Latest news with #BriefingRoom
Newsweek
5 days ago
- Politics
- Newsweek
Donald Trump's Honesty Rating Hits New Low
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's honesty rating has fallen to its lowest point since he re-entered the White House, according to newly released polling. Just 31 percent of Americans view Trump, according to the latest YouGov/Economist poll, conducted between August 9-11. And that trend is also present among Republicans. In January, 77 percent of Republicans said the president was trustworthy. By August, that had dropped to 71 percent, while those finding him untrustworthy doubled from 7 percent to 14 percent. Why It Matters A president's perceived honesty is a key driver of public trust, shaping both voter enthusiasm and their willingness to believe campaign promises. For Trump, whose political brand has long relied on projecting authenticity to his base, a sustained decline in honesty ratings could weaken his ability to roll out his agenda. President Donald Trump speaks with reporters in the James Brady Press Briefing Room at the White House, Monday, Aug. 11, 2025, in Washington. President Donald Trump speaks with reporters in the James Brady Press Briefing Room at the White House, Monday, Aug. 11, 2025, in Washington. Alex Brandon/AP What To Know Mounting Pressure Over Epstein Files The latest polling comes as Trump is facing mounting criticism for his handling of the Jeffrey Epstein case. The Department of Justice (DOJ) and FBI recently released a memo and video stating that Epstein died by suicide in 2019 and that no secret "client list" exists, directly countering years of speculation and conspiracy theories. This disclosure has sparked further anger from Trump supporters and victims' advocates, who believe the administration is withholding key details. In a significant legal setback for transparency efforts, a federal judge in Manhattan denied the Trump administration's request to unseal grand jury transcripts from Epstein associate Ghislaine Maxwell's prosecution, calling the move more of a diversion than a genuine attempt to release new information. A similar request in Florida was also rejected, with the court citing legal precedent. These rulings leave many of the case's most sensitive records under seal. Meanwhile, Maxwell, who is serving a 20-year sentence, has held multiple meetings with Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche to discuss the case. Her legal team has reportedly floated the idea of a presidential pardon and is appealing her conviction, arguing that Epstein's 2007 non-prosecution agreement should have applied to her as well. Maxwell's recent transfer to a minimum-security prison has intensified outrage from survivors, who see it as further evidence of leniency toward those linked to Epstein. And public frustration has only grown. Billionaire Elon Musk has urged Trump to "just release the files as promised," while author Michael Wolff has speculated that Trump may be seeking major distractions to shift attention away from the Epstein fallout. Victims and advocacy groups remain adamant that all records be made public, arguing that the current handling of the case "smacks of a cover-up." Public discontent is also reflected in the polls. Only 20 percent of Americans said they approve of Trump's handling of the Epstein case in the most recent YouGov/Economist poll. And 71 percent say they think Trump knew a lot or something about Epstein's crimes. Just 8 percent said they believe he did not know anything. Trump has maintained that he had no knowledge of or involvement in Epstein's crimes. Economic Confidence Slips Meanwhile, the economy is also causing a headache for Trump. Inflation rose to 2.7 percent in June. That is despite Trump's previous promise to end inflation on day one of his second term. "Starting on day one, we will end inflation and make America affordable again, to bring down the prices of all goods," he said during a rally in Bozeman, Montana, in August 2024. And job growth slowed sharply in July, with just 73,000 new jobs added—down from 147,000 the previous month, according to the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. The unemployment rate edged up to 4.2 percent, though it remains near historic lows. After last month's jobs report was published, Trump fired BLS Commissioner Erika McEntarfer. In a post, Trump accused McEntarfer—without offering evidence—of rigging the numbers to harm his administration. Now, only 22 percent say the government's unemployment rates are accurate. There are also concerns about Trump's tariff program. Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick predicted $50 billion in monthly revenue from the new import taxes, which came into effect this month. But JPMorgan warned that 60 percent of the increased costs are expected to be passed on to American consumers through higher prices. Amid those concerns, approval of Trump's handling of the economy has fallen sharply this year. In January, 49 percent approved and 37 percent disapproved. By August, approval had dropped to 41 percent, while disapproval had risen to 52 percent. His ratings on inflation show a similar slide. In January, 45 percent approved and 39 percent disapproved. By August, only 35 percent approved, compared with 58 percent who disapproved. What Happens Next The Republican-led House Oversight Committee subpoenaed the DOJ for its files on Epstein, with a deadline of August 19 to hand them over, suggesting the issue isn't going away for the president anytime soon. Meanwhile, Trump's new nominee to run the BLS hinted at suspending the monthly release of jobs data. August's numbers are due to be published in the first week of September.
Forbes
7 days ago
- Politics
- Forbes
Why Tony Blair May Be Right About Digital ID
VIENNA, AUSTRIA - JUNE 03: Arnold Schwarzenegger and Tony Blair attend the Austrian World Summit at Hofburg Congress Center on June 03, 2025 in Vienna, Austria. (Photo by) Getty Images There was a very interesting discussion on BBC Radio 4 last week, part of the excellent 'Briefing Room' series hosted by David Aaronovitch, on the subject of national identity cards. While the subject of a national identity scheme for the UK has been bubbling for years, the topic of illegal migration has reignited the debate. However, the debate itself needs to change: It should no longer be about whether people should be made to carry a card or not! We are now in an age of digital identity and that provides an entirely different model that can advance both security and privacy in the modern age. The debate is timely, which is why I agree with former British Prime Minister Sir Tony Blair on one thing at least: We have to do something about identity, despite the failure of the previous attempt at a national identity scheme introduced in 2007 under *checks notes* Sir Tony Blair. Sir Tony wrote recently that 'our present system isn't working,' which true, and that it is 'this is a time for shaking up' which is also true. And despite what the media insist on calling 'Electronic Identity Cards' or similar, he is right to ignore the old tropes about identity cards and say that 'digital ID is a good place to start." Sir Tony is right. It really is time to have sensible national discussion about digital identity and stop the simplistic black-and-white tropes about identity cards. Blair and the former British Foreign Secretary, William Hague (now Baron Hague of Richmond), issued a report a while back calling for a digital identity infrastructure in the UK. In a report, the former Labour leader and former Conservative leader argued that government records "are still based in a different era'. What their report actually called for was not for a 'digital ID card', as was widely reported in the press along with hysterical nonsense about how having an identity card leads to tyranny (as in France, presumably?), but for a "secure, privacy-preserving digital identity for citizens" that allows them to interact more efficiently and effectively with government services. Media commentators have started to talk about the efficiencies that might accrue through the deployment of a digital ID, while continuously confusing authorisation with identification, while expressing concerns about government's disastrous track record with major IT projects and expressing perfectly reasonable concerns about the security of systems that might function as honeypots: while at the same time noting that Ukraine, which is under continuous cyberattacks, has managed to deploy a working national digital ID in less time that it takes will take us Brits to get round to even discussing how such a scheme might work. These are serious issues, but they are issue that can be managed and can managed more effectively now, using tried and tested technology from the crypto world as well a tried and tested technology from defence, finance and other sectors. There is no need for a honeypot. In the UK we now have a framework in place and the government has said it will support economic growth through the creation of trusted digital identity products and services from certified providers. The necessary Data (Use and Access) Act received Royal Assent in June. When the legislation is 'commenced' (as they say here), the government will have new powers and responsibilities which will include maintaining a statutory register of digital verification service (DVS), consulting on the UK trust framework, issuing an official UK digital identity trust mark (rather pointlessly, in my opinion) so that people can see which services can be trusted and enabling public authorities to share information with providers of registered services. Choose your mask. © Helen Holmes (2025). However, just to reiterate, what the government is not planning to do is to create a digital identity. The government 'super app" currently under development will be used only to log in to government services and will not provide a portable digital identity for more general use. The beta version of the app launched for iPhones and Android devices in June but is currently just bookmarks for the existing government website. The government expect the private sector create the identity schemes within their framework, and are indifferent as to whether it is the banks or media companies or social media or brands or anyone else who will deliver it. My own view is that is should be banks who lead the way, but perhaps it will be the crypto world that will rise to meet this challenge by using new technology to bring a new approach to the problem of identity in the new economy.. With new age verification laws coming into place on (and with the Supreme Court upholding a Texas age-verification law) and with plenty of other examples where credentials are required for offline use (you cannot rent an e-scooter, for example, without submitting ID), the New York Times puts forward a typical response and saying that 'a comprehensively different internet is coming into view: one where, before you can do much of anything, you need to reveal who you are'. But this simply is not true: you do not have to reveal who you are to prove that you are old enough to look at pornography or that you are old enough to rent an e-scooter and that you have a driver's licence issued by a recognised authority. Let us rethink digital identity from this privacy-enhancing perspective. A digital identity infrastructure is vital national infrastructure that is desperately needed to support our transition to a new economy, not one that stutters along digitising the relics of the post-industrial revolution bureaucratic response to urban anonymity. We have all of the technologies that we need to build the new kind of digital identity that we need for the 21st century — zero-knowledge proofs, verifiable credentials, strong authentication — and now we need to put them to work to deliver not a National Identity Scheme (NIS) as previously envisaged but a National Entitlement Scheme (NES). The crucial difference between the two is that an identity scheme is about who people are, whereas an entitlement scheme is about what people are: that is, over 18 and entitled to drive, or a parent and a lawyer or whatever. By shifting the essence of the infrastructure from establishing someone's identity, which is then used as a key into some other database in order to obtain the actual credential required. To take a simplest example, when buying a drink in the pub, the bartender should be asking for proof that I am over 18, not proof that I am David Birch. This is easily achieved now that Open ID for Verifiable Presentations 9OID4VP is a standard. This is a protocol for requesting and presenting verifiable credentials and it delivers interoperability across wallet types, credential formats and trust frameworks. OID4VP powers EUDI Wallet pilots, cross-border digital ID systems and real-world deployments like the California DMV's mDL login service. A comprehensive and convenient digital identity infrastructure transforms the prospects for fintechs, simply because dealing with the identity demands on financial services organisations is so complex and expensive. Know-your-customer (KYC) and associated issues such as know your buisness, employee, agent, business partner and so on have served as a moat around the incumbents. If startups were able to use an infrastructure that takes care of these things, they could concerate their resources on developing products and services to compete more effectively to make financial services better for the rest of the economy.
New York Times
28-01-2025
- Politics
- New York Times
CNN Anchor Jim Acosta to Step Down
Jim Acosta, a CNN anchor who earned notice for grilling Trump administration officials in the White House Briefing Room, said Tuesday that he was leaving the network after nearly 20 years. Mr. Acosta announced the decision at the end of his 10 a.m. show, which will be his last for CNN. He is stepping down after clashing with the network over a decision to move his show to start at the midnight hour, a cable news backwater, according to two people with knowledge of the discussions. The network is moving Wolf Blitzer, a well-known CNN anchor, into his time slot, along with a co-anchor, Pamela Brown. Mr. Acosta's show is third place in his time slot for total viewers, behind both MSNBC and Fox News, though he has outperformed his MSNBC competitor in the key demographic for advertisers. In a statement, CNN said it was grateful for Mr. Acosta's track record of 'dedication and commitment.' 'Jim has had a long, distinguished nearly 20-year career at CNN, with a track record of standing up to authority, for the First Amendment and for our journalistic freedoms,' the statement said. Mark Thompson, CNN's chief executive, informed Mr. Acosta this month that the network wanted to move him to midnight as part of a reorganization of the network's lineup, the two people said. Mr. Acosta was resistant to the idea, wary that he was being shuffled to the graveyard shift as part of a plan to sideline journalists who have been critical of President Trump. Mr. Thompson told Mr. Acosta that it had nothing to do with Mr. Trump's inauguration, adding that Mr. Acosta's slot would be in prime time on the West Coast, and offered to relocate him, the people said. But they were at an impasse. Status, an email newsletter, earlier reported on the tension between Mr. Acosta and CNN. Mr. Acosta's exit is part of a broader remaking of CNN, which last week announced it was laying off roughly 200 people as part of a pivot to digital. CNN said last week it was working on a new streaming service and planned to hire roughly 100 people in new roles during the first half of the year. Mr. Acosta was one of the most prominent journalists at CNN during the first Trump administration, where he became known for his strident interrogatories in the White House Briefing Room. When White House officials tried to bar Mr. Acosta from the room, CNN sued the government and the administration restored his credentials. During the show on Tuesday, Mr. Acosta said that the highlight of his career at CNN came during a trip to Cuba during the Obama administration, when he asked Cuban President Raúl Castro about that country's political prisoners. 'As the son of a Cuban refugee, I took home the lesson … it is never a good time to bow down to a tyrant,' Mr. Acosta said. 'I have always believed it's the job of the press to hold power to account. I've always tried to do that at CNN and plan to go on doing it in the future.'
