White House denies reporting by Guardian on VA benefits: ‘totally FALSE story'
The Trump administration on Monday denied reporting by The Guardian that said new Veterans Affairs (VA) hospitals could refuse care to veterans based on factors like marital status and political affiliation due to an executive order by President Trump.
The Guardian earlier Monday published a report saying VA hospitals are implementing new rules in response to Trump's executive order in January, which would permit workers to deny care to veterans based on characteristics not protected by federal law.
On the first day of his second term, Trump signed an executive order titled 'Defending Women from Gender Ideology Extremism and Restoring Biological Truth to the Federal Government,' which ordered the federal government to recognize only two biological sexes.
According to the documents it obtained, The Guardian reported that 'doctors and other medical staff can also be barred from working at VA hospitals based on their marital status, political party affiliation or union activity.'
VA press secretary Peter Kasperowicz, a former politics editor at Fox News Digital, reportedly did not deny that veteran patients could be denied care and physicians could be dismissed based on their marital status or political affiliation when reached by The Guardian.
But White House deputy press secretary Anna Kelly adamantly denied The Guardian's reporting. Writing on the social media platform X, Kelly addressed the article's writer, Aaron Glantz, saying, 'Aaron, this is a totally FALSE story that The Guardian should retract immediately. Fearmongering with our Veterans to try to score clicks for your failing 'news outlet' is pathetic and shameful.'
The VA also responded on X, writing, 'This story is disinformation. All eligible Veterans will always be welcome at VA and will always receive the benefits and services they've earned under the law.'
The Hill has reached out to The Guardian for comment.
According to those who work with veterans benefits, some hospitals have begun updating their bylaws, but the extent of what effect these changes are having is unclear.
According to Kyleanne Hunter, CEO of Iraq and Afghanistan Veterans of America, the VA has historically been 'very expansive' in its anti-discrimination policies, which have gone beyond federally protected classes. In response to Trump's executive order earlier this year, some bylaws have 'shrunk' so that anti-discrimination policies only encompass federally protected classes like race, religion and sex. She notes, however, that there don't appear to be any rules that mandate discrimination based on unprotected classes.
'There are over 140 different VA medical centers as hospitals that each have their own set of bylaws that exist. So we don't know how many different hospitals this has actually been changed at,' Hunter told The Hill.
'We're trying right now to really gather the information we can, to see how widespread the changes of bylaws might actually be, as well as to engage and understand how it is actually impacting our veterans,' added Hunter.
She lamented that VA employees are getting in the crosshairs of this dispute while they seek to provide care to veterans.
'The VA employees that we have talked to and connected with are personally very, very committed to continue to serve all veterans and are concerned that the way in which this is being discussed will continue to destroy morale among VA employees,' Hunter said.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
21 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Barabak: Newsom stood tall against Trump. Does that make him presidential timber?
Today we discuss presidential politics, window treatments and disasters of the natural and man-made variety. Time for Gavin Newsom to start measuring those White House drapes. Huh? You know, president of the United States. I'm thinking something Earth-friendly, like recycled hemp. Wait, what? Did you catch the nationally televised speech the governor recently gave? The one about "democracy at a crossroads." I did. It was a fine speech and the governor made some important points about President Trump's reckless commandeering of California's National Guard, his administration's indiscriminate immigration raids and the wholly unnecessary dispatch of Marines to Los Angeles. (From the halls of Montezuma, to the shores of Venice Beach.) Newsom was plenty justified in his anger and contempt. Trump, acting true to his flame-fanning fashion, turned what was a middling set of protests — nothing local law enforcement couldn't handle — into yet another assault on our sorely tested Constitution. Newsom's speech certainly "met the moment," to use one of his favorite phrases. I'll grant you that. Unlike a lot of extracurricular activities aimed at boosting his presidential prospects, Newsom was addressing a Trump-manufactured crisis unfolding right here at home. It was a moment that called for gubernatorial leadership. Just the kind of leadership despondent Democrats need. So it's been said. It's not much of a leap to see Newsom leading the anti-Trump opposition clear to the White House! Actually, that's a bigger leap than it takes to clear the Grand Canyon. Read more: Barabak: Putting the bully in bully pulpit, Trump escalates in L.A. rather than seeking calm Granted, Newsom's speech received a lot of raves from Democrats across the country. Many are desperate for someone in a position of power to give voice to their blood-boiling, cranium-exploding rage against Trump and his many excesses. Newsom did a good job channeling those emotions and articulating the dangers of an imprudent president run amok. But let's not go overboard. There is no lack of Democrats eager to take on Trump and become the face of the so-called resistance. There is no shortage of Democrats eyeing a 2028 bid for the White House. Those who run won't be schlepping all the political baggage that Newsom has to tote. Such as? Rampant homelessness. An exploding budget deficit. Vast income inequality. Plus, a lot of social policies that many Californians consider beneficent and broad-minded that, to put it mildly, others around the country consider much less so. Don't get me wrong. I love California with all my heart and soul. But we have a lot of deep-seated problems and cultural idiosyncrasies that Newsom's rivals — Democrat and Republican — would be only too happy to hang around his neck. So let's not get too caught up in the moment. The fundamentals of the 2028 presidential race haven't changed based on a single — albeit well-received — speech. It's still hard to see Democrats turning the party's fate over to yet another nominee spawned in the liberal stew of San Francisco politics and campaigning with kooky California as a home address. Stranger things have happened. True. That said, 2028 is a zillion political light years and countless news cycles away. First come the midterm elections in November 2026, giving voters their chance to weigh in on Trump and his actions. The verdict will go a long way toward shaping the dynamic in 2028. Well at least Newsom has brought his A-game to social media. His trolling of Trump is something to behold! Whatever. Read more: Lopez: My theory for why Trump's agents targeted Dodger Stadium and a bus stop outside Winchell's You're not impressed? I think it's best to leave the snark to professionals. I do, however, have some sympathy for the governor. It's not easy dealing with someone as spiteful and amoral as the nation's ax-grinder-in-chief. Consider, for instance, the disaster relief money that fire-devastated Southern California is counting on. Helping the region in its time of desperate need shouldn't be remotely political, or part of some red-vs.-blue-state feud. Historically, that sort of federal aid has never been. But this is Trump we're dealing with. To his credit, Newsom tried making nice in the days and weeks following the January firestorm. He ignored the president's provocations and held what was later described an an amicable session with Trump in the Oval Office. Their working relationship seemed to be a good one. Read more: Barabak: If Gavin Newsom wants to be president, he's got work to do — starting at home But few things last with the transactional Trump, save for his pettiness and self-absorption. Asked last week if his "recent dust-ups" with Newsom would impact the granting of wildfire relief, Trump said, "Yeah, maybe." He called Newsom incompetent, trotted out more gobbledygook about raking forests and then soliloquized on the nature of personal relationships. "When you don't like somebody, don't respect somebody, it's harder for that person to get money if you're on top," Trump said. Yeesh. Responding in a posting on X, Newsom correctly noted, "Sucking up to the President should not be a requirement for him to do the right thing for the American people." Hard to argue with that. Yet here we are. The nation's second-most populous city is occupied by National Guard and Marine troops. Thousands of people — displaced by disaster, their past lives gone up in smoke — are hostage to the whims of a peevish president who always puts his feelings first and cares nothing for the greater good. The midterm election can't come soon enough. Get the latest from Mark Z. BarabakFocusing on politics out West, from the Golden Gate to the U.S. me up. This story originally appeared in Los Angeles Times.
Newsweek
21 minutes ago
- Newsweek
Satellite Images Show 'Unusual' Activity at Iran Nuclear Site Before Strikes
Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources. Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content. Satellite imagery captured ahead of U.S. strikes on three major Iranian nuclear sites showed "unusual" movement around the entrance to Iran's Fordow enrichment facility. Pictures captured on Thursday and Friday showed "unusual truck and vehicular activity" close to the entrance of the underground Fordow complex south of Tehran, satellite imagery giant Maxar said late on Saturday U.S. time. A total of 16 cargo trucks were spotted on the access road leading up to the Fordow tunnel entrance on Thursday, but most of the trucks had relocated to one kilometer (0.6 miles) northwest of the access road by the following day, Maxar said. New trucks and multiple bulldozers had appeared close to the main entrance by Friday, with one truck very close to the main tunnel entrance, the satellite imagery provider said. U.S. President Donald Trump said on Saturday evening the U.S. had bombed the Fordow, Natanz and Isfahan sites in central Iran in "massive precision strikes" to take out Tehran's nuclear enrichment facilities and Iran's ability to make a nuclear weapon. Satellite imagery captured by Maxar on June 19 showing cargo trucks close to the underground entrance of the Fordow fuel enrichment facility, prior to U.S. air strikes on the underground complex. Satellite imagery captured by Maxar on June 19 showing cargo trucks close to the underground entrance of the Fordow fuel enrichment facility, prior to U.S. air strikes on the underground complex. Satellite image ©2025 Maxar Technologies The strikes were a "spectacular military success," Trump said. "Iran's key nuclear enrichment facilities have been completely and totally obliterated." Israel launched strikes on Iran's nuclear facilities and scientists, as well as the country's ballistic missile sites and other military assets, late on June 12 U.S. time. Iran responded with drone and ballistic missile barrages. Israel targeted Natanz and Isfahan, but experts said only the U.S.'s B-2 heavy stealth bombers and 30,000lb "bunker buster" bombs could successfully take out Fordow, a complex built deep into a mountain roughly 60 miles from Tehran. Fordow's existence was secret until 2009. This is a developing story and will be updated.
Yahoo
21 minutes ago
- Yahoo
U.S. bombs Iran nuclear sites, Trump issues warning
U.S. bombs Iran nuclear sites, Trump issues warning originally appeared on TheStreet. The U.S. has carried out a major strike on Iran on Saturday, bombing three of its key nuclear facilities — Fordo, Natanz, and Isfahan. President Donald Trump confirmed the move on Truth Social, calling it a 'successful attack' and warning Iran not to retaliate. In an address to the nation, Trump said, 'Iran's key nuclear enrichment facilities were completely and totally obliterated,' he said. 'Any future attacks would be far greater and a lot easier.' The strikes come on the ninth day of escalating conflict between Israel and Iran, with the U.S. now directly involved. Iran's Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi reacted swiftly, calling the attacks a 'grave violation' of international law and said Iran 'reserves all options' to defend itself. 'The events this morning are outrageous and will have everlasting consequences,' he posted on X, adding that Iran would act under the UN Charter's self-defense provisions. U.S. officials are on high alert for possible retaliation over the next 48 hours, especially against U.S. bases in the Middle East. In Latin America, however, the reaction has been less supportive. Leaders from Mexico and Cuba condemned the strike and urged diplomatic solutions. At the White House, top officials including VP JD Vance, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, and National Intelligence Director Tulsi Gabbard were present in the Situation Room during the attack. The U.S. Navy also launched 30 Tomahawk missiles as part of the strike. And Trump's message to Iran was loud and clear: 'ANY RETALIATION... WILL BE MET WITH EVEN GREATER FORCE.' As war jitters spread globally, crypto markets responded. Bitcoin slipped below $103,000, and Ethereum dropped 5.7% to $2,287. The total crypto market cap fell 3.7% to $3.26 trillion in the past 24 hours. Traders seem to be taking profits and hedging risk amid geopolitical uncertainty. U.S. bombs Iran nuclear sites, Trump issues warning first appeared on TheStreet on Jun 22, 2025 This story was originally reported by TheStreet on Jun 22, 2025, where it first appeared. Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data
