Large crowds attended 'No Kings' rallies: Organizers
Jeremy Pressman, the co-director of the Crowd Counting Consortium - a Harvard University and University of Connecticut project that estimates political crowds - told USA TODAY June 15 that it will take "some time" to complete an estimate on the "No Kings" rallies.
The Los Angeles Times reported that "tens of thousands" of people demonstrated in the city roiled by Trump's recent immigration enforcement. The New York Post reported that 50,000 people showed up in New York City, where President Donald Trump was born.
"Today's protests are a resounding message that people across the nation will not be intimidated by President Trump's fear tactics," ACLU Chief Political & Advocacy Officer Deirdre Schifeling said in the statement. "Americans are brave, democracy loving people and will not sit idly by as the Trump administration feeds our Constitution into the shredder -- nor will the ACLU."
'No Kings' protests across US largely peaceful
The mostly calm marches, organized under the theme that no individual is above the law, coincided with the day Trump presided over a military parade on the streets of the nation's capital.
A demonstration in Northern Virginia, about 70 miles from Washington, D.C., was met with violence when a man intentionally drove an SUV through a crowd of departing protesters, striking at least one person, police said.
Police in Los Angeles hit protesters with batons, fired tear gas and ordered a large crowd in downtown to disperse; authorities said they were responding to people throwing "rocks, bricks, bottles," and "fireworks" at officials.
In Minnesota, organizers canceled protests across the state out of an abundance of caution after a shooter targeted local lawmakers, killing one and her spouse at their home and injuring another lawmaker and his spouse at their residence. In a statement, the "No Kings" group said it was adhering to guidance from Minnesota State Patrol and Gov. Tim Walz, who urged people not to attend any rallies Saturday.
Contributing: N'dea Yancey-Bragg, Sarah D. Wire, Jeanine Santucci, Jonathan Limehouse, Jay Calderon, Brian Day, USA TODAY.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Reuters
4 minutes ago
- Reuters
Washington's chip stakes look like industrial policy on overdrive
LONDON, Aug 21 (Reuters) - Market talk may be of fiscal dominance in the U.S. debt market but Washington's startling moves to take a direct stake in its leading chipmakers look like industrial policy on overdrive - alarming some investors about where it might end. For an administration that loudly espouses a credo of deregulated free markets, that's quite a look. Donald Trump's second administration is proving anything but a "light touch" government - pursuing high trade barriers, greater control of monetary policy, heavy-handed re-industrialization, strict immigration controls and heightened national security priorities. But taking direct stakes in leading U.S. companies is a whole different level, moving into territory most Western market economies have feared to tread for decades. The White House confirmed on Tuesday that it's working on a deal that could see the U.S. government take a 10% stake in troubled chip giant Intel (INTC.O), opens new tab, less than two weeks after Trump had suggested its boss should step down over his China links. Intel is the only integrated American firm currently capable of manufacturing leading-edge chips and its importance is underlined by the fact the world's premier producer - Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co ( opens new tab - is caught in geopolitical crosshairs due to China's claim on the island. Initially, the Intel deal looked like it might be a one-off, reflecting both the company's struggles and its strategic heft. But now the entire sector appears to be up for grabs. According to Reuters sources, U.S. Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick is considering having the government take equity stakes in other chipmakers in exchange for cash grants approved by former President Joe Biden's CHIPS Act, which was aimed at spurring factory-building in America. The Commerce Department oversees the $52.7 billion CHIPS Act funds, much of which has not yet been disbursed to companies such as Micron (MU.O), opens new tab, Samsung ( opens new tab, TSMC and Intel. A widening government footprint in the corporate world, which Lutnick suggested would stop short of controlling stakes or even voting rights, follows a series of government moves on what it sees as critical companies and possibly revenue sources. What looked to some like a government export tax was agreed with Nvidia (NVDA.O), opens new tab and Advanced Micro Devices (AMD.O), opens new tab last week, giving the U.S. government 15% of revenue from sales to China of certain advanced chips. The White House said it may expand this to other chip companies too. Meanwhile, the Pentagon is slated to become the largest shareholder in a small mining company, MP Materials (MP.N), opens new tab, in a bid to boost output of rare earth magnets amid a tense standoff with China. When it comes to Intel at least, investors seemed to welcome the plan as a way of steadying the shaky ship and the stock initially surged to a six-month high on the news - aided by an additional $2 billion investment from SoftBank. However, the share price has since been dragged back down by a wider tech sector swoon. The extent to which government dabbling in what it considers strategically important companies is partly responsible for this week's tech shakeout is unclear. But obvious concerns about shareholders getting diluted by Uncle Sam and who or what Washington might next consider "strategic" are bound to have unnerved some investors. Writing on the Intel proposals, Saxo Bank investment strategist Jacob Falkencrone said the structure of the deal would be as important as the move itself, though he noted that the shift in U.S. industrial policy from subsidies to ownership stakes was perhaps the biggest takeaway of all. Indeed, government stakes in private companies have been a rarity since World War Two, only seen in scale recently when Washington was forced to plow funds into ailing banks and other firms as part of the financial rescue during the banking bust in 2008. "Then, the motive was survival. Now, it's about resilience," Falkencrone said. And even if outright nationalization is not on the agenda, government involvement could still impact capital allocation, export compliance and where chips are made. "The broader point is this: if Washington is willing to take a stake in Intel, it may be prepared to do the same in other 'strategic' companies," Falkencrone said. "That's a shift worth considering across the portfolio – not just in semiconductors, but in any sector that could be deemed critical to national security in the years ahead." Perhaps the most telling review of the moves came from U.S. Senator Bernie Sanders, a progressive Democrat, who on Wednesday threw his support behind Trump's chipmaker stakes. "If microchip companies make a profit from the generous grants they receive from the federal government, the taxpayers of America have a right to a reasonable return on that investment," Sanders said. Unfettered, free-wheeling capitalism may be alive and well in parts of the new economy, such as crypto markets, but it seems the West Wing will be breathing down the neck of the industrial world for some time to come. The opinions expressed here are those of the author, a columnist for Reuters -- Enjoying this column? Check out Reuters Open Interest (ROI), your essential new source for global financial commentary. Follow ROI on LinkedIn. Plus, sign up for my weekday newsletter, Morning Bid U.S.
Reuters
an hour ago
- Reuters
Asia's imports of US LNG to surge, but likely not enough for Trump
LAUNCESTON, Australia, Aug 21 (Reuters) - There are early signs that some Asian countries are stepping up their imports of U.S. liquefied natural gas (LNG) as part of trade deals with President Donald Trump. Asia's imports of the super-chilled fuel are on track to hit an eight-month high of 2.01 million metric tons in August, according to data compiled by commodity analysts Kpler. But of far more importance is the Kpler estimate that Asia's LNG imports from the United States will surge to 3.61 million tons in October, which would be the second-highest on record behind the 3.75 million from February 2021. There are caveats to the October prediction insofar as these are cargoes that have been arranged on a preliminary basis and may not actually load. But even if there is some slippage in actual volumes, it's likely that October will still see a surge of U.S. LNG arriving in Asia. The buyers for all this LNG have yet to be fully disclosed, but initial destination data suggest the bulk is heading towards North Asia, and this largely means Japan and South Korea. The world's second- and third-largest LNG buyers both committed to ramp up their energy imports from the United States as part of deals reached with Trump on import tariffs and investment. Japan didn't commit to an exact figure, but the White House website said on July 23 that Tokyo has committed to a "major expansion" of energy purchases from the United States. South Korea undertook to buy energy products worth $100 billion from the United States in a deal announced by Trump on July 30, although the time frame for that value to be reached wasn't made clear. However, the $100 billion figure looks high when compared with how much LNG, crude oil and coal South Korea has historically imported from the United States. South Korea imported 5.71 million tons of U.S. LNG in 2024, which at the current Asian spot price of $11.65 per million British thermal units works out to a total of $3.45 billion. Japan imported 6.50 million tons of LNG from the United States in 2024, according to Kpler, which would have a value of around $3.93 billion at current prices. Even if a tripling of LNG imports from the United States is assumed for Japan and South Korea, the combined value comes only to an annual total of around $22 billion. But the volume imported would rise to around 36 million tons, or about 42% of the 84.8 million tons the United States exported in 2024. U.S. LNG exports are likely to increase in coming years as new plants come online, but its capacity will be overwhelmed by demand if every country that has pledged to massively boost its imports as part of trade deals actually tries to follow through. Trump said the European Union agreed to buy $250 billion a year for three years of U.S. energy, a figure I described as delusional once the actual volumes needed to meet this figure were considered. What is not delusional is that most countries that have struck deals with Trump will at least make some effort to meet the terms of the deal, even if they all know the stated amounts are unrealistic. Even trying to buy more LNG, crude oil and coal from the United States has the potential to disrupt trade flows around the world and distort pricing. For example, if Japan did triple its LNG imports from the United States to an annual level of around 20 million tons, this would mean that it would likely buy about 12 million tons less from current suppliers such as Australia and Qatar. Japan would likely end up buying virtually no spot cargoes and would also likely be forced to sell term cargoes at discounts to other buyers. It's unlikely Japanese utilities would be willing to wear losses just in order to try to keep Trump happy, so the chances are there is an upper limit as to how much U.S. LNG they will be willing to buy. Furthermore, it's likely that an upper limit is well short of what Trump believes it should be. Enjoying this column? Check out Reuters Open Interest (ROI), your essential new source for global financial commentary. ROI delivers thought-provoking, data-driven analysis of everything from swap rates to soybeans. Markets are moving faster than ever. ROI can help you keep up. Follow ROI on LinkedIn, opens new tab and X, opens new tab. The views expressed here are those of the author, a columnist for Reuters.
Rhyl Journal
2 hours ago
- Rhyl Journal
UK military chief meets US counterparts for Ukraine talks
Admiral Sir Tony Radakin met senior US defence officials alongside other European military chiefs in Washington DC on Wednesday to discuss military options to secure peace in Ukraine. He later attended a virtual meeting of Nato's military committee, described by its chairman Italian Admiral Giuseppe Cavo Dragone as 'candid'. On Tuesday evening, Admiral Radakin, the chief of the defence staff, had dined with his US counterpart General Dan Caine. The meetings come amid renewed planning for a 'coalition of the willing', led by the UK and France, that would guarantee Kyiv's security in the event of a ceasefire. Earlier in the week, Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer and French President Emmanuel Macron co-chaired a meeting of the coalition, in which members of the group also discussed the possibility of further sanctions on Russia. Western security guarantees, strongly resisted by Moscow, are one of the central issues for any peace deal for Ukraine, which fears Russia could otherwise use a ceasefire to regroup and launch a renewed invasion. So far, only the UK and France have indicated they could commit troops to a peacekeeping force in Ukraine. In an interview on Tuesday Donald Trump ruled out an American ground contribution but suggested the US could be willing to provide some form of air support. His special envoy, Steve Witkoff, had earlier suggested the US could offer Ukraine a mutual defence agreement similar to Nato's Article 5, without Kyiv formally joining the alliance. Renewed talks among the 'coalition of the willing' follow last week's summit between Mr Trump and Vladimir Putin in Alaska as the US president continued to push for an end to a conflict he had promised he could finish on his first day in office. Those talks appeared to result in little progress towards a deal, but sparked concern among some in Europe that Mr Trump could seek to pressure Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky into accepting a deal without sufficient security guarantees. On Monday, Sir Keir and Mr Macron joined other European leaders in travelling to Washington in a show of support for Mr Zelensky during a meeting with Mr Trump. Meanwhile, the UK and Russia traded sanctions as London sought to increase the pressure on Moscow to end its invasion. Europe minister Stephen Doughty unveiled sanctions on a series of organisations linked to Kyrgyzstan's financial services sector, saying they had been involved in Kremlin attempts to 'soften the blow of our sanctions by laundering transactions through dodgy crypto networks'. Russia in turn sanctioned 21 individuals, including former Labour MP Denis MacShane, several journalists, and the Government-appointed independent reviewer of terrorism legislation, Jonathan Hall.
