
Amid Trump standoff, Smithsonian says only secretary can hire and fire
The Smithsonian's Board of Regents said on Monday night that 'all personnel decisions' are directed by Secretary Lonnie G. Bunch III, 10 days after President Donald Trump claimed that he had fired the director of the institution's National Portrait Gallery. The board, which issued its statement after an all-day meeting Monday, also said that it supported Bunch's 'authority and management' of the Smithsonian.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Newsweek
an hour ago
- Newsweek
Donald Trump Touts 'Obliteration' of Iran Sites Seen in Satellite Images
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. President Donald Trump said "monumental damage" was done to Iran's nuclear sites citing satellite imagery after Tehran disputed whether the strikes on the facilities had dealt a knockout blow to the Islamic Republic's atomic program. Trump posted on Truth Social on Sunday that "obliteration is an accurate term" for the strikes on three key Iranian facilities amid attempts by analysts to clarify whether the strikes had completely destroyed Iran's hopes for developing a nuclear bomb. Former Israeli intelligence official Avi Melamed told Newsweek that at this stage, Iran's military nuclear program has been significantly set back by the attacks but not entirely dismantled. President Donald Trump disembarks Marine One upon arrival at the White House South Lawn in Washington, DC, on June 21, 2025. President Donald Trump disembarks Marine One upon arrival at the White House South Lawn in Washington, DC, on June 21, 2025. MEHMET ESER//Getty Images Why It Matters Trump said the U.S. struck Fordow, around 60 miles south of Tehran, as well as the Natanz complex to the southeast and Isfahan, southwest of Natanz. The U.S. president is often accused of hyperbole and social media posts saying Iran's key nuclear enrichment facilities had been destroyed have been greeted with caution by analysts as questions remain over whether the operation dubbed Midnight Hammer spells the end of the Iranian nuclear threat. What To Know On Sunday, Trump posted that "monumental damage" had been done to all nuclear sites in Iran, citing satellite imagery. He described how the white structure in one image was embedded into the rock and the biggest damage took place far below ground level," adding "Bullseye!!!" U.S. Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Gen. Dan Caine said there was "severe damage and destruction" to the facilities at Fordow, Natanz and Isfahan, but did not say Iran's nuclear capacities had been obliterated. Trump did not share the imagery in his post but he could have been referring to pictures published by the firm Maxar on Sunday showing large craters or holes at the top of the ridge above the underground complex at Fordow. When asked if Iran still retains any nuclear capability, Caine said that "BDA is still pending" referring to Battle Damage Assessment by intelligence analysts and reconnaissance teams, using data from drones, satellites, radar, or ground reports. Melamed, a Middle East analyst told Newsweek Iran's military nuclear program has been significantly set back—though not entirely dismantled. Craters are visible and ash can be seen on the ridge at Fordow on Sunday, after U.S. strikes on the underground facility. Craters are visible and ash can be seen on the ridge at Fordow on Sunday, after U.S. strikes on the underground facility. Satellite image ©2025 Maxar Technologies Tehran can either escalate, which threatens the regime's survival, or negotiate, which would preserve its power base "while swallowing a bitter pill," he said. At this point, all eyes should be on Beijing who will likely pressure Iran to deescalate. Pranay Vaddi, who served as special assistant to President Joe Biden as well as senior director for arms control, disarmament, and nonproliferation at the National Security Council, told the publication Defense One that if the deeper reaches of Fordow had survived, Iran could still enrich uranium beyond the reach of the monitors of the IAEA (International Atomic Energy Agency). That may require further "high risk" U.S. action if the locations are beyond the reach of bunker-busting bombs. Also, Iran retains substantial know-how on enrichment and possibly nuclear weaponization, added Vaddi, senior nuclear fellow in the Center for Nuclear Security Policy at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. The UN nuclear watchdog chief, Rafael Grossi, has said it was not yet possible to assess the damage done at the Fordow nuclear facility. Iranian state media said key nuclear sites had been evacuated ahead of U.S. attacks, with enriched uranium moved "to a safe location." What People Are Saying President Donald Trump on Truth Social: "Monumental Damage was done to all Nuclear sites in Iran, as shown by satellite images. Obliteration is an accurate term!" Former Israeli intelligence official Avi Melamed: "At this stage, it can be assessed that Iran's military nuclear program has been significantly set back—though not entirely dismantled." Pranay Vaddi, former senior director for arms control, disarmament, and nonproliferation at the National Security Council, to Defense One: "If the deeper reaches of Fordow survive, Iran is able to enrich, and there's no monitoring anymore because Iran suspends any IAEA access, that's a bad outcome and may require further U.S. action." What Happens Next Tehran has threatened retaliation for the strikes. Experts say these could include additional rocket launches at Israel, the disruption of shipping in the Strait of Hormuz or strikes against U.S. military sites.
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
Social Security Benefits Are an Estimated 8 Years Away From Being Slashed -- and the Cuts Are Even Bigger Than Initially Forecast
Most retirees rely on their Social Security income, to some varied degree, to make ends meet. The 2025 Social Security Board of Trustees Report is calling for an even steeper reduction to retired-worker and survivor benefits come 2033 than was forecast last year. Ongoing demographic shifts are (mostly) responsible for Social Security's financial woes. However, the longer Congress waits to implement reforms, the costlier it'll be on working Americans. The $23,760 Social Security bonus most retirees completely overlook › Social Security represents more than just a monthly check for most retirees. To many, it's a financial lifeline that surveys and studies have shown they'd struggle to make do without. For 23 consecutive years, national pollster Gallup surveyed retirees to determine how important their Social Security income was to covering their expenses. Every year, no fewer than 80% of respondents noted it was necessary, in some capacity, to cover their costs. A separate analysis from the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities found that Social Security pulled 22 million people above the federal poverty line in 2023, including 16.3 million adults aged 65 and above. If the Social Security program didn't exist, the poverty rate for this group would be nearly four times higher (37.3%, estimated) than it was in 2023 (10.1%). For lawmakers, ensuring the financial health of Social Security should be of paramount importance. But based on the latest Social Security Board of Trustees Report, America's leading retirement program is on anything but stable ground. In January 1940, the Social Security program doled out its very first retired-worker benefit. Since then, the Social Security Board of Trustees has published an annual report intricately detailing how the program generates income, as well as where every dollar in outlays ends up. But what tends to garner even more attention is the Trustees' forecasts of what's to come for Social Security. Specifically, the short- (10-year) and long-term (75-year) projections, which are regularly updated to reflect fiscal policy changes, monetary policy shifts, and an assortment of demographic adjustments. Last week, the 2025 Social Security Board of Trustees Report was released -- and it contained some rather chilling news for current and future retirees. To begin with, the program's long-term unfunded obligation continues to widen. Every annual report since 1985 has pointed to a 75-year funding deficit between projected income to be collected and forecast outlays, which includes annual cost-of-living adjustments (COLAs). In present-day dollars, discounted to Jan. 1, 2025, this 75-year deficit stood at a staggering $25.1 trillion. However, the more worrisome news is the short-term forecast for the Old-Age and Survivors Insurance trust fund (OASI). This is the fund responsible for doling out monthly benefits to retired workers and survivors of deceased beneficiaries. Beginning in 2021, the OASI began outlaying more in benefits than was being collected in income. This outflow from the OASI's asset reserves is expected to grow with each passing year. By 2033, the OASI's asset reserves are projected to be completely exhausted. Before going any further, let's make clear that the OASI doesn't need a penny in asset reserves to remain solvent and continue to pay benefits to eligible recipients. With the lion's share of Social Security income collected from the 12.4% payroll tax on wages and salary, there will always be income to disburse to qualified beneficiaries. But if the OASI's asset reserves are depleted in eight years, as the latest Trustees Report predicts, the current payout schedule, inclusive of COLAs, won't be sustainable. The Trustees are forecasting a 23% cut to payouts may be necessary for retired workers and survivor beneficiaries by 2033 -- this is up from an estimated 21% cut outlined in the 2024 Trustees Report -- to sustain monthly benefits without the need for any further reductions through 2099. With Social Security providing a financial foundation to retirees for more than eight decades, the obvious question for current and future retirees is simple: How did Social Security get into this mess? What can be said with certainty is that "congressional theft" and "undocumented migrants receiving traditional Social Security benefits," which are two common myths/scapegoats mentioned by some people online, are the wrong answers. Rather, Social Security's worsening financial outlook is a function of numerous ongoing demographic shifts, as well as inaction on Capitol Hill. Some of these shifts are well-documented and understood by the public. For example, baby boomers reaching retirement age and leaving the workforce in larger numbers are weighing down the worker-to-beneficiary ratio. Likewise, people are living longer today than they were when Social Security initially began paying retired-worker benefits in 1940. To be somewhat blunt, the program wasn't designed to dish out payments to retirees for two or more decades, as is somewhat commonplace today. But a number of these demographic shifts aren't nearly as visible -- nevertheless, they're playing a key role in weakening the program. For starters, the U.S. fertility rate (i.e., hypothetical lifetime births per woman) hit an all-time low in 2023. A laundry list of factors, ranging from people waiting longer to get married and have children, to concerns about the health of the U.S. economy, have reduced the number of children being born and will, eventually, weigh down the worker-to-beneficiary ratio. Rising income inequality is another issue for Social Security. Based on data from the Social Security Administration, approximately 90% of all earned income (wages and salary, but not investment income) was subject to the 12.4% payroll tax in 1983. By 2023, only 83% of earned income was subject to this program-funding tax. In simple terms, the wages and salaries for high earners have been increasing at a faster pace than the National Average Wage Index, which determines the upper range of earned income exposed to the payroll tax. In short, more earned income is escaping the payroll tax as time passes. Insufficient net migration into the U.S. has been problematic, too. Social Security relies on younger people migrating to the U.S. and contributing to the program for decades via the payroll tax before earning a retirement benefit for themselves one day. Since 1997, the net migration rate into the U.S. has dropped off dramatically. The final culprit is the aforementioned lack of action by lawmakers in Washington, D.C. Although plenty of bills have been proposed, the cavernous ideological gap between Democrats and Republicans on Capitol Hill as to how best to strengthen Social Security has led to an ongoing stalemate. If there's a silver lining here, it's that lawmakers do have a knack for coming to Social Security's rescue in the 11th hour. But the longer Congress waits to tackle this issue, the costlier it's going to be on working Americans to fix. If you're like most Americans, you're a few years (or more) behind on your retirement savings. But a handful of little-known could help ensure a boost in your retirement income. One easy trick could pay you as much as $23,760 more... each year! Once you learn how to maximize your Social Security benefits, we think you could retire confidently with the peace of mind we're all after. Join Stock Advisor to learn more about these Motley Fool has a disclosure policy. Social Security Benefits Are an Estimated 8 Years Away From Being Slashed -- and the Cuts Are Even Bigger Than Initially Forecast was originally published by The Motley Fool 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


USA Today
an hour ago
- USA Today
LA isn't burning. ICE has terrorized many into an ominous silence.
The threat of ICE raids on commencement ceremonies was credible enough that our Los Angeles school district devised plans to protect students from being kidnapped as they received their diplomas. Apparently, according to Attorney General Pam Bondi and President Donald Trump, 'California is burning.' Here in Los Angeles, however, we know too well the smell of a serious conflagration ‒ and also the stench of political gas when politicians try to justify corrupt assertions of authoritarian power. We are protesting now not because we are lawless, but because what is happening is a racially selective application of immigration laws that should have been reformed years ago. We are protesting because we still believe in decency, human dignity and respect for hard work and family. Some protesting among us have succumbed to anger, while others have opportunistically caused mayhem the way some revelers do when the Lakers or the Dodgers win a championship. Meanwhile the president and his ministers of cruelty, hysteria and lies are opportunistically causing far more mayhem, disrupting businesses and communities and devastating families and insulting our brave troops by gratuitously deploying them to our streets, pitting them against American civilians, trying to use the selfless members of our military as an authoritarian flex. Rogue opportunists don't represent all LA protesters California is not burning. LA is not burning. Some cars and other objects have been set ablaze by a few individuals who are willing to go to jail for their outrage, nihilism, pyromania or whatever. Their conduct doesn't represent me or most of the rest of us. They certainly do not represent my students now living with terror and dread, watching masked Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents in armored vehicles occupying the parking lots of their supermarkets, scrolling the rumors that scream across social media about the next ICE raid at another Home Depot or factory or a school graduation. The threat of ICE raids on this spring's commencement ceremonies was credible enough that our Los Angeles school district officials devised plans to protect parents, grandparents, and other friends and family members and the students themselves from being kidnapped as they receive their diplomas. My students didn't talk much about it during their last days of the school year. They were trying to be happy about the impending summer vacation. They are exhausted. They spent more than a year of their childhood isolated from peers by the COVID-19 pandemic, many of them trapped in chaotic circumstances, watching the parents who are now treated as expendable when they were essential workers compelled to risk their health and their family's health to keep things going for the rest of us. Some watched those parents get sick and in some cases die or infect grandparents or aunts and uncles who died. My students saw those sacrifices of their parents rewarded with vicious slights and condemnations, heard them called criminals for their very presence in this country. Those adults now must wonder if it is safe to go to work anymore, if there is any other way to provide food and shelter. This summer, end-of-the-school-year silence was ominous We can only guess what is happening to many of our students and their families, though. Not only because of their silent stoicism but because, actually, most stopped attending classes ‒ more of them than usual, even for the last week of school. I don't know what that means but I can imagine. One girl told me almost no one showed up recently at her usually crowded church. With fear and apprehension come small doses of relief. When a graduation goes unmolested by federal agents. When a kid reaches out by email to say they and their family are all right ‒ and asked that I round their grade up to a B. The end of a school year usually brings a silence that is a break from the constant cacophony. This year, that end-of-the-day at the end-of-the-school-year silence was ominous. This year, that silence reminds me of the cruelties. Not just the ICE raids and not just the threats to people who wish to exercise their First Amendment rights, but also the threats to Pell Grants and other forms of student financial aid that could derail the hopes and dreams of my students and undermine the hard work that my colleagues and I commit ourselves to every day. As a parent myself, I know how difficult it is to go through adolescence with a child. It can be frustrating and terrifying, and the feelings of powerlessness can overwhelm. I cannot imagine what it is like to experience that and wonder if you're going to suddenly be seized by armed men and not know if you will ever see your child again. So when I see the silent stoicism of my students, I don't know what to make of it. Is it fatalism or denial disguised as optimism or something else that I don't understand? Whatever it is, my colleagues and I will continue to indulge it and keep things as optimistic as the kids want it, understanding that there could be some we won't ever see again and others returning to school without parents at home. We will try to prepare ourselves to pick up the pieces left by the brutality that is being unleashed on some of the most vulnerable people in our city. Larry Strauss, a high school English teacher in South Los Angeles since 1992, is the author of 'Students First and Other Lies: Straight Talk From a Veteran Teacher' and "A Lasting Impact in the Classroom and Beyond," a book for new and struggling teachers.