Trending News
Judge orders White House to restore access for CNN, MS NOW and Politico
A federal judge ordered early Thursday that the White House immediately restore access for CNN, MS NOW and Politico, saying that President Donald Trump's directive barring the three news outlets last week was most likely unconstitutional.In granting a 14-day temporary restraining order reinstating the outlets' access while their legal challenge proceeds, U.S. District Judge Timothy Kelly wrote that the plaintiffs are likely to succeed in their lawsuit against the administration, at least on the grounds that their credentials were revoked without due process.Trump, he wrote, did not dispute that the outlets "did not receive notice and an opportunity to be heard before their hard passes were revoked."The White House did not immediately respond to a request for overnight comment from NBC News."This is a strong ruling vindicating freedom of the press, due process and the rule of law. We greatly appreciate the court's swift action," the attorney representing CNN, Politico and MS NOW, Ted Boutrous, said in a statement.Trump had posted on social media before a Wednesday hearing in the case that he expected the "totally disloyal" Kelly, whom he nominated to the bench during his first term, to rule against him — adding that "as usual, we'll go for appeal."Trump announced the ban in a post on Truth Social on Friday, and said it was "a result of their constant 'reporting' FAKE NEWS!""Media Outlets shouldn't be able to constantly write or report FICTION and LIES when they're covering the President of the United States, the Trump Administration, or the United States of America. Other Fake News Media Outlets to follow," he said.Thursday's order rejected the White House's argument that banning the outlets was motivated by national security concerns. "Certainly, that is not what President Trump said when he announced that he was 'banning' Plaintiffs from the White House — instead, he focused on the alleged lack of truthfulness and negativity of Plaintiffs' reporting," Kelly wrote.Speaking to reporters in the Oval Office a short time after the post, Trump referred to his directive as "the ban on the free press." "I don't want them in my office. I don't want them here," he said.He said the policy was not in response to a particular report, but because of "cumulative stories over the last few years.""They purposely write negative news. And they do that because they want to try and diminish the Republicans and a Republican administration," he said. "If they could straighten themselves out, I'd love it," he added. Trump administration Sep 23 Defending Trump media ban, DOJ cites national security and says White House access is a 'privilege' Trump administration Sep 19 MS NOW, CNN, Politico say their journalists were denied access to White House after Trump ban The outlets said in their suit challenging the ban that Trump's remarks show the policy was motivated by "retaliation" and "intended to cow" the outlets "into changing their reporting and threaten other journalists lest they suffer the same fate." The "Constitution does not allow a president or any other government official to deprive the press of their First Amendment rights and liberty and property interests with no notice or process based solely on that official's dislike of the content of their reporting. The ban is patently unconstitutional and should be immediately restrained," they argued.The White House appeared to be trying to address those due process claims in letters to the news outlets on Tuesday, which told them they could "contest this initial decision" in written responses by Friday. The letters accuse them of publishing "sensitive security information, and misinformation" which "undermines the President's ability to safeguard the national security."They cited specific articles about munitions stockpiles impacted by the Iran war and sanctions against Russia, but also one about a request for $1 billion in funding for East Wing renovations that the president had said would be fully funded by donors, and another about negative "vibes" at the recent Republican midterm convention.The letters also allege the organizations have "exhibited behavior in violation of the standards of professionalism and decorum expected of those given access to the White House Complex." Trump made a similar argument in a Truth Social post Monday. "It is called the Oval Office, and it should be treated with Decorum, Respect, and Dignity, not defiled by Third Rate Clowns, who purposefully distort, twist, and degrade with everything they write or publish," he wrote.NBC News previously reported that Trump's Friday announcement caught a number of high-level White House aides off guard. A senior White House official defended the move to NBC News earlier this week, saying, "Nobody close to the President was surprised at his action to hold the fake news accountable."The Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press, the White House Correspondents' Association and a group of 49 news and media organizations — including NBCUniversal Media LLC, the parent company of NBC News — filed a legal brief in the case Wednesday backing the three outlets.The filing said the president's stated reasons for the ban "are transparently viewpoint discriminatory" and "inconsistent with the First Amendment." "The ban at issue in this case does exactly what longstanding D.C. Circuit precedent" has said the government can't do, the filing said — "prohibited three news organizations from access to the entirety of the White House and its grounds due to the content of their reporting."It also clashes, the filing said, "with bedrock Supreme Court precedent, which recognizes that 'even though a person has no 'right' to a valuable governmental benefit,' the government 'may not deny a benefit to a person on a basis that infringes his constitutionally protected interests — especially, his interest in freedom of speech.'"
Judge orders Trump White House to restore access to CNN, MS Now and Politico
US district judge orders temporary lifting of Trump's ban on the three media outlets, saying it was likely unconstitutionalA federal judge has ordered the Trump administration to temporarily restore ⁠White House ⁠access ​to journalists from CNN, MS Now and Politico, ⁠saying his ban on the three media outlets was ⁠likely unconstitutional.US district judge Tim Kelly issued his order in a lawsuit that the news organizations filed ‌contesting the ban that the president announced ​on 18 September. Continue reading...
'We've become dumb!' GOP at war with itself as Big Oil slams Trump's diesel plan
A decades-long alliance between congressional Republicans and the fossil fuel industry is fracturing over a proposed diesel export ban, with farm-state GOP lawmakers and MAGA populists now openly attacking "Big Oil" as skyrocketing fuel prices threaten Republicans' standing heading into November.The White House is weighing a 90-day halt on diesel exports, an idea Trump himself has publicly floated as fuel prices climb toward record territory. Oil industry advocates warn the move would backfire, arguing it could actually worsen an already difficult fuel market rather than fix it. Rather than blame the Iran war and the administration's own foreign policy for driving up prices, many conservatives are instead directing their frustration squarely at the oil industry.Energy lobbyist Mike McKenna, who worked in Trump's first White House, worries the rift signals something bigger than a policy disagreement. "We've become literally as dumb as the other side," he said.That's a stark shift for a relationship that's historically been mutually beneficial: oil companies got favorable policy, and Republicans got dependable campaign cash. Just this year, virtually the whole GOP caucus lined up behind a major budget bill containing a laundry list of drilling-friendly provisions.Not every Republican strategist thinks the anger will stick. Arizona-based GOP consultant Barrett Marson predicted the current frustration is a temporary reaction that will fade once the Iran conflict winds down.The tension has spilled directly onto the Senate floor, where oil-state Republicans are clashing with farm-state colleagues pushing the export ban, led by Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-IA). Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-AK) voiced skepticism that restricting exports would meaningfully move prices given how globally interconnected fuel supply really is, while Sen. Mike Rounds (R-SD) argued the better fix is restarting idled refineries, including two shut down in California under strict state environmental rules.Diesel prices have climbed to roughly $6.52 a gallon nationally, nearly $3 higher than a year ago, squeezing farm states like Iowa, Kansas and Nebraska where Republicans now face competitive Senate races that weren't on anyone's radar a year earlier.Democrats have dismissed the export ban proposal as a political gimmick, arguing Republicans are avoiding the real fix: pressuring Trump to end the war in Iran that's driving the price spike in the first place.
IRS could, for the first time, add a question about immigration status to Form 1040
Taxpayers are used to the routine questions on Form 1040, the annual federal tax return most filers use—from filing status and wages, to deductions and credits. But next year's form could include a very different question about citizenship and authorization to work.The IRS released a draft of Form 1040 that adds a single question for taxpayers—and their spouses if they file jointly—asking whether they are U.S. citizens, U.S. nationals, or are legally authorized to work in the country.The yes-or-no question appears below the filing status section, in a box titled "other information.""At the time you file your return, are you, and your spouse if filing jointly, a U.S. citizen, U.S. national, or an alien lawfully authorized to work in the U.S.?" the form says.The draft has not been finalized, but if the question remains in the final version, it would be the first time the IRS directly asks people who file Form 1040 about their citizenship or authorization to work.The form would be used to file 2026 tax returns during the 2027 tax season.Telemundo Digital contacted the IRS to ask why the question was proposed and how the information would be used, but had not received a response at the time of publication. Trump administration Sep 11 Trump administration proposes census overhaul to exclude some immigrants and race data Immigration Aug 6 Trump signs immigration actions to limit birthright citizenship, curb 'birth tourism' What could the IRS do with this information?Legal expert Joseph Malouf said the proposed question could be tied to determining which taxpayers qualify for certain tax credits.In August, the Treasury Department and the IRS proposed regulations aimed at limiting eligibility for certain federal tax credits, including the Child Tax Credit, the American Opportunity Tax Credit, the Earned Income Tax Credit and the Adoption Tax Credit."That's the excuse they're using to try to implement those changes, saying, 'Look, the reality is we can't calculate correctly without the information,'" Malouf said in an interview with Noticias Telemundo Ahora.Under federal law, eligibility for certain federal public benefits is generally restricted to U.S. citizens, U.S. nationals and certain qualifying noncitizens, with some exceptions.The proposed question also raises concerns about privacy and about how the information collected by the IRS could be shared with other government agencies.Malouf said he believes the proposal could face legal challenges based on federal laws governing the confidentiality and sharing of taxpayer information."There's a federal law that limits the type of information this kind of agency can share, especially when it comes to privacy. We'll see what the court decides in the end," Malouf said.Section 6103 of the Internal Revenue Code generally protects the confidentiality of tax returns and taxpayer information, though it sets out some exceptions that allow those data to be shared under certain circumstances.The Treasury Department and the Department of Homeland Security reached an agreement that would allow ICE to request certain taxpayer information from the IRS and compare it with immigration data. Later, a federal judge determined that the IRS had illegally disclosed information from thousands of taxpayers to ICE.Malouf also raised a concern related to the Fifth Amendment, questioning whether the form could force some people to provide information that could later be used against them."They [the government] have described people who are undocumented as people who have committed a crime: being in the country illegally. The first question I ask myself is how this form is consistent with the Fifth Amendment in terms of you admitting that you're undocumented in the country; that would be admitting to a crime," Malouf said.The changes to the form could also scare some immigrants and discourage them from filing their returns, Malouf said."This is going to make a lot of people not file their tax forms out of fear they'll be deported if they do," he said.
Iran fires back at Trump at UN - CityNews Kitchener
Iran fires back at Trump at UN  CityNews Kitchener
Carney says he studied risk of U.S.-led military action in NYT interview
Carney declined to discuss in detail what that examination involved, but he suggested it would be irresponsible not to prepare for what he called "extreme tail risk."
Trump has dirt on this senator — and he'll rain hell on her if she steps out of line
Years ago, I worked with a person who habitually used the word "concerned." They had a junior role on our team but, nevertheless, constantly interrupted meetings with her "concerns." They'd come to me expressing "concern" for how something didn't meet their satisfaction, always "concerned" about being "concerned."It drove me crazy. Eventually, she was moved to another team because I was "concerned" she was affecting my mental health and, more seriously, the momentum of our team.Maybe that's why Sen. Susan Collins gets on my nerves. She frequently uses phrases like "concerned," "deeply concerned," or "very concerned" to signal her disapproval of controversial actions or statements by presidents and fellow politicians, particularly Donald Trump, without breaking ranks to take strong legislative or punitive action.It smacks of wimpiness, an inability to have a backbone, and when it comes from Collins, it's a mealy-mouthed way to make her sound like she gives a damn when she really doesn't. So, thank God, Mainers are getting more "concerned" about Collins being their senator for the next six years.She shouldn't even be in this election at all. Thirty years ago, Collins promised she would serve just two terms. Three decades later, she is still here. Still "concerned" about a host of issues, without actually having the fortitude to do anything about her "concerns."Unquestionably, she has become an entrenched creature in the slimy swamp that is Washington, practicing the exact kind of backroom, self-serving wheeling and dealing that should raise serious concerns about her honesty, integrity and morality.First and foremost, and the most recent example, is a damning investigative report by ProPublica that recently exposed what Democratic challenger Troy Jackson rightly called "corruption of the highest order." The investigation unsealed internal records revealing a sprawling, pay-to-play operation involving defense contractor Navatek.The contractor allegedly funneled an illegal $150,000 donation into a pro-Collins super PAC. In return, Collins used her immense legislative power to deliver millions in taxpayer-funded federal contracts straight back to that very donor.It is a classic Washington swamp deal, by an embedded creature of the swamp. And who helped bury the initial FBI investigation into this alleged bribery scheme? None other than Donald Trump and his administration.Now that this has been put into the public record, ask yourself this question: "Why hasn't Susan Collins been more vocal, more angry, more energized in speaking out against Trump, and against the rot, destruction and diminishing of our democracy?"Well, I don't think I have to spell it out for you, but I will. Trump has her in a sort of blackmail situation, that he likely has with other members of Congress. If you speak ill of me, I will rain down campaign finance violations upon you.She's denied that there was any wrongdoing, but I don't believe her for a second. She's been a fraud and phony and mealy-mouthed defender of Trump from the get-go. In fact, she mirrors him in other ways, which makes you wonder if she's Trump lite.In 2012, Collins' reported net worth was actually in the negative, languishing around negative $255,000. But after years of wielding massive leverage on the powerful Senate Appropriations Committee, her mandatory federal disclosures reveal her personal wealth has ballooned up to an astronomical $9.6 million.Her stock and bond portfolio alone has surged too, heavily packed with blue-chip tech giants, corporate securities, and aerospace companies.It makes you wonder if Navatek is the only other company that benefits from a financial arrangement with Collins. I'm not saying there are others, I'm just pointing out that it would be a bit unusual if this is just a one-off. When it comes to campaign donations, and when your coffers are empty, you'll fudge around the outskirts of the law to improve your lot.And why wouldn't Trump protect her when she's been a solid vote for him? Collins has been his most dependable legislative rubber stamp. While she desperately tries to market herself to Mainers as an independent, "pro-choice moderate," her actual voting record tells a devastating story. CQ Roll Call verified that Collins voted in lockstep with Donald Trump's stated positions a staggering 94.6% of the time during 2025.When Trump needed to demolish the federal government, Collins was right there to greenlight his most radical picks. She voted to confirm Trump's controversial budget director and Project 2025 architect, Russell Vought. You would have to be an obtuse idiot to confirm Vought and not think he wasn't going to run the federal budget based on his extremist views expressly laid out in Project 2025.Collins might as well have voted for another wacko to run government intelligence. Oh wait, she did. She voted to approve Tulsi Gabbard to oversee the nation's core intelligence agencies. One of the reasons she supported Gabbard was because "Ms. Gabbard addressed my concerns regarding her views on Edward Snowden."Oh, there go those concerns again!But her ultimate betrayal of Maine women and families remains her monumental vote to confirm Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh. Now, you would think that she would vote against him because Mainers were concerned about him. But her concerns lay elsewhere. She voted for him citing "concerns" with the "special interests" that opposed Kavanaugh from the onset and misrepresented him, i.e., Dr. Christine Blasey Ford's.And in hindsight, Collins still refuses to apologize. Recently, she doubled down on her betrayal, stating on the record to the Portland Press Herald, "I do not regret that vote," and even admitted in an audio recording obtained by The New York Times that she "would vote for him again."She clearly has no concerns whatsoever about what her vote for Kavanaugh unleashed. She clearly has little concern about watching her wealth balloon while middle-class Mainers struggle with high gas and grocery prices caused by a woefully incapable and corrupt president Collins supports nearly 95% of the time. And she doesn't seem to be too concerned about ProPublica's recent expose.Susan Collins' "concerns" are the biggest package of BS in American politics, and Mainers should have zero concern for her on November 3rd.
Venezuela being 'reborn', Rodríguez tells UN – as it happened
Acting president says Venezuela returning strongly after 'setbacks'. This blog is now closed – see our full reports:Trump greets Xi Jinping on arrival in rare move as US-China trade truce extendedIran's president hits out at 'bully' Trump in UN speech but signals willingness to talkThese latest attacks come just hours before Volodymyr Zelenskyy's address to the UN general assembly, so he is likely to reflect on them during his UN speech later.So far, we have had no public comment from Zelenskyy or Ukraine's foreign minister Andrii Sybiha. Continue reading...
Has Netanyahu lost America? – Stateside with Kai and Carter
Benjamin Netanyahu lands in New York today to speak at the UN general assembly. This visit marks the Israeli prime minister's first time in the city since Mayor Zohran Mamdani vowed to arrest him for war crimes – and it's happening as support for Israel among US voters is taking an unprecedented plunge. Sixty percent of Americans now have an unfavorable view of Israel. (In 2022, only 42% of Americans said the same.) But what does this mean for Netanyahu's hold on US politics? And how will it play into Israel's October elections? Kai Wright and Carter Sherman are joined by two reporters with different perspectives on the Netanyahu story. Andrew Roth spent time reporting from Israel and the West Bank this summer, and Alice Speri has covered the pushback against Israel in Democratic politics here in the US Continue reading...
'If pardoned for one murder, I'd shoot Gyanesh': VIP chief targets CEC over SIR row
Mukesh Sahani expressed strong dissatisfaction with Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar's conduct regarding the Election Commission's decisions. He accused the commission of operating under BJP influence and indicated potential consequences for its members. Sahani stated that those involved could face imprisonment after the elections in 2029, particularly highlighting Gyanesh Kumar. The Election Commission defended its processes, asserting that internal disagreements were normal and legal compliance was maintained.
On TV
Star Trek: Strange New Worlds — 4x10: "Tomorrow's Enterprise" (Paramount+)
A time ripple damages the Enterprise, forcing young and old Uhura to cooperate and fix the timeline.
New Music

John Williams — "Legacy" (Deutsche Grammophon)

In theaters

No new releases hitting theaters today. Your popcorn can wait.

Launching today

Nothing launching today. Every rocket is staying grounded and behaving.

Useless Fact

The U.S. military operates 234 golf courses

The loonie
CAD → USD
0.7094
▼ 0.0016
CAD → EUR
0.6227
▲ 0.0014
Today In History
2015 — Deadly Hajj Stampede Kills Over 2,400 in Mecca
According to Saudi officials, 769 people died in a stampede during the hajj to Mecca; however, other estimates claim that more than 2,400 were killed, making it one of the deadliest accidents in the pilgrimage's history. The stampede occurred on the first day of Eid al-Adha, a major Islamic holiday, when large crowds were gathered for the annual pilgrimage to Mecca.
1995 — BBC Miniseries "Pride and Prejudice" Debut
The BBC miniseries Pride and Prejudice, starring Colin Firth and Jennifer Ehle, debuted on British television, and it became one of the most acclaimed adaptations of Jane Austen's classic novel. How much do you know about Jane Austen?
1993 — Norodom Sihanouk Crowned King of Cambodia (Second Term)
Norodom Sihanouk was crowned king of Cambodia for the second time
1991 — Nirvana's Nevermind album popularizes grunge music
American alternative rock group Nirvana released its breakthrough album Nevermind, which helped make grunge an international phenomenon and gave voice to Generation X
1968 — Launch of Landmark News Program "60 Minutes"
The prime-time American television news show 60 Minutes debuted in 1968. It was created by Don S. Hewitt and featured renowned journalists such as Mike Wallace. The program went on to become one of the most successful and long-running news programs in broadcast history.
1960 — Launch of USS Enterprise, First Nuclear Carrier
The first nuclear-powered aircraft carrier, the Enterprise, was launched by the United States
1957 — Federal troops sent into Little Rock, Arkansas
On this day in 1957 racial desegregation took centre stage when federal troops were dispatched to Little Rock, Arkansas, to maintain order and enforce the right of black students to attend the local public high school
1938 — Don Budge Wins First Grand Slam Tennis Title at U.S. Open
Don Budge won the 1938 U.S. Open tennis championship, becoming the first player to win a Grand Slam title.
1934 — Babe Ruth's Last Baseball Game for the New York Yankees
Babe Ruth played in his last baseball game for the New York Yankees at Yankee Stadium. baseball quiz UPI/Bettmann Archive
1906 — Devils Tower Designated as First U.S. National Monument
Devils Tower in northeastern Wyoming was named the first national monument in the United States. How much do you know about iconic monuments?
1896 — Birth of American novelist F. Scott Fitzgerald
American short-story writer and novelist F. Scott Fitzgerald—famous for his depictions of the Jazz Age, his most brilliant novel being The Great Gatsby (1925)—was born
1877 — Saigo Takamori's Rebellion Against the Meiji Government
Saigo Takamori, a hero of the Meiji Restoration, was killed after reluctantly leading a rebellion against the Meiji government
1869 — Grant Intervenes to Curb Gold Market Manipulation
Plummeting gold prices in 1869 led to a panic known as Black Friday. U.S. President Ulysses S. Grant, after learning of an attempt by financiers Jay Gould and James Fisk to drive up the gold market, ordered $4 million of government gold to be sold on the market to stabilize prices and counter the manipulation.
1755 — Birth of John Marshall, 4th U.S. Chief Justice
John Marshall, the fourth chief justice of the United States and principal founder of the U.S. system of constitutional law, including the doctrine of judicial review, was born. Why are there nine justices on the U.S. Supreme Court?

This is today, boiled down to the essentials. The full stash lives at logicalchaos.ca. Go get lost in it.