Two months after Trump's funding cuts, a nonprofit struggles to support refugees and itself
Bulonza Chishamara (standing) and Muganga Akilimali (center) left the Democratic Republic of Congo 10 years ago. The family was approved for refugee resettlement in Tennessee last year. Credit: Arielle Weenonia Gray for ProPublica
This story was originally published by ProPublica.
ProPublica is a Pulitzer Prize-winning investigative newsroom. Sign up for The Big Story newsletter to receive stories like this one in your inbox.
Broken Promises: A Trump administration freeze of funds designated to help new refugees is causing chaos for families and forcing nonprofits to cut promised services.
Frustrated Families: Immigrants receiving less help from caseworkers are struggling to find work and navigate health care systems.
Overwhelmed Volunteers: Church members and other volunteers are filling some gaps, but they don't have the same resources as the aid agencies that used to do this work.
These highlights were written by the reporters and editors who worked on this story. Were they helpful?
When Max Rykov started reading a Jan. 24 letter sent to the leaders of the country's 10 refugee resettlement agencies, he found the wording vague but ominous. The agencies were ordered to 'stop all work' funded by the Department of State and 'not incur any new costs.'
At first, he wondered if the order from the Trump administration was only targeting refugee work in other countries. Rykov, then the director of development and communications at a refugee resettlement partner in Nashville, began texting colleagues at other agencies. 'What does it mean?' he asked.
By Monday, three days after the memo, it became clear. The Nashville International Center for Empowerment, along with similar nonprofits across the country, would not have access to the money the government had promised to refugees for their first three months in the United States. That day, NICE laid off 12 of its 56 resettlement staff members and scrambled to free up funds to pay for the basic needs of nearly 170 people dependent on the frozen grants.
Rykov knew exactly what was at stake, and that delivered an additional dose of dread. Born in the former USSR, he and his family arrived in the U.S. as refugees in 1993, fleeing the collapse of the Soviet Union, the economic devastation and discrimination against Soviet Jews. He was 4 years old, and it was bewildering. Though his family was part of one of the largest waves of refugee resettlement in U.S. history, they ended up in a place with few Russian immigrants.
Life in Birmingham, Alabama, a post-industrial city shaped by the Civil Rights movement and white flight, revolved around Saturday college football games and Sunday church. Rykov said his family felt 'barren' in the U.S. away from their culture. Birmingham's Jewish community was small and the Russian population tiny.
But a local Jewish organization sponsored the Rykovs and paired them with a 'friendship family.' The group rented them an apartment and furnished it. Then the organization helped Rykov's parents find work. And Birmingham's Jewish community banded together to fund scholarships for Rykov and other Soviet refugee children to attend a private Jewish school, where Rykov felt less isolated.
He went on to attend the University of Alabama and overcame his feeling of otherness. After graduation, he found purpose in bringing people together through his work organizing cultural events, including arts festivals and an adult spelling bee, doing social media outreach for the Birmingham mayor and, in 2021, finding a dream job at a Nashville nonprofit devoted to the very efforts that he believes helped define him.
When Rykov heard that President Donald Trump's second administration had ordered cuts to the refugee program, his thoughts raced to the Venezuelan refugee family his organization was assisting, an older woman in poor health, her daughter who cared for her and the daughter's two children, one not yet kindergarten age. None of them spoke English, and there was no plan for how they would cover the rent, which was due in four days.
'This is a promise that we made to these people that we have reneged on,' he said. 'Is that really what's happening? Yeah, that's exactly what's happening.'
As the realization of what lay ahead set in, Rykov started to cry.
Over the next two months, the Trump administration carried out and defended its destabilizing cuts to the refugee program. The moves brought wave after wave of uncertainty and chaos to the lives of refugees and those who work to help resettle them.
One of the largest nonprofit agencies that carry out this work, the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops, laid off a third of its staff in February and said Monday that it would end all of its refugee efforts with the federal government. A Jewish resettlement organization, HIAS, cut 40% of its staff. As the groups fight legal battles to recoup the millions of dollars the government owes them, some have been forced to close resettlement offices entirely.
The Nashville International Center for Empowerment is still struggling to keep its own afloat. Although NICE staff members had anticipated some cuts to refugee programs under Trump, they said they were caught off guard when reimbursements for money already spent failed to appear and by the dwindling opportunities to seek recourse.
After a judge ordered the Trump administration to restart refugee admissions, the administration responded by canceling contracts with existing resettlement agencies and announcing plans to find new partners. And the administration has indicated it will remain resistant, refusing to spend millions appropriated by Congress for refugees.
'Many have lost faith and trust in the American system because of this,' said Wooksoo Kim, director of the Immigrant and Refugee Research Institute at the University of Buffalo. 'For many refugees, it may start to feel like it's no different from where they came from.'
In court documents, lawyers for the Department of Justice argued the U.S. does not have the capacity to support large numbers of refugees.
'The President lawfully exercised his authority to suspend the admission of refugees pending a determination that 'further entry into the United States of refugees aligns with the interests of the United States,'' the motion said.
In Nashville, that anxiety has been playing out week after week in tear-filled offices and in apartment complexes teeming with families who fled war and oppression.
Rykov couldn't help but feel overwhelmed by the extreme shift in attitudes about immigrants in just a few years. In 2022, when Russia invaded Ukraine, his family's dormant fears about Russia were reawakened — but they felt a surge of pride for the U.S. when it stepped up to help Ukraine and welcome its refugees.
Months after the invasion, Ukrainian athletes came to Birmingham for the World Games, which is similar to the Olympics. When they entered the stadium waving the Ukrainian flag, the crowd gave them a standing ovation. His parents, who'd never felt quite at home in the U.S., loudly joined in the 'U-S-A' chant that followed.
But now, three years later, was all of America now ready to abandon refugees? Rykov was starting to see the signs, but he refused to believe it and instead recommitted himself to the work.
He and his colleagues reached out to every donor in their network and called an online meeting with local churches who might be able to help with rent payments, food, job searches and transportation.
Agencies would struggle without the help of the churches. And churches don't have the resources, training or bandwidth to carry out the work of the agencies.
But Rykov knew that for the time being, he'd need more help than ever from church volunteers.
'Without your intervention here, this is gonna be a humanitarian disaster in Nashville,' he told them in the online meeting held about a week after the cuts. 'And in every community, obviously, but we were focusing on ours. We're not gonna be in a position to help in the same way much longer, and this is a stark reality that we're facing.'
Then he went on the local news, warning that 'this immediate funding freeze puts those recently arrived refugees really at risk of homelessness.' The responses on social media reflected the hate and intolerance that had polluted the national conversation about immigration.
'The common theme was, 'Refugees? Do you mean 'illegal invaders'?'' Rykov recalled. 'People are so completely misinformed, clearly not reading the article or watching the story, and it's very disappointing to see that. And I guess it's sad too that I expect it.'
In late February, church volunteer Abdul Makembe and a program manager from NICE squeezed into the cramped apartment of a family of five from the Democratic Republic of Congo.
Both Makembe and NICE had been working with the family for months, but with the loss of funding, NICE could no longer offer support and had asked Makembe to be more involved.
A native of Tanzania, Makembe moved to Tennessee in the late 1970s. After working in infectious disease research and nonprofit management, which involved several trips to Africa, he retired in 2015 and began volunteering to help newly arrived African families. Rykov came to know him as a fixture of the refugee community, always eager to help.
In the apartment, Makembe perched on the edge of a couch and Mungaga Akilimali sat across from him on the floor.
'So, the situation has improved a little bit?' Makembe asked.
The Congolese man ran his hands over his head.
'The situation, so far, not yet,' Akilimali said. 'I'm just trying to apply and reapply and reapply, but so far nothing.'
Akilimali and his family fled the Democratic Republic of Congo more than 10 years ago. Since 1996, soldiers and militias have killed 6 million people there and committed atrocities against countless civilians. War, political instability and widespread poverty have displaced millions of others.
Akilimali and his wife settled for a time in South Africa, where they encountered xenophobia and anti-immigrant violence. Immigrants and refugees have become political scapegoats there, spawning a rash of attacks and even murders. His wife, Bulonza Chishamara, nearly died there in 2018 after an ambush by an anti-immigrant mob.
Doctors gave her eight units of blood and Chishamara spent days paralyzed in a hospital bed, Akilimali said. She still walks with a limp.
The family had rejoiced when they got approved for refugee resettlement in 2024 in Tennessee. Their new life in Nashville began with promise. Akilimali, who speaks fluent English and trained as a mechanic, got a driver's license and a job at Nissan.
However, he lost the job before his probationary period ended due to layoffs, and he hasn't been able to find another one. NICE used to have a robust staff of employment specialists. But the cuts forced the organization to reassign them.
That left fewer resources for people like Akilimali, who had been in the U.S. longer than the three months during which new refugees were eligible for state department aid but who still needed help finding work.
For Rykov, the work of spreading awareness about the cuts and raising funds to offset them intensified throughout February. He and others working with refugees across the country were hoping that the courts might force the administration to release the federal money — that if they could keep things afloat in the short term, relief would come.
Then, on Feb. 25, a federal judge in Washington ruled in favor of the agencies. He ordered the administration to restore payments and restart refugee admissions.
The relief was short-lived. A day later, the administration canceled contracts with resettlement agencies, and lawyers for the administration have appealed the order. Their argument: The gutted refugee agencies no longer have capacity to restart resettlement, making it impossible to comply with court orders.
Rykov said some of the diminished number of remaining staff members began to look for new jobs.
After that, Rykov and his team kicked into emergency mode. They worked long hours making phone calls and arranging meetings with potential volunteers and donors.
'It was a cocktail of emotions,' he said. The generosity of donors and volunteers filled him with gratitude. But he couldn't escape the sense of foreboding that consumed the office, where many desks sat empty and remaining employees voiced deepening concerns about the fates of their clients.
Rykov likened the urgent energy at NICE to the aftermath of a natural disaster. 'There's no time to screw around.'
At the same time, staffers worried about the cratering budget and the future of the organization. And it was hard not to notice how much the mood in Tennessee and around the country was shifting. In an order suspending refugee admissions, Trump described immigrants as a 'burden' who have 'inundated' American towns and cities.NICE had always felt protected, powered by an idealistic and diverse staff who chose to work in refugee resettlement despite the long hours and low pay. The cuts and the discourse eroded that sense of safety, Rykov said.
In February, a tech company offered him a job in Birmingham. It was a chance to be closer to his parents and back in the city where he'd come of age — a reminder of an era that felt kinder than the current one. He took the job.
'Working at NICE, it's the best job I ever had and the most meaningful job I ever had,' he said.
Rykov packed up a few things from NICE. A Ukrainian flag lapel pin. A signed photograph of him and his coworkers. In his Birmingham apartment, he placed the picture on a bookshelf next to one of him and his parents at his high school graduation.
By the time he left, NICE's refugee resettlement team was down to 30 employees; it had been 56 before the cuts. For its part, NICE has vowed to carry on. The organization has paired 24 families with volunteer mentors since the funding cuts.
Church volunteers, who were accustomed to helping furnish and decorate apartments for new arrivals, now had to help prevent evictions. They had to track down documents and help complete paperwork lost in the confusion of the nonprofit's layoffs. And the group of mostly retired professionals now had to assist with the daunting task of finding unskilled jobs for refugees who didn't speak much English.
On a mid-March morning, Makembe woke at 6 a.m. to begin tackling his volunteer work for NICE. Despite the long hours he clocks volunteering, the 74-year-old has kept his energy level and his spirits up. As he left the garage apartment he shares with his wife in a rough north Nashville neighborhood, he made sure to double-check the locks.
On this day, he was working not with the Akilimali family but with a family of four who recently arrived from Africa. The child needs to see a specialist at the Children's Hospital at Vanderbilt.
It was Vanderbilt that brought Makembe to Nashville decades ago, for his master's degree in economic planning. He followed that with a doctorate in health policy and research at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. Over the years that followed, he made repeated trips back to Tanzania to do research on malaria and parasitic infections.
All that took a toll on Makembe's marriage, and he and his first wife divorced when his two children were very young. They are now grown and successful. His son is an accountant and his daughter recently finished law school and works at a firm in New York. That leaves him more time to spend with refugees.
But the volunteer work does bring some financial stress. He is trying to save $5,000 to apply for a green card for his wife, which is tough. Because he spent much of his career working outside the U.S., Makembe receives less than $1,000 a month from Social Security. He drives a 2004 Toyota that was donated to his church to aid the congregation's work with refugees, but he pays out of pocket for gas and car insurance. The costs can add up. It's not uncommon for him to burn a quarter tank of gas a day when he is volunteering.
Makembe's church, Woodmont Hills Church, is a significant contributor to the city's refugee resettlement work — an ethos shared by its current congregants but that has led to the loss of members over the years. Though it had a congregation nearing 3,000 members in the late '90s, attendance shrank as the church's ideology grew more progressive and Tennessee's grew more conservative. It's now down to 800 members.
Yet the church remained steadfast in its commitment to helping refugees. Its leaders invited NICE to hold classes in its empty meeting rooms and made space to house a Swahili church and a Baptist church formed by refugees from Myanmar. And when NICE lost funding, Woodmont Hills members donated their time and money.
Makembe has helped dozens of refugees over the years but was particularly worried for the family he had to take to the Children's Hospital that March morning, serving as both driver and translator. They arrived right before Trump cut off funding, and they had struggled to get medical care for their 5-year-old's persistent seizures. A doctor at a local clinic had prescribed antiseizure medication, but it didn't work, and the child experienced episodes where his muscles tensed and froze for minutes at a time.
Nashville has world-class medical facilities, but NICE no longer had staff available to help the family understand and navigate that care, leaving them frustrated.
It took months for the family to get in to see a specialist. During the long wait, Makembe said, the boy's father began to lose hope. His son's seizures had become longer and more frequent. Makembe stepped in to help them get a referral from a doctor at the local clinic.
The child's father had to miss the doctor's appointment that March morning so that he could go to an interview at a company that packages computer parts. Both he and his wife had been searching for jobs and striking out. Makembe has tried to help but has run into barriers. He does not have the same connections with labor agencies that NICE staffers did.
Makembe said he wants to get the child enrolled in a special school for the fall and find a wheelchair so his mom won't have to carry him.
And that's just this family. Makembe said new refugees have been waiting for months to get job interviews. When he visits the five families he mentors, their neighbors approach him asking for help. Many of their requests are for the assistance NICE and other refugee agencies once offered.
'I'm very much worried,' he said. 'I mean, they have no idea of what to do.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Forbes
19 minutes ago
- Forbes
Is Donald Trump An Authentic Leader?
On the performative nature of authenticity, and why Trump exposes the paradoxical and unscientific meaning of the term. In a world obsessed with personal branding, real and deep fake influencers, and AI-fueled persuasion, 'authenticity' seems more valuable than ever, as the distinction between what's real and what isn't transcends everything and everyone. We no longer expect our leaders to be merely competent — a trait that, inconveniently, remains hard for most voters to identify. We want them to be 'real,' too, though no one can quite agree on what that entails in an era where even authenticity can be performative. From viral LinkedIn mantras to inspirational TED Talks, authenticity is praised as the antidote to crooked leaders, political doublespeak, and robotic managerialism, not to mention phony politicians. Indeed, research suggests that people rate 'authentic leaders' as more trustworthy, relatable, and morally grounded. And yet, despite its near-universal appeal, authenticity remains vague and elusive as a concept. We want, admire, demand it — but few can define it, especially in a sensible or cogent way, and even fewer appear to know how we would go about measuring it, at least with some degree of precision or objectivity. In the leadership literature, authenticity is generally associated with transparency, consistency, and self-awareness. In line, leaders who are seen as authentic inspire greater followership, because they appear more predictable and less manipulative. Employees trust them more, and citizens are more likely to forgive their mistakes. Consider why figures like Nelson Mandela or Angela Merkel continue to command admiration — not merely for their achievements, but for the perceived harmony between what they believed, said, and did. They were not just competent, but coherent. Conversely, politicians who appear to shapeshift with every poll are penalized — not always for their views, but for the whiff of inauthenticity. Voters would rather support someone they disagree with than someone they suspect of pandering. Indeed, perceptions of authenticity are less about ideological alignment and more about emotional resonance. People tend to see those they like as authentic — and label those they dislike as fake. Unsurprisingly, Trump supporters view him as the embodiment of authenticity, just as Obama's admirers did with him. Ask their detractors, however, and the verdict flips. In a way, the real litmus test of authenticity is whether even your critics concede that you are 'the real deal.' On that front, Trump may score higher than Obama, unless you deny the possibility that more authentic doesn't always equate to more effective… Therein lies the philosophical catch: authenticity, for all its cultural currency, is not a fixed trait. It is an attribution — something we project onto others. We can't scan a person's soul (Neuralink hasn't cracked that yet) to verify the alignment between their inner essence and their outer behavior. In truth, we struggle to verify even our own. As neuroscientist David Eagleman put it, 'The conscious mind is like a broom closet in the mansion of the brain.' Much of what drives us is hidden from ourselves, let alone others. What feels authentic might just be a well-rehearsed act — one we've repeated so often, we've come to believe it ourselves (which, admittedly, sounds great, except for the fact that the most brutal dictators in history were pretty good at it). That's why psychologists argue authenticity is socially constructed. It's not some universal signal — it's context-dependent. A CEO crying in a board meeting might be praised for vulnerability in Silicon Valley, and ridiculed as unfit in Frankfurt. Compare Obama's curated 'cool dad' persona with Merkel's austere pragmatism: both were labeled authentic, but by very different cultural standards. In the end, we judge authenticity not by some Platonic essence of the self, but by how well someone's performance matches our expectations of who they ought to be. Which brings us, inevitably, to Trump. The question is not whether he is authentic — we can't ever truly know — but why he seems authentic to so many. Trump checks all the cultural boxes of 'realness': he's blunt, unfiltered, often incoherent (even when not spontaneously so), and defiantly unrehearsed. He rants on social media at ungodly hours and insults opponents with the fervor of a WWE heel. These are not behaviors traditionally associated with leadership—but to many, that's the point. His refusal to play by the rules of political etiquette is precisely what makes him persuasive. Unlike the focus-grouped politician who triangulates every utterance, Trump performs spontaneity. And for a certain kind of voter, that performance is more persuasive than policy. So how do we assess authenticity more analytically? As I illustrate in my forthcoming book, we can determine this by examining Trump vis-à-vis the four mainstream tenets or mantras for examining authenticity in others (not just leaders), namely: (1) always be honest with yourself and others; (2) always be true to your values, no matter what; (3) don't worry about what people think of you; and (4) bring your whole self to work. 1. Is Trump brutally honest with himself and others? Trump is certainly honest with others — at least in the sense that he says what he thinks. Whether those thoughts are factually accurate is another matter entirely. Although there's little evidence of self-reflection or self-critique, we simply don't know whether his statements are improvised or calculated, even when they seem spontaneous. Furthermore, there's no way to know whether he truly believes some of the over-the-top comments he makes, for instance on his own capabilities. When he tells us that he is 'a very stable genius', does he truly believe it? It would be easier to prove or disprove whether such statements are factually correct than whether he actually believes them himself. Evolutionary psychology shows that truly believing such statements even when they are not factually correct (what psychologists refer to as self-deception) is rather common in humans because it helps us display convincing signs of confidence and be regarded as competent. In other words, the best way to fool others is to fool yourself first. This introduces an interesting paradox: your likelihood of being perceived as authentic increases when you are not honest with yourself. By the same token, if you are honest with yourself, and therefore aware of your limitations, you may not be perceived as confident and therefore competent! In this way, Trump's self-deception may be a powerful tool to come across as genuine and competent – people are more likely to believe you are a stable genius if they see that you truly believe it yourself when you make such statements. 2. Is Trump uncompromisingly true to his values? Trump's values are difficult to pin down ideologically, but he is consistent in tone and temperament. He prizes dominance, loyalty, and personal success — values that appear deeply ingrained across decades of business and political life. He doesn't pivot or play nice to broaden appeal. That may limit his coalition, but it boosts the perception that he 'sticks to his guns.' Also, his decisions seem consistently optimized to enhance self-interest (either at national, party, or individual level), and despite his self-presentation as master deal maker he seems quite transparent in the goals and outcomes he pursues. To be sure, those who don't share his values will not accept that he is acting authentically by 'following his values no matter what'. This is an important reminder of the fact that value-centricity is not inherently beneficial or effective in leaders: what matters is what your values are, whether they are shared by others, and how they impact others (not just your voters, but society at large). In fact, history is replete with examples of leaders who were clearly true to their values, and impressively executed against them, but without having much in the form of positive effects (and often many negative effects) on their followers. 3. Is Trump unbothered by what people think of him? This one seems tailor-made for Trump. He thrives on attention but is often indifferent — when not hostile — to criticism. Most politicians spin, apologize, or moderate. Trump doubles down. Whether it's calling opponents nicknames, attacking journalists, or airing grievances, he seems genuinely unconcerned with being liked by everyone. In the authenticity game, that's a powerful signal: he performs as someone who is beyond calculation. To be sure, breaking prosocial etiquette norms does not make you authentic, just like being controversial doesn't make you right. Still, given that overt and aggressive confrontation tends to be uncharacteristic in a typical politician (and even someone with traditional political skills), it can make you seem authentic regardless of whether this is a calculated self-presentational strategy. It's like being a social media troll: you offend, and some people will celebrate your radical candor! That said, this disregard for what people think of you is also emblematic of a narcissistic personality, whether in its clinical or sub-clinical (highly functioning) form. Research on vulnerable narcissism suggests that those who lash out or seem impervious to criticism may in fact be protecting a fragile ego—especially when rejection threatens their self-image. Trump's combative and adversarial style, far from indicating thick skin, may signal the opposite: a compulsive need to dominate the narrative to avoid feeling diminished. As a result, what looks like radical candor may actually be a meticulously constructed performance of invulnerability. 4. Does Trump bring his whole self to work? Unquestionably. Trump does not compartmentalize. The same persona that tweets 'covfefe' at midnight is the one addressing (and trying to dismantle) the UN General Assembly. His speeches, interviews, and online posts share the same syntax, cadences, and vocabulary. His business brand, political identity, and personal life blur into one. That's the very definition of bringing your whole self to work—for better or worse. In fact, applying one of the most common scientific and popular criteria for defining authenticity, namely consistency between what leaders say and do, there's no question that with Trump (at least his current iteration) what you see is what you get – after nearly 150 days of presidency, he has enacted most of his intended plans and promises. To be sure, unlike Melania, who also has access to the private or personal version of the president, we will never know whether the home version of Trump is radically different from his professional self, which is the norm with most leaders (and people). Conclusion: More Authentic, Less Effective? So, is Trump an authentic leader? From the perspective of public perception, probably yes — at least to those who admire him. Even many critics concede that his rawness makes him 'real.' He stands out precisely because he does not seem like a conventional politician. But here's the irony: the very traits that enhance his reputation for authenticity—lack of filter, abrasiveness, impulsivity — also limit his effectiveness as a leader, particularly in contexts that require diplomacy, coalition-building, and emotional intelligence. Indeed, if you were tasked with coaching Trump, the likely strategy would be to curb his most 'authentic' impulses: inject some tact, broaden his emotional bandwidth, tone down the narcissism, and embrace more perspective-taking. That might make him more effective — but also less 'himself.' Such is the paradox of authenticity in leadership: being too true to yourself can inhibit your leadership talents. Ultimately, the case of Donald Trump reminds us that authenticity is not an unqualified virtue. Like most traits, it is only beneficial in moderation and context. What followers experience as authenticity may simply be a refusal to conform. But in politics — as in life —there's a fine line between being genuine and being a jerk. The best leaders know how to walk that line without losing either their compass or their followers. In other words, they are clear about where their right to be themselves ends, and their obligation to others begins. Importantly, while people seem to genuinely love the concept of 'authenticity' (not just in leaders, but humans in general), we would do well to acknowledge that, alas, there is just no objective way to quantify how authentic someone is, or whether someone is acting in an authentic way or not. Rather, authenticity is retrofitted to affection: we tend to deem people authentic if we like them, and fake if we don't. In politics, this creates a curious paradox. Donald Trump is hailed as the very embodiment of authenticity — by his supporters. So too is Barack Obama — by his own. But ask the other side, and the verdict flips. Same goes for charisma: it is an attribution we make about people we like and admire, because they seem better able to influence and persuade us, because we share their beliefs, values, and personal attributes, to the point of embodying a part of who we are or want to be. In that sense, Freud was onto something when we noted that our connection with leaders is in itself narcissistic: we love people who represent who we are, and when they are also leaders who appear to love us, our love is a subliminal and socially legitimate way of loving ourselves. In the end, authenticity may be less a moral virtue than a psychological illusion —comforting, relatable, and occasionally dangerous. We crave it in leaders because it reassures us that someone, somewhere, is being 'real' in a world that often feels fake. But the paradox is hard to escape: the more someone tries to prove their authenticity, the less authentic they seem. Perhaps the lesson is this: in leadership, as in life, being true to yourself only matters if your 'self' is worth following.
Yahoo
21 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Reporter Gets Hit By Rubber Bullet At L.A. Protest, Sparking Shock Allegation
A journalist covering the protests in Los Angeles was blasted by a rubber bullet during her report, prompting allegations that she was purposely targeted by an LAPD officer. (Watch the video below.) As demonstrations against the Trump administration's ICE raids and deployment of the National Guard intensified, 9 News Australia reporter Lauren Tomasi said, 'This situation has now rapidly deteriorated. The LAPD moving in on horseback firing rubber bullets at protesters, moving them on through the heart of L.A.' She is then hit by an apparent rubber bullet in the leg, screaming 'whaa!' as he jumps in pain. Video showed an officer taking aim in her direction, and Australian politicians alleged the attack was deliberate. 'The first thing he [Prime Minister Anthony Albanese] must tell [President Donald Trump] is to stop shooting at our journalists,' Senator Sarah Hanson-Young said, per the Guardian. 'Freedom of the press is a fundamental pillar of a strong, functioning democracy.' Senator Matt Canavan told the outlet 'it looks like there was a targeting there' but didn't want to jump to conclusions. U.S. Correspondent Lauren Tomasi has been caught in the crossfire as the LAPD fired rubber bullets at protesters in the heart of Los Angeles. #9NewsLATEST: — 9News Australia (@9NewsAUS) June 9, 2025 Reporting that Tomasi was indeed struck by a rubber bullet, News 9 said in a statement to the Daily Beast: 'Lauren and her camera operator are safe and will continue their essential work covering these events. This incident serves as a stark reminder of the inherent dangers journalists can face while reporting from the frontlines of protests, underscoring the importance of their role in providing vital information.' The LAPD told the Daily Beast it was not aware of the incident. The BBC reported that British photographer Nick Stern sustained a leg wound from a rubber bullet amid the protests. He required emergency surgery to remove the projectile. Protests Intensify In Los Angeles After Trump Deploys Hundreds Of National Guard Troops Republicans Offer Cowardly Lack Of Pushback To Hegseth Suggesting Marines Could Quell Protests National Guard Troops Ordered To Los Angeles By Trump Find Quiet Streets And Few Protests
Business Insider
22 minutes ago
- Business Insider
Travel ban: 10 exceptions that allow citizens from restricted countries to enter the U.S.
Some select groups of people from the 12 countries affected by President Trump's travel ban may still be allowed entry into the United States. President Trump's travel ban affects citizens from 12 countries, imposing restrictions due to national security concerns. Certain exceptions allow entry based on humanitarian grounds, national interest, or specific visa classifications. Critics argue the travel restrictions disproportionately affect vulnerable populations and strain international relations. Despite the travel ban in place, there are specific exceptions that allow citizens from the affected or restricted countries to enter the United States. These exceptions are typically based on humanitarian grounds, national interest, or specific visa classifications and are designed to accommodate urgent or essential travel needs that align with U.S. policy considerations. The travel ban which takes effect from today, bars nationals from Afghanistan, Myanmar, Chad, Congo-Brazzaville, Equatorial Guinea, Eritrea, Haiti, Iran, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, and Yemen from entering the U.S. Additionally, nationals from seven other countries - Burundi, Cuba, Laos, Sierra Leone, Togo, Turkmenistan, and Venezuela, face partial travel restrictions. The U.S. government justifies these measures on national security grounds, citing concerns over terrorism, insufficient passport controls, and high visa overstay rates in the affected countries. However, exceptions exist that allow certain individuals from these nations to enter the U.S. These exemptions reflect the government's recognition of humanitarian, diplomatic, and strategic factors that require flexibility beyond the broad restrictions. Here are 10 exceptions to Trump's travel restrictions According to the BBC, the travel restrictions do not apply to specific categories of individuals, as detailed in the list below. "Lawful permanent" US residents Their immediate family members who hold immigrant visas US government employees with Special Immigrant Visas Adoptions Dual nationals when the individual is not travelling on a passport from one of the affected countries Afghan nationals holding Special Immigrant Visas Holders of "immigrant visas for ethnic and religious minorities facing persecution in Iran" Foreign nationals travelling with certain non-immigrant visas Athletes, their teams (including coaches and supporting staff), and their immediate family when travelling for major sporting events, such as the men's football World Cup in 2026 and the Summer 2028 Olympics in Los Angeles In addition, the US Secretary of State may grant exemptions to individuals on a "case-by-case" basis, if "the individual would serve a United States national interest". Trump's travel restrictions criticized President Trump's travel restrictions have sparked widespread criticism both internationally and domestically. Numerous countries and organizations have voiced dissent, arguing that the ban unfairly targets certain nations and exacerbates existing geopolitical tensions. The African Union was among the first to publicly condemn the policy, urging the United States to engage in meaningful dialogue with the affected countries rather than impose broad restrictions. The group emphasized that cooperation and diplomatic engagement would better address security concerns without harming innocent civilians. In a notable response, the President of Mali took retaliatory measures by limiting visa issuance to U.S. citizens hoping to travel to Mali.
