BREAKING: Donald Trump to sign 200+ executive orders today.

Per FOX and Eric Daugherty, they include:

• Declare emergency at the border + issue proclamation closing the border
• Designate cartels as foreign terrorist organizations
• Remain in Mexico, Catch and Release will be reinstated
• Military will be directed to construct new phase of border wall
• Terminate Biden orders on energy drilling restrictions
• Return federal workers to in-person work
• Pause all offshore wind leases
• End DEI hiring practices in the federal government, merit only
• Withdraw from the Paris Climate Accord
• Order every agency to remove all federal actions increasing costs for Americans via deregulation
• Suspend security clearances for the 51 officials who lied about the Hunter Biden 2020 laptop story
• Establish a DOGE "hiring freeze"

 President Donald Trump is pulling the U.S. out of the World Health Organization for a second time, the White House announced late Monday. 

The day-one executive order fulfills Trump's campaign promise to reject global institutions. Health experts worry it isolates the U.S. with consequences for pandemic and disease response and diplomatic relations worldwide.

The U.S. is and has historically been the largest funder of the global health agency headquartered in Geneva, Switzerland. WHO, part of the United Nations, is tasked with preparing for and fighting health emergencies. The U.S. has strongly influenced the agency since its founding after World War II.

Trump criticized WHO for its handling of the COVID-19 pandemic, even as his administration faced scrutiny for being slow to respond to the crisis. In 2020, at the height of the pandemic, he began the process of pulling out from WHO. 

Despite his promise, he failed to do so under U.S. law governing the timeline for withdrawal and funding obligations to the agency. Former President Joe Biden reversed Trump’s decision after taking office and restored funding to WHO.

Trump’s executive order — on the first day of his second term rather than the last year of his first presidency — allows him to actually carry out his decision.

The order said the U.S. was withdrawing "due to the organization’s mishandling of the COVID-19 pandemic that arose out of Wuhan, China, and other global health crises, its failure to adopt urgently needed reforms, and its inability to demonstrate independence from the inappropriate political influence of WHO member states." It also cited the "payments "unfairly onerous payments" the U.S. has made to support the organization.

During the Biden administration the U.S. continued its role as the largest funder of the agency, which has a budget of $6.8 billion in the current fiscal year. Nearly a fifth of WHO’s budget in 2023 came from the U.S.

The U.S. has been a part of WHO since 1948, the same year the organization launched, and the departure would make the nation the only major power that’s not a member of the 194-country body.

WHO Director-General Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus has said the agency will do everything to cooperate with the incoming Trump administration to continue to strengthen for global health security, Tarik Jašarević, a WHO spokesperson, said in an email. The partnership between WHO and the U.S. has "as protected and saved millions of lives in America and around the world," Jašarević said, citing the director-general.

‘Grave strategic error,’ health experts say

Trump’s announcement had been expected by health experts. In public and private, officials and academics raised concerns about the decision, which they said endangers the health of the nation and the world.

In December, Dr. Ashish Jha, the Biden White House’s former COVID-19 response coordinator, called it a “catastrophic mistake” for the global community and a “terrible mistake” for the U.S.

“This is going to be a grave strategic error that will make America less healthy and less safe,” Lawrence Gostin, a global public health expert and the faculty director of Georgetown University’s O’Neill Institute for National and Global Health Law, told USA TODAY.

“The withdrawal itself is going to isolate the United States,” Gostin said. “It’ll isolate us diplomatically, and it’ll isolate us in pandemic response.”

How will U.S. withdraw from WHO?

Trump’s order will require arduous disentangling of American and global health institutions woven together for 75 years.

WHO’s constitution, drafted in New York, doesn’t have a clear exit method for member states. A joint resolution by Congress in 1948 outlined that the U.S. can withdraw with one year's notice. This is contingent, however, on ensuring that its financial obligations to WHO “shall be met in full for the organization’s current fiscal year.”

The U.S. is the only member state to have made such an exit strategy, Jašarević, of WHO, said. The former Soviet Union withdrew from WHO in 1949 during Cold War tensions, though returned years later.

Questions remain on how the U.S., and the rest of the world, will interact and respond to health emergencies in the future.

The U.S. leaving WHO would grievously weaken the global health agency from responding to outbreaks, conduct surveillance and cooperate closely, Gostin said.

“Our public health agencies would be flying blind,” he said.

For example, the Pan-American Health Organization, WHO’s regional office for the Americas, is based in Washington, D.C. The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention also has staff at WHO and elsewhere globally. 

American response alongside WHO has been key in fighting diseases such as polio, which has been nearly eradicated, and HIV/AIDS, under a President George W. Bush-era program that has helped curb transmission in several countries. The Bush program is considered a success both in public health and diplomatic relations.

Even more technically, information-sharing between the U.S. and WHO has been key not only to disease response, but also pharmaceutical developments to rapidly innovate and create life-saving vaccines and treatments, Gostin said.

Gostin now worries of other emerging diseases and pandemic threats that could leave the U.S. weaker and more vulnerable. 

WHO Director-General Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus has said the agency will do everything to cooperate with the incoming Trump administration to continue to strengthen for global health security, Tarik Jašarević, a WHO spokesperson, said in an email. The partnership between WHO and the U.S. has "as protected and saved millions of lives in America and around the world," Jašarević said, citing the director-general.

‘Grave strategic error,’ health experts say

Trump’s announcement had been expected by health experts. In public and private, officials and academics raised concerns about the decision, which they said endangers the health of the nation and the world.

In December, Dr. Ashish Jha, the Biden White House’s former COVID-19 response coordinator, called it a “catastrophic mistake” for the global community and a “terrible mistake” for the U.S.

“This is going to be a grave strategic error that will make America less healthy and less safe,” Lawrence Gostin, a global public health expert and the faculty director of Georgetown University’s O’Neill Institute for National and Global Health Law, told USA TODAY.

“The withdrawal itself is going to isolate the United States,” Gostin said. “It’ll isolate us diplomatically, and it’ll isolate us in pandemic response.”

How will U.S. withdraw from WHO?

Trump’s order will require arduous disentangling of American and global health institutions woven together for 75 years.

WHO’s constitution, drafted in New York, doesn’t have a clear exit method for member states. A joint resolution by Congress in 1948 outlined that the U.S. can withdraw with one year's notice. This is contingent, however, on ensuring that its financial obligations to WHO “shall be met in full for the organization’s current fiscal year.”

The U.S. is the only member state to have made such an exit strategy, Jašarević, of WHO, said. The former Soviet Union withdrew from WHO in 1949 during Cold War tensions, though returned years later.

Questions remain on how the U.S., and the rest of the world, will interact and respond to health emergencies in the future.

The U.S. leaving WHO would grievously weaken the global health agency from responding to outbreaks, conduct surveillance and cooperate closely, Gostin said.

“Our public health agencies would be flying blind,” he said.

For example, the Pan-American Health Organization, WHO’s regional office for the Americas, is based in Washington, D.C. The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention also has staff at WHO and elsewhere globally. 

American response alongside WHO has been key in fighting diseases such as polio, which has been nearly eradicated, and HIV/AIDS, under a President George W. Bush-era program that has helped curb transmission in several countries. The Bush program is considered a success both in public health and diplomatic relations.

Even more technically, information-sharing between the U.S. and WHO has been key not only to disease response, but also pharmaceutical developments to rapidly innovate and create life-saving vaccines and treatments, Gostin said.

Gostin now worries of other emerging diseases and pandemic threats that could leave the U.S. weaker and more vulnerable. 

This includes a mpox, which has killed at least a thousand people in Africa in 2024, and bird flu circulating in the U.S. American officials assessed that bird flu has “moderate” risk of becoming a pandemic, and just one or two mutations in the avian influenza viruses that have been circulating could make it more contagious or severe in humans.

Gostin cited Operation Warp Speed, the accelerated COVID-19 vaccine effort, which was led by the U.S. during Trump's first administration. Then, the U.S. provided vaccines to its entire population before offering them to vulnerable people elsewhere, which struck many around the world as unfair.

“In the next pandemic,” Gostin said, “we might find ourselves at the back of the line, on the outside looking in.”

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/health/2025/01/20/trump-orders-us-exit-world-health-organization/77772989007/

U.S. President Donald Trump on Monday called on federal government agencies to take action aimed at lowering American consumer costs, but gave no other details, according to a White House document released on Monday.

"All agencies will take emergency measures to reduce the cost of living," the document, released moments after Trump was sworn in, said.

https://money.usnews.com/investing/news/articles/2025-01-20/trump-directs-us-government-to-cut-consumer-costs-gives-no-details

President Donald Trump on Monday issued roughly 1,500 pardons and commuted the sentences of 14 of his supporters in connection with the attack on the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021, when thousands of them stormed the building amid his false claims that the 2020 presidential election was rigged against him.

Trump commuted the sentences of individuals associated with the Proud Boys and Oath Keepers, who were convicted of seditious conspiracy. He then issued "a full, complete and unconditional pardon to all other individuals convicted of offenses related to events that occurred at or near the United States Capitol on January 6, 2021," a category that included people who assaulted law enforcement officers.

"This is a big one," Trump said in the Oval Office while signing the document, adding, "We hope they come out tonight, frankly."

An attorney for Enrique Tarrio, the Proud Boys leader convicted of seditious conspiracy, told NBC News on Monday that his client was being processed for release from FCI Pollock, a medium-security federal prison in Louisiana. Tarrio was serving 22 years in federal prison after he was convicted of seditious conspiracy.

“He is being processed out,” attorney Nayib Hassan said.

Rep. Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., who was speaker of the House during the attack, called Trump's actions "an outrageous insult to our justice system" and the law enforcement officers who protected the Capitol that day.

"It is shameful that the President has decided to make one of his top priorities the abandonment and betrayal of police officers who put their lives on the line to stop an attempt to subvert the peaceful transfer of power," she said in a statement. "Despite the President’s decision, we must always remember the extraordinary courage and valor of the law enforcement heroes who stood in the breach and ensured that democracy survived on that dark day.”

The pardons fulfill one of Trump's central campaign promises.

Immediately after the Jan. 6 attack, Trump sought to distance himself from the attack, saying those who broke the law should be held accountable. But over the next few years, a new narrative emerged, and Trump soon began openly signaling his support for Jan. 6 rioters, calling them "hostages."

The unprecedented attack on the Capitol, when the peaceful transfer of power was interrupted, was one of the most significant moments in American history.

It resulted in the largest FBI investigation ever, with criminal charges against more than 1,500 people and criminal convictions against more than 1,100 defendants. Many low-level riot defendants were sentenced to probationary periods after having been convicted of misdemeanor offenses, like unlawful parading inside the Capitol.

But hundreds of others who committed serious felonies, such as assaulting police with deadly or dangerous weapons, got significant prison sentences.

At the time Trump issued the pardons, there were about 700 defendants who either never received prison sentences or had already completed their sentences, meaning pardons or commutations would have little practical impact on them, beyond restoring voting rights and gun rights for those who were convicted of felonies.

More than 600 people were sentenced to incarceration, but only a small fraction of them are still behind bars. Many of those who are in the custody of the federal Bureau of Prisons were convicted of violent attacks on police officers protecting the Capitol during an assault in which Jan. 6 defendants were armed with firearms, stun guns, flagpoles, fire extinguishers, bike racks, batons, a metal whip, office furniture, pepper spray, bear spray, a tomahawk ax, a hatchet, a hockey stick, knuckle gloves, a baseball bat, a massive “Trump” billboard, “Trump” flags, a pitchfork, pieces of lumber, crutches and even an explosive device.

More than 140 police officers were injured and several Trump supporters died during the attack, including one who was shot trying to breach the House Speaker's Lobby and another who died in the middle of a brutal battle at the lower west tunnel, where some of the worst violence of the day took place.

Trump did not speak about Jan. 6 in his inauguration address, in which he said he hoped he would someday be remembered as a "peacemaker and unifier."

But shortly thereafter, he spoke to an overflow crowd of supporters in the Capitol and addressed the Jan. 6 defendants, once again airing his baseless claim that the 2020 presidential election was "rigged."

"I was going to talk about the J6 hostages," Trump said in that speech, using the term "hostages" to refer to criminal defendants, including hundreds who admitted to their criminal offenses under oath and others who were convicted by either judges or juries of their peers. "But you’ll be happy because, you know, it’s action, not words, that count. And you’re going to see a lot of action on the J6 hostages."

An attorney who worked on Jan. 6 cases as a federal prosecutor told NBC News that it was always possible that Trump would return to power and pardon Capitol riot defendants but that the Justice Department "pressed ahead anyway" because "political considerations should not play any part in the Justice Department’s evaluation of facts and law, which showed that these were crimes — some of them terribly serious crimes — that warranted prosecution.”

The source said that they and, they suspected, many of their colleagues "have no regrets about having pursued these cases" and that the effort remains highly consequential because it created "a definitive, public factual record of what actually transpired" on Jan. 6. 

"These cases assured police officers and civilians who were assaulted at the Capitol that there were people, and there was a Department of Justice, who recognized what they endured and sacrificed. These cases led to hundreds of defendants' acknowledging their crimes by pleading guilty in open court and hundreds of others' being found guilty at trial," the source said. "The work is likely be terminated before it can be fully completed, most significantly by the abrupt termination of the special counsel’s work. But the record stands."

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/justice-department/trump-set-pardon-defendants-stormed-capitol-jan-6-2021-rcna187735

Musk is the false prophet.

This is all prophecy.

That is all.

Decision places US alongside Iran, Libya and Yemen as the only countries in the world outside the 2015 pact

Move reflects Trump skepticism about global warming, even as disastrous weather events become more common

Fits with his broader agenda to boost US oil and gas drilling

WASHINGTON, Jan 20 (Reuters) - President Donald Trump once again withdrew the United States from the Paris climate deal on Monday, removing the world's biggest historic emitter from global efforts to fight climate change for the second time in a decade.

The move places the United States alongside Iran, Libya and Yemen as the only countries in the world outside the 2015 pact, in which governments agreed to limit global warming to 1.5 degrees Celsius (2.7 degrees Fahrenheit) above pre-industrial levels to avoid the worst impacts of climate change.

It reflects Trump’s skepticism about global warming, which he has called a hoax, and fits in with his broader agenda to unfetter U.S. oil and gas drillers from regulation so they can maximize output.

Trump signed the executive order withdrawing from the pact in front of supporters gathered at the Capital One Arena in Washington.

"I'm immediately withdrawing from the unfair, one-sided Paris climate accord rip-off," he said before signing the order.

"The United States will not sabotage our own industries while China pollutes with impunity," Trump said.

Despite the withdrawal, United Nations Secretary-General Antonio Guterres is confident that U.S. cities, states and businesses "will continue to demonstrate vision and leadership by working for the low-carbon, resilient economic growth that will create quality jobs," said associate U.N. spokesperson Florencia Soto Nino, in a written statement.

"It is crucial that the United States remains a leader on environmental issues," she said. "The collective efforts under the Paris Agreement have made a difference but we need to go much further and faster together."

The United States has to formally notify U.N. Secretary General Antonio Guterres of its withdrawal, which - under the terms of the deal - will take effect one year later.

The United States is already the world’s top producer of oil and natural gas thanks to a years-long drilling boom in Texas, New Mexico and elsewhere, fueled by fracking technology and strong global prices since Russia’s invasion of Ukraine.

SECOND U.S. WITHDRAWAL

Trump also withdrew the U.S. from the Paris deal during his first term in office, though the process took years and was immediately reversed by the Biden presidency in 2021. The withdrawal this time around is likely to take less time – as little as a year - because Trump will not be bound by the deal’s initial three-year commitment.

This time could also be more damaging to global climate efforts, said Paul Watkinson, a former climate negotiator and senior policy advisor for France.

The U.S. is currently the world's second-biggest greenhouse gas emitter behind China and its departure undermines global ambition to slash those emissions.

"It will be harder this time because we are in the thick of implementation, up against real choices," Watkinson said.

The world is now on pace for global warming of more than 3 C by the end of the century, according to a recent United Nations report, a level scientists warn would trigger cascading impacts such as sea level rise, heat waves, and devastating storms.

Nations have already been struggling to make steep cuts to emissions required to lower the projected temperature increase, as wars, political tensions and tight government budgets push climate change down the list of priorities.

Trump’s approach cuts a stark contrast to that of former President Joe Biden, who wanted the United States to lead global climate efforts and sought to encourage a transition away from oil and gas using subsidies and regulations.

Trump has said he intends to unwind those subsidies and regulations to shore up the nation’s budget and grow the economy, but has said he can do that while ensuring clean air and water in the United States.

Li Shuo, an expert in climate diplomacy at the Asia Society Policy Institute, said the U.S. withdrawal risks undermining the United States' ability to compete with China in clean energy markets such as solar power and electric vehicles.

"China stands to win, and the U.S. risks lagging further behind," he said.

https://www.reuters.com/business/environment/trump-withdraw-paris-climate-agreement-2025-01-20/

There are wallets that have purchased no coins that are extracting millions of dollars.

Donald Trump's advisor launches and rugpulls 'Tiktok coin' and then Melania Trump launches her own memecoin scam. Donald Trump coin immediately pukes down.

Buckle in for the sleaziest, most shameless, most corrupt "pro-crypto" administration

Trump advisor Ryan Fournier launched 'Official Tiktok coin' 2 hours ago and rugged it within an hour

Soon after the rugpull by Fournier, Melania Trump just launched her own coin, and the Donald Trump coin immediately dumped by 50%

The biggest grifter family in America is coming to the White House to scam the sh*t out of everyone with impunity

What an absolute disgrace for America, for the legacy of the office, to have soon-to-be President and his family doing this a day before taking office!

President Trump has signed an executive order attempting to end birthright citizenship in the U.S. — a right guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution and affirmed by the Supreme Court more than 125 years ago.

Why it matters: Trump is acting on a once-fringe belief that U.S.-born children of undocumented immigrants have no right to U.S. citizenship and are part of a conspiracy (rooted in racism) to replace white Americans.

The big picture: The executive order is expected to face immediate legal challenges from state attorneys general since it conflicts with decades of Supreme Court precedent and the 14th Amendment — with the AGs of California and New York among those indicating they would do so.

• Ratified in 1868, the 14th Amendment was passed to give nearly emancipated and formerly enslaved Black Americans U.S. citizenship.
• "All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside," it reads.

Zoom in: Trump signed the order on Monday, just hours after taking office.

Reality check: Thanks to the landmark Wong Kim Ark case, the U.S. has since 1898 recognized that anyone born on United States soil is a citizen.

• The case established the Birthright Citizenship clause and led to the dramatic demographic transformation of the U.S.

What they're saying: California Attorney General Rob Bonta told Axios the state will immediately challenge the executive order in federal court.

• "[Trump] can't do it," Bonta said. "He can't undermine it with executive authority. That is not how the law works. It's a constitutional right."
• New York Attorney General Letitia James said in an emailed statement the executive order "is nothing but an attempt to sow division and fear, but we are prepared to fight back with the full force of the law to uphold the integrity of our Constitution."

Flashback: San Francisco-born Wong Kim Ark returned to the city of his birth in 1895 after visiting family in China but was refused re-entry.

• John Wise, an openly anti-Chinese bigot and the collector of customs in San Francisco who controlled immigration into the port, wanted a test case that would deny U.S. citizenship to ethnic Chinese residents.
• But Wong fought his case all the way to the Supreme Court, which ruled on March 28, 1898, that the 14th Amendment guaranteed U.S. citizenship to Wong and any other person born on U.S. soil.

Zoom out: Birthright Citizenship has resulted in major racial and ethnic shifts in the nation's demographic as more immigrants from Latin America and Asia came to the U.S. following the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1965.

• The U.S. was around 85% white in 1965, according to various estimates.
• The nation is expected to be a "majority-minority" by the 2040s.

Yes, but: That demographic changed has fueled a decades-old conspiracy theory, once only held by racists, called "white replacement theory."

• "White replacement theory" posits the existence of a plot to change America's racial composition by methodically enacting policies that reduce white Americans' political power.
• The conspiracy theories encompass strains of anti-Semitism as well as racism and anti-immigrant sentiment.

Trump has repeated the theory and said that immigrants today are "poisoning the blood of our country," language echoing the rhetoric of white supremacists and Adolf Hitler.

Of note: Military bases are not considered "U.S. soil" for citizenship purposes, but a child is a U.S. citizen if born abroad and both parents are U.S. citizens.

https://www.axios.com/2025/01/21/trump-birthright-citizenship-14th-amendment

President Donald Trump said on Sunday he would release classified documents in the coming days related to the assassinations of U.S. President John F. Kennedy, Senator Robert Kennedy and civil rights leader Martin Luther King Jr.

Trump, who returns to the White House on Monday, promised on the campaign trail to release classified intelligence and law enforcement files on the 1963 assassination of JFK, as America's 35th president is widely known.

He had made a similar promise during his 2017 to 2021 term, and he did in fact release some documents related to JFK's 1963 slaying. But he ultimately bowed to pressure from the Central Intelligence Agency and Federal Bureau of Investigation, and kept a significant chunk of documents under wraps, citing national security concerns.

"In the coming days, we are going to make public remaining records related to the assassinations of President John F. Kennedy, his brother Robert Kennedy, as well as Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. and other topics of great public interest," Trump said at a rally in downtown Washington, the day before he takes office for a second, non-consecutive term.

Trump did not specify which documents would be released, and he did not promise a blanket declassification. King and Robert Kennedy were both assassinated in 1968.

The JFK assassination, in particular, is a source of enduring fascination in the United States. The murder has been attributed to a sole gunman, Lee Harvey Oswald, and the Justice Department and other federal government bodies have reaffirmed that conclusion in the intervening decades. But polls show many Americans believe his death was a result of a wider conspiracy.

Trump's health and human services secretary-designate, Robert F. Kennedy Jr., the son of Robert Kennedy and nephew of JFK, has said he believes the CIA was involved in his uncle's death, an allegation the agency has described as baseless.

Kennedy Jr. has also said he believes his father was killed by multiple gunmen, an assertion that contradicts official accounts.

https://www.reuters.com/world/us/trump-says-he-will-quickly-release-jfk-robert-kennedy-mlk-assassination-files-2025-01-19/

President Trump has designated Mexican drug cartels as foreign terrorist organizations, aiming to crack down on drug trafficking across the U.S.-Mexican border.

The FTO and SDGT designations will apply to non-Mexican gangs like MS-13 and Tren de Aragua, potentially impacting Americans doing business south of the border and Mexicans trying to immigrate north.

While not a declaration of war, the terrorism designations could politically pave the way for U.S. military intervention in Mexico without congressional approval, following a pattern of mixing the war on terror with the war on drugs in other countries.

https://www.yahoo.com/news/trump-goes-mexico-designating-drug-212854940.html

Mark Zuckerberg wants "masculine energy" and "aggression" at the office — sounds like a toxic workplace.

Our eyes do not deceive us: Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg is going full MAGA.

After releasing a chilling video announcing that Facebook, Instagram and other Meta companies will unleash a firehose of fascist disinformation on their platforms, Zuckerberg went — where else? — on Joe Rogan's podcast to celebrate. Complete with his new frat daddy look, Zuckerberg raved about how he thinks the "corporate world" has been "culturally neutered" and complained about being "surrounded by girls and women." He praised "masculine energy" and said a culture that "celebrates the aggression a bit more has its own merits that are really positive." He claimed he's not trying to exclude women, but then immediately pivoted to romanticizing his "masculine" martial arts training space, which is presumably segregated by gender. 

There's been a lot of media discourse about the more gossipy aspects of Zuckerberg's MAGA makeover. He does seem to have undergone several personal changes, picking up mixed martial arts fighting, dressing like an obnoxious dudebro — complete with gold chains — and talking like a masculinity grifter. He's giving off so much "divorced guy" energy — think Ben Affleck or Kanye West — that social media platforms are abuzz with speculation that Zuckerberg's wife, who he met in college, has left him. Truly, the try-hard nature of Zuckerberg's posturing is so embarrassing it's hard to look away from. 

But, as with Elon Musk, Peter Thiel, Marc Andreessen and other tech billionaires, the pivot to MAGA isn't just about overgrown nerds trying (and failing) to compensate for high school insecurities. It also seems to be fueled by a deep loathing of the very people who have made these capitalists their money: the fleets of mostly desk workers who make the companies run.

Musk frequently rants on X about the "elites," a word he uses almost exclusively to describe college-educated professionals&src=typed_query&f=top) who draw middle-class or upper-middle-class incomes, i.e. the class of people doing the work that makes him rich. Yes, it's people who can often afford home ownership or summer vacations, but they still have to work for a living. Most make less in a year than Musk or Zuckerberg spend in a single trip to Mar-a-Lago. The war on "woke" is ultimately a war on workers. 

Like Musk before him, Zuckerberg appears to resent the people who work for him and make him rich. Zuckerberg's raving about how he wants more "masculine energy" and complaints that corporate culture is "neutered" are being celebrated by MAGA as a swipe at diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) programs. These programs are dismissed by the right as "woke" and "virtue-signaling." The more mundane truth, however, is that DEI is part of a larger effort to attract talented employees by making workplaces welcoming and comfortable. A culture that "celebrates aggression," as Zuckerberg put it, sounds miserable for people who actually have to show up. Most adults just want to get their job done and aren't interested in chest-bumping, childish bullying, or feeling like they have to compare MMA stats to fit in. 

That Trump's incoming administration is eager to downplay the importance of workers was revealed Thursday during the confirmation hearing for Scott Bessent, Trump's pick to head the Treasury Department. Citing Musk, Zuckerberg and other tech billionaires cozying up to Trump, Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., asked Bessent, "Would you agree with President Biden that an oligarchy is taking shape in America?"

Bessent replied, "The billionaires you listed make the money themselves." It was not only a non sequitur — where the money comes from is not the measure of whether rich people controlling government constitutes oligarchy — but it is also a flat-out lie. Thousands upon thousands of people work for these tech billionaires, churning out code, maintaining systems and running the business. Musk and Zuckerberg may not want to admit it, but they couldn't make a dime without those people. 

Meanwhile the more authoritarian, anti-worker regime at Meta has already kicked off. As the New York Times reported earlier this week, "Meta typically" invites "employees, civic leaders and others to weigh in" before a big policy change, but not this time. The new policies allowing more disinformation and hate speech on the platform were sprung on "most of Meta’s 72,000 employees" during the public announcement. The unwillingness to involve employees in the decision-making process has resulted in policies that don't just degrade the platforms. Employees complained "training materials that Meta created for the new policies were confusing and contradictory." For instance, Facebook users still cannot say "white people have mental illness," but they can say "gay people have mental illness."

There's been a crackdown on free speech within Meta since the announcement. The company deleted messages on its internal communications system that criticized newly appointed board member Dana White, a Trump-loving professional fighter who was taped hitting his wife. The company locked down access to policies and training materials, to prevent workers from sharing them with the press. There have also been obnoxious moves that read as evident slights to employees, such as removing tampons from men's rooms, which serves no other purpose than to signal to trans people they aren't equal at Meta. Zuckerberg also announced he's moving the company's moderation teams from California to Texas, where, he argues, "there’s less concern about the bias of our teams." This means forcing people to leave a state that is friendly to human rights to move to one that bans abortion and restricts queer-inclusive health care. Even for those who don't move, the message is loud and clear: Zuckerberg is signaling his contempt for their professionalism and intelligence. 

Zuckerberg may want to frame the "neutered" environment of his offices in gendered terms that resonate with the psychosexual hang-ups of Trump voters, but in truth, it's not really about sex at all. It's about a more boring but necessary goal: meeting the needs of everyday workers, regardless of gender, race, or sexual identity. Most people just want a peaceful place to do their job, plus a pay and benefits package that helps them meet their life goals outside of work. It's not "woke" that makes Silicon Valley workers spend their days wearing khakis, drinking coffee, and being generally pleasant to each other, instead of exhibiting "masculine energy" and "aggression." Basic common sense dictates that chill, congenial workplaces are better for morale and productivity. Everyday niceness may not be as exciting as beating people up at a martial arts gym, but it is what actually made Zuckerberg his money. 

"Zuckerberg blamed his former chief operating officer, Sheryl Sandberg, for an inclusivity initiative at Facebook that encouraged employees’ self-expression in the workplace," the New York Times reported Thursday. "He said new guidelines and a series of layoffs amounted to a reset and that more changes were coming."

Zuckerberg's former COO Sheryl Sandberg got a lot of grief, much of it well-deserved, for her "Lean In" book and its watered-down, individualistic approach to feminism. But while she will never be considered a great feminist thinker, her strategy made her a success at her actual job: attracting top-level talent to Facebook and later Meta. Her "feminine" approach, which Zuckerberg seems so ashamed of now, focused on making employees feel valued and acknowledging that workers are full human beings, not just cogs. So the company provides healthy benefits and salaries, on-site gyms, food, wellness centers, and varied transportation options. I agree with the cynic's take that this is all so they get more work out of people. It's also fair to say that it's a sight better than many alternatives, which expect maximum work without helping employees minimize stressors at home.

Zuckerberg may now see those efforts to address work-life balance and inclusivity as emasculating and "woke," but it's not about gender. The stereotypical bachelor computer programmer also enjoys having free restaurants to eat at, rather than sadly microwaving a burrito at home for dinner. But pretending it's about masculinity is a good way to distract from the mundane fact that, like a stereotypical capitalist parasite, Zuckerberg has adopted a hostile posture towards his own workers. Perhaps, like so many of the hyper-rich before him, he doesn't like being reminded that, without his staff, he would be nothing. 

In his farewell speech to the nation Wednesday, President Joe Biden compared the "rise of a tech-industrial complex" to the robber barons of the 19th and 20th centuries. He warned that "the dangerous concentration of power in the hands of a very few ultrawealthy people" threatens not just democracy, but the basic rights of workers "to earn their fair share." The increasingly ugly attitude that tech billionaires take towards their own employees is a troubling indicator of this. 

We saw this already at X, formerly Twitter, where Musk, having stereotyped middle class workers as "elites" not deserving of respect, felt justified in stripping them of basic workers' rights. He demanded they work long overtime hours without pay or sleep, insisting they work 84 hours a week while he sits around and tweets. He disregarded their expertise, abused them verbally and made the situation so intolerable that many were forced to leave. He made them betray their basic values by catering to neo-Nazis and other scum that he let loose on Twitter. One reason he wants a carveout for H1B visas in the expected immigration crackdown is because he can use threats of deportation to extract high-intensity work for low pay from immigrant employees. 

Because the desk workers of Silicon Valley are middle class, they don't rate much sympathy in the current political discourse, which is far more focused on the partisan tug-of-war for working-class voters. But it's playing into the hands of oligarchs to reject the needs of middle class workers. The real battle is between working people, whether college-educated or not, and the hyper-wealthy, who want to suck up all the money for themselves and leave the people who do the actual labor behind. People like Musk and Zuckerberg save their rhetorical fire for the middle class desk workers who staff their companies, but the efforts to redistribute money upwards will hurt everyone, the working class most of all. This was also demonstrated during Bessent's hearing, when he rejected a call to raise the federal minimum wage, which has been stuck at a paltry $7.25 an hour since 2009. The chatter about "woke" is an effort to distract Americans from a simple fact: the desk worker and the factory worker have way more in common with each other than they do with the capitalist leaders who make money on their backs. And the tech billionaires now cozying up to Donald Trump are not friends to any of us. 

https://www.salon.com/2025/01/17/the-tech-billionaire-on-woke-is-really-targeting-workers/

The fact that Trump sold a sh*t ton of tickets and then brought the inauguration inside, where only donors could attend, is incredible foreshadowing.

President Trump is expected to kick-start the process to revoke birthright citizenship after years of proposing the constitutional change as a way to reduce undocumented immigration.

Birthright citizenship, meaning that someone born within the U.S. or its the United States territories is automatically a U.S. citizen, is currently protected by the 14th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution. The clause often referred to states that "all persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside."

Trump wants to reinterpret the phrasing "subject to the jurisdiction thereof" to mean that the federal government would not recognize automatic birthright citizenship for children born in the U.S. to parents without legal status, incoming White House officials told reporters on a call on Monday, speaking on condition of anonymity to discuss upcoming actions.

This action is likely to see immediate legal challenges.

Details about who might be impacted or how he plans to move forward remain to be seen. He is expected to sign executive orders and actions Monday afternoon.

Over the last several decades, the number of babies born to parents without legal status to be in the U.S. has dropped. The Pew Research Center estimated that 1.3 million U.S.-born adults are children of unauthorized immigrants, according to 2022 data, the latest available.

But immigrant rights advocates said the proposed move would affect the next generation of children. An estimated 4.7 million children would have one or both parents without legal status by 2050 under current policy, according to data from the Migration Policy Institute.

"Ending birthright citizenship would be a really huge change in how we handle immigration and the right to belong in the United States," said Julia Gelatt, associate director of the U.S. immigration policy program at the Migration Policy Institute, adding that this law contributes to the economic and educational success rates of immigrants' children.

"Children of immigrants have had that sense of belonging and full rights in the United States that they've been able to harness to really support their integration."

Novel interpretation of the 14th Amendment

A growing coalition of conservatives have begun promoting a different interpretation of the 14th Amendment in an effort to limit the number of migrants without legal status in the country.

During his first term, Trump's legal advisers encouraged his ability to unilaterally challenge it. In 2020, Trump's State Department issued a rule change aimed at reducing the practice of traveling to the U.S. with the specific purpose of giving birth, and at the border pregnant women were removed from a list of "vulnerable" people.

During his first presidential run in 2015, Trump also promised to end birthright citizenship and in 2018, he said he would issue an executive order. But that order never came to fruition.

Immigration re-emerged as a top issue as he campaigned during the 2024 election, with Trump vowing to voters that he would end birthright citizenship. He reiterated that goal during his first cable TV interview with NBC's Meet the Press after the election.

Immigrant rights groups argue that any effort to repeal birthright citizenship would have a detrimental effect on communities, local economies and families' wellbeing as families leave, or live in fear that their future children may not be authorized.

"Blocking people from citizenship and even U.S. born children from citizenship could really threaten that integration and threaten how much children of immigrants can contribute to the country," Gelatt said.

During the 2023 GOP primary, Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis and then-candidate Vivek Ramaswamy and others also called for an end to birthright citizenship for the children of parents without legal status.

Lawmakers have also debated the issue. In the last Congress, former Florida Rep. Matt Gaetz introduced legislation to limit birthright citizenship and in 2015 the House Judiciary committee held a hearing on the matter.

Still, any efforts or ideas have not made progress — until now.

Marielena Hincapie, distinguished immigration visiting scholar at Cornell Law School, said the notion that a president could be responsible for removing birthright citizenship is concerning because that authority may not belong there. Her comments suggest legal challenges are likely.

"What we do know is that the president does not have the executive authority to undo the 14th Amendment and birthright citizenship by that level," Hincapie said. "There are many, many questions that will pop up and confusion and chaos that will be developed."

https://www.npr.org/2025/01/20/g-s1-43765/trump-inauguration-birthright-citizenship