Clintons subpoened in House Epstein probe
Former FBI directors James Comey and Robert Mueller and six former US attorney generals will also be compelled to testify before the committee - the US Department of Justice has also been subpoenaed for records related to Epstein.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Reuters
11 minutes ago
- Reuters
Trump announces $100 billion new investment pledge from Apple
WASHINGTON, Aug 6 (Reuters) - President Donald Trump announced on Wednesday that Apple (AAPL.O), opens new tab will invest an additional $100 billion in the United States, a move which will expand the company's domestic investment commitment and could help it sidestep potential tariffs on iPhones. The new pledge brings Apple's total investment commitment in the U.S. to $600 billion. Earlier this year, the company had announced it would invest $500 billion and hire 20,000 workers across the country over the next four years. The announcement centers on expanding Apple's supply chain and advanced manufacturing footprint in the U.S., but still falls short of Trump's demand that Apple begin making iPhones domestically. "Companies like Apple, they're coming home. They're all coming home," Trump told reporters in the Oval Office, moments after Apple CEO Tim Cook gave him a U.S.-made souvenir with a 24-karat gold base. "This is a significant step toward the ultimate goal of ensuring that iPhones sold in America also are made in America," Trump added. Asked if Apple could eventually build entire iPhones in the U.S., Cook noted that many components such as semiconductors, glass and Face ID modules are already made domestically, but said that final assembly will remain overseas "for a while." While the investment pledge is significant, analysts say the numbers align with Apple's typical spending patterns and echo commitments made during both the Biden administration and Trump's previous term. In May, Trump had threatened Apple with a 25% tariff on products manufactured overseas, a sharp reversal from earlier policy when his administration had exempted smartphones, computers and other electronics from rounds of tariffs on Chinese imports. Trump's effort to reshape global trade through tariffs cost Apple $800 million in the June quarter. "Today is a good step in the right direction for Apple, and it helps get on Trump's good side after what appears to be a tension-filled few months in the eyes of the Street between the White House and Apple," said Daniel Ives, an analyst with Wedbush Securities. Apple has a mixed track record when it comes to following through on investment promises. In 2019, for instance, Cook toured a Texas factory with Trump that was promoted as a new manufacturing site. But the facility had been producing Apple computers since 2013 and Apple has since moved that production to Thailand. Apple continues to manufacture most of its products, including iPhones and iPads, in Asia, primarily in China, although it has shifted some production to Vietnam, Thailand and India in recent years. Despite political pressure, analysts widely agree that building iPhones in the U.S. remains unrealistic due to labor costs and the complexity of the global supply chain. "The announcement is a savvy solution to the president's demand that Apple manufacture all iPhones in the U.S.," said Nancy Tengler, CEO and CIO of Laffer Tengler Investments, which holds Apple shares. Partners on Apple's latest U.S. investment effort include specialty glass maker Corning (GLW.N), opens new tab, semiconductor manufacturing equipment supplier Applied Materials (AMAT.O), opens new tab, and chipmakers Texas Instruments (TXN.O), opens new tab, GlobalFoundries (GFS.O), opens new tab, and Broadcom (AVGO.O), opens new tab. Apple shares closed up 5% on Wednesday. Shares of Corning rose nearly 4% in extended trading, while Applied Materials gained almost 2%.
BBC News
13 minutes ago
- BBC News
Suspect in shooting of Israel embassy couple faces hate crime and murder charges
Prosecutors have formally charged a suspect in the fatal shooting of two Israeli embassy staff members in Washington DC in May with hate crimes and first-degree murder. Along with the nine-count indictment against Elias Rodriguez, 31, the US Department of Justice filed legal findings that could allow the death penalty to be pursued in the case. Prosecutors say Mr Rodriguez opened fire on couple Yaron Lischinsky, 30, and Sarah Lynn Milgrim, 26, outside the Capital Jewish Museum before shouting "Free Palestine" during his arrest. The defendant - who has been held in federal custody since he was arrested - has yet to enter a plea in court. Prosecutors say Mr Rodriguez, who is from Chicago, had expressed support for violence against Israelis, including in social media posts where he allegedly wrote: "Death to Israel."Prosecutors say he travelled from Chicago to the Washington DC area on 20 May with a handgun. They say Mr Rodriguez researched an event on 21 May at the Capital Jewish Museum. Prosecutors allege he bought a ticket to the event, which was sponsored by the American Jewish Committee and attended by both of the victims. The event was described as a networking opportunity to bring Jewish young professionals and the diplomatic community Mr Lischinsky and Ms Milgrim left the museum, the assailant allegedly fired 20 shots and told police at the scene: "I did it for Palestine. I did it for Gaza." The Israeli Ambassador to the US, Yechiel Leiter, said that Mr Lischinsky had just bought an engagement ring and was planning to propose to Ms Milgrim next week in say Mr Rodriguez wrote a document called "explication" in which he expressed his support for Palestine and claimed Israel was trying to exterminate Palestinians. In the charging documents, prosecutors also detailed Mr Rodriguez's eligibility for the death penalty, including that he was older than 18 years of age at the time of the shooting, that he allegedly intentionally killed the victims and did so after substantial planning.
Reuters
13 minutes ago
- Reuters
Stanford student newspaper sues Trump administration for alleged free speech violations
Aug 6 (Reuters) - Stanford University's student newspaper sued the Trump Administration on Wednesday, arguing it has violated the free-speech rights of foreign students by threatening to deport them for writing stories that it considers "anti-American or anti-Israel." The Stanford Daily and two unidentified students said in the lawsuit, opens new tab, filed in federal court in California against Secretary of State Marco Rubio and Secretary of Homeland Security Kristi Noem, that foreign students at the Palo Alto, California, school have refused to write about the conflict in the Middle East for fear they could be arrested, detained and deported. "This pall of fear is incompatible with American liberty," the lawsuit said. "Our First Amendment stands as a bulwark against the government infringing the inalienable human right to think and speak for yourself." Spokespeople for the White House did not immediately respond to a request for comment. "In the United States of America, no one should fear a midnight knock on the door for voicing the wrong opinion,' Stanford Daily attorney Conor Fitzpatrick said in a statement. A spokesperson for Stanford University said the newspaper is an independent organization and that the school is not part of the lawsuit. The Trump administration has attempted to deport students who have expressed pro-Palestinian views, calling them antisemitic and extremist sympathizers whose presence in the country was adverse to U.S. foreign policy. Protesters say that the government wrongly conflates their criticism of Israeli actions in Gaza and advocacy for Palestinian rights with antisemitism and extremism. Judges have ordered the release of some students who the administration arrested and detained without being charged with a crime. The Stanford Daily said in its lawsuit that the administration has caused its foreign writers to self-censor to avoid being targeted. It argued that the administration's threats prevent them from "engaging in protected expression like attending protests, using certain slogans, and publicly voicing their true views about American foreign policy, Israel, and Palestine." The newspaper asked the court to rule that the U.S. Constitution prevents the government from deporting non-citizens for engaging in free speech.
