标签： North America

In a primetime televised address from the White House Thursday, former President and 2024 presidential candidate Donald Trump reiterated a series of unproven allegations that China interfered in the 2020 U.S. presidential election and claimed there are “shocking vulnerabilities” in the nation’s voting infrastructure. The address came three months ahead of November’s midterm elections that will determine congressional control for the remainder of his current term.

During the 30-minute speech, delivered to an audience of senior administration members with no opportunity for press questioning, Trump claimed he had declassified hundreds of intelligence documents to back up his assertion that Beijing sought to tilt the 2020 election outcome toward Joe Biden, who ultimately defeated Trump in the contest. Trump also claimed that China had illegally obtained 220 million voter records containing sensitive personal information, alleging that voter data across 18 U.S. states had been “bought, stolen or hacked by China.” He further accused officials who had uncovered this alleged activity of failing to alert executive branch leaders or members of Congress. At no point during the address did Trump present tangible evidence showing China used the purloined data to manipulate voting systems or alter election results.

These claims directly contradict long-standing conclusions from the entire U.S. intelligence community. A 2021 declassified assessment from the U.S. National Intelligence Council stated with high confidence that China did not engage in any interference efforts targeting the 2020 presidential election, and only considered but ultimately rejected influence operations designed to change the vote outcome. The report noted the decision stemmed from China’s calculation that neither candidate’s victory offered enough strategic benefit to justify the risk of major diplomatic backlash if the interference was discovered.

In a statement provided to Reuters following the speech, the Chinese Embassy in Washington D.C. rejected all allegations, confirming that Beijing “has never and will never interfere in the presidential elections” of the United States. The BBC has also reached out to China’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs for additional comment, and has not yet received a response.

Domestically, the speech drew immediate sharp pushback from Democratic leaders, who argue Trump is deliberately spreading misinformation to erode public trust in the upcoming midterm elections ahead of voting. “Let’s be clear – in America, voters choose their leaders, not the other way around,” Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer wrote on social media immediately after the address. “Democrats will fight like hell to make sure every American voter can cast their ballot freely, without obstruction or interference from Donald Trump.”

Former Vice President Kamala Harris echoed this criticism in a post on X ahead of the speech, arguing that Trump’s goal is to suppress turnout among opposition voters. “The president is scared of your power, and he wants you to believe your vote does not matter,” she wrote. “He wants you to lose confidence in our electoral system so you stay home this November. He knows how discontent the American people are, and he wants to make sure that you do not vote.”

Beyond his China allegations, Trump expanded his claims of voting system vulnerability, asserting that widely used U.S. voting machines are “extremely exposed” to tampering by foreign adversaries including Russia, China, and Iran. While gaps and weaknesses in U.S. election infrastructure have been well documented by independent experts and government auditors, many vulnerabilities were addressed after the 2016 presidential election, when U.S. intelligence confirmed Russia carried out a large-scale meddling campaign including hacking, social media disinformation, and funding for grassroots political activity.

Trump also repeated unproven claims of domestic voter fraud: he alleged that Michigan law enforcement uncovered a voter registration fraud scheme linked to a Democratic-aligned organization, but that the FBI blocked investigators from acting before the statute of limitations expired. Calling the activity “pay, play and cheat,” Trump again offered no evidence that any vote totals were altered or any voting machines were compromised. He also claimed the Department of Homeland Security has identified 278,000 non-citizens registered to vote, but did not provide data showing any of these individuals actually cast ballots or affected the result of any election.

To address the purported flaws he outlined, Trump used his closing remarks to renew calls for Congress to pass the SAVE America Act, a bill that would ban most forms of mail-in voting, require documentary proof of citizenship to register to vote, and mandate photo identification to cast a ballot. The legislation has been stalled in the evenly divided Senate for months, and Trump’s push for passage is widely expected to fail unless Republican lawmakers agree to overhaul long-standing Senate procedural rules that currently require a 60-vote supermajority to advance most legislation, a step Republican leadership has so far rejected. The address comes as a new Washington Post-Ipsos poll shows Trump’s national approval rating has fallen to 37%, driven largely by widespread public pessimism over rising cost of living and the ongoing conflict with Iran.

Political analysts note the speech does little to ease Democratic fears that Trump will continue to question election legitimacy ahead of 2028’s presidential contest, should he choose to run for reelection. The ongoing partisan fight over election security has already become one of the defining issues of the 2024 midterm campaign cycle.

In a high-profile policy shift tied to his vision of a more “manly” fighting force, United States Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth has unveiled plans for mandatory testosterone screenings for all active-duty military personnel aged 30 and older. The new requirement marks a notable departure from previous military health protocols, framing physical fitness and hormonal balance as central to operational readiness aligned with Hegseth’s public emphasis on traditional masculine standards within the armed services. While details around implementation—including how results will be used, whether screening will be integrated into regular physical examinations, and what accommodations will be made for personnel with low testosterone readings—are still emerging, the announcement has already drawn widespread attention for its intersection of health policy and cultural ideology within the US Department of Defense. The policy is set to roll out across all branches of the military in the coming months, with officials expected to release additional guidance on logistics and privacy protections for service members in the near future.

The Trump administration has brought together senior officials from more than 60 nations across Europe, Latin America, Asia and beyond for a high-stakes Washington summit focused on addressing what top U.S. diplomat Marco Rubio frames as a rapidly expanding transnational threat: left-wing terrorism.

In opening remarks to Thursday’s closed-door session, Secretary of State Rubio called on participating countries to deepen cross-border intelligence sharing and coordinate joint counterterrorism action, arguing that far-left extremism represents a global, interconnected challenge that demands collective response. Administration officials framed the political violence linked to left-wing groups as a singular form of harm rooted in deep-seated animosity toward existing Western social and political structures.

White House Deputy Chief of Staff Stephen Miller doubled down on this framing during the summit, claiming left-wing activism is fundamentally driven by resentment, hatred and envy toward successful individuals and democratic institutions. On the same day the gathering convened, the State Department announced new sweeping visa restrictions that bar entry to the U.S. for members of groups labeled “Far-Left Terrorist and other aligned groups”, including individuals accused of involvement in so-called economic sabotage. Washington has already formally designated four European far-left groups — Germany’s Antifa Ost, Italy’s Informal Anarchist Federation/International Revolutionary Front, and two Greek factions, Armed Proletarian Justice and Revolutionary Class Self-Defense — as official Foreign Terrorist Organizations. The administration previously designated the loose U.S.-based far-left anti-fascist movement Antifa as a domestic terrorist organization, aligning the global initiative with a long-stated domestic policy priority of the Trump White House.

Notably, the entire summit agenda made no mention of addressing the growing threat of far-right extremist violence, a choice that has drawn immediate fierce pushback from Democratic lawmakers. Eleven congressional Democrats sent a formal letter to Rubio one day before the summit, raising sharp questions about whether the narrow focus on left-wing groups would ultimately be used to target peaceful, law-abiding political protests and label legitimate opposition activists as terrorists.

The letter, which was obtained by Reuters, urged the State Department to refocus its counterterrorism work on evidence-based, nonpartisan priorities rooted in on-the-ground threat data. Lawmakers accused the administration of sidelining objective threat assessments to advance the narrow political agenda of hardline elements within the Trump White House, calling the initiative a rubber-stamp for partisan political gains.

Existing research on domestic extremism in the U.S. paints a mixed picture that does not clearly back the administration’s singular focus. A 2025 threat assessment from the nonpartisan Center for Strategic and International Studies found that lethal attacks linked to left-wing terrorism surpassed those linked to far-right extremism for the first time in more than three decades, though the report also noted that overall numbers of ideologically motivated attacks from both factions remain relatively low. By contrast, the U.S. Department of Justice removed a 2024 internal assessment from its public website last year that found far-right extremists were responsible for the vast majority of ideologically motivated lethal violence in the U.S. over the preceding decade, a move that critics say was intended to align official government data with the administration’s political framing.

The Trump administration has formally announced final plans to roll out sweeping new restrictions on international students studying in the United States, a policy shift that marks one of the most significant overhauls to the country’s student visa system in decades. Among the most impactful changes is a hard four-year limit on stays for most foreign students, with extensions only available through explicit federal government approval, a power previously held by accredited U.S. higher education institutions themselves. The new rules also curtail international students’ ability to switch academic programs or transfer between postsecondary institutions, and cut the post-graduation grace period for departing the country or switching to an alternative visa category in half, from 60 days to just 30.

Previously, international students holding F-1 student visas and J-1 exchange visas were granted entry under the “duration of status” framework, which allowed them to remain in the U.S. for as long as they needed to make satisfactory progress toward completing their academic degree, regardless of how long that process took. The U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) framed the new regulations, set to take effect this coming September, as a targeted measure to crack down on widespread misuse of the student visa system and bolster national security through routine, repeated vetting of international enrollees.

DHS Secretary Markwayne Mullin defended the policy in public remarks, arguing that decades of open-ended admissions for foreign students have created loopholes that thousands of people exploit to remain in the U.S. indefinitely by continuously enrolling in low-credit courses to avoid deportation. But critics of the new rules point to a key structural reality of U.S. higher education: while most undergraduate programs are completed within four years, the majority of international students in the U.S. are enrolled in graduate programs, particularly in STEM (science, technology, engineering and mathematics) fields. Doctoral and advanced research degrees often require five to seven years of study to complete, as students navigate lengthy research projects, publication timelines, and unexpected delays ranging from research funding gaps to personal circumstances that extend their time to degree completion.

The policy has drawn sharp pushback from leading higher education and international education advocacy groups, who argue the restrictions are both poorly conceived and unnecessary. NAFSA: Association of International Educators, a leading non-profit that supports institutions with international student enrollment processes and policy guidance, has emerged as one of the most vocal critics of the plan. NAFSA CEO Fanta Aw said the new regulations inject unnecessary uncertainty, layers of unneeded bureaucracy, and widespread fear into a student visa system that has operated effectively for decades. She characterized the changes as a “solution in search of a problem,” arguing there is no widespread crisis of visa abuse that justifies upending the existing framework.

The new visa rules are not an isolated policy change, but rather part of a broader, coordinated agenda by the Trump administration to cut overall immigration levels to the U.S. and reduce the total number of international students enrolled at American institutions of higher education. In recent months, the administration has already moved to impose enrollment caps on international students at a number of elite U.S. colleges and universities, and has taken steps to revoke the visas of international students who have publicly expressed criticism of U.S. foreign policy.

A political controversy has emerged at the White House after a senior teleprompter operator was placed on unpaid leave amid allegations that they exploited confidential advance information about former President Donald Trump’s public speeches to place profitable bets, netting nearly $100,000 in illegal gains. The unidentified staffer, whose role gave them exclusive early access to the full text and timing of remarks Trump was set to deliver at public events and campaign appearances, is now the subject of an internal White House probe alongside preliminary law enforcement inquiries into the potential securities or gambling violations connected to the scheme.

Sources familiar with the case confirm that the allegations center on betting markets tied to specific phrases and policy announcements Trump would include in his speeches, a niche but active area of speculative trading that allows actors with inside knowledge to lock in guaranteed profits. Prior to this incident, the White House has maintained strict internal policies barring staff from using non-public information gained through their official roles for personal financial gain, a standard ethics rule designed to preserve public trust in the executive branch.

As of the latest updates, no formal charges have been filed against the staffer, and the investigation remains in its early stages. The White House has declined to release additional details about the staffer’s identity or the full scope of the probe to avoid compromising ongoing investigative work.

A former White House teleprompter technician is at the center of a federal investigation after being accused of exploiting confidential access to President Donald Trump’s prepared speeches to place illegal insider bets that netted nearly $100,000 in potential profits, multiple major U.S. news outlets have confirmed.

Gabriel Perez, who had served on the White House staff since Trump first took office in 2016, allegedly placed wagers on Kalshi, a digital prediction marketplace that allows users to bet on the outcome of real-world events, including specific word choices in high-profile political addresses. The scheme focused on major public remarks from the president, most notably the annual State of the Union address, where Perez used his advance knowledge of the speech’s text to bet that specific pre-selected terms would appear in the address.

In an official statement shared with the BBC, Kalshi representatives confirmed that their internal risk team first flagged suspicious activity in March, when analysts identified irregular patterns in betting on the platform’s so-called “mention markets” — contract listings that let users predict whether a public speaker will reference specific topics, countries, economic phrases or campaign slogans during a given address.

“The words of top political leaders, from presidents to Federal Reserve chairs, can move billions of dollars across foreign exchange markets, oil futures and global stock markets,” Kalshi noted in its comment, underscoring the inherent risk of insider activity on prediction contracts tied to public policy remarks.

After cross-referencing account details and user information, the company confirmed that the account linked to the suspicious trades belonged to Perez, a federal employee responsible for drafting and operating the president’s teleprompters. Acting quickly to block potential illicit gains, Kalshi froze the account before Perez could withdraw more than $90,000 in accumulated profits.

Robert DeNault, Kalshi’s head of enforcement, confirmed the firm immediately reported the suspicious activity to the U.S. Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC), the federal regulator that oversees prediction market platforms operating in the United States, and turned over all collected evidence to investigators.

White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt confirmed Tuesday that President Trump had been briefed on the allegations against Perez. She stated that Perez has been placed on unpaid leave and will no longer serve on the White House staff, ending his tenure that began in 2016.

The investigation was first reported by ABC News, and the BBC’s U.S. news partner CBS News later independently confirmed key details of the case. Sources close to the probe told reporters that Perez has been fully cooperative with CFTC investigators throughout the inquiry. As of this report, federal prosecutors in Manhattan have declined to open a criminal investigation into the matter. When reached for comment by the BBC to confirm the ongoing probe, a CFTC spokesperson said the agency could not “confirm or deny” the existence of any ongoing investigation.