Latest news with #Bulwark
Yahoo
4 days ago
- General
- Yahoo
GOP members face tough crowds at town halls over House bill: 'They are getting heckled'
Managing Editor of the Bulwark and Princeton University professor Eddie Glaude join Nicolle Wallace to discuss the latest round of GOP town halls filled with angry constituents frustrated by the Trump administration – this time without Elon Musk to blame.
Yahoo
5 days ago
- Business
- Yahoo
How Bruce Springsteen Gave Us a Roadmap for Surviving Trump
A DAY AFTER DONALD TRUMP called Bruce Springsteen a 'pushy, obnoxious JERK' who 'ought to KEEP HIS MOUTH SHUT,' I found myself in Manchester, England, for one of the opening shows of Springsteen's 'Land of Hopes and Dreams' tour. It was a birthday surprise for my husband, Jim. And as we mingled on the floor of Co-op Live Arena, we talked with some American fans about why Springsteen's tidy yet devastating critique of the Trump administration as 'corrupt, incompetent, and treasonous' had drawn such a positive public reaction—and such an unsurprisingly churlish one from the president himself. I speculated that it was a combination of things, including the way Springsteen presented his argument as a patriotic defense (and not a condemnation) of 'the America I love.' Then, too, many Americans are simply hungry for some unequivocal pushback. But for me, the real power of Bruce's remarks could be found in one line: 'We will survive this moment.' Survive. The concept hit me with a wave of relief. It was a courageous affirmation of the exceptional nature of America when I needed to hear it most. Even as he acknowledged the ways the president has undermined democracy, and the failures of our system of checks and balances to protect the country from a demagogue, Springsteen was saying there is an innate resilience in the American people. Surviving is what we do. And he said this at a time when that core belief has been shaken. Springsteen has always been attuned to trouble in America, and he had an early understanding of Trump's appeal. In September 2016, he told Rolling Stone that he thought the country was paying a price 'for not addressing the real cost of [American] deindustrialization and globalization.' Trump's solutions were 'fallacious,' he noted, but they offered hope to people who had been deeply hurt by these economic changes. I read those comments during Hillary Clinton's debate prep at the Doral Arrowwood Resort in Westchester County and found their truthfulness devastating. It was one of the few moments during the 2016 campaign that I thought we were going to lose. Another time was when Springsteen echoed these same themes during a performance of the song 'Long Walk Home'—which he now calls his 'fighting prayer' for America—at a rally for Clinton the night before the election. The alienation and disappointment conveyed in the song seemed too overwhelming for our campaign to overcome. And, indeed, we didn't overcome them. Fast-forward eight years and here was Bruce again, now assuring us that we will, eventually, make it back home. I choose to trust his gut more than my own. The country is going through a lot. Just know that we're right there with you—a source of sense and solace in crazy times. Become a free or paid Bulwark subscriber today. FOR A FULL DECADE AND OVER THREE presidential campaigns, I have aided efforts to keep Donald Trump out of office—only to see him emerge as the winner of the 2024 election with more support than ever. Not everything we did to try and stop him was a mistake. That is a simplistic way of looking at one of the most vexing political problems America has faced since the Civil War. Nevertheless, our efforts to defeat him failed. Keeping Trump from being re-elected to a cataclysmic second term was the singular focus of Resistance 1.0. For the better part of a decade, it kept everyone aligned and helped us to organize around a clear goal. But now, we are no longer engaged in a debate; we are under assault. More Americans buy into his MAGA vision than ever, even as our arguments—that Trump would do everything from wreck the economy to ruin democracy—are being vindicated by his actions. What more is there to say? To combat Trump 2.0 effectively, we need a new direction. Finding one has not been easy. The lack of a North Star for anti-Trump forces is one of the reasons it feels like Resistance 2.0 has floundered, or at least has failed to take real shape. My own failure to imagine a new approach has kept me on the sidelines of politics since the election last fall. I largely stopped doing television appearances and writing or even tweeting about politics. After thirty years working in the field, including five presidential campaigns and twelve years in the White House, I should have had something more sophisticated to contribute than 'Yeah, Democrats should do more podcasts.' But I didn't. And so, I have said very little. I needed something to feel certain about. The idea of surviving 'this moment' gave me that certainty. What Bruce said sounded to me like a new North Star. I am a believer in the power of a winning attitude in politics. The best presidential campaigns are built on it. If the candidate and staff expect to win, it affects every decision, producing leaders who are certain of what they believe in and what they are elected to do. That's what Bruce provided. Join now If we keep in mind during this second and more damaging Trump administration that we will eventually win, our mission becomes clearer: We must do what we can to protect America and limit the damage until we get to the other side. It's important and courageous for Springsteen to rebuke Trump, particularly when so many people in positions of power are busy kowtowing to him. Because every time he stands up to Trump—whether it is with the 'corrupt, incompetent, treasonous' comments, or opening his set with 'No Surrender' after Trump threatened him with an investigation, or mixing up the lyrics of 'Wrecking Ball' from 'come on, take your best shot, let me see what you've got' to 'let me feel what you've got' to let Trump know his online attacks had not left a mark—Springsteen is also sending a lifeline to those of us who feel wholly alienated by Trump's debasing of American values. We are not alone, he is saying. We can get through this. It was that implicit commitment, his belief that America will make it through this 'dangerous time' (and the lyrics of 'Land of Hope and Dreams' where Bruce promises to 'stand by your side') that reduced me to tears of relief for three straight songs on the floor of the Co-op Live arena. It gave me a sense of agency I had not felt since Trump won the election in November. When Trump controls the White House, MAGA Republicans are running Congress, and we cannot count on the president even to follow court orders or the Constitution. It is hard to imagine any meaningful way Democrats can hold him accountable—but having faith America will make it through is a powerful act of resistance. If we don't hold on to the belief that democracy will survive, we risk resigning ourselves to authoritarian rule. Faith in our democracy will help guide us through the rest of this administration. Because Trump will not be president forever. Share DONALD TRUMP IS AN ARCHETYPICAL Springsteen villain. He is the con man who preys on the vulnerable, the guy who ruined the boardwalk in 'Atlantic City,' the 'Rainmaker' who makes vulnerable people believe 'white is black and black is white,' and, perhaps most aptly, the rich man who wants to be king from 'Badlands,' which goes on to describe a king who will not be satisfied till he rules everything. But just as any Springsteen villain is never the focus of a song but the obstacle to be overcome, the Land of Hopes and Dreams tour isn't just about Trump. It's about how America survives him. After opening his show with a litany of all the Trump administration has taken from us, an utterly defiant Springsteen spent the rest of it singing about the great things in America we will never let Trump own. It felt like he was telling the American people: We will define what it means to be an American, not Trump. The set list consists of songs that are decades old, in some cases, but have lyrics that resonate today. Because I am an obsessive fan, I kept notes on my phone of the lines Bruce seemed to give a special emphasis when he sang them. They add up to a kind of hymn to encourage us to hold on to faith in America now. It goes like this: You will need a good companion for this part of the ride A little revenge and this too shall pass I walk the way I wanna walk Maybe everything that dies someday comes back Tell me, in a world without pity, do you think what I am asking is too much? He steals what he will never own Hold tight to your anger, don't fall to your fears I make my way through this darkness, I can't feel nothing but this chain that binds me Certain things are set in stone—who we are, what we'll do and what we won't I have made my vows to those who have come before May the truth ring out from every small-town bar This train, faith will be rewarded. It is not a great time to be an American abroad. I was reminded of this when the security agent at the Manchester airport told me, 'You can go ahead and put the eagle away.' He was pointing at the logo of my American passport. There was an edge in his voice that suggested he had been hoping for some time that America would get its comeuppance. That America will always be the country that elected Donald Trump twice is humbling. The repercussions of those elections will be felt for decades to come. My Springsteen hymn is my way of holding on to the faith that it's within our power to preserve the best part of America—even now. This is not all a buildup to say, 'I have seen the future of the Resistance, and its name is Bruce Springsteen.' (That said: Bruce, if you're reading this. . .) But it's clear that Americans depressed over Trump need inspiration to keep fighting. We've already seen some talented, committed leaders fill the void, like Senator Cory Booker with his history-making filibuster (Jersey is killing it!); America's first pope, Leo XIV from Chicago, who almost certainly would not have been selected had Trump not won; and Harvard University's ingenious response to the administration's attacks: the offer of free online courses on civic engagement and the Constitution. And so, I will do as a fan told me after the show, paraphrasing a lyric from 'Does This Bus Stop at 82nd Street?' I will spread the word that 'the dope is that there is still hope.' I will survive and fight for what comes next. I am not putting the eagle away. Share The Bulwark
Yahoo
14-05-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
One of Trump's Afrikaner 'Refugees' Is Quite the Antisemite
The Trump administration's new policy of denying immigration benefits to people expressing antisemitic views apparently doesn't apply to white South Africans. One of the Afrikaner 'refugees' who has taken up President Trump's offer for white South Africans to immigrate to the United States to flee a nonexistent genocide has a history of posting antisemitic content on social media. Charl Kleinhaus, who claims to be a former farmer, has called Jewish people 'untrustworthy' and 'dangerous.' Kleinhaus also responded to a post on X about clashes in Jerusalem between Palestinians and Israelis with a link to a video and the caption 'Jews spitting on Christians!' But if one were to think that Kleinhaus opposes Israel, that would be a mistake. After Hamas's October 7 attacks on Israel, he made several posts praising the country and offering it his total support. Kleinhaus's claims to be a farmer are also suspect, as his X account mentions his ownership of a granite mine, which he put up for sale last month. The Bulwark points out that Kleinhaus's X profile is otherwise full of pro-Christian, pro-Trump, and pro-MAGA content. But the antisemitic posts seem to show a contradiction in the White House's new policy, as outlined by Secretary of State Marco Rubio, of denying immigrants with antisemitic views into the U.S. because their presence would undermine 'U.S. policy to combat anti-Semitism around the world and in the United States, in addition to efforts to protect Jewish students from harassment and violence in the United States.' That policy was used to detain Columbia University graduate Mahmoud Khalil and strip him of his permanent residency status in March. Why is Kleinhaus seemingly being held to a different standard? Is it because Khalil is of Palestinian origin, while Kleinhaus is a white South African? Or is it because despite openly expressing prejudice against Jewish people, Kleinhaus also professes love for Israel? Either way, there's clearly racism at the root of it.
Channel Post MEA
13-05-2025
- Business
- Channel Post MEA
Appknox Targets 5x GCC Growth with Strong Regional Push and New StoreKnox Launch
Rishika Mehrotra, Chief Strategy Officer at Appknox, is spearheading the company's aggressive growth strategy from her base in Dubai, focusing on scaling operations across the GCC region and globally. Appknox, a leading mobile application security company, provides an automated security testing platform that helps organizations secure their mobile apps throughout the software development lifecycle (SDLC). With cybersecurity risks rising, especially in mobile ecosystems, Appknox is responding to market demands with innovative solutions. A major milestone for the company is the recent launch of StoreKnox, a post-deployment monitoring tool that detects fake apps and scans for malware across app marketplaces. This addition complements Appknox's pre-deployment security tools and positions it as a full-spectrum mobile app security provider. Looking ahead to 2025, Appknox is targeting 5x growth in the GCC and 3x global growth, powered by its two-tier distribution model. The company works closely with master distributor Bulwark and more than 100 partners across the GCC. This partner-first approach includes regular technical enablement, joint marketing campaigns, and shared market intelligence to strengthen ecosystem capabilities. The GCC's tightening regulatory environment is a key growth driver. Increasing compliance requirements and rising cybersecurity threats are pushing enterprises and governments to adopt more advanced mobile security measures. Recognizing this, Appknox is expanding into new markets like Oman and Egypt, with a special focus on government contracts. Rishika notes that as governments introduce stricter cybersecurity frameworks, the demand for robust, end-to-end mobile security across the SDLC is surging. Appknox's scalable platform, regional presence, and commitment to partner empowerment position it well to capitalize on this momentum and deliver secure mobile experiences at scale. 0 0
Yahoo
06-05-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Can Trump Handle the India-Pakistan Crisis?
IF THERE IS EVER A TIME WHEN the world needs sane, capable leadership from Washington, it is when India and Pakistan rattle their nuclear sabers at each other. The April 22 terrorist attack in Kashmir that killed twenty-six tourists immediately sparked a new Indo-Pakistani crisis and raised fears of a wider war. It remains an open question whether the Trump administration is equipped to play a helpful role. There is a worrisome precedent for this sort of crisis. In 2016 and 2019, India responded to terrorist attacks with military operations against Pakistan. In 2019, Indian airstrikes on Pakistani soil were followed by the downing of Indian aircraft, the capture (and return) of an Indian pilot, Pakistani counterstrikes in India, an Indian friendly-fire incident, and threats of impending missile attacks. That the entire episode did not blow up further can be attributed mainly to dumb luck. An errant bomb, an unintended missile launch, or any number of other events could have pushed the two sides further up the ladder of nuclear escalation. Mistakes do happen: In March 2022 India accidentally shot a supersonic BrahMos missile into Pakistan. According to the accounts of Trump administration officials working in 2019—many of whom were initially distracted by separate high-level meetings then underway with North Korea and the Taliban—it took some time for U.S. diplomats to encourage restraint from both New Delhi and Islamabad. Get the best The Bulwark has to offer in your inbox. Join Bulwark+. Washington's approach reflected conflicting U.S. interests. On the one hand, American officials were sympathetic to the plight of its strategic partner in India and fully cognizant that the United States would, if attacked as India had been, also want to lash out against terrorists and their backers. On the other hand, as the crisis wore on, they appreciated that India lacked low-risk military options to solve its security problem, that Pakistan was certain to respond to India with tit-for-tat attacks, and that the whole situation could quickly spiral into a major war. In retrospect, that second problem should have been apparent at the start. This does not mean that Washington should have undermined India's ability to deter or punish, but it does mean that everyone should have looked at least two moves ahead. What, for instance, would green-lighting an Indian air or missile strike on Pakistani soil lead to next? And after that? In 2019, the Indian readout of a call between then–National Security Advisor John Bolton and his counterpart in New Delhi read, 'Ambassador Bolton supported India's right to self-defence against cross-border terrorism. He offered all assistance to India to bring the perpetrators and backers of the attack promptly to justice. NSA Doval appreciated U.S. support.' Whatever Bolton meant to convey by his words, in the region his comments were widely interpreted as a green light for India to strike Pakistan. Join now If Washington had actually meant to forestall India's punitive airstrikes (which came almost two weeks after the terrorist attack), the White House could have clarified its position publicly. Only after India hit Pakistan, Pakistan downed an Indian jet, and—as former Secretary of State Mike Pompeo records in his 2023 memoir—Washington heard that both India and Pakistan feared the other side was readying its nuclear forces did American diplomats more seriously assert themselves as go-betweens to calm nerves and help to bring the crisis to an end. Today the situation looks even more volatile than in 2019. Anger and anguish in India—both for the loss of life and the disruption to Prime Minister Narendra Modi's high-stakes political project of pacifying Kashmir—is running high. Modi switched from Hindi to English in a recent speech, emphasizing to global audiences his vow that India would 'identify, track and punish every terrorist and their backers' (meaning Pakistan). Both India and Pakistan have conducted missile tests, and there have been significant violations of the ceasefire implemented in 2021. India has 'put in abeyance' a water-sharing agreement with Pakistan that dates to 1960, and Pakistan has similarly threatened to suspend a 1972 bilateral agreement on border management. Perhaps in an ideal world, India could exact targeted revenge against the Pakistan-based terrorist outfit Lashkar-e-Taiba (a persistent threat and the most plausible backers of the April attack), as Israel did last year against Hamas's Ismail Haniyeh in Tehran and Hasan Nasrallah in Lebanon, while also defending itself against likely Pakistani counterstrikes, also as Israel—with U.S. help—did from Iran. But this seems far-fetched; India does not appear to enjoy Israel's military superiority, either in terms of intelligence about its enemies or its defenses against counterstrikes. Now would be the time for Trump administration officials to speak with one clear voice, to urge India to think several steps ahead as it fights terrorists without prompting a war that no one wants and that might even create vulnerabilities for India against hostile Chinese forces deployed along their contested border. The United States holds no brief for anti-Indian terrorists and should have no patience for Pakistan's continued support to them. The question, however, remains how best to go about improving security and deterrence. If the answers were easy, India would have found them already. Thus far, however, Washington looks as if it may be internally divided over its policies. Vance and Rubio speak as if they are trying to balance public support for India, condemnation for the terrorists, and concerns about the dangers of escalation. But Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth has reverted to language that is being interpreted in India very much like Bolton's 2019 comment that effectively endorsed India's reprisals against Pakistan. Worst of all, a clearly preoccupied President Trump seems to believe he can somehow remove himself from this crisis, stating that 'they'll get it figured out one way or the other,' and repeating a deeply misinformed quip that 'there have been tensions on that border for 1500 years.' We can hope that even more constructive work is being done behind the scenes. But for now, the situation continues to unfold, slow-motion-train-wreck style, with little evidence of the sort of creative, pro-active American leadership that might help avoid another war. Share
