Donald Trump Says 'Bring in the Troops' as LA Riots Escalate
Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources.
Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content.
President Donald Trump called for troops to enter Los Angeles amid rioting in the Californian city that stemmed from protests against immigration enforcement.
The Republican president is deploying 2,000 California National Guard troops to L.A. to quell the intense violence, despite opposition from Democratic Gov. Gavin Newsom.
"Looking really bad in L.A. BRING IN THE TROOPS!!!" Trump posted to his Truth Social platform in the early hours of Monday morning.
This is a developing story. Updates to follow.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Forbes
30 minutes ago
- Forbes
U.S.-China Trade Deal ‘Done,' Trump Says
President Donald Trump on Wednesday said a trade agreement was reached between the U.S. and China, pending final approval from him and Chinese President Xi Jinping, following weeks of escalated tensions between both countries as trade negotiations were carried out. The trade agreement includes full magnets and 'any necessary rare earths' from China as the U.S. ... More makes concessions on student visas. Trump, in a post on Truth Social, said a deal was 'done' between the U.S. and China, which will supply 'any necessary rare earths' and full magnets as the U.S. makes concessions on allowing Chinese students to attend American universities. This is a developing story.
Yahoo
31 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Musk apology to Trump could reopen path for renewed alliance says Dan Ives
-- Wedbush analyst Dan Ives said in a note Wednesday that Elon Musk's recent apology to President Donald Trump could reopen the path for a renewed alliance, which he views as a "smart move with [the] Robotaxi launch on deck." Musk posted on X, "I regret some of my posts about President Trump last week, They went too far." The Wedbush analyst believes this marks an "important step" in mending fences between the two. Ives feels the apology is crucial because "Musk needs Trump and Trump needs Musk." The firm has observed that the "former BFFs turn against each other has been an overhang on shares of Tesla (NASDAQ:TSLA)," as investors feared a "Trump in revenge mode will make it more difficult for an autonomous future with Tesla front and center." While not expecting a return to their "Mar-a-Lago connected at the hip days," Wedbush anticipates they will "slowly mend the fences" as Trump needs Musk to stay close to the Republican party, and Musk needs Trump for various reasons, including a "green light on a federal framework for autonomous." The timing of the reconciliation is considered notable as Tesla is set to launch its highly anticipated Robotaxi in Austin on June 22. Wedbush sees this as a "major endeavor for Musk and Tesla" and believes the "Trump feud is not getting in the way of this." The core focus for investors, according to Ives, is the "AI Revolution is now coming to Tesla," which will position Tesla as "one of the best pure plays on AI over the next decade" alongside companies like Nvidia (NASDAQ:NVDA) and Microsoft (NASDAQ:MSFT). Wedbush estimates the "AI and autonomous opportunity is worth at least $1 trillion alone for Tesla" and fully expects that "under a Trump White House, these key initiatives will get fast-tracked." They believe "Tesla could reach a $2 trillion market cap by the end of 2026 in a bull case scenario," as the "march to a $2 trillion valuation for TSLA has now begun." Related articles Musk apology to Trump could reopen path for renewed alliance says Dan Ives Ouster shares surge on Pentagon approval for lidar sensor Tesla gains as Musk says he regrets some Trump-related posts Errore nel recupero dei dati Effettua l'accesso per consultare il tuo portafoglio Errore nel recupero dei dati Errore nel recupero dei dati Errore nel recupero dei dati Errore nel recupero dei dati
San Francisco Chronicle
33 minutes ago
- San Francisco Chronicle
Big changes are being proposed for a US food aid program. Here's a breakdown by the numbers
President Donald Trump's plan to cut taxes by trillions of dollars could also trim billions in spending from social safety net programs, including food aid for lower-income people. The proposed changes to the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program would make states pick up more of the costs, require several million more recipients to work or lose their benefits, and potentially reduce the amount of food aid people receive in the future. The legislation, which narrowly passed the U.S. House, could undergo further changes in the Senate, where it's currently being debated. Trump wants lawmakers to send the 'One Big Beautiful Bill Act' to his desk by July 4, when the nation marks the 249th anniversary of the Declaration of Independence. Here's a look at the food aid program, by the numbers: Year: 2008 The federal aid program formerly known as food stamps was renamed the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, or SNAP, on Oct. 1, 2008. The program provides monthly payments for food purchases to low-income residents generally earning less than $1,632 monthly for individuals, or $3,380 monthly for a household of four. The nation's first experiment with food stamps began in 1939. But the modern version of the program dates to 1979, when a change in federal law took effect eliminating a requirement that participants purchase food stamps. There currently is no cost to people participating in the program. Number: 42 million A little over 42 million people nationwide received SNAP benefits in February, the latest month for which figures are available. That's roughly one out of every eight people in the county. Participation is down from a peak average of 47.6 million people during the 2013 federal fiscal year. Often, more than one person in a household is eligible for food aid. As of February, nearly 22.5 million households were enrolled in SNAP, receiving an average monthly household benefit of $353. The money can be spent on most groceries, but Trump's administration recently approved requests by six states — Arkansas, Idaho, Indiana, Iowa, Nebraska and Utah — to exclude certain items, such as soda or candy. Dollars: $295 billion Legislation passed by the House is projected to cut about $295 billion of federal spending from SNAP over the next 10 years, according to the Congressional Budget Office. A little more than half of those federal savings would come by shifting costs to states, which administer SNAP. Nearly one-third of those savings would come by expanding a work requirement for some SNAP participants, which the CBO assumes would force some people off the rolls. Additional money would be saved by eliminating SNAP benefits for between 120,000 and 250,000 immigrants legally in the U.S. who are not citizens or lawful permanent residents. Another provision in the legislation would cap the annual inflationary growth in food benefits. As a result, the CBO estimates that the average monthly food benefit would be about $15 lower than it otherwise would have been by 2034. Ages: 7 and 55-64 To receive SNAP benefits, current law says adults ages 18 through 54 who are physically and mentally able and don't have dependents need to work, volunteer or participate in training programs for at least 80 hours a month. Those who don't do so are limited to just three months of benefits in a three-year period. The legislation that passed the House would expand work requirements to those ages 55 through 64. It also would extend work requirements to some parents without children younger than age 7. And it would limit the ability of states to waive work requirements in areas that lack sufficient jobs. The combined effect of those changes is projected by the CBO to reduce SNAP participation by a monthly average of 3.2 million people. Percentages: 5%-25% The federal government currently splits the administrative costs of SNAP with states but covers the full cost of food benefits. Under the legislation, states would have to cover three-fourths of the administrative costs. States also would have to pay a portion of the food benefits starting with the 2028 fiscal year. All states would be required to pay at least 5% of the food aid benefits, and could pay more depending on how often they make mistakes with people's payments. States that had payment error rates between 6-8% in the most recent federal fiscal year for which data is available would have to cover 15% of the food costs. States with error rates between 8-10% would have to cover 20% of the food benefits, and those with error rates greater than 10% would have to cover 25% of the food costs. Many states could get hit with higher costs. The national error rate stood at 11.7% in the 2023 fiscal year, and just three states — Idaho, South Dakota and Vermont — had error rates below 5%. But the 2023 figures are unlikely to serve as the base year, so the exact costs to states remains unclear. As a result of the cost shift, the CBO assumes that some states would reduce or eliminate benefits for people. Margin: 1 House Resolution 1, containing the SNAP changes and tax cuts, passed the House last month by a margin of just one vote — 215-214. A vote also could be close in the Senate, where Republicans hold 53 of the 100 seats. Democrats did not support the bill in the House and are unlikely to do so in the Senate. Some Republican senators have expressed reservations about proposed cuts to food aid and Medicaid and the potential impact of the bill on the federal deficit. GOP Senate leaders may have to make some changes to the bill to ensure enough support to pass it.
