US says it opened foreign funding probe into University of Pennsylvania
WASHINGTON, May 8 (Reuters) - The U.S. Department of Education said on Thursday it opened a foreign funding investigation into the University of Pennsylvania, alleging the school made inaccurate and untimely foreign financial disclosures in the past.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Daily Mail
29 minutes ago
- Daily Mail
Shocking moment British photographer films himself getting shot in the head by LA riot cops
Shocking footage has captured the moment LA police shot a British photographer in the head with a rubber bullet as the city was rocked by violent riots on Sunday evening. Father-of-two Toby Canham, who was on assignment for the New York Post, was filming videos of the chaos from an elevated level when a California Highway Patrol officer suddenly fired at him, leaving him with a severe head wound. Disturbing footage taken by Canham captured the moment he was struck in the forehead, which caused him to fall to the ground. 'F**k, f**k, I just got shot in the head!' the photographer can be heard screaming from behind the camera. Just moments before he was struck, Canham's video showed a police officer positioning himself behind a pillar. It is unclear why Canham was hit. The LA-based photographer, who had previously served for the British Army, was treated in hospital for whiplash and neck pain. Images show the bloody red wound he was left with on his forehead. Speaking about his harrowing ordeal, Canham said: 'When I got whacked, to my best recollection it was just me filming with my cameras on and then I got shot,' said Canham. 'Where I was hit, I was the only person overlooking the freeway. I wasn't surrounded so I was an easy target.' Seconds before he was hit with the rubber bullet, a flashbang initially exploded a few feet from him, causing shrapnel to kick up and leave two holes in his pants. Los Angeles is currently in its fifth day of protests against President Donald Trump's immigration crackdown. Demonstrations have spread to other cities nationwide, including Dallas and Austin, Texas, Chicago and New York, where a thousand people rallied and multiple arrests were made. Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass declared a local emergency and said a curfew will run from 8 p.m. Tuesday until 6 a.m. Wednesday. 'We reached a tipping point' after 23 businesses were looted, Bass said during a news conference. The curfew covers a 1 square mile section of downtown that includes the area where protests have occurred since Friday. Trump left open the possibility of invoking the Insurrection Act, which authorizes the president to deploy military forces inside the U.S. to suppress rebellion or domestic violence or to enforce the law in certain situations. It's one of the most extreme emergency powers available to a U.S. president. The protests began Friday after federal immigration raids arrested dozens of workers in Los Angeles as part of his crackdown on immigration. Protesters blocked a major freeway and set cars on fire over the weekend, and police responded with tear gas, rubber bullets and flash-bang grenades. The demonstrations have been mostly concentrated downtown in the city of 4 million. Thousands of people have peacefully rallied outside City Hall and hundreds more protested outside a federal complex that includes a detention center where some immigrants are being held following workplace raids. Thousands of people have peacefully rallied outside City Hall and hundreds more protested outside a federal complex that includes a detention center where some immigrants are being held following workplace raids Despite the protests, immigration enforcement activity has continued throughout the county, with city leaders and community groups reporting ICE present at libraries, car washes and Home Depots. School graduations in Los Angeles have increased security over fears of ICE action and some have offered parents the option to watch on Zoom. McDonnell said that police had made 197 arrests on Tuesday, including 67 who were taken into custody for unlawfully occupying part of the 101 freeway. Several businesses were broken into Monday, though authorities didn't say if the looting was tied to the protests.
Daily Mail
29 minutes ago
- Daily Mail
EXCLUSIVE Voters reveal if Trump would have won election without Elon Musk and weigh in on his new political party idea
During their face-off last week, Elon Musk boldly claimed that he was the reason President Donald Trump won the 2024 election. 'Without me, Trump would have lost the election, Dems would control the House and the Republicans would be 51-49 in the Senate,' Musk claimed on Thursday. 'Such ingratitude,' the billionaire added. The billionaire SpaceX, X and Tesla head contributed around $277 million to Trump and Trump aligned candidates in the 2024 race and Musk personally hit the campaign trail in support of the Republican nominee. But in a Daily Mail poll conducted by JL Partners and released Friday, more registered voters sided with Trump than Musk. The polling found that 45 percent believed that Trump would have won the election without the help of Musk. Another 34 percent said Trump needed Musk to win. Finally 21 percent of respondents said they were unsure. When broken down by party, Republicans were more likely to say that Trump would have won without Musk's help. Among Republicans, 71 percent said Trump won on his own, while just 15 percent said that Trump wouldn't have won the November presidential election without the DOGE leader's help. Fifty-three percent of Democrats credit Musk for Trump's win, while just 24 percent said that Trump did it on his own. Amid their fighting, Musk suggested the idea of starting his own third-party. He floated the idea of forming the 'America Party' to represent the '80 percent' of people he said were in the political middle. When voters were asked what party they'd vote for if candidates in their area were running for office, a party created by Musk received only 4 percent backing among all the poll's respondents. Overall Democrats had an edge - with 42 percent saying the Democratic Party - while Republican candidates received 35 percent. When voters surveyed were broken down by party, Musk's third-party did the best with unaffiliated voters, with 7 percent backing that option. Just 1 percent of Democrats would vote for a Musk-party candidate, while 5 percent of Republicans said they'd make that choice. Democrats and Republicans largely stayed in their camps - with 86 percent of Democrats saying they'd support a Democrat and 84 percent of Republicans saying they'd vote Republican. On Friday, the Daily Mail and JL Partners released the first batch of numbers from the new poll - finding that Republicans overwhelmingly took Trump's side in the fight despite Musk's almost year-long association with the MAGA movement. Among GOP voters, 59 percent sided with the U.S. president, while just 12 percent chose Musk. Another 28 percent said they were unsure. Since April Trump has lost some support with GOP voters, while Musk's has grown - but Trump still has nearly five times as much support. Previous polling found that 70 percent of Republicans backed Trump, while 6 percent selected Musk. 'Republicans are clear: Donald Trump is their man. As our polling showed before, Trump voters are sticking by the person they backed in November over Elon Musk,' said J.L. Partners pollster James Johnson. The fresh poll was conducted Friday with a sample of 1,006 registered voters, with a margin of error of plus or minus 3.1 percent.
The Independent
33 minutes ago
- The Independent
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 SNAP, receiving an average monthly household benefit of $353. 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 would 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.
