Los Angeles protests: NY photojournalist shot in forehead by police while covering anti-ICE protest
LA protests (Image credits: AP)
New York Post photographer Toby Canham was shot in the forehead with a rubber bullet by a California Highway Patrol (CHP) officer while covering a violent protest in Los Angeles on Sunday evening.
Canham was filming a scene where a protestor was throwing a water bottle at the police. Just 20 seconds later, he got shot.
He was fired from about 100 yards away and fell to the ground and was later taken to the hospital with neck pain and a large bruise on his forehead. 'When I got whacked, to my best recollection it was just me filming with my cameras on and then I got shot,' said Canham.
The clash between law enforcement and protesters escalated after ICE raids sparked widespread outrage.
On Sunday, demonstrators took over the freeway, lighting self-driving cars on fire and forcing CHP to redirect the crowd onto an exit ramp. Protesters hurled objects, including water bottles and rocks, at officers during the unrest.
Despite the serious injury to a credentialed member of the press, neither CHP nor LAPD have offered detailed statements. CHP has yet to respond to inquiries, while LAPD said the incident remains under investigation.
California governor Gavin Newsom's office declined to comment and referred questions to local law enforcement. The Los Angeles mayor's office also did not immediately respond.
In response to the growing unrest, US defense secretary Pete Hegseth has ordered 700 Marines to assist the 300 National Guard troops already deployed in the city.
This comes the same day an Australian reporter was also struck with a rubber bullet while covering the protests live.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
&w=3840&q=100)
First Post
37 minutes ago
- First Post
Why Elon Musk's apology to Trump was a good business decision
Last week, Tesla CEO Elon Musk claimed that Donald Trump, whom he endorsed for president and gave hundreds of millions of dollars in campaign contributions, was part of the files linked to Jeffrey Epstein. This week, Musk has backed down, saying his posts against Trump 'went too far'. Post the apology, Tesla shares rose, and Musk's net worth increased by $191 million read more Tesla CEO Elon Musk has backtracked this week, apologising and saying his posts against Donald Trump 'went too far'. AP Last week, Elon Musk made a serious allegation against US President Donald Trump. The Tesla CEO and richest man in the world claimed that Trump, who he endorsed for president and to whom he gave hundreds of millions of dollars in campaign contributions, was part of the files linked to Jeffrey Epstein. Epstein, the disgraced financier and convicted sex offender, killed himself in prison in 2019. However, Musk quickly backtracked this week, apologising and saying his posts against 'went too far'. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD Musk's apology also came ahead of a major product launch for Tesla next week. But how did the feud escalate? And how has his apology has been good for business? Let's take a closer look How the feud escalated It began with Trump and Musk having a fallout over the Republican president's 'big, beautiful bill'. 'I'm sorry, but I just can't stand it anymore. This massive, outrageous, pork-filled Congressional spending bill is a disgusting abomination. Shame on those who voted for it: you know you did wrong. You know it,' Musk wrote on X on June 3. Trump, two days later, during a meeting in the Oval Office with Germany's new leader, said he was 'very disappointed' with Musk's comments. 'Elon knew the inner workings of this bill better than almost anybody sitting here,' Trump said. 'Elon and I had a great relationship. I don't know if we will anymore.' 'He hasn't said bad about me personally, but I'm sure that will be next,' Trump said. 'But I'm very disappointed in Elon. I've helped Elon a lot.' 'False,' Musk hit back immediately on X even as Trump continued to speak. 'This bill was never shown to me even once and was passed in the dead of night so fast that almost no one in Congress could even read it!' STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD When Trump further said he would have 'won Pennsylvania easily' without Musk's help, The Tesla CEO responded immediately. Musk, remember, spend hundreds of millions of dollars to elect Trump including a $1 million a day giveaway in Pennsylvania. Musk responded that Trump would have lost the election without him and that the Democrats would control both the House and the Senate. Donald Trump said he was 'very disappointed' with Elon Musk. Reuters 'The Big Ugly Bill will INCREASE the deficit to $2.5 trillion!' Musk added. Musk then put up a poll asking his followers if it was time to create a new political party – one that represented the 80 per cent of Americans in the middle. Musk then pointed out that he would be around for a lot longer than Trump. 'Oh and some food for thought as they ponder this question: Trump has 3.5 years left as President, but I will be around for 40+ years…' Trump then launched an all-out assault on Musk. 'I asked him to leave, I took away his EV Mandate that forced everyone to buy Electric Cars that nobody else wanted (that he knew for months I was going to do!), and he just went CRAZY!' Trump wrote on social media. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD Trump also threatened Musk's government subsidies and contracts. He wrote, 'The easiest way to save money in our Budget, Billions and Billions of Dollars, is to terminate Elon's Governmental Subsidies and Contracts. I was always surprised that Biden didn't do it!' 'Such an obvious lie. So sad,' Musk responded. Then came the big bombshell accusation. Musk claimed Trump appeared in the Jeffrey Epstein files . 'Files linked to the investigation of convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein have emerged as a point of fixation for Trump and his allies and right-wing media figures,' Musk wrote. 'Time to drop the really big bomb: Donald Trump is in the Epstein files. That is the real reason they have not been made public.' 'Mark this post for the future. The truth will come out,' Musk added. On June 6, the White House claimed that the two men were said to have a phone call to clear the air. However, Trump, in his usual fashion put paid to that telling ABC he was 'not particularly' interested in speaking to Musk. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD 'I'm not even thinking about Elon. He's got a problem. The poor guy's got a problem,' Trump said. Musk backs down Trump's threats against Musk's subsidies and government contracts seemed to have worked. Musk on Wednesday back down from his claims. 'I regret some of my posts about President @realDonaldTrump last week. They went too far,' Musk wrote on X early Wednesday morning. This came after Musk made a private phone call to Trump. The development came after Musk and Trump allies including Vice President J Dance and White House Chief Suzie Wiles privately met to discuss a truce. SpaceX headquarters is shown in Hawthorne, California. The company receives billions of dollars in revenue every year in government contracts. Reuters Trump, for his part, appeared pacified by the apology. 'I thought it was very nice that he did that,' Trump told the New York Post. 'Look, I have no hard feelings,' Trump said. 'I was really surprised that that happened. He went after a bill that's phenomenal. …He just — I think he feels very badly that he said that, actually.' 'The President acknowledged the statement that Elon put out this morning and he is appreciative of it and we are continuing to focus on the business of the American people,' the White House said in a statement. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD How has Musk's apology been good for business? According to Forbes, Musk's net worth rose to $411.4 billion after the apology – an increase of $191 million. This came as, Tesla's shares, which had tanked 14 per cent in the middle of the feud, gained around 1 per cent on Wednesday. The spat between the two men had caused Musk around $34 billion of his net worth – which makes given that SpaceX and Tesla, which form a huge chunk of his net worth, are hugely dependent on government contracts and subsidies. Investors in Musk's companies would now be heaving a sigh of relief after his apology to Trump. Now, with both men seemingly on a path to reconciliation, Musk can keep financing Trump and the Republicans' political ambitions and the government money can keep flowing for both SpaceX and Tesla. With inputs from agencies
Mint
an hour ago
- Mint
Members of the Fulbright Foreign Scholarship Board resigned en masse: Here's why
At least 11 out of the 12 members of the Fulbright Foreign Scholarship Board have resigned en masse to protest 'unprecedented interference' from Trump adminstration officials, they claimed in a statement on Substack. The statement posted on June 11 titled 'Fulbright Foreign Scholarship Board Resignation Statement', said that members of the board voted to resign 'rather than endorse unprecedented actions that … compromise national interests and integrity'. Notably, AP reported that one board member has not joined the mass resignation. Board members Carmen Estrada-Schaye told the agency, 'I was appointed by the president of the United States and I intend to fill out my term.' According to the statement, the Trump administration denied a number of US academics from receiving the prestigious awards and has rejected scholarships for the 2025-2026 academic year. Further, they alleged 'unauthorized review' of 1,200 foreign Fulbright recipients. As per the New York Times, which broke the story, US State Department officials have cancelled Fulbright scholarships for nearly 200 US professors and researchers at universities and research centers abroad. The board alleges that the current administration has usurped the authority of the board in contradiction to Fulbright mission and the values, including free speech and academic freedom. When US Congress established the Fulbright scholarship program, the board was given final approval over applicants, and screening by nonpartisan career staff at the State Department. It added that over 35 foreign governments match or exceed the US contributions to the program. The board added that its written objections to senior administration officials failed to receive a response and to 'continue to serve … would risk legitimising actions we believe are unlawful and damage the integrity of this storied program and America's credibility abroad'. A US State Department official, in statements to the media, dismissed the mass resignation as politically motivated. They also disputed claims of board independence and said that it has final say over applications. 'It's ridiculous to believe that these members would continue to have final say over the application process, especially when it comes to determining academic suitability and alignment with President Trump's Executive Orders. The claim that the Fulbright Hayes Act affords exclusive and final say over Fulbright Applications to the Fulbright board is false. This is nothing but a political stunt attempting to undermine President Trump,' the official said. 'The 12 members of the Fulbright board were partisan political appointees of the Biden administration. It's ridiculous to believe that these members would continue to have final say over the application process, especially when it comes to determining academic suitability and alignment with President Trump's executive orders,' they added. The AP reported noted that besides Estrada-Schaye, 11 of the board members were selected under former US President Joe Biden. 'Effective immediately, members of the Congressionally mandated Fulbright Foreign Scholarship Board voted overwhelmingly to resign from the board, rather than endorse unprecedented actions that we believe are impermissible under the law, compromise U.S. national interests and integrity, and undermine the mission and mandates Congress established for the Fulbright program nearly 80 years ago. At the program's inception, Congress clearly specified that the Fulbright Board has final approval authority of applicants, which occurs after an exhaustive and deliberate, year-long process led by non-partisan career staff at the State Department and Embassies around the world. The process involves 49 binational, treaty-based commissions and over 150 countries, which contribute a significant amount of the annual funding for the Fulbright program. In fact, 35+ foreign governments match or exceed the U.S. government's annual contribution. Under Democratic and Republican administrations alike, the Board has followed the law, operating with independence pursuant to its statutory mandate. Indeed, the Fulbright-Hays Act emphasizes the non-political and non-ideological character of the program. However, the current administration has usurped the authority of the Board and denied Fulbright awards to a substantial number of individuals who were selected for the 2025-2026 academic year. The administration is also currently subjecting an additional 1,200 foreign Fulbright recipients to an unauthorized review process and could reject more. We believe these actions not only contradict the statute but are antithetical to the Fulbright mission and the values, including free speech and academic freedom, that Congress specified in the statute. It is worth noting that the awards that were overridden include studies in categories such as biology, engineering, architecture, agriculture, crop sciences, animal sciences, biochemistry, medical sciences, music, and history. Through generations of war and peace, the Fulbright Foreign Scholarship Program has been a bipartisan pillar of American diplomacy—an enduring symbol of our nation's commitment to mutual understanding and diplomacy, academic excellence, and international cooperation. It has promoted U.S. interests and global stability. Fulbright alumni have gone on to become leaders of government, industry, academia, arts, and culture in every part of the world. Members of Congress of both parties tout the prestige and economic benefits bestowed upon their home state colleges and universities who support such distinguished students and alumni. This proud legacy has depended on one thing above all: the integrity of the program's selection process based on merit, not ideology, and its insulation from political interference. That integrity is now undermined. We have raised these legal issues and our strong objections with senior administration officials on multiple occasions, including in writing. The officials have refused to acknowledge or respond to the Board, failing to even attempt good faith efforts to course correct and operate the Program in accordance with the statute. Our resignation is not a decision we take lightly. But to continue to serve after the Administration has consistently ignored the Board's request that they follow the law would risk legitimizing actions we believe are unlawful and damage the integrity of this storied program and America's credibility abroad. Indeed, the erosion of the Fulbright program weakens America and our national security interests. Institutions and the rule of law matter and have distinguished our country for almost 250 years. As a Board, we are proud of our stewardship of the program, the way we've worked to uphold its mission, integrity, and adherence to the law. It is our sincere hope that Congress, the courts, and future Fulbright Boards will prevent the administration's efforts to degrade, dismantle, or even eliminate one of our nation's most respected and valuable programs. Injecting politics and ideological mandates into the Fulbright program violates the letter and spirit of the law that Congress so wisely established nearly eight decades ago.' Established around 80 years back, in 1946, to promote international exchange and American diplomacy, the Fulbright Scholarship is a highly selective program that awards close to 9,000 scholarships annually in the US and over 160 other countries to students, scholars, and professionals in a range of fields. Sponsored by the US Department of State's Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs (ECA) it was established under legislation introduced by late Senator J William Fulbright, of Arkansas. According to the Fulbright website, its alumni include 62 Nobel prize winners and 93 Pulitzer recipients. Some notable alumni include King Felipe VI of Spain; Luc Frieden, prime minister of Luxembourg; Leslie Voltaire, president of Haiti's transitional presidential council; and Muhammad Yunus, chief adviser of Bangladesh. The United States–India Educational Foundation (USIEF) administers the Fulbright Program in India, according to the US Embassy in India website. It added that India's program 'is one of the largest with more than 350 fellowships granted annually'. Donald Trump's crackdown on immigration and foreign students in the US is likely to impact 'thousands' of Indian students. Sanjog Anand, co-founder of Rostrum Education told Business Standard in May, 'India has become the leading source of international students in the US. More than 331,600 Indian students were enrolled in the US during the 2023–24 academic year, making up nearly 30 per cent of the international student body.' (With inputs from Bloomberg and AP)
&w=3840&q=100)
First Post
2 hours ago
- First Post
China plans to choke Western militaries with 100% control of this rare earth
China controls the world's entire supply of samarium, a rare earth mineral used almost entirely by the military industry and required to make fighter planes, missiles, smart bombs, and other advanced platforms. With the halt in samarium exports, China is choking Western militaries. read more An F-35 fighter jet on the deck of the US nuclear-powered aircraft carrier George Washington. (Photo: AP) Even as China controls most of the world's rare earths, there is one mineral whose supply it controls completely. The rare earth mineral, samarium, is used almost entirely by the military industry and is required to make fighter planes, missiles, smart bombs, and other advanced platforms. The centrality is such that planes like F-35 cannot be made without samarium magnets. China banned the export of samarium and six other rare earths in April amid the ongoing trade war with the United States. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD Out of these seven rare earths, the demand of six —dysprosium, gadolinium, lutetium, scandium, terbium, and yttrium— is largely civilian, but samarium is used 'almost exclusively used for military purposes', Stanley Trout, a metallurgist at the Metropolitan State University of Denver, told The New York Times. China can choke Western militaries with samarium supply ban With a halt in the supply of samarium, China can essentially choke Western militaries by essentially blocking deliveries of new platforms and affecting the repair, maintenance, and upgradation of existing platforms. It appears that the plan is already in motion. Even as China has started granting licences for some other rare earths, such as dysprosium and terbium, licences have not been granted for samarium, according to The Times. William Bain, the head of trade policy at the British Chambers of Commerce, noted that the continued halt of samarium supplies would bring the production of planes like F-35 to a halt. For context, F-35 needs up to 50 pounds of samarium magnets and its maker, Lockheed Martin, is the main customer of samarium in the United States. 'We've seen some relaxation over the weekend with licenses granted in sectors connected with robotics and electric vehicles, but if you take, for example, a critical mineral like samarium, within magnets, that's absolutely essential for F-35 fighter jet construction in the US. They can't make them without that. And not having access to that is severely affecting both US construction in that area, but also perhaps its national security if that remains in place,' Bain told CNBC. STORY CONTINUES BELOW THIS AD Samarium chokehold gives China edge There is evidence that samarium and other rare earths have given China edge in ongoing trade negotiations with the United States. After focus of the talks shifted from tariffs to rare earths, China appears to have secured concessions from the United States regarding Chinese access to critical Western technologies in return of relaxation on Chinese supply of rare earths. Western companies and the US Department of Defense keep samarium reserves that would only last for months. In the absence of new supplies, reserves are expected to get depleted soon. Such a disruption has come at a time when the United States and others in the West are replenishing their arsenals after stocks' depletion because of supplies of Ukraine and Israel.
