Trump requests release of documents related to Epstein case
Taking to his social media platform Truth Social, Trump said, "Based on the ridiculous amount of publicity given to Jeffrey Epstein, I have asked Attorney General Pam Bondi to produce any and all pertinent Grand Jury testimony, subject to Court approval. This SCAM, perpetuated by the Democrats, should end right now."
The remarks came after a collection of letters gifted to Jeffrey Epstein for his 50th birthday in 2003 included a note bearing Donald Trump's name and an outline of a naked woman, according to a Wall Street Journal report published on Thursday (local time), as per CNN.
The report, which cites documents reviewed by the newspaper, comes amid continued public interest in Epstein's past connections with powerful individuals. Epstein died in jail in 2019 while awaiting trial on charges of child sex trafficking.
Trump has denied writing the letter and accused the media of running a coordinated smear campaign, according to CNN.
Trump also threatened to sue The Wall Street Journal, News Corp., and Rupert Murdoch for the Jeffrey Epstein story they published on the Epstein files.
"The Wall Street Journal, and Rupert Murdoch, personally, were warned directly by President Donald J. Trump that the supposed letter they printed by President Trump to Epstein was a FAKE and, if they print it, they will be sued. Mr. Murdoch stated that he would take care of it but, obviously, did not have the power to do so. The Editor of The Wall Street Journal, Emma Tucker, was told directly by Karoline Leavitt, and by President Trump, that the letter was a FAKE, but Emma Tucker didn't want to hear that. Instead, they are going with a false, malicious, and defamatory story anyway. President Trump will be suing The Wall Street Journal, NewsCorp, and Mr. Murdoch, shortly. The Press has to learn to be truthful, and not rely on sources that probably don't even exist," Trump said in a post on Truth Social.
White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt also issued a strong statement on X (formerly Twitter), accusing the Journal of publishing unverified claims. "The Wall Street Journal published a hatchet job article with a FAKE 'birthday letter' that is supposedly from 2003," she wrote.
"This is like the Steele Dossier that kickstarted 'the Russia, Russia, Russia' Hoax all over again. The WSJ refused to show us the letter and conceded they don't even have it in their possession when we asked them to verify the alleged document they're basing their ENTIRE fake story on," she said.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Observer
6 hours ago
- Observer
India reels from US tariff hike threat
Mumbai - Indian exporters are scrambling for options to mitigate the fallout of US President Donald Trump's threatened tariff salvo against the world's most populous nation. Many warn of dire job losses after Trump said he would double new import tariffs from 25 percent to 50 percent if India continues to buy Russian oil, in a bid to strip Moscow of revenue for its military offensive in Ukraine. "At a 50 percent tariff, no product from India can stand any competitive edge," said economist Garima Kapoor from Elara Securities. India, one of the world's largest crude oil importers, has until August 27 to find alternatives to replace around a third of its current oil supply from abroad. While New Delhi is not a major export powerhouse, it shipped goods worth approximately $87 billion to the United States in 2024. That 50 percent levy now threatens to upend low-margin, labour-intensive industries ranging from gems and jewellery to textiles and seafood. The Global Trade Research Initiative estimates a potential 60 percent drop in US sales in 2025 in sectors such as the garment industry. Exporters say they are racing to fulfil orders before the deadline. "Whatever we can ship before August 27, we are shipping," said Vijay Kumar Agarwal, chairman of Creative Group. The Mumbai-based textile and garment exporter has a nearly 80 percent exposure to the US market. But Agarwal warned that it is merely triage. Shipping goods before the deadline "doesn't solve" the problem, he said. "If it doesn't get resolved, there will be chaos," he said, adding that he's worried for the future of his 15,000 to 16,000 employees. "It is a very gloomy situation... it will be an immense loss of business." - Shifting production abroad - Talks to resolve the matter hinge on geopolitics, far from the reach of business. Trump is set to meet Vladimir Putin on Friday, the first face-to-face meeting between the two countries' presidents since Russia launched its full-scale invasion of Ukraine in February 2022. New Delhi, with longstanding ties with Moscow, is in a delicate situation. Since Trump's tariff threats, Prime Minister Narendra Modi has spoken to both Putin and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky, urging a "peaceful resolution" to the conflict. Meanwhile, the US tariff impact is already being felt in India. Businesses say fresh orders from some US buyers have begun drying up -- threatening millions of dollars in future business and the livelihoods of hundreds of thousands in the world's fifth biggest economy. Among India's biggest apparel makers with global manufacturing operations, some are looking to move their US orders elsewhere. Top exporter Pearl Global Industries has told Indian media that some of its US customers asked that orders be produced in lower-duty countries such as Vietnam or Bangladesh, where the company also has manufacturing facilities. Major apparel maker Gokaldas Exports told Bloomberg it may boost production in Ethiopia and Kenya, which have a 10 percent tariff. Moody's recently warned that for India, the "much wider tariff gap" may "even reverse some of the gains made in recent years in attracting related investments". India's gems and jewellery industry exported goods worth more than $10 billion last year and employs hundreds of thousands of people. "Nothing is happening now, everything is at a standstill, new orders have been put on hold," Ajesh Mehta from D. Navinchandra Exports told AFP. "We expect up to 150,000 to 200,000 workers to be impacted." Gems and other expensive non-essential items are vulnerable. "A 10 percent tariff was absorbable -- 25 percent is not, let alone this 50 percent," Mehta added. "At the end of the day, we deal in luxury products. When the cost goes up beyond a point, customers will cut back." Seafood exporters, who have been told by some US buyers to hold shipments, are hoping for new customers. "We are looking to diversify our markets," says Alex Ninan, who is a partner at the Baby Marine Group. "The United States is out right now. We will have to push our products to alternative markets, such as China, Japan... Russia is another market we are looking into." Ninan, however, warns that it is far from simple. "You can't create a market all of a sudden," he said.
Times of Oman
7 hours ago
- Times of Oman
India "a bit recalcitrant", says US Treasury Secretary on trade talks amid Trump's tariff concerns
Washington DC: US Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent on Tuesday stated that India has been headstrong in their trade negotiations with the US, noting that New Delhi has been "a bit recalcitrant", days after US President Donald Trump announced an additional 25 per cent tariff, citing the country's oil purchase from Russia. Speaking to Fox Business Network's "Kudlow", Bessent also stated that there were still some "big trade deals" yet to be done or agreed upon, including Switzerland and India, acknowledging the possibility of concluding tariff negotiations by October. "There are big trade deals that aren't done and aren't agreed. Switzerland is still around; India has been a bit recalcitrant. I think we have agreed on substantial terms with all the substantial countries," the US Treasury Secretary stated. "That's aspirational. I think we're in a good position," he added when asked about the possibility of concluding tariff negotiations by October. On August 6, Trump signed an Executive Order imposing an additional 25 per cent tariff on imports from India in response to New Delhi's purchase of Russian oil, taking the total tariff on India to 50 per cent. According to the order issued by the White House, Trump cited matters of national security and foreign policy concerns, as well as other relevant trade laws, for the increase, claiming that India's imports of Russian oil, directly or indirectly, pose an "unusual and extraordinary threat" to the United States. The additional tariffs will take effect on August 27. The Ministry of External Affairs (MEA) has slammed the US's move to impose additional tariffs, calling it "unfair, unjustified and unreasonable", and further noted that New Delhi will take "all actions necessary to protect its national interests". The announcement came days after he announced the 25 per cent reciprocal tariff on India, which came into effect on August 7. Meanwhile, Trump had earlier stated that there would be no trade negotiations with India until a dispute over tariffs is resolved. When pressed by ANI at the Oval Office on whether he expected talks to resume in light of the new 50 per cent tariff, he stated, "No, not until we get it resolved."
Observer
19 hours ago
- Observer
Climate security is energy security
For all the uncertainties generated by Donald Trump's administration over the past six months, one thing is clear: 'climate' technologies are out and 'energy' technologies are in. But while going along with this rhetorical shift may appease some, it should be recognised for what it is: a change in wording. The fundamental economic and technological forces that are pushing the world away from oil, coal and gas and towards low-carbon, high-efficiency technologies have not abated. Over the past two decades, climate change has been a leading item on the global agenda, driving efforts to deploy technologies that will reduce carbon dioxide emissions. Those efforts are now facing headwinds and not just in the United States. Geopolitical developments elsewhere, like Russia's war in Ukraine, have called attention to the importance of energy affordability and security over other considerations. Policymakers in the US, Europe and elsewhere initially responded to the war by doubling down on the shift from fossil fuels and for good reason. Oil, coal and gas are commodities whose prices will always be linked to geopolitical vagaries (that goes for not only global oil markets but also regional gas markets, which are increasingly linked by trade in liquefied natural gas). As a case in point, the summer of 2022 brought massive inflation, largely driven by fossil-fuel price spikes. Europe's gas prices peaked at ten times their long-term average and US gas prices at around triple their long-term average. While the US Inflation Reduction Act of 2022 is widely considered a misnomer, history will judge the name kindly: The only permanent way to address such bouts with 'fossilflation' is to stop using fossil fuels. Though the blowback against climate policies has been particularly strong at the federal level in the US, Europe, too, has undergone a retrenchment. This is somewhat understandable, even if it is shortsighted. Germany, Europe's largest economy, has been in a recession for more than two years, with high energy prices a chief culprit. Climate technologies that are already commercially viable could help, of course. But taking full advantage of the lower prices of solar, wind and (increasingly) batteries requires a willingness to reform power markets and pass these savings to households and industrial consumers. It also calls for more upfront public investment, an area where climate priorities compete with other priorities like national security that are often perceived to be more immediate. In grappling with these tradeoffs, the European Union delivered the kinds of efficiency measures that Trump's 'Department of Government Efficiency' (DOGE) had promised but failed to achieve. For example, Europe dialed back its carbon border adjustment mechanism by requiring 90 per cent fewer companies to comply. On the surface, this seems like a decisive blow to the goal of establishing a carbon tariff for imports, commensurate with Trump's DOGE hatchet. But unlike Trump and Elon Musk, the EU ensured that the remaining 10 per cent of importers still accounted for over 90 per cent of emissions. This outcome is far from ideal when viewed solely through a climate lens. But viewed from a broader climate-economic perspective, it is exactly the kind of surgical intervention that DOGE promised but never delivered. The summer of 2022 brought massive inflation, largely driven by fossil-fuel price spikes. Still, fiddling at the climate-policy margins ignores the bigger picture. While Europe and America are taking steps back, China is leaping forward. It alone accounted for over 40 per cent of the record $2.1 trillion of global investment in the energy transition last year — more than the EU, the United Kingdom and the US combined. The balance is even more lopsided for specific clean-energy technologies. China produces around 75 per cent of the world's solar panels and 80 per cent of its lithium-ion batteries. That dominance is the result of a concerted green industrial policy, in which innovation plays a key role. The claim that China only manufactures and assembles is woefully outdated. China's electric vehicles, for example, are second to none. BYD, the country's leading carmaker, recently unveiled a groundbreaking charging system capable of adding 470 km of range in just five minutes, putting the company in a league of its own globally. China's dominance extends to technologies that are not yet competitive without price support. LONGi, one of the world's top solar manufacturers, formed LONGi Hydrogen in 2021 to pursue green hydrogen production. It now leads the world in electrolyser manufacturing capacity. These are not isolated examples. China's ambitious industrial policy has helped lift five other Chinese hydrogen companies into the global top ten. Have Europe and the US already lost this race for the future? While the US now seems hellbent on turning itself into a petrostate, the EU has a chance to revive its clean-energy fortunes. It is even starting with a significant policy advantage: a CO2 price hovering around $100 per metric tonne means that most low-carbon technologies — from clean electrons and electrification to clean molecules like biofuels — are already economically viable. Others, like green hydrogen, will need further support to help climb the learning curve and slide down the cost curve. According to Bernd Heid, a senior partner at McKinsey & Company who leads its Platform for Climate Technologies, around 90 per cent of climate technologies will be in the money by 2030 with a $100 carbon price. While China dominates with six top-ten global players, three of the others are European. The Swedish startup Stegra is building the world's first low-carbon steel plant using electrolysers made by ThyssenKrupp Nucera, in which the German steelmaker has a majority stake. Despite recent political developments, the US, too, has shown that rapid change is possible. Although breaking China's solar manufacturing dominance will be difficult, the US has made significant inroads just over the past three years. Earlier this year, it exceeded 50 gigawatts of panel manufacturing capacity, a fivefold increase since 2022. These 50 GW in panel supply roughly matched US demand. True, onshoring the solar supply chain comes with costs that can be justified only by priorities other than the climate, such as national security or promoting domestic manufacturing. But that is the point. If political conditions require stronger emphasis on technologies like geothermal and nuclear; and if technologies formerly known as 'climate tech' must be relabelled as more neutral-sounding 'energy tech', so be it. The larger forces propelling us towards decarbonisation remain the same. @Project Syndicate, 2025
