What to know about the trial of Brazil's former President Jair Bolsonaro
The case received renewed attention after President Donald Trump directly tied a 50% tariff on Brazilian imported goods to Bolsonaro's judicial situation, which Trump called a ' witch hunt .'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
7 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Trump Says He'll Likely Name Temporary Fed Governor to Open Seat
(Bloomberg) -- President Donald Trump indicated he would likely nominate a temporary Federal Reserve governor to fill the soon-to-be vacant seat on the central bank's board within the coming days, rather than use the seat to signal his choice to replace Jerome Powell as chairman. All Hail the Humble Speed Hump Mayor Asked to Explain $1.4 Billion of Wasted Johannesburg Funds Three Deaths Reported as NYC Legionnaires' Outbreak Spreads Major Istanbul Projects Are Stalling as City Leaders Sit in Jail PATH Train Service Resumes After Fire at Jersey City Station 'We're probably going to go with the temp and then a permanent,' Trump told reporters Wednesday at the White House. 'I think the temp is going to be named, I'd say, over the next two, three days, and then we're going to go permanent.' Fed Governor Adriana Kugler announced last week that she plans to vacate her role on Aug. 8. That gives Trump a choice. He can elevate someone to serve out the rest of her term, which expires in January, and keep weighing his options for the more prominent chair role, or he can make a decision on the Fed chair role months earlier than he'd planned and announce that now. Several of those on Trump's Fed short list are outsiders, and the president isn't guaranteed to get another chance to name a new board member before Powell's term as chair expires in May. While Fed chairs typically step off the board when they step down, he does have the option to stay on and deny Trump a second opening. Powell's underlying post as a governor extends into 2028 and he has so far declined to reveal his plans. Advisers had encouraged the president to name a short-term pick first, simply to complete Kugler's term that expires in January. That approach would give Trump weeks or months more to interview candidates to serve as chair. And it's the strategy Trump said Wednesday he's leaning toward. Trump said he was considering 'probably' three candidates for the temporary position, adding that they could come from Wall Street. 'Yeah, essentially, we're all from Wall Street, aren't we, when you get right down to it?' Trump said. He added that Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick, Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent, and Vice President JD Vance were among the advisers participating in the process. Separately, Trump reiterated that he considered 'the two Kevins' — former Federal Reserve Governor Kevin Warsh and National Economic Council Director Kevin Hassett — as top candidates for the Fed Chair role when it becomes open. --With assistance from Justin Sink. (Updates with additional details on Fed timing and selection process starting in fourth paragraph.) Russia's Secret War and the Plot to Kill a German CEO The Pizza Oven Startup With a Plan to Own Every Piece of the Pie AI Flight Pricing Can Push Travelers to the Limit of Their Ability to Pay Government Steps Up Campaign Against Business School Diversity The GOP Is Choosing Pesticides Over the MAHA Moms ©2025 Bloomberg L.P. Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data
Buzz Feed
8 minutes ago
- Buzz Feed
The Right-Wing Movement Taking Over Public Schools
Across the United States, more parents are growing concerned as they witness a narrow religious ideology gaining influence over their children's public schools. While some argue that inclusive school curricula are threatening their religious freedom, many others are worried that one belief system is being imposed — dictating not only which books are available in classrooms but who gets to be represented in the school experience. The battle over books, especially those centering LGBTQ+ lives and diverse identities, has become a larger conflict about who controls the definition of American childhood and which values shape that narrative. 'The question emerging in the law right now is: Which parents have rights?' Jessica Mason Pieklo, Senior Vice President and Executive Editor of Rewire News Group, told HuffPost. 'We're seeing the conservative legal movement rally around a narrow vision of parental identity, control, and rights, one that doesn't reflect or include all families.' Education, once a shared public good, is increasingly becoming a battleground. And at the center of it is a Supreme Court case that could have far-reaching consequences: Mahmoud v. Taylor, which challenged the inclusion of LGBTQ+ books in a Maryland school district. In Mahmoud v. Taylor, the Supreme Court blocked a Maryland school district's LGBTQ+-inclusive curriculum, ruling it posed a 'very real threat' to the religious beliefs of some parents and supporting their right to opt their children out of such instruction. While the ruling doesn't impose a nationwide ban, it opens the door for local challenges that can limit educators' ability to provide diverse and inclusive education. For parents, this means the fight is about whose voices are heard in their communities. 'This isn't a book ban case,' explains Kelly Jensen, award-winning author and editor at Book Riot. 'It's a case about education and religious rights. None of the books are being banned or pulled from curricula. The real issue is the chilling effect.' Teachers, already working under immense pressure, may now think twice before including LGBTQ+ books in classrooms, even if those books are age-appropriate and affirming. 'The silent erasure of books, disappearing from shelves without formal challenges, is as insidious as outright bans,' Jensen warns. The ruling in Mahmoud v. Taylor didn't change the law outright, but it signaled a cultural shift. One where certain religious beliefs are being elevated above others. The uproar over inclusive books in schools isn't a spontaneous, grassroots movement; it's a carefully coordinated effort. 'These book bans are astroturfed,' Pieklo said. 'They don't bubble up organically in a community because there's overwhelming concern that some inappropriate material has been placed there. These are part of a larger advocacy campaign.' Despite the noise, most families support inclusive curricula and occupy a middle ground, favoring opt-out options for personal or religious objections without imposing blanket bans that restrict access for everyone else. According to Pieklo, these efforts to flood schools with opt-outs are part of a broader conservative legal strategy aimed at undermining public education and controlling what students learn, particularly around race, gender, and history. 'This isn't about free speech or parental choice,' she said. 'It's about using the power of the law to try and direct outcomes.' And those outcomes are already changing. The 11th Circuit Court recently upheld a Florida law that prevents teachers from using students' preferred pronouns, mandating that they refer to students only by their sex assigned at birth. The court even ruled that misgendering students is protected speech. The religious justification being used in these cases isn't general, it's specific. 'The ruling essentially says religion is more important than your identity, and not just any religion, but specific types of religious interpretations,' Pieklo explains. In oral arguments for Mahmoud, conservative justices grossly distorted the nature of inclusive books. Justice Neil Gorsuch even described Pride Puppy, a board book about a child attending a Pride parade, as 'a bondage manual for kindergartners.' For many families, the cultural and legal battles over school curricula aren't abstract; they're deeply personal. 'My kids are older now,' Pieklo said, 'but it is very important for me and my family that our children have access to, not just exposure, but access to, books, information, resources, materials that explain not just the world around them but a world they may or may not feel 100% a part of. That helps them understand and navigate shifting understandings of identity.' That sense of wanting children to see and understand the world in its full complexity is shared by other parents across the country. Stephanie, a mother from North Carolina, echoes the importance of broad exposure: 'I'm a Christian and I want my kids to learn about the world as it is, not just through the lens of our faith.' Katie, a public school teacher and parent, said she's horrified by efforts to limit what kids can learn. 'I want my kids to learn as much about the world as they can, and I know I can't teach them everything. I trust that they can handle hearing viewpoints that differ from their own.' That trust in students' ability to think critically is matched by a strong belief in the power of representation. Mindi, a former teacher, reflects on how she would approach things if she were still in the classroom. 'I would have integrated books with secondary characters who identify as LGBTQ — not for 'indoctrination,' but to support my students with other identities. No book bans, ever.' For some, like Denise, a mother in Pennsylvania, the issue goes even deeper — into questions of visibility and belonging. 'I think it's disgusting that LGBTQ+ is being erased from our children's education,' she said. 'These are real people with real and valid ways to love. Taking it out of schools means my kids will always think it's taboo to love who they love.' "We All Lose Something" Underlying all of these perspectives is a shared concern about whose values are shaping what's taught, and whose voices are being silenced. 'When one religious ideology dictates what can be taught, read, or affirmed in public schools, we all lose something,' Pieklo notes. As public schools face funding cuts and increasing pressure, decisions like Mahmoud v. Taylor hand a louder platform to a narrow, often extreme religious agenda that can then shape what every child is allowed to learn, regardless of their own parents' wishes. Though these rulings claim to protect parental rights, some parents feel they frequently silence and disenfranchise those who want their children to see themselves reflected in their education and to understand the rich diversity of the world around them. Megan, a mother of children in public schools, puts it even more bluntly: 'Religion does not belong in schools. I do not enforce or force my beliefs on other people's children. And I'm incredibly not okay with one religion being forced on mine in a 'free' country.' The deeper issue, some parents argue, is the widening gap between well-funded private religious schools and under-resourced public ones. Jensen warns that unless communities push back, this divide will only deepen: 'This ruling might fuel the expansion of voucher programs, pushing public funds toward private religious education,' she said. 'It divides the 'haves' from the 'have-nots.' And it hurts public schools that already struggle for funding.' Megan echoes that concern, pointing to the strain on her children's school, where the teachers' union has had to fight for basics like smaller class sizes and fair pay. 'They deserve help — not funding cuts and more pressure on an already struggling system.'
CNBC
9 minutes ago
- CNBC
Asia markets set to open lower as investors weigh Trump's vow on fresh chip tariffs
Asia-Pacific markets are set to start the day lower, following U.S. President Donald Trump's vow to impose a 100% tariff on imports of semiconductors and chips to the U.S., but companies that are "building in the United States" will be exempted. Details such as how much a company needs to be manufacturing in the U.S. to qualify for the tariff exemption were not immediately clear. Good morning from Singapore. Investors will be keeping a close watch on chip stocks following U.S. President Donald Trump's vow to impose 100% tariffs on imported semiconductors and chips, unless they are made by companies "building in the United States." Japan's benchmark Nikkei 225 was set to open lower, with the futures contract in Chicago at 40,785 while its counterpart in Osaka last traded at 40,790, against the index's last close of 40,794.86. Futures for Hong Kong's Hang Seng index stood at 24,903, pointing to a weaker open compared with the HSI's Wednesday close of 24,910.63. Australia's S&P/ASX 200 was set to start the day lower with futures tied to the benchmark at 8,779, compared with its last close of 8,843.70. — Amala Balakrishner President Donald Trump said late Wednesday that he would slap a 100% duty on imports of semiconductors and chips – with an exception for companies that are "building in the United States." "We're going to be putting a very large tariff on chips and semiconductors," he said, speaking in the Oval Office on Wednesday afternoon. "But the good news for companies like Apple is if you're building in the United States or have committed to build, without question, committed to build in the United States, there will be no charge," Trump added. Shares of Apple advanced 3% in extended trading, fresh off a 5% gain in the regular session. Stock chart icon Apple shares in the past day – Kevin Breuninger, Darla Mercado All the three major averages finished with gains on Wednesday. The S&P 500 advanced 0.73% to finish at 6,345.06, while the Nasdaq Composite jumped 1.21%, closing at 21,169.42. The Dow Jones Industrial Average also rose 81.38 points, or 0.18%, to end the day at 44,193.12. — Sean Conlon
