标签： North America

In a striking turn of irony that has reverberated across American political circles, the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) has confirmed that controversial British right-wing commentator Milo Yiannopoulos has been deported back to his home country following detention by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE). The 41-year-old, a former editor at conservative outlet Breitbart News and one-time political advisor to rapper and 2020 presidential candidate Kanye West, was removed from the country on August 29, according to an official DHS statement shared with the BBC.

DHS officials characterize Yiannopoulos as an illegal alien from the United Kingdom who violated U.S. immigration law by overstaying his authorized period of entry after arriving in the country in May 2019. The commentator was first taken into custody on August 27 when he landed at Louis Armstrong New Orleans International Airport, marking the end of his multi-year overstay. What makes the deportation particularly notable is Yiannopoulos’s long history of advocating for harsh, restrictive U.S. immigration policies — stances that put his own treatment at the hands of immigration authorities in the national spotlight.

A self-described provocateur who has styled himself as the “most fabulous supervillain on the internet,” Yiannopoulos built his public profile on incendiary rhetoric that has drawn widespread condemnation from critics, who label his statements as hate speech targeting marginalized groups. Over the years, he has openly called for mass deportations of undocumented immigrants, demanding the immediate removal of anyone unable to prove legal status in the U.S. Just last year, he pushed for full legal immunity for ICE agents conducting enforcement operations, writing on social media in 2025 that “we have got to deport millions and millions of people. Without that, nothing else matters.”

Yiannopoulos first rose to national prominence as an early supporter of Donald Trump during the 2016 presidential election, headlining the “Gays for Trump” event at that year’s Republican National Convention. While he still expresses general support for Trump’s policy agenda, he has become a public critic of the former president and current commander-in-chief, claiming in a March 2025 post on X that Trump had “lost his way, bought off by foreign interests.”

The commentator’s career has been marked by repeated controversy. In 2017, he was disinvited from speaking at the Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC) — a major annual gathering of U.S. conservatives that has long hosted Trump — after surfacing footage showed him appearing to condone pedophilia. Yiannopoulos denied the allegations, claiming the comments referenced his own childhood abuse experiences, but he ultimately resigned from his position at Breitbart following the backlash. He has also been frequently associated with the alt-right movement, a loose coalition of anti-political correctness groups that includes white supremacists and neo-Nazis; while he has rejected labeling himself as a member of the movement, he has described it as “energising and exciting.”

Beyond his political commentary, Yiannopoulos has held a series of controversial political roles: he assisted Kanye West’s 2020 independent presidential campaign, and later worked for former Republican Congresswoman Marjorie Taylor Greene, who ultimately split with Trump and resigned from office after becoming a fierce critic of the former president. Yiannopoulos, who once identified as gay, now describes himself as “ex-gay,” and has drawn outrage for his inflammatory comments about transgender people, Muslims, Black Lives Matter, feminists, and LGBTQ+ people.

Fellow far-right commentator Laura Loomer, a Trump ally who has had a long public feud with Yiannopoulos, publicly claimed credit for tipping off authorities that led to his arrest. In a post on X Friday evening, Loomer wrote that Yiannopoulos’s deportation flight had already departed, adding that “this subversive foreign agent is already out of the United States and DHS tells me he’s NEVER allowed to come back to the United States ever again.”

As of this report, the BBC has reached out to the UK Home Office for comment on the deportation, and has not yet received a response. DHS has also publicly released the booking mugshot of Yiannopoulos following his detention, confirming the details of his arrest and removal.

A former White House teleprompter operator has been hit with over $172,000 in penalties and restitution after being caught exploiting confidential access to then-U.S. President Donald Trump’s planned speech content to place illegal insider bets on a public prediction market, U.S. financial regulators have confirmed.

The case centers on Gabriel Perez, who held a position as a White House teleprompter operator between late 2025 and early 2026. Over that three-month window, Perez used his advance knowledge of exactly what terms and topics the president would include in public addresses to place wagers on Kalshi, a popular prediction trading platform that allows users to bet on the outcome of real-world events.

The Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC), the federal regulator that oversees commodity and prediction markets, announced a settlement with Perez on Friday. Under the terms of the agreement, Perez is required to surrender all $107,539 in illicit profits he earned from the scheme, plus pay an additional $65,000 civil penalty. Regulators noted the penalty was reduced from its original proposed amount because Perez offered “exemplary cooperation” throughout the CFTC’s investigation. Beyond financial penalties, Perez also received a three-year permanent ban from all trading activity overseen by the CFTC.

Internal records show the scheme was first uncovered by Kalshi’s own compliance team back in March 2026. Analysts at the platform flagged unusual, concentrated betting activity on so-called “mention markets” — contracts that pay out if a public figure uses a specific pre-named term in a public address, ranging from country names to campaign slogans. After cross-referencing account data, Kalshi investigators confirmed the account holder was a federal employee working as a White House teleprompter, and immediately reported the suspicious activity to the CFTC.

Kalshi’s lead counsel Bobby DeNault publicly praised the regulator’s ruling in a post on X following the settlement announcement. “It doesn’t matter who you are: violate our rules or federal law and you will face the consequences,” DeNault wrote.

In a July 2026 statement ahead of the settlement, Kalshi had already highlighted the broader systemic risk posed by this type of insider trading, noting that planned remarks from senior U.S. leaders like the president and Federal Reserve chair routinely move global foreign exchange markets, oil futures, and stock markets by billions of dollars. The company emphasized that policing insider activity is critical to maintaining market integrity.

Back in July, then-White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt confirmed that Perez had been placed on unpaid leave and would not be allowed to return to his role at the White House. The White House has not issued any additional comment on the final settlement ruling. Shortly after Perez’s activity was uncovered, the White House Management Office issued a formal advisory to all White House aides reminding staff that betting on political prediction markets violates federal ethics rules and is prohibited for executive branch employees, administration officials confirmed to CBS News, the BBC’s U.S. media partner.

No criminal charges have been announced against Perez to date, and the settlement resolves the civil case brought by the CFTC.

A bombshell executive order signed by former US President Donald Trump has sent shockwaves across the nation, igniting fierce public debate after it proposed rebranding one of North America’s iconic Great Lakes — Lake Ontario — to a new name: Lake America. The unexpected policy move has drawn divided responses from US citizens, with many taking to social media and public gatherings to voice their criticism, with some commentators going so far as to declare “He’s losing it” in response to what many see as an unnecessary and divisive policy gesture.

Lake Ontario is one of the five Great Lakes that straddle the border between the United States and Canada, holding deep geographic, cultural, and economic significance for communities on both sides of the international boundary. The lake’s long-standing name has roots in Indigenous history, tracing back to centuries-old Haudenosaunee terminology that has endured through colonial and modern eras. The sudden push for a name change has raised questions not only about domestic political priorities but also about potential diplomatic ripples between the US and its northern neighbor, which shares jurisdiction over the lake.

Footage captured from public reactions across several US states shows a range of public opinion, from a small subset of nationalist supporters who frame the change as a gesture of national pride to the overwhelming majority of critics who argue that the executive order wastes government time and political capital on a non-issue that could damage cross-border relations. Many members of the public have also pointed out that the name change erases the lake’s Indigenous historical roots, further adding to the backlash against the proposal. As of now, it remains unclear how the order will be implemented, as legal experts note that changing a transboundary geographic feature requires cooperation from Canadian authorities, making the executive order largely symbolic at this stage.

In a surprising announcement that has sent ripples through global energy and political circles, former U.S. President Donald Trump has confirmed that Washington has struck a wide-ranging agreement with Venezuela that grants the United States control over more than 65 billion barrels of the South American nation’s proven crude oil reserves.

Taking to his social media platform, Trump framed the agreement as a landmark achievement for American energy security, emphasizing that the deal would more than double the United States’ total documented oil reserves. He added that the expanded access to Venezuelan crude would significantly boost domestic oil supply and drive down retail gasoline prices for consumers across the country, a key priority for his political agenda.

The agreement comes months after U.S. authorities arrested Nicolás Maduro, Venezuela’s sitting president, earlier this year. Following that high-profile detention, Trump publicly pledged to unlock access to Venezuela’s vast oil reserves, which are officially recognized as the largest proven crude reserves on the planet. In recent weeks, the former president has faced mounting domestic political pressure to address elevated gasoline prices that have weighed on American household budgets, making a push for expanded oil supply a critical policy and political win.

U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio has also publicly praised the pact, calling it a transformative victory that delivers tangible benefits for both the American public and the people of Venezuela. As of the current announcement, no further details about the terms of the deal, its timeline for implementation, or the specific terms of control over the reserves have been released to the public, leaving energy analysts and political observers waiting for additional clarity on the agreement’s long-term implications.

Against a backdrop of worsening U.S.-Canada relations and growing politicization of academic research in the United States, Canada is successfully recruiting dozens of leading academic researchers from top American universities through a generous new federal funding initiative, with climate science and medical research among the key focus areas.

Out of 64 international researchers moving to Canadian institutions under the program, 48 — more than three-quarters of the total cohort — hail from U.S. universities, including elite institutions such as Harvard University. The initiative allocates a total of C$504 million (equivalent to roughly $362 million) to support researchers working in high-priority fields ranging from climate change adaptation to cutting-edge medical research.

The shift of academic talent comes as the Donald Trump administration has taken multiple steps that have created widespread uncertainty for U.S.-based researchers. The administration has repeatedly criticized U.S. universities for what it claims is a dominance of left-wing ideology, and has accused institutions of failing to address alleged antisemitism on campus. It has also frozen billions in federal research funding for a range of programs it deems wasteful, creating an unstable funding landscape that has pushed many scholars to seek opportunities abroad.

This talent migration unfolds alongside an escalating U.S.-Canada trade war, which recently hit a major turning point amid new tariff disputes. As tensions rise, Canada has taken an increasingly assertive stance on the global stage, positioning itself as a welcoming alternative for scholars locked out of stable funding in the U.S.

Seth Guikema, a leading climate resiliency researcher currently based at the University of Michigan who will join the University of Western Ontario, is one of the many scholars making the move. Guikema explained that he began reaching out to Canadian institutions last year, frustrated by the growing challenges facing climate-related research in the U.S. “The funding environment in the U.S. for anything related to climate and resilience has become challenging,” he said. “I was looking for a good intellectual home where I could have practical impact.” Over the next eight years, Guikema will use C$8 million in program funding to develop new tools for improving community preparedness for natural hazards including extreme storms and wildfires. The University of Michigan declined to provide comment on his departure.

Another high-profile recruit is Peter Caravan, a biopharmaceutical researcher who spent 20 years on the faculty at Massachusetts General Hospital and Harvard Medical School. Caravan, who will now continue his work on early detection of cancer and chronic diseases at the University of British Columbia in Vancouver, spoke emotionally at a press conference announcing the new appointments this week. Some recruits like Caravan and Guikema are U.S.-born scholars, while others are Canadian academics who built their careers abroad and are now returning to their home country.

Academics across the U.S. have cited the Trump administration’s policies as the core driver of this brain drain. Steven Lamy, a professor of international relations at the University of Southern California, noted that major U.S. grant agencies “have been cut and politicised” by the current administration, making offers from foreign universities far more appealing than they once were. Stephanie Burt, an English professor at Harvard University, called the ongoing funding cuts “a generational disaster for science and scientists,” adding that Canada offers a “far more welcoming environment” for academic work.

While U.S. universities still top global rankings — with MIT, Stanford, and Harvard holding three of the top five spots in the 2026 QS World University Rankings — higher education leaders warn that the long-term impact of current policies could severely damage U.S. research leadership. Lynn Pasquerella, president of the American Association of Colleges and Universities, said member institutions feel “helpless” in the face of widespread federal and state funding cuts. “The deeper concern is not the short-term brain drain,” she explained, “but the possibility that the U.S. could become less attractive as a place to pursue knowledge.”

Canadian officials have pushed back against suggestions that the program amounts to deliberate talent poaching that could further escalate bilateral tensions. “The US administration is taking its own decisions and we’re taking ours,” Industry Minister Melanie Joly told reporters this week, adding that the Canadian government is “very glad that these fantastic professors are coming.”

Six decades have passed since Martin Luther King Jr. stood on the steps of the Lincoln Memorial and delivered his transformative ‘I Have a Dream’ speech, a moment that redefined the American civil rights movement. Today, thousands of activists, community organizers, and ordinary citizens gathered once again in the U.S. capital for the annual March on Washington commemoration, but this year’s gathering carried a renewed sense of urgency around a core promise of King’s work: equal access to the ballot box.

Attendees marched through the streets of Washington D.C., carrying signs and sharing personal stories about persistent barriers to voting that remain entrenched across the country, from restrictive voter ID laws to gerrymandering, and cuts to early voting access. For many participants, the 63rd anniversary was not just a moment to reflect on how far the nation has come in advancing racial equality and democratic rights, but also a stark reminder of how much work remains unfinished. Speakers and marchers alike emphasized that the fight for voting rights is the direct continuation of the struggle King led in 1963, arguing that any celebration of his legacy must include concrete action to protect and expand access to voting for all marginalized communities.

Unlike the historic 1963 march that drew national attention to segregation and unequal rights, this year’s gathering comes amid a series of recent legal and political setbacks for voting rights advocates. Federal voting rights legislation has stalled in Congress in recent years, and multiple states have enacted new restrictions on voting since 2020. Marchers called on federal and state policymakers to reverse these changes, pass sweeping national voting rights protections, and uphold the core democratic principle that every eligible voter deserves a voice, regardless of their race, zip code, or political affiliation.

As the United States prepares to complete its full troop withdrawal from Iraq by the end of September, a bombshell development has emerged: the Trump administration is poised to halt longstanding security assistance to Iraq’s Peshmerga, the Kurdish security force that stood as a core U.S. partner in defeating the Islamic State (IS) militant group. Four independent sources with direct knowledge of closed-door discussions have confirmed the plan, which has sparked widespread alarm among regional leaders and policy analysts.

In recent high-level meetings with leaders of Iraq’s semi-autonomous Kurdistan Regional Government (KRG), Department of Defense officials explicitly stated that the administration does not intend to renew the existing memorandum of understanding (MoU) that underpins U.S. security support for the 180,000-strong Peshmerga. The agreement is scheduled to expire on September 30 – the exact same date that the U.S. and its coalition partners will withdraw their final remaining troops from Iraq, formally closing the books on the decades-long international counter-IS campaign. The last active U.S. military base in Iraq, located in the Kurdistan regional capital Irbil, will also shutter next month following the troop pullout.

This planned aid cutoff comes at a moment of escalating aggression from Iran against the KRG. By late May of 2026, Iran and Iranian-aligned militias had already carried out 158 separate drone and missile strikes across Iraqi Kurdistan, according to the latest data compiled by the Washington-based Foundation for Defense of Democracies. Just days ago, an Iranian drone attack targeted Irbil itself, amplifying already urgent fears among Kurdish officials about the coming security gap.

For fiscal year 2026, the Peshmerga received $61 million through the Pentagon’s counter-IS program, funding that covered weapons procurement, military training, and troop stipends. In the administration’s 2027 budget request, the Pentagon proposed eliminating all of this security assistance, arguing that with the declared defeat of IS, the funds can be redirected to other priorities. That budget proposal remains stalled amid a broader partisan budget battle in Congress, but even so, Kurdish officials who held out hope for a short-term extension of the existing aid agreement have now been told no extension is planned. Multiple sources note that a final formal decision is still under review, and administration officials are reportedly exploring limited alternative forms of security support after the troop withdrawal, but no concrete plan for continued full funding has emerged.

The timing of this move aligns with President Trump’s long-stated second-term goal of reducing U.S. military entanglements across the Middle East. It also comes six months into the ongoing open conflict between the U.S. and Iran, a confrontation that shows no sign of de-escalation. What makes the development particularly striking is that it comes less than a year after the U.S. opened its largest diplomatic consulate in the world in Irbil, an $800 million facility that senior State Department officials hailed just last December as a lasting symbol of the close strategic partnership between Washington and the KRG.

Both the KRG and the U.S. State Department have declined to publicly comment on the confidential talks. A Pentagon spokesperson directed inquiries to a July statement from Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth following his meeting with newly elected Iraqi Prime Minister Ali al-Zaidi, which noted that “the United States, Iraq, and Coalition partners have achieved tremendous success in defeating ISIS and now the Iraqi Security Forces, including the Peshmerga and other Iraqi Kurdistan Region security forces, will lead the fight against terrorists in Iraq.”

Regional policy experts and former U.S. officials have widely condemned the planned aid cutoff, warning it carries severe strategic consequences for U.S. credibility in the Middle East. Analysts argue that ending support for the Peshmerga will not only create a dangerous power vacuum in northern Iraq but also send a clear message that the U.S. cannot be counted on to stand by its long-term regional allies.

Yerevan Saeed, director of the Global Kurdish Initiative for Peace at American University, emphasized the deep cost of abandoning a partner that sacrificed heavily for U.S. goals in the region. “The US would be cutting off the Kurds, who shed so much blood to help the Americans achieve their goals in Iraq and the wider Middle East,” Saeed said. “This is going to be a big win for Iran, China, and Russia if the Kurds are left so exposed.”

James Jeffrey, who led the global counter-IS coalition during Trump’s first term and served as a U.S. ambassador to Iraq and Turkey under the Obama administration, warned that cutting aid would repeat a catastrophic mistake of the past. “It’s money well spent, as we found out when the Islamic State rolled into northern Iraq,” Jeffrey said, referring to the 2011 U.S. full troop withdrawal that left a power vacuum and allowed IS to seize large swathes of northern Iraq.

Jason Campbell, a former U.S. defense official and Middle East expert at the Middle East Institute, noted that the withdrawal of U.S. troops will already reduce Iran’s ability to target American personnel in the region – but it will leave the Peshmerga far more exposed to Iranian aggression. “The Peshmerga have been the frontline in the US and international war with ISIS,” Campbell said. “If the US moves forward with this, it’ll make the Kurds perhaps the most vulnerable potential targets of Iran.”

The discussions on Peshmerga aid are part of broader negotiations between Washington, Baghdad, and the KRG tied to the upcoming troop withdrawal, which was agreed to in a 2024 bilateral security deal between the U.S. and Iraq. American combat troops initially withdrew from Iraq in 2011, but returned in 2014 after the vacuum created by the first withdrawal allowed IS to rise to power and seize large portions of northern Iraq and Syria. Today, experts estimate fewer than 1,000 U.S. troops remain in Iraq, down from a peak of 170,000 during the height of the Iraq War.

Leading the U.S. side in the recent security talks is Tom Barrack, a close Trump ally who serves as U.S. ambassador to Turkey and special envoy to Iraq and Syria. The administration has publicly stated it is open to a new bilateral security agreement with Baghdad, and the topic was discussed during al-Zaidi’s July visit to Washington, where the Iraqi prime minister met with President Trump, Defense Secretary Hegseth, and congressional leaders. During his visit, al-Zaidi framed the upcoming withdrawal as a historic milestone for Iraqi sovereignty: “October 1 will mark a new day in the trajectory of the Iraqi state, as Iraq will be free of any foreign military presence,” his office said in a statement.