标签: North America

北美洲

  • US blocks long-term renewal of North American trade deal

    US blocks long-term renewal of North American trade deal

    Six years after the landmark U.S.-Mexico-Canada Agreement (USMCA) replaced the decades-old North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) to reshape regional trade rules, a senior U.S. administration official has confirmed that Washington will not renew the trilateral pact in its current form. This decision blocks the deal from accessing the automatic 16-year extension outlined in the agreement’s original founding terms.

    Under the USMCA’s official framework, all three member nations must unanimously approve an extension to lock in another 16-year term. If no unanimous agreement is reached, the agreement is set on an irreversible 10-year countdown to potential termination, bringing the earliest possible expiration date for the pact to 2036. Without a long-term extension confirmed, the three nations will now be required to hold annual negotiation meetings to revisit the terms of the deal.

    The U.S. official emphasized that the administration deliberately chose against rubber-stamping an automatic renewal to force action on long-standing unresolved issues that Washington has prioritized. For months, U.S. trade negotiators have repeatedly raised concerns about three core sticking points: inconsistent enforcement of automotive rules of origin, insufficient access for U.S. exports to Canada’s dairy market, and loopholes that allow non-member nations like China to exploit the regional trade bloc by shipping goods through member countries.

    The USMCA currently underpins roughly $2 trillion in annual cross-border trade across North America, touching every major sector from agriculture to automotive manufacturing. While the deal remains fully in effect for the time being, the lack of a finalized long-term commitment has injected fresh economic uncertainty across the continent, a risk that business advocacy groups have repeatedly warned against. The U.S. Chamber of Commerce has long noted that both manufacturing and agricultural sectors on both sides of the border depend on stable, predictable cross-border trade rules to plan long-term investments and supply chains.

    The decision has split domestic U.S. industry groups, however. Domestic steel trade associations including the American Iron and Steel Institute and the Steel Manufacturers Association have publicly welcomed the shift, arguing that mandatory annual reviews give U.S. negotiators ongoing leverage to revise and fix problematic provisions of the deal that do not serve American industrial interests.

    Originally negotiated during the first presidential term of Donald Trump, the USMCA entered into force in July 2020 as a major update to NAFTA, which had governed North American trade since 1994. The updated pact introduced new regulations for digital trade, strengthened protections for worker rights, and tightened rules for regional automotive manufacturing, requiring a larger share of vehicle parts to be produced within North America to qualify for tariff-free access. If the current terms are not revised and reapproved by all three members within the next decade, the landmark trade agreement will expire, reshaping the economic integration of the North American continent.

  • Bibles, Home Alone and perfume: Six surprising ways Trump made money in 2025

    Bibles, Home Alone and perfume: Six surprising ways Trump made money in 2025

    In a recent release from the U.S. Office of Government Ethics, a sprawling 927-page financial disclosure document detailing President Donald Trump’s personal and business finances during his first year of his second term in the White House has been made public. The massive filing, which dwarfs the disclosures of other top U.S. officials, offers an unprecedented look into the income streams, investments and business dealings of the sitting president. For context, Vice President JD Vance’s 2025 disclosure clocks in at just 17 pages, while former President Joe Biden’s final 2024 disclosure was only 11 pages long. After combing through the thousands of lines of financial data, six of the most noteworthy findings have emerged.

    First, Trump’s famous personal brand remains a powerful moneymaker. The president pulled in millions of dollars in 2025 from licensing his name to a wide range of branded products. His coffee-table book *Save America* generated $1.8 million (£1.38 million) in revenue alone. A Trump-branded Bible added $208,000 to his total income, while a line of signature footwear and fragrances – including the women’s Victory 47 perfume, which retails for $249 per bottle – brought in an additional $67,000. Even limited-edition MAGA-themed merchandise turned a profit: sales of the “American Eagle” collector’s guitar netted roughly $36,000.

    Second, First Lady Melania Trump recorded substantial personal income in 2025, led by her eponymous documentary produced by Amazon. The streaming giant invested $40 million into the film, which followed the First Lady in the months leading up to her husband’s second inauguration. The documentary pulled in $7 million at the box office last year, and Melania, credited as both producer and the documentary’s subject, earned $10.7 million from the project. Beyond the film, she added $6 million in income from non-fungible token (NFT) sales and another $520,000 from her memoir, also titled *Melania*.

    Third, the disclosure reveals a staggering volume of investment activity from Trump: more than 21,285 separate share trades across hundreds of public companies in 2025. Among the most high-profile holdings was stock in AI chip giant Nvidia, a company that made major headlines last year for its $5 trillion market valuation and its central role in U.S.-China trade tensions over advanced semiconductor technology. Last summer, Nvidia struck an agreement with the Trump White House to invest billions of dollars in domestic U.S. chip manufacturing, a move that sent the company’s share price climbing rapidly. In August, the administration announced a deal requiring Nvidia to pay the U.S. government 15% of all revenue generated from sales of one of its key AI chip models to China. Later that same month, investment managers acting on Trump’s behalf acquired between $5 million and $25 million worth of Nvidia stock. When asked about the potential conflict of interest this week, Trump maintained that all of his personal investments are managed on a strict arms-length basis. “I don’t get involved in my personal [finances], we have funds that run my money,” he said. “I’ve made a lot of money before I became president, and they invest my money, and I don’t talk to them.”

    Fourth, the sitting president collects a six-figure annual pension from the U.S. entertainment industry’s leading labor union. Trump holds two separate pension plans with SAG-AFTRA, the union representing film and television performers, stemming from his decades of on-screen cameos and hosting work. The pensions paid out a combined $86,532 in 2025. Trump’s entertainment credits include a cameo in *Home Alone 2: Lost in New York*, a multi-season run as host of *The Apprentice*, and a guest appearance on *The Fresh Prince of Bel-Air*. The two separate plans date back to before the 2012 merger of the original film actors’ union SAG and the television performers’ union AFTRA. Though Trump resigned from the union in 2021, shortly before the union was set to vote on expelling him over his role in the January 6 Capitol riot, his pension benefits remained fully intact.

    Finally, a series of legal settlements against major media and technology companies netted Trump $86.5 million in 2025. The largest single payout came from Meta, the parent company of Facebook and Instagram, which paid $24.5 million to settle a lawsuit brought by Trump over the suspension of his social media accounts in the wake of the 2021 Capitol riot. Lawsuits against Paramount (owner of CBS News) and ABC News each resulted in $16 million settlements. Per the disclosure, net proceeds from these three settlements will be donated to the Trump presidential library. YouTube paid $22 million to settle a similar account suspension lawsuit, with that sum earmarked for the trust that manages Washington D.C.’s National Mall. Former Twitter co-founder Jack Dorsey also paid $8 million to settle a related claim against Trump after his 2021 ban from the platform (now known as X); the disclosure does not specify how these funds will be used.

    Beyond these highlights, the filing also confirms that Trump earned more than $1 billion in total from cryptocurrency-related business dealings in 2025, underscoring the breadth of his ongoing business interests while serving as U.S. president.

  • Watch: Two people climb to highest point of Empire State Building

    Watch: Two people climb to highest point of Empire State Building

    In an incident that has drawn widespread public attention, two unauthorized climbers successfully reached the 1,454-foot (443-meter) summit of the iconic Empire State Building, one of New York City’s most recognizable landmarks. According to on-site observations, the pair remained at the highest point of the skyscraper for a minimum of 10 minutes, during which they unfurled a large banner to display their message. After completing their demonstration, the climbers voluntarily made their way back down the structure.

    Local law enforcement and building management have not yet released additional details about the identity of the two individuals, the full content of the banner they displayed, or what prompted the unsanctioned climb. The Empire State Building, a 102-story Art Deco icon that draws millions of tourists from across the globe every year, has strict security protocols in place to prevent unauthorized access to its upper spire and outdoor observation areas. This unapproved ascent has already sparked discussions around urban exploration culture and landmark security measures in major metropolitan centers.

  • Two people climb to top of NYC’s Empire State Building

    Two people climb to top of NYC’s Empire State Building

    In an audacious and unexpected stunt that stunned onlookers in New York City on Wednesday, two individuals pulled off one of the most high-profile unsanctioned climbs in recent memory, ascending all the way to the peak of Manhattan’s iconic Empire State Building. Upon reaching the top of the 1,454-foot landmark, the pair immediately unfurled a massive cloth banner emblazoned with a pacifist message: “When the power of love beats the love of power the world knows peace”.

    After posing together at the highest point of the building’s spire, the two climbers made their way down to a smaller observation platform just below the peak. It was there that witnesses and captured footage show one person dropping to one knee in a clear gesture of marriage proposal to the other. Following the proposal, the couple shared a kiss before continuing their controlled descent down the building’s exterior.

    Authorities confirmed the pair remained at the top of the 102-story skyscraper for no less than 10 minutes before beginning their climb down. As of this report, the New York Police Department has declined to release any additional details about the incident, the identities of the two climbers, or any potential charges that may be filed, when reached for comment by the BBC. The incident has already sparked widespread discussion online about the audacity of the stunt, as well as questions about security protocols at one of New York City’s most visited tourist landmarks.

  • Is Taylor Swift really getting married at Madison Square Garden?

    Is Taylor Swift really getting married at Madison Square Garden?

    Speculation has erupted across social media and entertainment circles this week surrounding a potential high-profile wedding between pop superstar Taylor Swift and NFL star Travis Kelce, with the iconic Madison Square Garden in Manhattan named as the rumored venue. Unconfirmed reports have pointed to a possible ceremony taking place over the upcoming Fourth of July holiday weekend, a timing that has sent fans and celebrity gossip outlets scrambling for more details.

    As of press time, neither Swift’s representatives nor Kelce’s team have issued an official statement confirming or denying the engagement or wedding plans. The long-running arena, which has hosted countless of Swift’s record-breaking tour stops over her career, would mark a fittingly grand location for a wedding between two of the biggest names in American entertainment. The pair have been linked romantically since last year, with their relationship drawing consistent media attention from both entertainment and sports audiences.

    Fans have already taken to social platforms to share theories, reaction memes, and hopeful messages for the couple, while entertainment journalists continue to pursue confirmation from insider sources. Until an official announcement is made, the rumor remains unsubstantiated, but that has not slowed the wave of public interest in the potential celebrity event.

  • Musk remaking the world like Ford – but far more dangerously

    Musk remaking the world like Ford – but far more dangerously

    Elon Musk, a figure who briefly claimed the title of the world’s first trillionaire before returning to mere billionaire status, has built a career defined by exceptionality. Unlike most industry leaders, he has not one but two globally transformative pioneering technology companies — Tesla and SpaceX — and has openly discussed plans to establish a permanent human settlement on Mars since two decades ago. He also upends standard CEO communication norms, posting multiple times daily to his own social platform X. In 2025, he drew widespread controversy for a public gesture widely interpreted as a Nazi salute in Washington D.C., and that same year, he took a high-level role in the U.S. federal government with no prior formal political experience, all while continuing to expand his sprawling business empire.

    During his short, turbulent tenure leading the newly created Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), Musk framed governance as a technical problem of data aggregation and pattern recognition, focused on generating algorithmically optimized policy outcomes. Critics argue this approach overlooked a fundamental reality: millions of real people, entitled to equal treatment and due process, were profoundly impacted by his top-down, desk-bound decisions.

    Musk’s outsize influence has made him a global household name and one of the most powerful individuals on Earth, leading many observers — including journalist Cory Doctorow — to question whether he has become uniquely dangerous, and where he fits alongside other widely criticized West Coast tech billionaires, often labeled “broligarchs,” such as Amazon’s Jeff Bezos, Palantir’s Alexander Karp, and Meta’s Mark Zuckerberg. A new carefully researched, thought-provoking book from Canadian political economist Quinn Slobodian and technology journalist Ben Tarnoff, titled *Muskism: A Guide for the Perplexed*, sets out to answer these questions by dissecting both Musk’s personal background and the vast systemic power he has accumulated.

    The term “Muskism” draws a deliberate parallel to “Fordism,” the socioeconomic model named for early 20th century industrialist Henry Ford, whose mass production system reshaped American government and society for 40 years starting in the 1930s. Slobodian and Tarnoff argue that Musk, alongside other leading tech titans, is constructing a sweeping new industrial framework that is reshaping modern society in a fundamentally different direction than Fordism. While Ford’s industrial model formed the foundation for mass employment, living wages, robust social safety nets, and widespread consumer prosperity in post-World War II America, Musk’s corporate empire aims to build an entirely new socioeconomic order: one that is hyper-connected, pervasively surveilled, anti-liberal, and insular.

    Under Muskism, the authors contend, unelected tech oligarchs collaborate with national governments to deploy advanced technology to erode democratic institutions, deepen social divisions, entrench rigid hierarchical power structures, and insulate elite actors from accountability. To understand the ideological roots of this system, they trace it back to Musk’s formative upbringing.

    “To understand the world that Musk aims to build, we have to understand the worlds that built Musk,” the authors write. The first and most formative of these worlds was 1970s South Africa, where Musk was born and raised in a wealthy white family during the final years of the apartheid regime. The authors argue that “South Africa was the cradle of Muskism,” teaching Musk the core ideology of “fortress futurism”: the belief that technology can be used to entrench individual and elite self-reliance in an inherently hostile world. The systemic racism that structured every layer of apartheid society, where state and private business colluded to entrench white privilege through complex bureaucratic rules and discriminatory legislation despite international condemnation, shaped Musk’s worldview long before he left the country.

    A bookish early adopter of video games, science fiction, and emerging technology, Musk emigrated to Canada in 1989 at age 17 to avoid mandatory military service in the apartheid military. Contrary to popular narratives that he left his apartheid-era beliefs behind, the authors argue he carried those ideological core assumptions with him. By 1992, Musk had moved to the United States to study physics and economics at the University of Pennsylvania, and by 1995 he had settled in Palo Alto to launch his first tech startup, Zip2. He went on to found X.com, which later merged with Peter Thiel’s PayPal to form the digital payment giant. By 2002, he had amassed his first fortune and founded SpaceX; he joined Tesla as an early investor and lead figure in 2004, helped found OpenAI in 2015, co-founded brain-computer interface firm Neuralink in 2016, launched tunneling venture the Boring Company in 2017, acquired Twitter and rebranded it as X in 2022, launched AI firm xAI with its Grok chatbot in 2023, and took the helm of DOGE in 2025 before splitting with then-President Donald Trump. All of these achievements came before Musk turned 55, marking an extraordinary pace of expansion that has left a white South African immigrant at the pinnacle of American political and economic power, with influence spanning the globe.

    Unlike existing biographies of Musk — ranging from the celebratory authorized accounts to Walter Isaacson’s widely cited 2023 definitive biography and Jacob Silverman’s 2025 critical work *Gilded Rage: Elon Musk and the Radicalization of Silicon Valley* — Slobodian and Tarnoff frame Musk as a distinct figure among big tech leaders, shaped by his unique apartheid-era South African upbringing that allowed him to accumulate social power in ways unmatched by his peers. “He sells the fantasy that, in an increasingly unstable world, both states and individuals can fortify their self-reliance by plugging into his infrastructures,” the authors write. “The paradox is that, in doing so, you become reliant on him.”

    They define Muskism as a cohesive system that blends proven commercial technologies, aspirational technological prophecies, cozy public-private partnerships, and viral online messaging designed to market and legitimize Musk’s sprawling empire. Together, these elements advance a project the authors call “tech-sovereignty”: a framework where cutting-edge technology developed by private corporations allows national governments and their favored demographic groups to project power globally while reducing vulnerability to external shocks or perceived rivals. This system secures American economic dominance in a post-free-trade era where China, Russia, and Iran are framed as systemic threats, and it operates largely out of public view even as it reshapes the lives of people around the world.

    At the core of Musk’s empire are three interconnected assets: SpaceX, Tesla, and X. SpaceX and Tesla pioneered new commercial technologies in the U.S. private sector — reusable rockets, low-orbit satellite networks, and mass-market electric vehicles — with Musk driving relentless innovation while raising massive capital through skillful hype and what the authors call “future fabulation.” He built vertically integrated conglomerates to reduce dependence on external suppliers; for example, Tesla now manufactures not just vehicles but also large-scale batteries and renewable energy storage systems, resembling the large Fordist conglomerates of the mid-20th century, but without the presence of large unionized workforces that defined the earlier era.

    Musk’s willingness to partner closely with the U.S. national government is most visible in SpaceX, which has become a preferred federal supplier, contractor, and partner with almost no competitors. Most notably, the U.S. military now relies on SpaceX’s Starlink low-orbit satellite internet system for frontline operations, pointing to a far more intimate integration of government and big tech than existed during Ford’s era. “State symbiosis,” rather than open market competition, is Musk’s preferred operating model when he can secure it. For Tesla, the Obama administration’s concerns about Chinese economic competition and climate change allowed Musk to secure massive federal subsidies after the 2008 financial crisis, giving him a decisive advantage over legacy American automakers that had barely entered the electric vehicle market at the time.

    From 2017 onward, Musk became increasingly active on what was then Twitter, using the platform first to promote his companies and later to broadcast his increasingly right-wing political views, which have aligned closely with the resurgence of global right-wing populism. After acquiring Twitter and rebranding it as X in 2022, he began spreading rhetoric about a so-called “woke mind virus” and has since posted repeated incendiary comments targeting immigrants, LGBTQIA+ people, and promoting false claims about declining white birth rates and the supposed collapse of Western civilization.

    The book devotes specific analysis to Neuralink, Musk’s brain-computer interface venture, and xAI, his artificial intelligence firm, framing these projects as core to Musk’s long-term vision. In a 2016 conversation with OpenAI CEO Sam Altman, Musk argued that merging humans and AI into a single symbiotic system would eliminate the risk of rogue AI, because “we are the AI collectively.” Musk envisions a future where digital and biological systems merge, raising critical unanswered questions about who will control the resulting cognitive and informational ecosystem. While this vision can sound like a fanciful, villainous plot straight out of a spy film, Slobodian and Tarnoff emphasize that Musk’s proven business acumen and access to state support have allowed him to turn this specific ideological vision into a concrete, functioning system that already shapes global society.

    In computer science terms, Musk is building an all-encompassing “superset” of interlocking infrastructure, spanning energy, transportation, space, communication, and artificial intelligence. Unlike other tech leaders such as Bill Gates, Alexander Karp, and Peter Thiel, Musk has never published a formal manifesto laying out his ideological vision, but his consistent pattern of expansion makes clear he is driven by a clear mission. It remains unclear how much more power Musk will accumulate, or what new technologies he will bring to market with continued state backing, but critic Nick Srnicek argues that the apparatus of Muskism is already a formidable, influential force.

    This new book offers critical insight into how one individual is working to reshape the world in his own image, without any input or consent from the vast majority of people affected by his decisions. It makes a clear case that no democratic society should allow a small handful of unelected individuals to accumulate the level of power that Musk currently holds. Just as the global community rejects the idea that millions should be left to die of deprivation, the authors argue, we must oppose the idea that unelected oligarchs get unilaterally to determine the future of global society. This commentary is adapted from an article by Noel Castree, Adjunct Professor of Society & Environment at the University of Technology Sydney, republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license.

  • ‘Time for him to pay’ – Carroll calls on Trump to pay $5m after president’s appeal fails

    ‘Time for him to pay’ – Carroll calls on Trump to pay $5m after president’s appeal fails

    A years-long legal battle between former advice columnist E. Jean Carroll and former U.S. President Donald Trump has reached a new turning point, after the U.S. Supreme Court rejected Trump’s bid to overturn a civil jury verdict that found him liable for sexual abuse and defamation, prompting Carroll’s legal team to demand immediate payment of the nearly $5.8 million in awarded damages.

    The core of the dispute stretches back to the mid-1990s, when Carroll, now 80, accused Trump of sexually assaulting her inside a fitting room at the luxury Bergdorf Goodman department store in Manhattan. The case moved forward decades later, culminating in a 2023 civil trial in New York, where a jury reached a verdict that Trump was responsible for the abuse, and additionally found him liable for defamation after he publicly labeled Carroll’s accusations a fabricated hoax on his social platform Truth Social. The jury initially awarded Carroll $5 million in compensatory and punitive damages.

    Trump immediately launched a series of appeals to challenge the verdict, arguing that the trial judge, Lewis Kaplan, had incorrectly permitted damaging evidence to be presented to the jury that unfairly skewed the panel’s perception of him. His appeal was rejected by a federal appeals court last year, which ruled that Kaplan had not committed any legal errors that would justify overturning the jury’s decision or ordering a new trial. On Monday this week, the nation’s highest court declined to take up Trump’s appeal for review, closing off this final avenue of appeal for the former president in this specific case.

    Following the Supreme Court’s ruling, Carroll’s legal team filed a new court motion on Tuesday asking a judge to compel Trump to release the full damages payment. With accumulated interest added to the original award, the total sum owed now stands at roughly $5.8 million. In the motion, Carroll’s attorneys noted that they had granted all of Trump’s prior requests to delay payment throughout the appeals process, but that cooperation would end now that all legal challenges had been exhausted. “Given the extraordinary lengths he has taken to avoid such payments and that each of those efforts has been denied in full, that cooperation ends today,” the filing read. “It is time for him to pay Carroll.”

    Carroll’s legal team also added a new piece of evidence to their filing: a Truth Social post Trump published on Monday immediately after the Supreme Court’s decision, in which he repeated his claim that the entire case was a “fake” brought against him through partisan “lawfare.” “Surprisingly, the Supreme Court declined to ‘review’ a fake case brought against me,” Trump wrote, adding that he would continue to fight the “weaponization and lawfare case” including “the ridiculous claim of defamation, with all of my power and strength.”

    This is not the only defamation case Trump has lost to Carroll. In a separate 2024 civil trial, another jury found Trump liable for a second instance of defamation related to additional comments he made about Carroll, awarding her nearly $84 million in damages. Trump also appealed that ruling, but a panel of federal judges rejected his appeal last year.

    The BBC has reached out to Trump’s legal team for a response to Carroll’s latest motion, and has not yet received a comment.

    This legal confrontation comes as Trump, the frontrunner for the 2024 Republican presidential nomination, faces a string of ongoing criminal and civil legal challenges across the country, many of which he has repeatedly labeled as politically motivated witch hunts.

  • French shipping company CMA CGM Group to buy FedEx’ logistics arm for $1.4B

    French shipping company CMA CGM Group to buy FedEx’ logistics arm for $1.4B

    In a major strategic move reshaping the global logistics landscape, France’s CMA CGM Group announced Wednesday it will purchase FedEx Supply Chain, FedEx’s third-party logistics division, in a $1.4 billion deal designed to supercharge the shipping giant’s presence across the United States market.

    The acquisition is set to triple the scale of CMA CGM’s existing logistics subsidiary CEVA Logistics, and will cement the company’s position as a leading contract logistics provider across North America, according to statements from the firm. This purchase aligns with CMA CGM’s previously announced 2025 commitment to inject $20 billion into U.S.-based infrastructure over four years, with investments earmarked for warehousing, air cargo operations and end-to-end logistics networks.

    Beyond the acquisition of FedEx Supply Chain, the two companies have also revealed plans to enter into long-term multiyear commercial partnerships covering both air and ocean freight services. For CMA CGM chief executive Rodolphe Saadé, the transaction underscores the group’s enduring dedication to growing its U.S. footprint while strengthening the reliability and productivity of American supply chains.

    Memphis-based FedEx, for its part, has been streamlining its corporate portfolio in recent months to refocus on its core package delivery operations, shifting priority to higher-margin business-to-business delivery services serving high-growth sectors including healthcare, automotive manufacturing, aerospace and data center infrastructure. Earlier this year on June 1, the company completed the independent spinoff of FedEx Freight, its less-than-truckload and bulk cargo division, as part of this strategic restructuring.

    The acquisition is on track to close in the final months of 2025, pending mandatory regulatory approvals from U.S. authorities. The separate air and ocean freight commercial agreements are scheduled to be finalized in incremental phases between 2026 and 2028, bringing the full strategic partnership into force over the next three years.

  • Watch: Man comes face-to-face with bear inside his truck

    Watch: Man comes face-to-face with bear inside his truck

    A startling wildlife encounter caught on home security cameras has captured the moment a Colorado resident came face-to-face with an unexpected intruder: a full-grown black bear that had made its way into the man’s pickup truck.

    The incident, which unfolded on private property in the mountainous state known for its frequent human-bear interactions, was recorded in full by the property’s outdoor surveillance system. The footage shows the man approaching the vehicle, unaware at first that the large mammal was waiting inside the cab. When the two locked eyes just inches apart, the man kept his composure, instead of panicking, and began testing a series of gentle tactics to encourage the curious bear to exit the truck on its own.

    Colorado wildlife officials regularly note that black bears often wander into residential areas during warmer months in search of food, frequently checking unlocked vehicles for discarded snacks or garbage left behind by humans. This encounter serves as yet another reminder of the importance of securing vehicles and food storage when living in or visiting regions with active bear populations.

    The released security footage has quickly spread across social media, drawing thousands of comments from viewers amazed at the man’s calm demeanor during the tense standoff between human and wild animal.

  • Trump’s $1.4bn crypto earnings revealed

    Trump’s $1.4bn crypto earnings revealed

    A bombshell new disclosure from U.S. President Donald Trump’s mandatory 2025 financial filing has uncovered that the sitting president pulled in over $1.4 billion in earnings last year from cryptocurrency-related business activities. The figure, which translates to roughly £750 million, marks one of the most unusual and high-profile personal financial windfalls for a sitting U.S. president in modern history, reigniting debates over conflict of interest and transparency in executive branch financial holdings.

    Mandatory financial disclosures are a core legal requirement for senior U.S. government officials, including the president, designed to give the public visibility into potential conflicts between personal business interests and official policymaking. Prior to this filing, Trump had already drawn widespread attention for his unusual engagement with the volatile crypto sector, breaking with longstanding norms around sitting presidents maintaining distance from speculative private assets during their time in office.

    The size of the disclosed earnings has already prompted questions from government ethics watchdogs, who argue that the massive crypto profit creates an obvious conflict of interest as the president oversees federal policy related to digital asset regulation, taxation, and market oversight. As details of the filing continue to circulate, public and congressional scrutiny of the transaction origins and regulatory compliance of Trump’s crypto dealings is expected to intensify in the coming weeks.