6 unhinged Trump moments as he buys support for his budget bill with free hats
Donald Trump has been watching telly, waiting for Republicans to finally ram through his healthcare-slashing budget bill since yesterday.
And it seems like he's got so bored he'll talk to literally anyone who will listen.
So he spent some of this morning talking on the phone too, who else? Vladimir Putin.
Meanwhile - remember that guy he deported by mistake? Well, he's back now and is telling the world exactly how torture-y the CECOT mega-prison that Trump wants to send more people to is.
Below you will find all that, plus what Trump and Starmer talked about over dinner.
Everything is fine. Here's what you need to know.
1. Trump's big beautiful bill on a knife-edge
House debates are underway in the final crunch of Donald Trump's healthcare slashing spending bill - and it's looking a lot more wobbly than it was yesterday.
After another chaotic day and night, at the Capitol, Speaker Mike Johnson insisted the House would meet Trump's July 4 deadline.
'Our way is to plow through and get it done,' Johnson said, emerging in the middle of the night from a series of closed-door meetings. 'We will meet our July 4th deadline.'
Democrats unified against the bill as a tax give-away to the rich paid for on the backs of the most vulnerable in society, what one called "trickle down cruelty."
But Republicans reckon they've managed to put down a mini-rebellion from its own side that threatened to sink it.
Earlier, the House voted to allow the bill to be debated on the floor by 219 to 213 - suggesting the revolt had been put down.
It's unclear when the final vote will actually take place. At the time of writing, Democratic leader Hakeem Jeffries has been speaking for nearly six hours, and has no time limit.
2. How did Trump win over wavering Republicans? With signed photos and hats
According to the New York Times a "conga line" of Republicans filed through the west Wing yesterday with concerns about his "big beautiful bill".
The Times reported many of them walked out with signed merchandise and photos in the oval office.
3. Wrongly deported man was tortured and beaten in Salvadoran gulag
Remember Kilmar Abrego Garcia? The guy the Trump administration sent to a torture prison in El Salvador by mistake and (initially) refused to bring back?
Well, he's back in the US, facing charges of migrant smuggling - to which he has pleaded not guilty and which a magistrate has found to be based on "insufficient evidence".
He's still in custody - after his lawyers warned that he is at risk of being captured and deported again by ICE if he's let out on bail.
Meanwhile, he's filed a complaint against the government, outlining in extreme detail how he was beaten and subjected to torture while being held at Salvadoran mega-gulag CECOT.
Here's a few highlights from the complaint - which, fair warning, are pretty grim.
It says he "was subjected to severe mistreatment upon arrival at CECOT, including but not limited to severe beatings, severe sleep deprivation, inadequate nutrition, and psychological torture.."
"Upon arrival at CECOT, the detainees were greeted by a prison official who stated, "Welcome to CECOT. Whoever enters here doesn't leave." Plaintiff Abrego Garcia was then forced to strip, issued prison clothing and subjected to physical abuse including being kicked in the legs with boots and struck on his head and arms to make him change clothes faster. His head was shaved with a zero razor and he was frogmarched to cell 15, being struck with wooden batons along the way..."
"In Cell 15, Plaintiff Abrego Garcia and 20 other Salvadorans were forced to kneel from approximately 9:00 PM to 6:00 AM, with guards striking anyone who fell from exhaustion. During this time, Plaintiff Abrego Garcia was denied bathroom access and soiled himself…"
"After approximately one week at CECOT, prison director Osiris Luna and other officials separated the 21 Salvadorans who had arrived together. Twelve individuals with visible gang-related tattoos were removed to another cell, while Plaintiff Abrego Garcia remained with eight others who, like him, upon information and belief had no gang affiliations or tattoos."
And this one's the kicker, given how much Trump himself wailed about Garcia having MS-13 tattoos on his hands...
"As reflected by his segregation, the Salvadoran authorities recognised that Plaintiff Abrego Garcia was not affiliated with any gang, and at round this time, prison officials explicitly acknowledged that Plaintiff Abrego Garcia's tattoos were not gang-related, telling him "your tattoos are fine."
4. Starmer had an awkward exchange with Trump
According to the Spectator's Tim Shipman, Keir Starmer's trick for connecting with Donald Trump is to talk about their families.
But that's not always smooth sailing. They had a White House lunch a few weeks after Starmer's brother died of cancer, which prompted Trump to ask the question: "Your bother, Keir...he died...Was it a good death?"
Starmer, it is said, steered the question back to lowering tariffs on Jaguar Land Rover.
5. Trump is talking to Putin again
Trump, for some reason, announced on Truth Social that he was going to be talking to Russian dictator Vladimir Putin at 10am Washington time - which was 3pm our time.
It's the sixth publicly disclosed chat between the two men since Trump returned to power - and comes a day after the US President halted shipments of weapons to Ukraine.
The Defence Department has been reviewing US weapons stockpiles and reportedly became concerned that it was sending too much kit elsewhere.
Washington has been Ukraine's biggest military backer since Russia launched its full-scale invasion, but the Trump administration has been disengaging from the war and there's no end to the fighting in sight despite recent direct peace talks.
Ukraine has raced to build up its domestic defense industry, producing increasingly sophisticated drones, and amid fraught relations with Trump, President Volodymyr Zelensky has enlisted more European help in weapons manufacturing.
But some high-tech U.S. weapons are irreplaceable. Patriot air defence missiles are needed to fend off Russia's frequent ballistic missile attacks, but cost $4 million each.
Get Donald Trump updates straight to your WhatsApp!
As the world attempts to keep up with Trump's antics, the Mirror has launched its very own US Politics WhatsApp community where you'll get all the latest news from across the pond.
We'll send you the latest breaking updates and exclusives all directly to your phone. Users must download or already have WhatsApp on their phones to join in.
All you have to do to join is click on this link, select 'Join Chat' and you're in! We may also send you stories from other titles across the Reach group.
We will also treat our community members to special offers, promotions, and adverts from us and our partners. If you don't like our community, you can check out any time you like. To leave our community click on the name at the top of your screen and choose Exit group. If you're curious, you can read our Privacy Notice.
6. Not bad for government work...
The White House has published a list of all the salaries of Donald Trump's staff.
At the top of the pyramid is someone called Jacalynne Klopp, a senior advisor that most people have never heard of, who does a job which has not been particularly well explained.
She earns an eye-watering $225,700 - with is incredibly high for a government stray.
Edgar Mkrtchian, an associate counsel, pulls down $203,645.
Below them there's 33 staffers who make $195,200 - including Karoline Leavitt, Chief of staff Susie Wiles, trade advisor Peter Navarro and senior familiar/Renfield impersonator Stephen Miller.
Eight staffers don't make anything at all, but most of those are due to overlapping duties.
They include Marco Rubio, who is paid by the State Department as Secretary of State, but not by the White House for his role as National Security Advisor.
Trump is paid a standard base salary of $400,000, plus $50,000 for expenses, $100,000 for travel and $19,000 for entertainment.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Independent
10 minutes ago
- The Independent
Grad student loans could soon be capped. Here's what that could mean for you
The House of Representatives moving the GOP 's 'Big Beautiful Bill' closer to President Donald Trump's signing brings graduate students nearer to facing unprecedented limits on funding higher education. While critics argue that the spending bill would disproportionately block marginalized communities from pursuing advanced degrees, Republicans say the limits will help control college costs by reducing incentives for schools to raise tuition. Starting next summer, the bill will affect borrowers taking out loans and those stuck on the Biden -era SAVE plan, potentially causing monthly payments to increase by hundreds of dollars, according to the Student Borrower Protection Center. What are the proposals? The 'big beautiful bill' proposes significant changes to how graduate and professional students finance their education. One of the biggest changes would be the elimination of the federal Grad PLUS loan program beginning in July 2026, which currently allows students to borrow up to the full cost of attendance for graduate programs. In its place, the bill raises annual and lifetime limits on federal Stafford loans, but these new caps may not be enough to cover further education for students. Graduate students would be limited to borrowing up to $20,500 annually, with a lifetime cap of $100,000, while professional students, such as those in medical or law school, could borrow up to $50,000 per year, with a $200,000 lifetime maximum. What impacts could the proposals have? The proposal could force students to rely on private loans with less favorable terms, delay or abandon plans for graduate education, or choose less expensive programs that may not align with their career goals. Experts warn this could worsen shortages in high-demand fields, particularly in rural healthcare, where access to graduate-trained professionals is already limited. What's happened to student loans so far? Recent student loan policy changes include the restart of loan payments following a pandemic pause, modifications to income-driven repayment plans, and ongoing legal battles over loan forgiveness programs. In June 2023, the Supreme Court struck down the Biden administration's plan to cancel up to $400 billion in student loans, and a court order continues to block its new income-driven repayment program. Meanwhile, the US Department of Education has resumed collecting on defaulted federal student loans. What's next? White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt announced Thursday that President Trump is scheduled to sign the "big, beautiful bill" on Friday at 5 p.m. EST.
Reuters
19 minutes ago
- Reuters
Explainer: Key healthcare provisions in Trump's tax bill
July 3 (Reuters) - The U.S. House of Representatives passed President Donald Trump's tax-cut and spending bill on Thursday, which contains sweeping changes to the government's Medicaid healthcare program covering about 71 million low-income Americans. Nearly 12 million of those enrollees could lose their insurance under the program if the bill is implemented and those changes become law, according to a June estimate from the Congressional Budget Office. Below is a breakdown of some of the key healthcare provisions in the current draft of the bill and how they could affect enrollees and businesses: Frequent eligibility checks U.S. states would be required to conduct eligibility checks at least twice a year for the roughly 20 million Medicaid enrollees covered through the Affordable Care Act (ACA) expansion, rather than yearly. These "expansion enrollees" are people with incomes of up to 138% of the federal poverty level, which roughly translates to $21,597 a year in 2025. The new bill also includes provisions to prevent Medicaid beneficiaries from simultaneously enrolling in more than one state Medicaid program. Mandatory work requirements Medicaid enrollees are not currently subject to work requirements under the law, but the new bill proposes that adults aged 19-64, with a few exceptions, complete a minimum of 80 hours of work or community engagement activities a month or be enrolled in an education program at least half time to qualify for the program. The requirements will apply from January 1, 2027. Scale back on provider taxes Medicaid is jointly financed by the federal and state governments. States help cover their share by collecting taxes from hospitals and other healthcare providers, known as provider taxes. The bill would tighten federal oversight of those taxes by replacing the current 6% cap on provider tax revenue with a new limit that is indexed to inflation. It would also restrict how states structure the taxes, including stricter rules on what kinds of services can be taxed and how payments are distributed across providers. While the bill does not reduce provider tax rates directly, the changes could make it harder for states to use these taxes to draw additional federal Medicaid funds. The final version of the bill also sets up a $50 billion rural hospital fund to help rural providers who have argued that the provider tax changes would force them to scale back service. Tightening verification Medicaid is currently open to some immigrants who are lawfully present in the country, though many - including green card holders - must wait five years before they can sign up. The new bill removes Medicaid eligibility for some non-citizens, including refugees, certain abused spouses and children, and people granted asylum. Increased cost-sharing requirements The current law gives states an option to impose nominal co-payments on individuals with incomes exceeding 150% of the federal poverty level. The new bill requires states to impose mandatory cost-sharing on expansion enrollees earning more than 100% of the federal poverty level. Co-pays can reach up to $35 per service, with some exemptions, including emergency care and preventive services. The bill could put a strain on the finances of insurers and hospitals, analysts said. Spencer Perlman, director of healthcare research at Veda Partners, estimated Medicaid enrollment could drop by 5 million compared to current projections. Since Medicaid insurers are paid a fixed amount per member, the decline could directly hit revenues of insurers like Elevance Health (ELV.N), opens new tab, Centene (ELV.N), opens new tab, and Molina Healthcare (MOH.N), opens new tab, which have significant exposure. In 2024, over 88% of Molina's total membership came from Medicaid plans, Centene derived about 46%, and Elevance about 19.5%. Analysts also warned of risks to insurers' exchange businesses, forecasting ACA marketplace enrollment to fall to 18 million by 2027 from 24 million in 2025, due to eligibility restrictions and likely subsidy expirations. "For companies like Centene, this is a double whammy," Perlman said. Hospitals face similar challenges, though a proposed $50 billion rural hospital fund could offset some reimbursement cuts, Jefferies analyst Brian Tanquilut said. Drugmakers are expected to see little impact, as Medicaid typically represents under 15% of their U.S. sales, UBS analyst Trung Huynh said.
Reuters
20 minutes ago
- Reuters
US Supreme Court sides with Trump in South Sudan deportation fight
July 3 (Reuters) - The U.S. Supreme Court again sided with President Donald Trump's administration in a legal fight over deporting migrants to countries other than their own, lifting on Thursday limits a judge had imposed to protect eight men who the government sought to send to politically unstable South Sudan. The court on June 23 put on hold Boston-based U.S. District Judge Brian Murphy's April 18 injunction requiring migrants set for removal to so-called "third countries" where they have no ties to get a chance to tell officials they are at risk of torture there, while a legal challenge plays out. The court on Thursday granted a Justice Department request to clarify that its June 23 decision also extended to Murphy's separate May 21 ruling that the administration had violated his injunction in attempting to send a group of migrants to South Sudan. The U.S. State Department has urged Americans to avoid the African nation "due to crime, kidnapping and armed conflict." The court said that Murphy should now "cease enforcing the April 18 injunction through the May 21 remedial order." Two liberal justices, Sonia Sotomayor and Ketanji Brown Jackson, dissented from the decision, criticizing the court's actions. "Today's order clarifies only one thing: Other litigants must follow the rules, but the administration has the Supreme Court on speed dial," Sotomayor wrote in a dissenting opinion. Fellow liberal Justice Elena Kagan, who dissented from the court's decision to lift Murphy's injunction, nevertheless agreed with the majority on Thursday. "I do not see how a district court can compel compliance with an order that this court has stayed," Kagan wrote in a brief opinion. Murphy's May 21 order mandating further procedures for the South Sudan-destined migrants prompted the U.S. government to keep the migrants at a military base in Djibouti. Murphy also clarified at the time that non-U.S. citizens must be given at least 10 days to raise a claim that they fear for their safety. After the Supreme Court lifted Murphy's April injunction on June 23, the judge promptly ruled that his May 21 order "remains in full force and effect." Calling that ruling by the judge a "lawless act of defiance," the Justice Department the next day urged the Supreme Court to clarify that its action applied to Murphy's May 21 decision as well. Murphy's ruling, the Justice Department said in court filings, has stalled its "lawful attempts to finalize the long-delayed removal of those aliens to South Sudan," and disrupted diplomatic relations. Even as it accused the judge of defying the Supreme Court, the administration itself has been accused of violating judicial orders including in the third-country deportation litigation. The administration has said its third-country policy is critical for removing migrants who commit crimes because their countries of origin are often unwilling to take them back. The Supreme Court has a 6-3 conservative majority. Sotomayor in a dissent called the court's June 23 decision pausing Murphy's injunction a "gross abuse" of its power that now exposes "thousands to the risk of torture or death." After the Department of Homeland Security moved in February to step up rapid deportations to third countries, immigrant rights groups filed a class action lawsuit on behalf of a group of migrants seeking to prevent their removal to such places without notice and a chance to assert the harms they could face. In March, the administration issued guidance providing that if a third country has given credible diplomatic assurance that it will not persecute or torture migrants, individuals may be deported there "without the need for further procedures." Murphy found that the administration's policy of "executing third-country removals without providing notice and a meaningful opportunity to present fear-based claims" likely violates due process requirements under the U.S. Constitution. Due process generally requires the government to provide notice and an opportunity for a hearing before taking certain adverse actions. The Justice Department noted in a filing that the administration has received credible diplomatic assurances from South Sudan that the aliens at issue will not be subject to torture." The Supreme Court has let Trump implement some contentious immigration policies while the fight over their legality continues to play out. In two decisions in May, it let Trump end humanitarian programs for hundreds of thousands of migrants to live and work in the United States temporarily. The justices, however, faulted the administration's treatment of some migrants as inadequate under constitutional due process protections.
