Latest news with #TheExcerpt
USA Today
10 hours ago
- Politics
- USA Today
Columbia University to pay $200 million fine in new agreement with Trump administration
On Thursday's episode of The Excerpt podcast: Columbia University has struck another deal with the Trump administration. A federal judge has rejected the Justice Department's bid to unseal grand jury testimony tied to Florida-based investigations of sex offender Jeffrey Epstein. Plus, Attorney General Pam Bondi reportedly told President Donald Trump in May that he was named multiple times in the government's files on Epstein. And the House Oversight Committee will subpoena Epstein files and documents from the Clintons and others. USA TODAY National Security & World Affairs Reporter Cybele Mayes-Osterman discusses why a handful of tech executives are joining the Army and what critics are worried about. A notorious Idaho killer was sentenced Wednesday to life in prison. Victims' families gave powerful testimony in court. USA TODAY Congress Reporter Savannah Kuchar breaks down a Republican redistricting plan out of Texas. We remember Amelia Earhart on her birthday. Hit play on the player below to hear the podcast and follow along with the transcript beneath it. This transcript was automatically generated, and then edited for clarity in its current form. There may be some differences between the audio and the text. Podcasts: True crime, in-depth interviews and more USA TODAY podcasts right here Taylor Wilson: Good morning. I'm Taylor Wilson, and today is Thursday, July 24th, 2025. This is USA TODAY's The Excerpt. Today, breaking down Columbia's latest deal with the Trump administration, plus what tech executives are doing in the Army, and how a potential map redraw in Texas could kick off a coast-to-coast redistricting battle. ♦ Columbia University has struck another deal with the Trump administration. The Ivy League school in New York City announced it will pay a massive $200 million fine over three years to the government to settle allegations it violated federal civil rights laws and failed to protect members of its Jewish community from discrimination. It will also jointly appoint an independent monitor to update the federal government on its compliance with new policies and pay an additional $21 million fine to the US Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. The agreement marks the second major concession from the university in its negotiations with the government. The school previously agreed, among other things, to bolster campus law enforcement, appoint a new administrator to oversee its Middle Eastern Studies Department, and retool its protest policies in an effort to play ball with the White House. The announcement also comes after the Trump administration pushed the University of Pennsylvania, another Ivy League school, to agree to a series of demands related to preventing transgender athletes from competing. Similarly, that deal was reached to restore massive amounts of federal money. ♦ A federal judge in Florida yesterday rejected a bid from President Trump's Justice Department to unseal grand jury testimony tied to a two-decades old investigation and to convicted sex offender, Jeffrey Epstein. The Justice Department asked the federal court in the Southern District of Florida to release transcripts from grand jury investigations that took place in West Palm Beach in 2005 and 2007, but a judge ruled that she doesn't have the power to order the records' release. Meanwhile, Attorney General Pam Bondi told President Trump in May that he was named multiple times in the government's files on Epstein according to reports from the Wall Street Journal and CNN. A White House official did not dispute Trump's name as mentioned in the Epstein files, telling USA TODAY that briefing binders Bondi prepared for MAGA influencers in February included the president's name, but the official rejected any suggestion that Trump engaged in wrongdoing in connection with Epstein. And the House Oversight Committee voted yesterday to subpoena the Justice Department for files related to Epstein, answering calls from lawmakers and voters alike for more information on the disgraced financier and sex offender. The committee also moved to request documents related to Epstein investigations from a swath of other well-known figures, including former President Bill Clinton, former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, and former Attorney General Merrick Garland. ♦ Several tech executives are joining the Army as reserve officers. I spoke with USA TODAY National Security and World Affairs reporter, Cybele Mayes-Osterman to learn more about their expected roles. Cybele, thanks for joining me. Cybele Mayes-Osterman: Happy to be here. Thanks, Taylor. Taylor Wilson: All right, so what has the Army announced about these tech executives in the military and who are they? Cybele Mayes-Osterman: The Army has announced that four tech executives are going to be directly commissioned in as officers in the Army Reserve. These include one executive who's from Palantir. One of them is from Meta, which used to be Facebook. One is from OpenAI, and the other is from Thinking Machines Lab, but he used to work with Palantir and one of the other companies as well. Taylor Wilson: I mean, how unprecedented is this? Do we have any historical context? Cybele Mayes-Osterman: It's not totally unprecedented for the Army to directly commission business people. It did happen in World War II. The most extreme example was an auto executive from Ford Motors who was commissioned in as a general, which is a higher rank. And outside experts are also frequently brought into the military under this title, Highly Qualified Expert, which is unique to the Pentagon. But that being said, directly commissioning in tech executives and at this rank of lieutenant-colonel, which takes around 17 years to achieve from the bottom up, is not something that is so common Taylor Wilson: In terms of the Army perspective here, why does the Army say this is necessary? How is this part of the broader Army Transformation Initiative? Cybele Mayes-Osterman: The Army says that these executives are going to bring good insight and advice as they undertake this big shift that's called the Army Transformation Initiative. Now this was ordered by Pete Hegsath, the Secretary of Defense, and he wants the Army to get rid of some equipment that he calls obsolete, like heavy ground vehicles, and get more of this newfangled technology like AI and drones, which are the area of expertise of these executives. Taylor Wilson: And in reporting this piece about, did you hear from the tech execs themselves? Cybele Mayes-Osterman: I did, yeah. I talked to one of the executives from Palantir, who was actually the one that first pitched the idea of joining to the Army and recruited the others, and he said that they won't actually be working on tech and AI. And they're going to be working, according to the Army, on totally separate things like recruitment is one category, human performance. This executive said that they need to stay away from those spaces, tech and AI, in order to avoid conflicts of interest. Taylor Wilson: And what concerns do critics have here, Cybele? Cybele Mayes-Osterman: Critics say that there's a lot of ethical issues with bringing these executives in. These companies that they're from already hold each hundreds of millions of dollars in defense contracts with the army. And critics are concerned that the executives could either get inside information that would make it easier for them to win future contracts, or they'd be in a position where they could influence the army to buy things in the future from their companies or feel like they need to. Taylor Wilson: All right. So what's next for this work and this conversation going forward? Cybele Mayes-Osterman: The executives I've been told are going to arrive in Fort Benning by the end of the month to start training. The Army says they're going to undergo the same training that anybody else would and they're going to be subject to the same physical fitness requirements. In fact, I heard from one Army official that they're going to be teaching them which hands that they need to salute with to be officers. Taylor Wilson: All right, interesting stuff. Folks can find the full version with a link in today's show notes. Cybele Mayes-Osterman covers National Security and World Affairs for USA TODAY. Thanks, Cybele. Cybele Mayes-Osterman: Thanks so much. ♦ Taylor Wilson: Bryan Kohberger was sentenced to life in prison yesterday for the 2022 murders of four University of Idaho students, receiving the ruling after hours of emotional statements from family and friends of the victims. Loved ones of Madison Mogen, Kaylee Goncalves, Xana Kernodle, and Ethan Chapin honored the students in court and spoke about the anger and devastation they felt after the killings. Those killed were all aged 20 or 21 years old. Olivia Goncalves: Do you feel anything at all or are you exactly what you always feared? Nothing. You didn't win, you just exposed yourself as the coward you are. Taylor Wilson: That was some of what Olivia Goncalves, sister of Kaylee Goncalves, had to say. You can read and hear more from victims' loved ones with the link in today's show notes. ♦ Republican Texas Governor Greg Abbott has requested at the White House's urging that the legislature consider redrawing lines for a handful of Texas's 38 congressional districts, giving Republicans the chance to flip seats red in the upcoming 2026 midterm elections. I spoke with USA TODAY Congress Reporter Savannah Kuchar for more and to hear how Democrats are pushing back. Savannah, thanks for hopping on. Savannah Kuchar: Thanks for having me. I always love talking about my home state. Taylor Wilson: Yeah. Well, let's get into this redistricting proposal from Governor Greg Abbott and Texas Republicans. What does this actually entail? Savannah Kuchar: What we're looking at is right now, Texas state lawmakers are at the start of a special session, and in that special session they will evaluate quite a few things that the governor has specifically asked them to look at. And one of those things is a proposal to redraw the congressional map in Texas, which is pretty rare for in the middle of the decade. It's typically every 10 years after a census data comes out. But Governor Greg Abbott in Texas has asked lawmakers to take a look at the congressional maps, potentially redraw some of the boundaries, and change up where districts are, which could affect elections as soon as next year's midterm elections. Taylor Wilson: Could this kick off a coast-to-coast redistricting battle nationwide? What really are the national implications here? Savannah Kuchar: Obviously this is happening right now in Texas, but it pretty quickly garnered reaction from, like you said, coast-to-coast. Democrats in states like California as well as New York are looking at how they can respond in a sense if Texas Republicans redraw the map to give themselves a boost in a handful of districts. Maybe California, New York, some other blue states will do basically an equal and opposite reaction. And then of course, that could set off other states, such as Florida and New Hampshire, it would be possible to redraw there. Ohio has to redraw their maps before 2026 due to their state constitution. So it's set off as interesting arms race of redistricting across the country. Taylor Wilson: Well, Savannah, as you said, Democrats are vowing to respond. Just more specifically, I mean, do Dems in Texas have any power to push back, and how is the party approaching this on a national level? Savannah Kuchar: Democrats in Texas really don't have a whole lot of tools to respond. The main one that they have used in history before is a walkout. So fleeing the state, not being there in person, would break a quorum and the state legislature couldn't move forward on agenda items. There are fees associated with that, so it will be curious to see if they do employ the strategy, but state Democrats have said they will do what they can to block this move. That'll be interesting to see how much they are able to move. At a national level, Democrats are responding in full, absolutely, or at least promising a tit-for-tat response of, "If you do this, we will respond," to try to cancel out what Texas Republicans are doing. Taylor Wilson: All right. And what has the President said about all this? Savannah Kuchar: It did originate from the White House and Trump's team has been pushing this idea and was asking Governor Greg Abbott to move forward on this. And so Trump wants Republicans to do this, to bump their numbers in 2026 and help the House out. President Trump has said that if they do redistricting in Texas, Republicans could maybe pick up as many as five districts is what he said. Taylor Wilson: All right. Well, we know midterms are really just around the corner, just over a year out at this point. What's next for this conversation? Savannah Kuchar: In the immediate future, state lawmakers in Texas are in that special session for 30 days. They're a few days in so far. So right now we're watching to see any maps to come out, how exactly Republicans want to redraw the map, we're waiting for specific map proposals to come out. And then like you said, midterm elections are right around the corner next year. And I think the other interesting thing is, along with Democrats saying they will actively respond, they're also warning that this could backfire on Republicans. If they move Republican voters from one district to a blue district to flip that seat, the district that those voters left could be potential pickups for Democrats. So the interesting thing to watch next year and heading into the election will be who does have the advantage? Did Republicans, if they change the map, did they help themselves out or did they shoot themselves in the foot? That would be the interesting to watch. Taylor Wilson: Great insight for us as always. Savannah Kuchar covers Congress for USA TODAY. Thanks, Savannah. Savannah Kuchar: Thank you, Taylor. ♦ Taylor Wilson: And before we close this episode, let's take a moment to remember Amelia Earhart on her birthday. The trailblazing aviator was the first woman to fly solo across the Atlantic in 1932. She also advocated for women's roles in aviation, broke barriers in the air and on the ground, and inspired generations. When she disappeared in 1937, she was setting out to be the first woman to complete a circumnavigation flight around the globe. ♦ And coming up later today, millions of Americans struggle with acute insomnia, an inability to fall or stay asleep for several days at a time. But what can you do about it? Jennifer Senior: I did all the things. I took Tylenol PM, which did not work. I did acupuncture, which were lovely, but did not work. I listened to a meditation tape that a friend gave me, did not work. Taylor Wilson: That's Jennifer Senior, staff writer at The Atlantic, sharing what she learned as she looked into her own experience with insomnia and what could be done to alleviate it. You can catch my conversation with her right here on this feed today, beginning at 4:00 PM Eastern Time. ♦ And thanks for listening to The Excerpt. You can get the podcast wherever you get your audio. If you're on a smart speaker, just ask for The Excerpt. As always, you can email us at podcasts@ I'm Taylor Wilson. I'll be back tomorrow with more of The Excerpt from USA TODAY.
USA Today
3 days ago
- Entertainment
- USA Today
Robin Williams' son Zak Williams honors late actor on 74th birthday: 'Love you forever'
Birthdays have become a bittersweet occasion for Zak Williams. The mental health advocate and entrepreneur, son of actor-comedian Robin Williams, paid tribute to the iconic performer on social media in honor of his birthday on Monday, July 21. Robin, who died in August 2014 at the age of 63, would have turned 74. "Every year, this season arrives with gravity," Williams, 42, wrote on Instagram alongside a throwback photo of Robin. "In just 60 days, we pass through Father's Day, his birthday, and the anniversary of his death. It's a tender and complicated stretch of time. One that asks a lot of the heart." He added: "For me, grief isn't linear. It loops and echoes. It softens, then crescendos. But alongside it lives a legacy, the kind built not from fame or recognition, but from generosity and relentless kindness." Robin Williams died by suicide following a battle with Lewy body dementia. The Oscar-winning actor also struggled with substance abuse for decades. His 2006 relapse, which he tried unsuccessfully to hide from his wife Marsha Garces, led to the unraveling of his second marriage. He later took up a stint at the Hazelden Foundation center, a rehab facility in Oregon. "My father lived to make people feel seen," Williams continued. "He gave permission to feel deeply and to laugh through the pain. In his absence, that mission continues. So today, I hold close the idea that the best way to honor those we love is to live the values they stood for. To lead with service and compassion. To lift others when they're down. And to find paths of light, even in the dark corners." He concluded: "Happy birthday, Dad. Love you forever." Matthew Lawrence reveals Robin Williams warned him against substance abuse as child Zak Williams opens up about childhood with dad Robin Williams In an August 2024 interview for USA TODAY's "The Excerpt" podcast, Williams reflected on his father's legacy in the entertainment industry, as well as his childhood memories with the eccentric actor-comedian. "He was very funny. But he also was very introspective," said Williams of Robin's off-screen demeanor. "He loved playing video games and collecting toys and comic books. I mean, he was a big kid at heart. "And the memories I'm most fond of, in terms of our private family life, relate to my siblings and spending time with him basically being a big kid." 'He was a big kid at heart': Zak Williams reflects on dad Robin Williams Williams, who appeared on the podcast ahead of the 10th anniversary of Robin's death, said he preserves his father's memory by focusing on his positive contributions as a public figure. "I think of my father fondly all year, but around this time of year, I think about his good works, his philanthropic focus," Williams said. "I tend to spend time with my family. ... It comes down to remembering him fondly for his incredible heart and love for humanity." If you or someone you know needs mental health resources and support, please call, text or chat with the 988 Suicide & Crisis Lifeline or visit for 24/7 access to free and confidential services. If you or someone you know needs help battling a substance abuse addiction, contact the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Service Administration's National Helpline at 1-800-662-HELP (4357). Contributing: Taylor Wilson and Marco della Cava, USA TODAY
USA Today
3 days ago
- Politics
- USA Today
Nobel laureates plea for diplomacy to prevent nuclear war
On Monday's episode of The Excerpt podcast: USA TODAY White House Reporter Davis Winkie breaks down what nuclear experts said last week about the current state of nuclear threats and what to do about it. Support for President Donald Trump's immigration policies fell in a new poll. USA TODAY National Immigration and Border Reporter Lauren Villagran discusses Louisiana's place as a major immigration detainer. Israeli fire killed 67 people seeking aid in Gaza. WNBA All-Stars make a CBA statement with 'Pay Us What You Owe Us' shirts. Hit play on the player below to hear the podcast and follow along with the transcript beneath it. This transcript was automatically generated, and then edited for clarity in its current form. There may be some differences between the audio and the text. Podcasts: True crime, in-depth interviews and more USA TODAY podcasts right here Taylor Wilson: Good morning. I'm Taylor Wilson, and today is Monday, July 21st, 2025. This is USA TODAY's The Excerpt. Today what nuclear experts are saying about present-day threats, plus support for Trump immigration policies drops in a new poll, and we hear how one state in the south is approaching immigration detention facilities. ♦ Top nuclear experts gathered last week to offer world leaders a playbook for reducing the risk of nuclear war. I discussed with USA TODAY White House reporter, Davis Winkie. Thanks for joining me, Davis. Davis Winkie: Good to be back, Taylor. Taylor Wilson: All right, just tell us a bit about this meeting of Nobel Prize winners and nuclear experts in Chicago, why was this held? Davis Winkie: Nobel Prize winners and physicists have long considered themselves the guardians, so to speak, of the nuclear world, because of their pivotal role in the creation of the nuclear bomb. A couple of physics Nobel winners thought the threat of nuclear war keeps creeping higher and higher in recent years, so this year, to mark the 80th anniversary of the Trinity nuclear test near Los Alamos, New Mexico, this group of Nobel laureates assembled in Chicago, and brought together nuclear policy experts, former government officials, diplomats, et cetera, to face down the challenges in reducing the risk of nuclear war right now, and to provide a declaration of policy recommendations that could help world leaders to reduce that risk. Taylor Wilson: Well, Davis, in terms of what they functionally did here, it's clear many of them hammered home the point that international agreements are key to reducing some of the risk of nuclear war. Let's start with the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty. Can you help us understand what that is, and how did this come up during these discussions? Davis Winkie: The CTBT, as it's known in nuclear circles, arose in the mid 1990s, after a lot of leading nuclear powers agreed to stop nuclear testing. A handful of the world's countries have at least signed this treaty, and have agreed to pause testing. However, it has not gone into binding effect, because nine countries that are specified in the treaty as needing to ratify it, or have their legislatures or governing bodies formally approve it. The United States is one of those countries, as is Russia, as is China, as is North Korea. The CTBT has always existed at the limit of its current potential. It has an organization headquartered Vienna, that does incredibly sophisticated technological monitoring of seismic activity around the world, satellite imagery, et cetera, that allows them to tell us in near real time whether something that has occurred is a nuclear test or not. That's incredibly valuable for international stability, but it's limited because of the fact that the treaty is not in enforced, and now you have Russia, China, and the U.S. potentially considering resuming explosive nuclear testing, because they are not bound by this treaty, because they've not ratified it. Taylor Wilson: Well, shifting gears, AI is entering basically every facet of society at this point. Does it have a role in nuclear spaces, Davis? Davis Winkie: Taylor, you've touched on something very hotly debated in nuclear policy circles right now, what is the appropriate extent in areas in which that AI can be integrated? Everybody pretty much agrees that the AI should not, SKYNET style, decide when and where the missiles are being launched. You cannot give control of the missiles over to AI. Former president, Joe Biden, and Chinese president, Xi Jinping, actually agreed to that publicly last year. So there's common ground among the nuclear powers on some of the limits of AI, but there's questions still swirling around what's the proper role of AI in things like early warning systems. It's a good thing, Taylor, that we've never had a global thermonuclear war. What that means, however, is that there is not global thermonuclear war data on which to train AI models for something like early warning, or targeting solution, or any of these other potential applications across nuclear command control and communications enterprise. One of the major things that came out at this conference though is the Vatican's representatives there was really outspoken about wanting there to be an independent faith leader component of assessing the morality of AI integration, which largely does align with some of the other initiatives regarding AI that we have seen coming out of the Vatican recently. I, for one, am really interested to see how these further policy recommendations and such develop in the months and years ahead. Taylor Wilson: USA TODAY White House reporter, Davis Winkie. Thank you, Davis. Davis Winkie: Thanks for having me. ♦ Taylor Wilson: Support for President Donald Trump's immigration policies fell in a new poll with stark differences between Republicans and Democrats on deportations, and the use of detention facilities. The poll out yesterday from CBS YouGov found that immigration is the top issue that swayed respondents' opinion on the president. 61% said immigration and deportation policies mattered a lot, followed by inflation and the economy. Overall, the poll puts Trump's approval rating at 42%, with disapproval at 58%. The survey previously found Trump's approval rating was 45% last month. In the latest CBS poll, 56% disapproved of the president's immigration stances, marking a 10-point drop from polling at the beginning of Trump's second term in February, the outlet reported. Support for Trump's immigration policies is split along party lines, nearly all Republicans surveyed, 91% say they approve of the president's deportation program. Among Democrats, 14% say they approve. You can read more with a link in today's show notes. ♦ One state in the south, long known for its prison economy now houses more ICE detention facilities than any other non-border state. I spoke with USA TODAY national immigration and border reporter, Lauren Villagran, to learn more. Thanks for joining me, Lauren. Lauren Villagran: Thanks for having me, Taylor. Taylor Wilson: How involved is Louisiana with detaining migrants? How many detention facilities do they have? Lauren Villagran: I think a lot of Americans don't realize that Louisiana is actually one of the biggest ICE detention center posts in the country. So Texas is the largest, and has the most ICE detention centers, but Louisiana is number two, with nine total dedicated ICE detention facilities. Taylor Wilson: How and why has the state become such a deportation hub? When did this begin? Lauren Villagran: Back in 2017, the state was going through a criminal justice reform. The result of that bipartisan reform was that many of Louisiana's prisons, the state is known as one of the world's largest incarcerators per capita, were emptied of many prisoners who were in jail for low-level offenses, and that's around when some communities turned to the federal government. ICE at the time was looking for ways to expand immigration detention, and they came to Louisiana, saw that there were empty beds, and they had people to fill them with. So you started to see a pretty dramatic expansion of ICE detention around 2019 in Louisiana. Several organizations have studied this phenomenon, the ACLU of Louisiana, Tulane University, researchers, and we had the opportunity to travel to Louisiana last month. Taylor Wilson: Yeah, I want to hear about that trip, Lauren. What did you see? Tell us about this experience. Lauren Villagran: Photographer, Omar Ornelas and I traveled around the state. Many of these detention centers are located far from New Orleans, the sort of metropolitan center of the state at the southern tip. You have to drive 3, 5, 7 hours to reach some of these facilities, many of which are located in rural communities, sometimes deep in the woods. There were, in July, more than 7,000 people detained in ICE detention in Louisiana. Taylor Wilson: Wow. Lauren, what are some of the advantages of Louisiana for immigration officials? And what are some of the advantages for Louisiana? Lauren Villagran: As of this recording, DHS had not responded to multiple requests for comment from USA TODAY. We asked why DHS, why ICE went to Louisiana, so far from the border, and we didn't get a response. Now, what we learned from community members, from immigration advocates who work in the area is that Louisiana had a number of advantages. One, it had these empty jails and prisons, so there were facilities and infrastructure already available. There were members of the community who know how to do corrections work, and the immigration advocates will say there was another reason as well, Louisiana is located in the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals, it's a circuit that has historically been very difficult for immigration advocates to win their cases, the immigration judges in Louisiana are considered some of the toughest in the nation. Taylor Wilson: And in terms of some of those advantages for the state itself, you're hearing similar things on the ground there? Lauren Villagran: Certainly for the smaller rural communities that had facilities that were an anchor to the economy, of course. The federal government offered to pay more than the state per bed, per night. And a facility where you've got several hundred people working there when your community is maybe a population 4,000 or so is a pretty big deal. It was considered economic development. Taylor Wilson: President Trump is increasingly leaning on Republican-led states far from the U.S.-Mexico border to detain and deport immigrants, as you write. Are other states following Louisiana's lead as more federal funding moves to ICE detention? Lauren Villagran: We saw Congress give ICE $45 billion for detention over the next four years, that quadruples the agency's annual budget currently. So we're going to see likely a huge expansion of immigration detention in this country. Taylor Wilson: We went through some of the apparent advantages for some of the players here. What do critics say about using these states to detain migrants in this way? What are some of the due process concerns and other worries? Lauren Villagran: There's been a practice for a long time now that seems to have accelerated under the current administration of detaining people far from their families. Now, previously, immigration detention was often used for recent border crossers. For example, under the Biden administration and under the first Trump administration, you saw moves to detain asylum seekers at the border. People would cross the border, and then be transferred to Louisiana. Now, as interior enforcement has ramped up, you're seeing people get picked up all over the country for immigration violations. But unlike local jails where folks might be taken into custody in their community, in this case, immigrants are being sent very far from their communities and their families. Some of the higher-profile detainees that we've seen under the Trump administration, Mahmoud Khalil, the Columbia University student activist, Kseniia Petrova, the Harvard University researcher from Russia, they were removed from respectively New York and Boston, and sent to Louisiana. Taylor Wilson: All right, Lauren, great reporting work on this story. I found it really eye-opening. Lauren Villagran covers the border and immigration for USA TODAY. Thanks, Lauren. Lauren Villagran: Really appreciate it, Taylor. Thanks. ♦ Taylor Wilson: Israel opened fire and killed dozens of Palestinians as they waited for UN aid trucks in Northern Gaza yesterday according to the Gaza health ministry, as Israel issued new evacuation orders for certain areas. There are continued starvation concerns in the enclave. Palestinian health officials said hundreds of people could soon die as hospitals were inundated with patients suffering from dizziness and exhaustion due to the scarcity of food and a collapse in aid deliveries. And Pope Leo called for an end to what he said was the barbarity of war as he spoke of his pain over an Israeli strike on the sole Catholic Church in Gaza that killed three people on Thursday. Israel and Hamas are engaged in indirect talks in the nation of Qatar, aimed at reaching a 60-day truce and deal to release Israeli hostages held in Gaza, though there has been no sign of breakthrough. ♦ All eyes were on the WNBA, as the best players in the league gathered in Indianapolis over the weekend for the All-Star game, and they used that opportunity to make a bold statement to the league, walking onto the court for warmups in black T-shirts that read pay us what you owe us. One of the main items on the All-Star Week agenda was a face-to-face meeting between the players and league on collective bargaining agreement negotiations, as the current contract expires at the end of the 2025 season. According to multiple players, that meeting did not go well. Still, more than 40 players turned out for the first meeting with league officials in months. WNBA commissioner, Cathy Engelbert, had a different tone, saying she believed the meeting with players had been productive. ♦ Thanks for listening to The Excerpt. You can get the podcast wherever you get your audio, and if you're on a smart speaker, just ask for The Excerpt. I'm Taylor Wilson, and I'll be back tomorrow with more of The Excerpt from USA TODAY.
USA Today
3 days ago
- Politics
- USA Today
Can Trump calm MAGA's fury by releasing more Epstein records?
On Saturday's episode of The Excerpt podcast: USA TODAY White House Reporter Zac Anderson breaks down some of the latest surrounding President Donald Trump and Jeffrey Epstein records. Trump sued the Wall Street Journal Friday over the newspaper's report that his name was on a 2003 birthday greeting for Epstein. Americans detained in Venezuela have been released in exchange for Venezuelans detained in El Salvador. USA TODAY Supreme Court Correspondent Maureen Groppe takes a closer look at how the Trump administrations is affecting litigation over gun regulations. Health insurance costs are set to spike again. The Open Championship continues. Hit play on the player below to hear the podcast and follow along with the transcript beneath it. This transcript was automatically generated, and then edited for clarity in its current form. There may be some differences between the audio and the text. Podcasts: True crime, in-depth interviews and more USA TODAY podcasts right here Taylor Wilson: Good morning. I'm Taylor Wilson, and today is Saturday, July 19th, 2025. This is USA TODAY'S The Excerpt. Today, the latest on Trump and Epstein records. Plus we take a look at a prisoner exchange between the US and Venezuela and how the Trump administration is impacting litigation over gun regulations. ♦ President Donald Trump sued The Wall Street Journal and its owners, including Rupert Murdoch for at least $10 million yesterday. The suit was filed over the newspaper's report that his name was on a 2003 birthday greeting for Jeffrey Epstein that included a sexually suggestive drawing and a reference to secrets they shared. The move came after Trump bowed to some of his critics by pushing for the release of certain additional Epstein records. I spoke with USA TODAY White House reporter Zac Anderson for more. Thanks for joining me, Zac. Zac Anderson: Good to be here. Taylor Wilson: So, President Trump has tapped Attorney General Pam Bondi to seek the release of grand jury testimony from Jeffrey Epstein's legal proceedings. Let's just start there, Zac. What's the latest and how did we get to this point? Zac Anderson: So, Trump has really faced a lot of pressure both from Republicans and his party and from Democrats to release more records related to Epstein. The Justice Department put out a memo last week that was attempting to close the book on this issue and dispel some of the concerns that people had. There's a lot of talk that Epstein had a client list of accomplices who were involved in his alleged sex trafficking scheme and speculation about how he died. The DOJ put out this memo saying they didn't have any reason to believe that he had this client list, that they affirm that he died by suicide in jail and that they weren't going to put out any more records justice officials said. And that really set people off, especially some high profile people in Trump's base, MAGA figures who were calling for the release of more records that built until Trump said that he would release certain grand jury records. But it's not all of the records and not everybody is satisfied. Taylor Wilson: Well, Zac, he doesn't usually bow to critics. What's different this time? Zac Anderson: Yeah, Trump is really known for punching back repeatedly and standing his ground in the face of criticism, but this issue has been different for him. He's feeling it from people on the right. It's also an issue that some of his top supporters, including people in his administration, really built up the expectations around this. They've talked about the Epstein files for years. They've insinuated that there could be bombshell revelations in them about powerful people complicit in illegal activity. So, this is really an issue that the right has focused on and the idea that there is nothing to here and that we're not going to release any more documents has upset a lot of people in his base who are saying that there needs to be more. There's actually a bill that was filed that would call for the release of all Epstein records, so it's become of a huge thorn in Trump's side. Taylor Wilson: Well, you mentioned his base. I mean, will this calm some of his biggest MAGA wing critics, at least on this? Zac Anderson: I think it remains to be seen. I saw some people who had called for the release of more records were sharing Trump's announcement on social media that he was going to try and unseal some of these grand jury testimony. So they seemed to be happy with that. But the Republican lawmaker, Thomas Massey, who filed the bill that would release all of the records, said that more needs to be done. Massey is not a Trump favorite. He's an independent Republican who Trump has clashed with. But again, like I said, Massey's bill is co-sponsored by some of Trump's strongest supporters. So Massey isn't giving up on this legislation. We'll see if the clamor dies down here from some of these MAGA folks. Taylor Wilson: This has clearly been an issue on the right. How are Democrats approaching this conversation? Zac Anderson: Democrats have really latched onto this as well. Massey's bill is co-sponsored by Ro Khanna, who's a democratic lawmaker from California. Other Democrats have really been pushing this issue. I think they see political opportunity here, but also there are still a lot of questions about what are in some of these records. This is really a bipartisan issue. You see both Republicans and Democrats really pushing this. Massey's bill is actually co-sponsored by both Marjorie Taylor Greene and Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez. So you have far left and far right people who have both really latched onto this issue. Taylor Wilson: Well, Zac, he's asked Attorney General Pam Bondi to seek this release. What's next as it pertains to these records and the broader conversation around this? Zac Anderson: We'll see where this goes. It sounds like Bondi was saying she was prepared to ask the court to unseal some of this grand jury testimony. Courts operate on their own timeline. It's not clear if they would even agree to that or how long that would take. And also, this is just a fraction of the records in there. So will people be satisfied if the grand jury stuff is released or is this going to continue to be an issue for Trump where people are going to question what other records should be released here and why aren't you releasing more? We'll have to see how that plays out. Trump has thrown this out there, I think to placate some of his critics and to show that he's listening to them. But he's also, before he did that, he really lashed out at them and said they were weaklings and they were buying into a hoax with the FDA and stuff. So he tried to hammer them, now he's trying to placate them a little bit. If they continue to grumble, would he go back to just lashing out? We'll see. Taylor Wilson: All right. Zac Anderson covers the White House for USA TODAY. Thank you, Zac. Zac Anderson: Thank you. ♦ Taylor Wilson: Secretary of State Marco Rubio says 10 Americans detained in Venezuela have been released, exchanged for Venezuelans detained in El Salvador. More than 200 Venezuelans who were deported from the US on allegations of gang membership earlier this year arrived home to the South American country yesterday. The Venezuelans were sent to El Salvador from the US in March after President Trump invoked the 1798 Alien Enemies Act to deport alleged members of the Tren de Aragua gang without going through normal immigration procedures. They were held in El Salvador's notorious CECOT maximum security prison. The shuttered US Embassy in Caracas shared a photo on social media of 10 men waving American flags alongside US charged affairs, John McNamara, who's based in Colombia. ♦ The Trump administration is affecting litigation over gun regulations in a number of ways. I spoke with USA TODAY Supreme Court correspondent Maureen Groppe for more. Hello, Maureen? Maureen Groppe: Hello. Taylor Wilson: All right, let's start by going back to 2022. What did the Supreme Court decide as it relates to who can be armed in public? Maureen Groppe: The court struck down a New York law that required the state's residents to have what the law called a proper cause to carry a handgun. In doing so, the court set up a new test for gun regulations. They said a regulation has to be similar to an historical rule about weapons to be constitutional. Taylor Wilson: Now, how did some Democrat-led states push back on that and it really just, Maureen, talk us through some of the tensions with the Trump administration that then led to? Maureen Groppe: So five states, including New York and Hawaii, changed their laws. If they're going to have less ability to control who can carry a gun in public, they focused instead on where in public someone can bring a gun. So they flipped the presumption. Instead of guns being allowed in a business or other private property, unless the property owner forbids it, the property owner under these laws has to expressly say it's okay to have a gun on the property. They have to say that either verbally or through a sign or something like that. A challenge to Hawaii's law is now pending before the Supreme Court and the Trump administration has urged the court to take the case and to declare Hawaii's law unconstitutional. The same would go for the laws in these other states, which at some administration says they all flout this decision that the court made in 2022. Taylor Wilson: Well, Maureen, as you're right, that's not the only example of how this administration is impacting litigation over gun regulations. The Justice Department also stopped defending a federal handgun rule. What's this rule in some of the broader context here? Maureen Groppe: So, under a decades old federal law, you have to be 21 to buy a handgun. That's being challenged by 18 and 20 olds who say that that rule doesn't meet the Supreme Court's test for gun rules. In one of these challenges, an appeals court agreed and said the law is unconstitutional. The Justice Department who was defending the law before the change in the administration, and that's what the Justice Department's role is is to defend federal laws. They chose not to appeal that decision to the Supreme Court, so that let's stand in that part of the country. That appeals court decision that restriction is unconstitutional. But we're waiting to see what the Justice Department says in another challenge. In that case, a different appeals court said that the law is constitutional. So that decision has been appealed to the court by the gun rights groups and the 18 and 20 year olds challenging it in that case. And it's possible that the Justice Department will say that they disagree with the appeals court decision and they think that the law is unconstitutional. If they do that and that the Supreme Court then wants to take the case, they're going to have to appoint a non-government attorney to defend the federal law. Taylor Wilson: Well, here in mid-2025, where do things stand broadly over the right to carry a gun in public? Maureen Groppe: Well, we've gotten conflicting opinions from two appeals courts about whether Hawaii's and New York's rules on where you can bring a gun, whether those are constitutional. So we have to wait and see if the Supreme Court wants to get involved to settle that question now, or if they're going to wait for more lower courts to weigh in before deciding whether they want to get involved. Taylor Wilson: You know Maureen, AR15s are such a fraught part of the conversation around firearms. How has the Justice Department during Trump's second term approached bans on these weapons? Maureen Groppe: Well, they have urged a Chicago-based appeals court to rule that Illinois's ban on AR15 is unconstitutional. No matter which way the appeals courts rule on that, the losing side is likely to bring the issue to the Supreme Court. The court in June declined to hear a challenge to a similar ban in Maryland, but Justice Kavanaugh said he expects the court will have to take up the issue soon. Taylor Wilson: We're talking a lot about the Trump administration-era Justice Department, but what has the president himself said about guns since retaking office earlier this year? Maureen Groppe: So, he promised during the campaign that he was going to vigorously defend the Second Amendment, and not long after his inauguration, he signed an executive order directing a review of the firearm rules that had been put in place by the Biden administration. And he also directed the Justice Department to review the positions that the government had taken on gun-related litigation. So that's why we're now seeing these different positions by the Justice Department through the administration and pending cases across the country. Taylor Wilson: All right. Maureen Groppe covers the Supreme Court for USA TODAY. Thank you, Maureen. Maureen Groppe: Thank you. ♦ Taylor Wilson: Consumers who buy health insurance through the Affordable Care Act marketplace will likely face double-digit rate hikes next year. Insurers plan a medium-premium increase of 15% for 2026 plans, which would be the largest ACA insurance price hike since 2018 according to a Peterson KFF Health System Tracker Analysis published yesterday. And many working-age consumers who get their health insurance through the workplace won't be spared either. Benefits consultant Mercer said, "More than half of big employers expect to shift a larger share of insurance costs to employees and their families next year by raising deductibles, co-pays or out-of-pocket requirements." KFF said the ACA insurers cited factors including medical cost inflation, the expiration of tax credits instituted during former President Joe Biden's administration that made plans cheaper and tariffs on prescription drugs and medical device imports. You can read more with a link in today's show notes. ♦ One of golf's biggest weekends of the year is underway. The Open Championship sees American Scottie Scheffler lead by one stroke as he starts play today. You can follow along with USA TODAY Sports. ♦ And coming up tomorrow, AI is having a transformative impact on today's job market, making both senior and entry-level roles obsolete. But there's still one area where humans have a distinct advantage. Jim Frawley: I think the number one advice that you can give anybody today is pick up on that emotional intelligence, emotional quotient focus. In-person social interaction is what's going to save you from AI because if you're looking for a new job, we hire people we like and we hire people we know. Taylor Wilson: That was executive coach Jim Frawley, who regularly sits down with CEOs across the country to talk AI strategy. Jim recently joined my colleague Dana Taylor to share his insights into how job seekers and those already employed can adapt to this rapidly changing landscape. You can find that episode right here tomorrow beginning at 5:00 AM Eastern Time. ♦ And thanks for listening to The Excerpt. You can get the podcast wherever you get your audio, and if you're on a smart speaker, just ask for The Excerpt. I'm Taylor Wilson, and I'll be back Monday with more of The Excerpt from USA TODAY.
USA Today
5 days ago
- Business
- USA Today
How to navigate a job market transformed by AI
On Sunday's episode of The Excerpt podcast: Entry level jobs that were once the gateway to upward mobility are disappearing fast. How can applicants prove their human worth to hiring managers? Executive coach Jim Frawley joins The Excerpt to share his insights. Hit play on the player below to hear the podcast and follow along with the transcript beneath it. This transcript was automatically generated, and then edited for clarity in its current form. There may be some differences between the audio and the text. Podcasts: True crime, in-depth interviews and more USA TODAY podcasts right here Dana Taylor: Hello and welcome to USA TODAY's The Excerpt, I'm Dana Taylor. Today is Sunday, July 20th, 2025. The US job market is undergoing a fundamental shift as AI advances roles that were once gateways to upward mobility are disappearing. In a recent interview quoted in The Wall Street Journal, the CEO of Ford conceded that artificial intelligence will "leave a lot of white-collar people behind." For college graduates just entering the job market, the outlook is particularly bleak as advancements in AI make those jobs mostly obsolete. As AI challenges and redefines the landscape of employment, how can society reconcile the human desire for self-sufficiency and the need for meaningful work? And how can individuals traverse an increasingly tricky job market? Here to share his insights on the impact of AI and job cuts is executive coach Jim Frawley. Thanks for joining me, Jim. Jim Frawley: Thanks for having me. Dana Taylor: I want to tackle how to navigate a rapidly changing job market, but first, if CEOs believe they can succeed with a fraction of today's staff, what does that mean for the middle class when white-collar jobs are facing a steep decline? Jim Frawley: Yeah, this is going to be, and we've been talking about it for a long time, a very large shock to the system, and there are two angles to sit on it, right? There's one side of the CEO has to run a business and run that business really, really well, and why do you pay for workers that you just don't need, right? So there's validity there, but there's also almost the social obligation component for the people who are no longer going to be employed and what do you do for them and how do you prepare for them? So, they're really stuck in between the rock and the hard place on how do we actually take care of the people that we don't need? How do we reposition them and how do we make sure that people are going to be set? At the same time, how do you acknowledge the accountability on the individuals who are going to be impacted on what changes can you do now to prepare yourself for the future? Dana Taylor: Staying with that, is it ethical for not only companies, but for a country to oversee the displacement of human workers without investing in retraining programs or a safety net for those displaced? Jim Frawley: Yeah, I think there's an argument to be made from an organizational perspective as well as a political perspective. There is an obligation to the people throughout the world, especially in this country, because we're in America, but what do you do for the people that have committed their lives to working for you, committed their lives to making the country a better place, the organization a better place, and their only crime being that they're looking to provide for their family? So I do think that we have a large social obligation to people to prepare them for the change, and that's where conversations like this go. I mean, we can retrain, we can push people, but there is also, and don't shoot the messenger on this, but there's also an obligation on the individual to start pushing buttons in their own kind of way as well. I mean, we've been talking about AI now for multiple years, we know it's coming. For those who haven't taken steps to start to position themselves differently, I mean, I don't know how else to tell them that there is an obligation here for you as well. So, I think there's obligation on both ends. Companies and governments should be preparing people and helping them in every possible way that they can, but we have to pick up the torch at some point and take care of ourselves as well. Dana Taylor: Can our society absorb unemployment increases of 10% to 20% if as the CEO of Anthropic predicts half of entry level jobs will vanish within the next five years? Jim Frawley: I don't think we can, and I'm not saying that from a monetary perspective. I'm not talking about the money perspective, I'm talking about the what do you do with your time perspective. If you're not working, we get so much from work beyond just a paycheck. We get a sense of purpose, we get time management, we get social interaction. There are so many things that we get from the workplace that we are losing because we're laying off so many people. So it's not just about paying bills, which is very important. We have to keep the lights on and we have to feed our families and all of that, but there are so many other components that we have to take care of as well from the workplace that we need to fill in. That's the real challenge I think society is going to have, is not just the fact that people aren't working, but what are they doing with their time and how do we give them something meaningful to do? It's not just purpose, it's usefulness and feelings of self-worth and mental health, and this snowballs very quickly into a much bigger challenge than just paying for the unemployed. Dana Taylor: Jim, I know you work with a lot of CEOs. What have they shared with you regarding AI? Jim Frawley: They're challenged with it quite a bit. One is you can't not do it. So, they're talking about how do we implement it and how do we adopt it? Because if we don't, the organization's not going to exist. So that's part of where their head is, but they're also worried about their people. A lot of the executives, and they're bringing me in, because they say, what do I do about my people? So they've stopped hiring new people and now they're trying to do the scramble so they don't have to lay people off, but that's keeping them up a lot at night. You have 20,000 employees, 100,000 employees, or even just 10 employees, when you have to cut them in half or 20%, what does that really mean? Because a lot of these CEOs do recognize that they're human beings and they have to take care of it, and they're really stuck between the obligation to the business, obligation to the people, and how do we mesh the two, but that's really where CEOs are struggling right now is how do we implement it, but with the minimal impact to people? Dana Taylor: Millions of students have or will receive their degrees this year. Four years ago they may have entered college with the anticipation of landing a white-collar job upon graduation. Do they just need to reset their expectations? Jim Frawley: I think a lot of people need to reset their expectations across the board, because what we think is going to happen in five years is nowhere near what's going to happen in five years. Even a few years ago, they were talking about college degrees are going to be outdated before people even graduate, so the incoming freshmen year degree's outdated before you even go. I think we have to rethink the way that we think about college and university, just because the degree doesn't prepare you for a job, it's what you learn outside of the classroom that really helps you position yourself. Then also grown-ups. The 30s, the 40s, the 50-year-olds who are in the white-collar jobs, how are you positioning yourself? Because your role's not going to be there in 10 years, so if you're in your late 30s, early 40s, how are you positioning yourself today? Things like in-person social interaction, building up a network, asking the types of questions and taking each day to challenge yourself, to push yourself forward in some other kind of non-traditional way. I think non-traditional is going to be the buzzword of the next decade. Dana Taylor: Not everyone can become a Michelin star chef, but are there AI-proof career options to explore? Jim Frawley: I think if you're looking for something AI-proof for at least the next decade or two decades, a lot of people will tell you the blue-collar jobs, right? The robots aren't going to be fixing plumbing and that kind of thing, that's fine. But outside of that, if you were thinking about a white-collar job, there's still roles. Anything I would go social interaction, things like psychology, psychiatry, the social need, the human need, all of the things ... now, there are apps and everything else that are going to be there, but there will always be a place for in-person social interaction for human beings. There is significant, significant need for that, so if you're thinking of what you want to do and where you're going to want to go in response to AI, I would think about what do people need and humans need, and how do you support that. Dana Taylor: How important are soft skills and emotional intelligence at this moment? Are these the uniquely human skills job seekers need to develop to make themselves more valuable in the workplace and to inoculate them from the impacts of AI? Jim Frawley: 100%. I think the number one advice that you can give anybody today is pick up on that emotional intelligent, emotional quotient kind of focus. In-person social interaction is what's going to save you from AI, because if you're looking for a new job, we hire people we like and we hire people we know. If you're looking for some kind of mental health hope, the support system around you are the people that are going to be able to do that. So the in-person social interaction, the social obligation we have to each other, that's ultimately what's going to save us from AI, and I will die on that hill 100 times a week. So when we surround ourselves with the right type of people, we then generate new ideas, we're able to create different types of things, we create new job opportunities in our minds and job prospects and everything else, new businesses, whatever it might be. So in-person social interaction, emotional intelligence, I think that's a huge one. Dana Taylor: Jim, are there best practices for demonstrating soft skills during a job interview? Jim Frawley: The number one piece of advice I give to people or the number one thing that I find I'm working on with a lot of executives is the ability to ask questions. It sounds incredibly simple and ridiculous, but most people don't know the true definition of a question. When you understand what a question is, it's a request for information where you legitimately do not know the answer. We are then by doing that eliminating judgment and assumption and being interested in the present moment and the people across from us. When you can ask a question with no judgment or assumption, you're welcoming information from them, that opens up a whole new level of interpersonal connection. That allows you, whether it's from a leadership perspective or a management perspective or an interview perspective, to make a different type of connection by showing an interest in the person there by asking a question with no judgment, no assumption. Dana Taylor: For some companies, AI is now integrated into the hiring process from resume screening to interviews. What are some of the best practices for navigating these new hiring processes? Jim Frawley: I would say ignore them. I mean, you can upload it all you want and you can work your resume and you use AI to build your resume, and you do that and you upload it and AI's looking at that, go to the people directly. If you can meet a person directly in-person socially, ideally when you're still hired, you want them to see you when you're at your best. When you can meet someone in-person, your name will go to the top of the list, right? Still at this moment human beings will trump AI in terms of AI found these five people, but I want this person, 'cause I met them and I know I'm going to work well with them. Dana Taylor: A quick scroll on LinkedIn is all it takes to see the mental toll this evolving job hunting process can take, and for those who are employed, there may be a psychological toll in trying to prove their job can't be done by AI. What do you see as the long-term mental health implications here? Jim Frawley: Massively significant. I mean, even if you're still employed, it's in the back of your mind, this uncertainty takes a major stress toll, it leads to burnout, it leads to so many other different outcomes and challenges, and it snowballs pretty significantly. I think one of the challenges we have is most people take their work and they align it with their identity of who they are as an individual and their self-worth, but work is only a part of who you are, and there is a big shift that we have to make when we're thinking about AI and the future of work and how does this support the person I am, I don't become the person that is the only person who can work. Rethinking your priorities, your motivations, your values is going to be an incredibly important part of responding to this challenge where you have a belief system in place, an anchor into where you can go, so that when the roadway ends your belief system, your anchor, your philosophy can bring you past that to let you know what direction you need to go into next. Dana Taylor: We've all heard the adage, if you can't beat them, join them. Is there a smart way forward that embraces the reality of AI? Jim Frawley: Yeah, I think accept it, it's going to become here. I think when you think about the arc of change, it really starts with awareness. We're beyond awareness, we know it's here, now it's about preparation, so you accept it, you prepare yourself in the best type of way. Whether it's from a mental health perspective, whether it's from a social perspective, whether it's from a physical perspective, whatever it is, you get yourself ready, then you move into learning and then wisdom. So we're in that preparation and learning type of mode, and so if we can embrace it, we need to start learning about AI. If you have not started toying with AI and testing AI, you are so far behind the eight-ball at this point. You need to at least become familiar with it, because at a basic level if you don't understand how AI works, you are going to be left behind. So, that's really an easy first step that you should be taking immediately. Then otherwise beyond that, get the social interaction and see how we as humans can help each other in responding to this new change. Dana Taylor: Terrific insights here, Jim. Thank you so much for being on The Excerpt. Jim Frawley: Thank you for having me. Dana Taylor: Thanks to our senior producers, Shannon Rae Green and Kaely Monahan for their production assistance, our executive producer's Laura Beatty. Let us know what you think of this episode by sending a note to podcasts@ Thanks for listening. I'm Dana Taylor, Taylor Wilson. Be back tomorrow morning with another episode of USA TODAY's The Excerpt.
