 |
|
|
|||||
President Donald Trump on Thursday threatened Canada with a 50% tariff on any aircraft sold in the U.S., the latest salvo in his trade war with America’s northern neighbor as his feud with Prime Minister Mark Carney expands.Trump’s threat posted on social media came after he threatened over the weekend to impose a 100% tariff on goods imported from Canada if it went forward with a planned trade deal with China. But Trump’s threat did not come with any details about when he would impose the import taxes, as Canada had already struck a deal.In Trump’s latest threat, the Republican president said he was retaliating against Canada for refusing to certify jets from Savannah, Georgia-based Gulfstream Aerospace.Trump said the U.S., in return, would decertify all Canadian aircraft, including planes from its largest aircraft maker, Bombardier. “If, for any reason, this situation is not immediately corrected, I am going to charge Canada a 50% Tariff on any and all Aircraft sold into the United States of America,” Trump said in his post.Trump said he is “hereby decertifying” the Bombardier Global Express business jets. There are 150 Global Express aircraft in service registered in the U.S., operated by 115 operators, according to Cirium, the aviation analytics company.Bombardier and Gulfstream are head-to-head rivals, with the Global series battling for market share against Gulfstream’s latest models.Bombardier said in a statement that it has taken note of the president’s post and is in contact with the Canadian government. The Montreal-based company said its aircraft are fully certified to Federal Aviation Administration standards and it is expanding U.S operations.“Thousands of private and civilian jets built in Canada fly in the U.S. every day. We hope this is quickly resolved to avoid a significant impact to air traffic and the flying public,” the company said.Spokespeople for the Canadian government didn’t respond to messages seeking comment Thursday evening.John Gradek, who teaches aviation management at McGill University, said certification is about safety and it would be unprecedented to decertify for trade reasons.“Certification is not trivial. It is a very important step in getting planes to operate safely,” Gradek said. “Somebody is not picking on the Gulfstream. Decertification for trade reasons does not happen.”Gradek said many Gulfstreams have been certified for years in Canada.“This is really a smokescreen that’s basically throwing up another red flag in the face of Mr. Carney,” Gradek said. “This is taking it to the extreme. This is a new salvo in the trade war.”The U.S. Commerce Department previously put duties on a Bombardier commercial passenger jet in 2017 during the first Trump administration, charging that the Canadian company was selling the planes in America below cost. The U.S. said then that Bombardier used unfair government subsidies to sell jets at artificially low prices.The U.S. International Trade Commission in Washington later ruled that Bombardier did not injure U.S. industry.Bombardier has since concentrated on the business and private jet market in its Global and Challenger families of planes. Both are popular with individual owners and businesses as well as fractional jet companies like NetJets and Flexjet. If Trump cuts off the U.S. market it would be a major blow to the Quebec company.Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent warned Carney on Wednesday that his recent public comments against U.S. trade policy could backfire going into the formal review of the U.S.-Mexico-Canada Agreement, the trade deal that protects Canada from the heaviest impacts of Trump’s tariffs.Carney rejected Bessent’s contention that he had aggressively walked back his comments at the World Economic Forum during a phone call with Trump on Monday.Carney said he told Trump that he meant what he said in his speech at Davos, and told him Canada plans to diversify away from the United States with a dozen new trade deals.In Davos at the World Economic Forum last week, Carney condemned economic coercion by great powers on smaller countries without mentioning Trump’s name. The prime minister received widespread praise and attention for his remarks, upstaging Trump at the gathering.Besides Bombadier, other major aircraft manufacturers in Canada include De Havilland Aircraft of Canada, which makes turboprop planes and aircraft designed for maritime patrols and reconnaissance, and European aerospace giant Airbus. Airbus manufactures its single-aisle A220 commercial planes and helicopters in Canada. Gillies contributed to this report from Toronto. AP writers Lisa Leff and Josh Funk contributed to this report. Michelle L. Price and Rob Gillies, Associated Press
Category:
E-Commerce
Concept creep is literally problematic. Its what happens when words like “problematic” and “literally” expand far beyond their original definitions, eventually becoming so diffuse as to no longer hold any real meaning. The latest victim of concept creep is doxxa word being stripped of its meaning amid debate whether federal agents should be allowed to shield their identities through masks and other means As a refresher, to doxx someone is, definitionally, to publicly identify or publish private information about [them], especially as a form of punishment or revenge. The word arose from 90s hacker culture, to describe the digital unmasking of someone otherwise known only by a username by sharing their identity or personal information publicly. Although it remained in the fringe realm of 4chan message boards for ages, doxxing went mainstream in the 2010s, with the Gamergate fiasco. During that unfortunate episode, disgruntled video game fans embarked on an online harassment campaign against women and marginalized people, falsely framing their efforts as a push for ethics in games journalism. As part of the harassment, trolls surfaced private informationincluding home addresses and personal emailsof mostly women in gaming culture, whom they perceived as their enemies. In the years since, the word has seemingly come to mean any form of nonconsensual disclosure whatsoever, regardless of what is being disclosed or its relevance to public interest. Perhaps unsurprisingly, the people most aggressively watering down what it means to doxx someonemembers of the Trump administration and Republican partyare also the ones most apt to do it the good old-fashioned way to intimidate perceived political opponents A loosening definition Earlier this week, Senator Thom Tillis of North Carolina took liberty with the definition of doxxing during an appearance on CNN. Speaking with anchor Jake Tapper, the Senator explained that he opposed ICE agents being barred from wearing masks because, “I’ve seen people take pictures and identify law enforcement officers and then put their families at risk.” Tillis says he opposes ICE being barred from wearing masks: "I've seen people dox me. I've seen people take pictures and identify law enforcement officers and then put their families at risk. So, I think that's a step too far."— Aaron Rupar (@atrupar.com) 2026-01-28T22:15:29.406Z Setting aside whatever Tillis thinks he means by having been doxxed himself, his definition for law enforcement officers is inaccurate. In order to meet the criteria for doxxing, merely identifying someone would only count if the person in question had no reason for their name to be publicly known. Federal agents, on the other hand, are public servantstraditionally identifiable by badges, something ICE agents tend not to wear. Revealing their names in a context related to public enforcement is not doxxing; its just normal transparency. (The kind of thing one might think the self-proclaimed most transparent administration in history would believe in.) Under some state laws, including in Minnesota, the identity of undercover agents can be legally withheld to protect their safety and the effectiveness of an investigation. Theres a difference, though, between an undercover agent and one who would just prefer to not be identified. In any case, when any agent is involved in a shooting, no umbrella federal statute exists prohibiting them from being identified. In fact, the public-records laws of many states require disclosing the names of officers involved in shootings upon request, barring any specific legal exemption. Department of Homeland Security secretary Kristi Noem seems to believe otherwise. Under her leadership, the names of the agents who shot Alex Pretti last weekend are being kept secret. Thats in-line with her Jan. 18 appearance on Face the Nation, when she said we shouldnt have people continue to dox Jonathan Ross, the ICE agent who shot Renee Goodby saying his name, which was by then a matter of public record. Brennan: Let me talk to you about the officer, Jonathan Ross..Noem: Don't say his name. For heaven's sakes, we shouldn't have people continue to dox law enforcement when —Brennan: His name was publishedNoem: That doesnt mean it should be said. pic.twitter.com/Q9inxaeTxf— Acyn (@Acyn) January 18, 2026 Shifting the definition of doxxing fits well into the broader effort to shield ICE officers from accountability. Perhaps thats why Rep. Andy Ogles of Tennessee sponsored the Protecting Law Enforcement from Doxxing Act last fall, which would criminalize publicly revealing federal officer names in order to obstruct an ICE investigation. (The bill currently remains in committee.) Interestingly, for as much as Republicans officials are loath to put public servants families at risk by having their names amplified online, that concern only seems to flow in one direction. Doxxer in chief? As lawsuits challenge various aspects of president Donald Trumps domestic policy agenda, he has increasingly found himself at odds with federal judges. Always hapy to be the proverbial hit dog, whenever lower court judges have ruled against Trump in his second term, he has often raged about them by name on social media, to his millions of fired-up supporters. Either as a direct result, or perhaps just in an incredible series of coincidences, several judges reported subsequently experiencing intense harassment. According to an NBC News report, one of these judges had to move houses, another froze her credit cards after a security breach, and others still had to either upgrade their home security systems or change their daily routines. Some forms of harassment have been more sinister than others. Dozens of judges have reportedly had unsolicited pizzas delivered to their homeswith the name on the order attributed to Daniel Anderl, the name of district judge Esther Salass 20-year old son, who was killed by a disturbed litigant posing as a deliveryman. The harassment campaign was so pronounced in the early months of Trumps second term, Chief Justice John Roberts even criticized the political attacks prompting themnaturally without ever mentioning whose prominent Truth Social account was behind them. Does merely mentioning these judges by name count as doxxing? When using a megaphone as singularly massive as the office of the presidency, it sure seems like it meets the definition of publicly identifying someone as a form of punishment or revenge. Whether it fits the bill as doxxing or not, though, Trumps targeted rants have repeatedly inspired precisely the kind of dangerous conditions Republican officials claim ICE agents should be shielded from. Despite an abundance of national news items about the harassment of judges who rule against Trump, no elected Republicans have rushed to protect these public servants in the same way. In fact, one such representative reportedly kept a wanted poster of judges whod ruled against the president hanging outside his congressional office last year. That representatives name? Andy Ogles of Tennesseethe same one who introduced the Protecting Law Enforcement from Doxxing Act last fall. Hopefully, he wont consider pointing out his hypocrisy in public the same thing as doxxing.
Category:
E-Commerce
Melania Trump is capping her first year back as first lady with the global release of a documentary she produced about the 20 days leading up to husband Donald Trump’s return to the White House.A private person, Melania Trump remains a bit of a mystery to the public in her husband’s second term. “Melania” premiered Thursday at the Kennedy Center before it is released on Friday in more than 1,500 theaters in the U.S. and around the world.“I want to show the audience my life, what it takes to be a first lady again and (the) transition from private citizen back to the White House,” Melania Trump told reporters as she and the president moved along a charcoal-colored walkway at the event attended by Cabinet members, members of Congress and conservative commentators.She said viewers will see how she conducts her businesses and philanthropy, cares for her family and builds her White House team.“It’s beautiful, it’s emotional, it’s fashionable, it’s cinematic and I’m very proud of it,” she said.The documentary was produced by AmazonMGM Studios and is said to have cost $40 million. It will stream exclusively on the Amazon Prime Video streaming service after its theatrical run.Director Brett Ratner said his measure of success would not be box-office performance.“It’s a documentary and documentaries historically have not been huge box office smashes,” he told reporters on his way into the premiere. “You can’t expect a documentary to play in theaters.”The Republican president saw the nearly two-hour film for the first time at a private White House screening over the weekend. He said Thursday that he thought it was “really great.”“It really brings back a glamour that you just don’t see anymore,” Trump said. “Our country can use a little bit of that, right?” ‘Melania’ more than a year in the making It was unclear how much money Melania Trump stands to earn or what her plans are for any film proceeds. Experts said it was unusual for a first lady to pursue a project of this kind from the White House but not unusual for the Trumps.“As far as I know, she’s the first first lady to be paid a lot of money to have a documentary made about her and it is unprecedented in terms of the Trumps because they are always breaking precedent,” said Katherine Jellison, professor emerita of history at Ohio University.Asked about the sum, Trump mentioned the book deal for Barack Obama and his wife, Michelle, that the publisher announced in 2017, shortly after he left office.Presidents and first ladies generally refrain from pursuing outside business ventures while in office to avoid potential conflicts of interest or raising ethical concerns.Both Trumps participate in numerous business ventures, selling everything from watches, fragrances and Bibles for him to jewelry, Christmas ornaments and digital collectibles for her.Marc Beckman, the first lady’s longtime senior adviser, defended the financial arrangement, which Amazon has declined to comment on. He noted that she was a private citizen when Amazon announced the film in January 2025 and that she is unelected and receives no salary as first lady. “So why should we limit her?” he said Thursday.The movie also marks another link between the Trumps and Amazon founder Jeff Bezos, who has worked to improve a once-tense relationship with the president.Melania Trump said Thursday that a bidding process was conducted and that Amazon “was the best because they agreed to do theatrical releases.”The movie is the first project by Ratner since he was accused of sexual misconduct in the early days of the #MeToo reckoning. Ratner’s lawyer has denied the allegations. ‘Here we go again’ In a scene from a teaser for the movie, it is Inauguration Day and Melania Trump is inside the Capitol, waiting to be escorted into the Rotunda for the ceremony. She turns her head, looks directly into the camera and says, “Here we go again.”She wrote in her self-titled memoir published in 2024 about how much she values her privacy. She is not seen or heard from as often as some of her recent predecessors, which may be influencing the public’s perceptions of her. But she also likes to do things her way.She said she did the film to show people what goes into becoming first lady.The U.S. public is divided on their views of her, but a significant number about 4 in 10 adults had no opinion or had not heard of her, according to a CNN poll from January 2025. About 3 in 10 adults saw her favorably while roughly the same share had an unfavorable opinion.Her standing among Republicans was higher, with about 7 in 10 saying in the poll that they viewed her favorably, but around one-quarter had no opinion.“I think it’s an attempt, in a way, to really augment or tailor or really refine her image for the American public,” said Katherine Sibley, who teaches history at Saint Joseph’s University in Philadelphia. “She’s a mystery to the American people.” First lady cites impactful first year of second Trump term Melania Trump, 55, said she’s honored to execute the traditional duties of first lady, such as planning state dinners, hosting the annual Easter Egg Roll and decorating for Christmas. But she also has said she wants to leave her mark in other ways, too.She spent chunks of time away from Washington last year working on the documentary and was deeply involved in every aspect of its development, according to Beckman.Her first-year record centers on the well-being and safety of children.She used her influence to lobby Congress to pass the “Take It Down Act,” making it a federal crime to publish intimate images online without consent. The president signed the bill into law and had her sign it, too.Her advocacy for foster children was enshrined in an executive order creating a “Fostering the Future” program. It’s part of the “Be Best” child-focused initiative she launched in the first term.She wrote to Russian President Vladimir Putin for help reuniting children who had been separated from their families because of his war against Ukraine. She had her husband hand-deliver the letter when the leaders met in Alaska, and she later announced that eight children had been reunited with their families.The first lady has a prominent role in the administration’s efforts on artificial intelligence and education and recently launched a global version of the foster child program.She told guests at a White House Christmas reception that she is working on a new legislative effort for 2026, but has not yet shared details. Associated Press writer Linley Sanders contributed to this reprt. Darlene Superville, Associated Press
Category:
E-Commerce
All news |
||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||