONG AND STAY SAFE.'
Locals were seen running to supermarkets to stock up on water and other essentials as Gov. Josh Green signed an emergency proclamation for the state.
'We pray that we won't lose any loved ones,' the governor said in a news conference as he warned the public to not 'go out until we give you the all clear.'
Photos posted online also showed bumper-to-bumper traffic on a Honolulu highway as residents scrambled to get to higher ground. On Oahu, the US Army and Navy opened Kolekole Pass and sections of Schofield Barracks on Oahu to help with the evacuation efforts there as at least one critical traffic accident was reported.
The National Guard is also prepared to help with any rescue efforts and Blackhawk helicopters have been deployed, but Green warned 'it is not likely we will recover you' if residents are swept up in the massive waves.
Beaches along the Southern California coast were closed as a safety precaution, with LAPD helicopters blaring warning sirens and ordering those on boats and at the shore to get to higher ground.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Sun
21 minutes ago
- The Sun
Everything you need to know about a Trump, Putin, Zelensky showdown summit – and who has the upper hand
A HISTORIC meeting between Donald Trump, Vladimir Putin and maybe Volodymyr Zelensky could finally decide the fate of the war in Ukraine. With battlefields burning and sanctions ready to bite, this diplomatic showdown could be the start of peace - or another powder keg. 8 8 This isn't just another summit – it's a historic high-stakes gamble. Trump is betting big that Putin wants peace, that Zelensky can stomach compromise, and that America's economic firepower can bring the war to an end. Here is everything you need to know about the major meeting and the men comprising the most explosive political triangle in years. When and where could the summit take place? Trump could sit down with Mad Vlad Putin as early as next week, according to the White House. A trilateral meeting including Zelensky is also on the table - a diplomatic first if it happens. A top aide to Putin, Yuri Ushakov, announced that 'an agreement was agreed in principle to hold a bilateral summit in the coming days,' following a suggestion from the American side. All parties are now working on the details, and while the venue has been agreed, it will be revealed later. The possibility of a trilateral meeting with Zelensky was also raised by US special envoy Steve Witkoff during his talks with Putin yesterday — though Ushakov says Moscow has, for now, left that idea 'without comment.' Don and Vlad last met in person at the G20 summit in Osaka, Japan, on June 28, 2019, during Trump's first term as America's leader. And if Zelensky joins the upcoming meeting, it would mark the first time all three leaders sit at the same table since war erupted in 2022. What will be discussed? One issue dominates: peace in Ukraine. Trump's administration says it is pushing hard for a deal. His special envoy, Steve Witkoff, just wrapped up a three-hour meeting with Putin in Moscow this week, which Trump called "highly productive". But there's a clock ticking. The Republican strongman slashed his original 50-day deadline for a Ukraine peace deal to just 10 days - and that deadline expires Friday. If Putin doesn't budge, Trump is poised to hammer Moscow - and its enablers - with crippling secondary sanctions. India has already been hit with 50 per cent tariffs over its Russian oil purchases - and China could be next. Trump warned: "We did it with India. We're doing it probably with a couple of others. One of them could be China." The White House says Trump has made it clear there will be "biting sanctions" if Russia doesn't agree to a ceasefire. Who has the upper hand? Right now, everything hangs in the balance - and the power dynamic could shift in a heartbeat. Hamish de Bretton-Gordon, former British Army officer and military analyst, said the fact the summit is even happening is a win in itself. But as for who's calling the shots? That's where things get complicated. Noting the Russian leader still believes he's making ground in Ukraine, the expert told The Sun: 'Until fairly recently, it's been pretty clear that President Putin has absolutely no desire for peace. 'His aim at the beginning of his special military operation over three and a half years ago was to subjugate the whole of Ukraine.' According to de Bretton-Gordon, Trump has only recently woken up to the fact that he's being played. 8 8 8 'It would appear that Trump has had a bit of an epiphany, a bit of a change of mind, and has now realised that Putin has been playing him.' And now, Don is bringing the businessman in him and threatening to hit Russia where it hurts most: the wallet. 'If Trump follows through with his sanctions and tariffs… then this is the reason I think that Putin has come to the table,' de Bretton-Gordon explained. 'Economic and financial analysts who really know about these things believe that the Russian economy would peter out pretty quickly without the massive amounts of money and resources it gets from oil.' In other words, Trump holds the economic sledgehammer — if he's willing to swing it. But Putin isn't out of the game. His forces are still advancing, still hammering Ukrainian cities, and still killing civilians. 'Russia seems to be moving forward slowly,' de Bretton-Gordon warned. 'Attacking civilian targets in Ukraine at an unbelievable scale.' Zelensky, meanwhile, remains the wild card. 'The people who are most important here are the Ukrainians,' he said. 'A bad deal for Ukraine is worse than no deal at all.' And that's the real risk. Trump might be chasing headlines, not justice. 'I think Trump probably just wants to get a deal of some description,' the former army officer said. 'One just hopes that Trump doesn't try and do some sort of backhand deal with Putin, just so that he can claim that there is now peace in Ukraine, because the short-term peace is no good to anybody.' So who has the upper hand? Right now, it's still up for grabs. But if Trump sticks to his economic guns, and if Putin starts to feel the heat on the home front, the balance might just tip. Will Trump be able to make a deal? That's the trillion-dollar question. Trump insists he's serious. He's been increasingly frustrated with Putin, telling reporters: "Can't answer the question yet. I'll tell you in a matter of weeks, maybe less. But we made a lot of progress." Zelensky says the pressure is working. "It seems that Russia is now more inclined to a ceasefire," he said, but warned, "The main thing is that they do not deceive us in the details – neither us nor the US." Putin, for his part, has not ruled out a meeting with Zelensky – a U-turn after rejecting talks for nearly five years. But the Kremlin remains cagey. Aides say they're open to a summit "after preparatory work is done at the expert level." Still, Russia continues to play the long game. Putin's demands for peace remain unchanged, and behind the scenes, Moscow is preparing for no limits on nuclear deployments – a chilling echo of Cold War escalation. If talks fail, Trump's next move could ignite a global trade war. A 100 per cent tariff on all Russian goods and those of its allies is on the table. His message to Moscow? Deal or suffer. 8 8 What is the situation on the frontline? While diplomats talk, Putin bombs. Russia has escalated its attacks in Ukraine in recent days - in what some see as a final show of force ahead of the talks. Kyiv, Kherson, Nikopol, Dnipropetrovsk - all hit. One missile slammed into a residential tower, killing 31 people, including five children. In Nikopol, a 23-year-old first responder was among the dead. Putin's war machine has launched hundreds of drones and missiles overnight in a relentless blitz. Even as Moscow talks ceasefire, its rockets keep flying. Ukrainian forces, meanwhile, have not backed down - striking deep into Russian territory with precision attacks on refineries, rail hubs, air defences and even military units inside Russia. The Afipsky Refinery in southern Russia went up in flames after a massive Ukrainian strike – a clear message that Kyiv can hit back hard. Just days ago, Russia declared there are now no limits on its deployment of nuclear missiles in a chilling warning to the West. Throwing off its gloves and restraints, Moscow vowed to match US and Nato moves with force, reigniting fears of a Cold War-style arms race. The Russian Foreign Ministry accused America and its allies of creating a "direct threat to the security of our country" by preparing to deploy intermediate-range weapons in Europe. Saying Moscow now has a free hand to respond, Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov told reporters: "Russia no longer considers itself to be constrained by anything. "Therefore Russia believes it has the right to take respective steps if necessary." The trigger, according to Russia, is the planned US deployment of Typhoon and Dark Eagle missiles in Germany starting next year. The Kremlin said the move shattered what remained of strategic stability, accusing Donald Trump's USA of risking "a dangerous escalation of tensions between nuclear powers." It was the clearest warning yet that Vladimir Putin is prepared to redraw the red lines of nuclear deterrence — and challenge the West head-on. Will there be peace in Ukraine? THE prospect of peace in Ukraine remains uncertain as the Russia-Ukraine war continues into its fourth year. While Trump's diplomatic efforts and the planned meeting signal continued U.S. engagement, the gap between Russia's demands and Ukraine's conditions remains wide. Putin's history of stalling and Zelensky's insistence on a full ceasefire and security guarantees suggest that a lasting peace agreement is unlikely in the immediate term without significant concessions from either side. Next week's meeting may produce a framework or memorandum for future talks, as Putin has indicated, but a concrete peace deal appears distant based on current dynamics. Recent US-brokered talks, including direct negotiations in Istanbul on May 16 and June 2, 2025, have yielded no breakthroughs, though agreements on prisoner exchanges signal some dialogue. US President Donald Trump has pushed for a ceasefire, shortening a 50-day deadline for Russia to negotiate or face sanctions, but tensions persist with Russian advances in eastern Ukraine and intensified drone and missile strikes on cities like Kyiv. Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky has suggested territorial swaps, while Russia shows little willingness to compromise. With ongoing military escalation and divergent American and European approaches, a lasting peace deal appears distant.
Daily Mail
21 minutes ago
- Daily Mail
Trump says he will impose a 100% tariff on computer chips
President Donald Trump has said that he will impose a 100% tariff on computer chips, raising the prospect of higher prices for electronics, cars, household appliances and other essential products dependent on the processors powering the digital age. 'We'll be putting a tariff of approximately 100% on chips and semiconductors,' Trump said in the Oval Office while meeting with Apple CEO Tim Cook on Wednesday. 'But if you're building in the United States of America, there's no charge.' The announcement came more than three months after Trump temporarily exempted most electronics from his administration's most onerous tariffs. The Republican president said companies that make computer chips in the US would be spared the import tax. During the Covid-19 pandemic, a shortage of computer chips increased the price of cars and contributed to higher inflation. Investors seemed to interpret the potential tariff exemptions as a positive for Apple and other major tech companies that have been making huge financial commitments to manufacture more chips and other components in the US. Big Tech already has made collective commitments to invest about $1.5 trillion in the US since Trump moved back into the White House in January. That figure includes a $600 billion promise from Apple after the iPhone maker boosted its commitment by tacking another $100 billion on to a previous commitment made in February. Now the question is whether the deal brokered between Cook and Trump will be enough to insulate the millions of iPhones made in China and India from the tariffs that the administration has already imposed and reduce the pressure on the company to raise prices on the new models expected to be unveiled next month. Wall Street certainly seems to think so. Apple's stock price gained 5% in Wednesday regular trading sessions before rising another 3% in extended trading after Trump announced some tech companies won't be hit with the latest tariffs while Cook stood alongside him. The shares of AI chipmaker Nvidia, which also has recently made big commitments to the US, rose slightly in extended trading to add to the $1 trillion gain in market value the Silicon Valley company has made since the start of Trump's second term. The stock price of computer chip pioneer Intel, which has fallen on hard times, also climbed in extended trading. The chip industry's main trade group, the Semiconductor Industry Association, has so far declined to comment on Trump's latest tariffs. Demand for computer chips has been climbing worldwide, with sales increasing 19.6% in the year-ended in June, according to the World Semiconductor Trade Statistics organization. It is not clear how many chips, or from which country, would be impacted by the new levy. Taiwanese chip contract manufacturer TSMC - which makes chips for most U.S. companies - has factories in the country, so its big customers such as Nvidia are not likely to face increased tariff costs. The AI chip giant has itself said it plans to invest hundreds of billions of dollars in US-made chips and electronics over the next four years. 'Large, cash-rich companies that can afford to build in America will be the ones to benefit the most. It´s survival of the biggest,' said Brian Jacobsen, chief economist at investment advisory firm Annex Wealth Management. Trump's tariff threats mark a significant break from existing plans to revive computer chip production in the US that were drawn up during the Biden administration. Since taking over from Biden, Trump has been deploying tariffs to incentivize more domestic production. Essentially, the president is betting that the threat of dramatically higher chip costs would force most companies to open factories domestically, despite the risk that tariffs could squeeze corporate profits and push up prices for mobile phones, TVs and refrigerators. By contrast, the bipartisan CHIPS and Science Act that Biden signed into law in 2022 provided more than $50 billion to support new computer chip plants, fund research and train workers for the industry. The mix of funding support, tax credits and other financial incentives were meant to draw in private investment, a strategy that Trump has vocally opposed. The Commerce Department under Biden last year convinced all five leading-edge semiconductor firms to locate chip factories in the US as part of the program. The department said the US last year produced about 12% of semiconductor chips globally, down from 40% in 1990. Any chip tariffs would likely target China, with whom Washington is still negotiating a trade deal. 'There's so much serious investment in the United States in chip production that much of the sector will be exempt,' said Martin Chorzempa, senior fellow at the Peterson Institute for International Economics. Since chips made in China won't be exempt, chips made by SMIC or Huawei would not be either, Chorzempa said, noting that chips from these companies entering the US market were mostly incorporated into devices assembled in China. 'If these tariffs were applied without a component tariff, it might not make much difference,' he said.
Reuters
21 minutes ago
- Reuters
US lenders weighed reputation rules, not politics, in closing accounts, sources say
NEW YORK, Aug 7 (Reuters) - Decisions by some major U.S. banks to close accounts were based on rules around reputational risk, people familiar with the matter said, pushing back on President Donald Trump's accusation that he and his conservative supporters were denied services for political reasons. Trump on Tuesday renewed his criticism of JPMorgan Chase (JPM.N), opens new tab and Bank of America (BAC.N), opens new tab, saying they discriminated against him by refusing to accept hundreds of millions of dollars in deposits. While banks have been careful not to contradict the president directly and provoke his ire, two industry sources cited regulations under the former President Joe Biden's administration that forced them to weigh reputational risks as the reason lenders have dropped clients or avoided others. The sources declined to be identified because of the sensitivity of the matter. One bank was concerned about this issue when dealing with Trump because of his legal woes during the Biden administration, the first source said. Spokespeople for JPMorgan and Bank of America both said they do not consider political affiliations in banking decisions and welcomed Trump's efforts to change regulations. A source familiar with the matter said that JPMorgan continues to have a banking relationship with members of the Trump family and it also banks a number of campaign accounts linked to Trump. The White House did not immediately respond to a request seeking comment. Under the Biden era, regulators who oversaw the banks would judge the lenders' compliance with the rules, which banks said were based on subjective judgments by government supervisors, the first industry source said. Banks were also concerned about whether regulators would punish them for providing services to individuals who faced legal proceedings, like Trump, the first and second sources said. The main U.S. bank regulators -- the Federal Reserve, Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation and Office of the Comptroller of the Currency -- have all directed its supervisors this year to stop considering reputational risk when examining banks, a metric that had drawn industry complaints for being too subjective. "The heart of the problem is regulatory overreach and supervisory discretion," the Bank Policy Institute, an industry group, said in a statement. A looming executive order expected as early as this week would instruct regulators to review banks for "politicized or unlawful debanking" practices, according to a draft reviewed by Reuters. Banks also plan to use the current debate to push the government to clarify anti-money laundering laws and establish a clear federal standard on fair access to financial services, the third source said. Trump's criticism echoed longstanding "debanking" complaints from Republicans, who have accused Wall Street banks of "woke capitalism," as well as denying services to gunmakers, fossil-fuel companies and others perceived to be aligned with the political right. Earlier this year, the Trump organization sued Capital One (COF.N), opens new tab for closing 300 accounts related to the group. The closures came after thousands of Trump supporters stormed the U.S. Capitol on January 6, 2021. Capital One declined to comment beyond its earlier legal filings. Trump also drew headlines in January when he blasted banks for debanking at a gathering of business leaders in Davos, Switzerland. Paul Chesser, director, corporate integrity project at the conservative-leaning National Legal and Policy Center (NLPC), cited former Kansas Governor and Senator Sam Brownback as among the conservatives who were debanked by JPMorgan and other banks. Brownback wrote in the New York Post that JPMorgan had abruptly canceled his newly opened account for the National Committee for Religious Freedom in 2022. The JPMorgan spokesperson said the decision to close the accounts was not related to politics. "The Senator is fully aware why his accounts were closed," the spokesperson said, without elaborating on the reasons for the closure. Brownback told Reuters he had been given five different reasons by the bank for the account closure and was not certain what the final explanation was. NLPC has raised debanking concerns with BofA and JPMorgan through shareholder proposals, which were not included in the banks' proxies, Chesser said. Bank supervision by government regulators is a mostly confidential process that limits banks from explaining to clients why they are declined services. "Customers should not be in the dark about why they are being de-banked," said Chesser. "Nobody got any explanation. They're totally left in the dark. And that is probably the number one priority."
