Catégorie oBox : OBOXMA

Former President Bill Clinton and former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton have agreed to testify in the House Oversight Committee’s Jeffrey Epstein inquiry, backing down after weeks of refusing to appear and facing the prospect of a House vote to hold them in criminal contempt of Congress. Their attorneys told committee staff that the Clintons accept Chairman James Comer’s terms and «will appear for depositions on mutually agreeable dates», while asking Republicans to halt the contempt process. Comer said he would not drop the effort immediately, telling reporters: «We don’t have anything in writing», and adding that any deal would depend on finalized terms.

The committee’s pressure campaign accelerated after Comer rejected earlier Clinton proposals that would have avoided full depositions. According to reporting, Bill Clinton had offered a transcribed interview and Hillary Clinton a sworn declaration, but Comer insisted both comply with in-person, sworn depositions under the committee’s rules. «The Clintons do not get to dictate the terms of lawful subpoenas,» Comer said, as the panel moved contempt resolutions through procedural steps toward a potential floor vote. The Oversight Committee had issued subpoenas in August, and the contempt push gained unusual bipartisan support in committee, with some Democrats voting to advance the measures in the name of transparency.

Their agreement arrives amid a surge of new disclosures tied to Epstein, after the Justice Department released a massive tranche of investigative material under the Epstein Files Transparency Act. DOJ said it published more than 3 million additional pages on Jan. 30 in compliance with the law, which it noted was signed by Trump on Nov. 19, 2025, and it has continued posting materials to an official Epstein Library webpage. The release has been accompanied by controversy over redactions and victim protections, with AP reporting DOJ pulled thousands of documents and media files after inadequate redactions exposed sensitive victim information.

«Epstein was a Democrat, and he is the Democrat’s problem, not the Republican’s problem! Don’t waste your time with Trump. I have a Country to run!»

-Donald Trump

As the document releases expanded, renewed attention has focused on the range of prominent names that appear across Epstein-related materials and images. AP and PBS reporting on the latest disclosures describe references to wealthy and politically connected figures, and House Oversight Committee Democrats have separately released photos from Epstein’s estate that include images of Donald Trump and Bill Clinton, as well as other high-profile individuals such as Bill Gates and Prince Andrew, while noting that the context, time frame, and location of many photos are unclear. The disclosures have fueled fresh calls for accountability alongside debates over what the files do and do not establish.

Trump has sought to steer the political narrative toward Democrats, repeatedly framing Epstein as a problem for his opponents while demanding scrutiny of figures such as Bill Clinton and Bill Gates. In one statement reported by France 24, Trump wrote: «Epstein was a Democrat, and he is the Democrat’s problem, not the Republican’s problem!», adding: «Don’t waste your time with Trump. I have a Country to run!» That posture has informed Republican messaging around the Oversight probe, with Comer and allies emphasizing Clinton’s past proximity to Epstein while also acknowledging Clinton has not been accused of wrongdoing in those interactions.

But the same files and photo releases have repeatedly pulled Trump back into the frame, complicating efforts to make the controversy a one-party story. The Justice Department release described by AP centers on what investigators knew about Epstein’s abuse and his interactions with the rich and powerful, including Trump, while congressional Democrats have highlighted Trump’s presence in Epstein estate photos as part of their transparency push. Against that backdrop, critics argue that Trump’s focus on Democrats functions as a political shield, even as official releases continue to surface material in which his name and image appear alongside other prominent figures connected to Epstein’s orbit.

President Donald Trump has urged Republicans to «take over» and «nationalize» elections, escalating rhetoric about the US voting system as the 2026 midterm elections approach. Trump made the comments during an interview with former FBI director Dan Bongino, accusing states of corruption and falsely suggesting widespread electoral misconduct. «The Republicans should say, We want to take over,» Trump said.

«We should take over the voting … in at least many, 15 places. The Republicans ought to nationalize the voting. We have states that are so crooked and they’re counting votes.» Trump did not provide evidence to support his claims or explain how such a takeover would be implemented within existing constitutional limits.

Trump’s remarks reflect a continued effort to undermine confidence in election administration, particularly at the state level, which the US Constitution explicitly assigns authority over federal elections. While Trump has repeatedly asserted that elections are being improperly conducted, experts and election officials have consistently stated that noncitizen voting is extremely rare and already illegal.

During the interview, Trump expressed frustration that Republicans were «not tougher» on the issue, again alleging improper influence on outcomes. He offered no data to substantiate the claims, instead framing the issue as an urgent political failure by his party rather than a matter addressed through established legal and electoral safeguards.

«Does Donald Trump need a copy of the Constitution?»

-Senate Minority Leader, Chuck Schumer

The comments came as federal authorities carried out a highly sensitive action tied to the 2020 election. Last week, the FBI executed a court-authorized search at the Fulton County Elections and Operations Hub in Georgia, seizing original 2020 voting records. Georgia was a key swing state that Joe Biden won in 2020. Trump immediately pointed to the seizure as validation of his long-standing claims, despite the absence of any public findings indicating fraud.

«Now you’re going to see something in Georgia where they were able to get, with a court order, the ballots,» Trump said. «You’re going to see some interesting things come out.»

Trump’s response to the FBI action fits a broader pattern in which he treats investigative steps as confirmation of wrongdoing, even when authorities have not alleged criminal conduct related to election results. Federal officials have not said the seized materials indicate fraud, and court records have not overturned Georgia’s certified outcome. Nonetheless, Trump has continued to portray the investigation as evidence that his loss was illegitimate. He has repeatedly claimed he either won Georgia or was the victim of a rigged process, assertions that have been rejected by courts, state officials, recounts, and independent audits conducted after the 2020 election.

«We should take over the voting … in at least many, 15 places. The Republicans ought to nationalize the voting. We have states that are so crooked and they’re counting votes.»

-Donald Trump

Democratic leaders reacted sharply to Trump’s call to «nationalize» elections, warning that the proposal runs directly counter to constitutional law. Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer denounced the comments on the Senate floor, saying Trump’s statements were «outlandishly illegal». «Does Donald Trump need a copy of the Constitution?» Schumer said, pointing to the Elections Clause, which grants states authority over voting procedures subject to congressional regulation. Legal scholars have similarly noted that Trump’s comments lack a legal framework and would require sweeping changes that Congress has neither debated nor approved.

Despite repeated debunking of his claims, Trump has continued to insist that the 2020 election was «rigged» or that he actually won, a narrative he has sustained throughout his presidency and beyond. The renewed focus on elections comes as Trump has warned Republicans that failure to win the midterms could lead to impeachment efforts against him. His rhetoric, critics argue, keeps election legitimacy at the center of partisan conflict while relying on allegations unsupported by evidence, even as federal investigations and court rulings have consistently affirmed the integrity of the 2020 vote.

A firm linked to the United Arab Emirates acquired a 49% stake in World Liberty Financial, the Trump family’s cryptocurrency company, just days before President Donald Trump’s second inauguration, according to reporting by The Wall Street Journal. The transaction, valued at roughly $500 million, was signed by Eric Trump and granted near-minority ownership to investors connected to Sheikh Tahnoon bin Zayed Al Nahyan, a senior Emirati royal, national security adviser, and overseer of major sovereign wealth funds. The timing of the deal has drawn attention in Washington and beyond, given the proximity to Trump’s return to office and the involvement of a foreign government-linked network in a company tied to the president’s family. Company documents cited by the Journal indicate that a substantial portion of the funds was paid upfront, with proceeds distributed to Trump family entities and to entities linked to Steve Witkoff, a longtime Trump associate and current US special envoy to the Middle East.

World Liberty Financial has described the transaction as a purely commercial decision driven by growth ambitions rather than politics. A spokesperson for the company, David Wachsman, said the investment reflected confidence in the firm’s trajectory and denied any connection to US policy decisions. «We made the deal in question because we strongly believe that it was what was best for our company as we continue to grow,» Wachsman said. He also rejected suggestions that the investment was tied to diplomatic or regulatory considerations, particularly amid reporting that Sheikh Tahnoon has sought greater US access to advanced artificial intelligence chips. «Any claim that this deal had anything to do with the administration’s actions on chips is 100% false,» Wachsman said, adding that the company does not seek or receive special treatment and operates under the same rules as other firms in the sector.

«This is corruption, plain and simple. Congress needs to grow a spine and put a stop to Trump’s crypto corruption.»

-Senator Elizabeth Warren

The White House has also pushed back against allegations of conflicts of interest stemming from the deal, emphasising that President Trump’s assets are held in a trust managed by his children. In a statement, White House spokesperson Anna Kelly said: «President Trump only acts in the best interests of the American public … There are no conflicts of interest.»

Administration officials have further noted that Trump and Witkoff are listed as emeritus co-founders and are no longer involved in the company’s operations, while their sons continue to promote the venture internationally. World Liberty Financial has confirmed that two senior executives from companies backed by Sheikh Tahnoon joined its board as part of the agreement, a move it characterises as standard governance practice following a major capital infusion.

Despite those assurances, the transaction has prompted sharp criticism from Democratic lawmakers and former officials, who argue that the deal blurs the line between public office and private gain. Senator Elizabeth Warren described the arrangement in stark terms, writing:

«This is corruption, plain and simple. Congress needs to grow a spine and put a stop to Trump’s crypto corruption.»

Other Democrats have echoed those concerns, warning that the involvement of foreign government-linked investors in a company associated with the family of a sitting president is unprecedented in modern US politics. Critics say the deal risks undermining public trust at a moment when the administration is actively promoting the expansion of the US cryptocurrency sector, while supporters counter that similar business activities by presidential families have occurred in past administrations, albeit without comparable foreign ownership stakes.

President Donald Trump threatened to sue comedian Trevor Noah after a joke delivered during the Grammy Awards, accusing the host of making a false and defamatory statement about his alleged presence on Jeffrey Epstein’s private island. In a lengthy post on Truth Social, Trump reacted angrily to Noah’s remarks during the broadcast, writing that the Grammys were «the WORST, virtually unwatchable!» and attacking CBS for airing what he described as «garbage.»

Trump said Noah had wrongly claimed that he and former president Bill Clinton spent time on Epstein Island, a claim Trump denied categorically.

«WRONG!!!» Trump wrote, adding that he had «never been to Epstein Island, nor anywhere close.»

The comments Trump objected to were made during Noah’s opening monologue at the ceremony, where the comedian delivered a joke referencing Trump, Epstein, and Clinton in a broader comedic aside. On stage, Noah said: «That is a Grammy that every artist wants, almost as much as Trump wants Greenland, which makes sense, because Epstein’s island is gone, he needs a new one to hang out on with Bill Clinton.»

Trump seized on the line, writing that the statement was «false and defamatory» and asserting that he had never previously been accused of being connected to Epstein’s island, including by what he referred to as the «Fake News Media.» The exchange quickly spread online, reigniting debate over political satire and Trump’s decision to frame a comedian’s joke as defamation.

Trump’s post concluded with a direct legal threat, marking a rare instance of a sitting president publicly signaling potential litigation over a late-night or awards-show joke. Referring to Noah as «a total loser,» Trump wrote that the comedian «better get his facts straight, and get them straight fast.» He added: «It looks like I’ll be sending my lawyers to sue this poor, pathetic, talentless, dope of an M.C., and suing him for plenty$.»

Trump also referenced past legal disputes, writing: «Ask Little George Slopadopolus, and others, how that all worked out. Also ask CBS!» Neither Noah nor CBS had publicly responded at the time of publication.

«That is a Grammy that every artist wants, almost as much as Trump wants Greenland, which makes sense, because Epstein’s island is gone, he needs a new one to hang out on with Bill Clinton.»

-Trevor Noah

At the same ceremony where Trump threatened to sue Trevor Noah, several artists used their platforms to vocalise opposition to the Trump administration’s immigration enforcement policies and actions by Immigration and Customs Enforcement, broadening the political message beyond Noah’s joke. Puerto Rican star Bad Bunny opened his acceptance speech by declaring «ICE out» and emphasising human dignity over hate, saying that immigrants are «humans and we are Americans», a line that drew sustained applause from the audience and highlighted frustration with federal enforcement actions.

Billie Eilish, after winning Song of the Year, said «No one is illegal on stolen land» and urged people to keep fighting, while she and her brother Finneas wore «ICE OUT» pins on the red carpet to visibly protest ICE’s activities under the current administration. Other artists, including Olivia Dean and nominees such as Justin and Hailey Bieber, also wore similar pins or referenced immigrant rights during the evening, signalling a broader cultural backlash against immigration policies and enforcement tactics that critics link to the Trump presidency.

Italy sees anti-ICE protests linked to Trump during Olympic spotlight as tensions flared this weekend in Milan over the decision by the US president to send Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents to assist with security ahead of the Winter Games opening next Friday. Hundreds of demonstrators marched through Piazza XXV Aprile, voicing outrage not only over the planned role of ICE but also the deadly confrontations involving the agency in the United States that have drawn global attention and protests.

In Minneapolis, Minnesota, a federal immigration agent fatally shot Renee Nicole Good earlier in January during an enforcement operation, a killing that triggered widespread protests and national debate over ICE tactics. Days later, another incident in Minneapolis resulted in the fatal shooting of 37-year-old ICU nurse Alex Pretti by federal officers during anti-ICE protests, intensifying criticism of federal immigration enforcement practices. These events have resonated far beyond US borders, prompting expressions of anger and calls for accountability from civil rights groups, community leaders, and citizens concerned about the use of force by federal agencies.

Beyond the immediate demonstrations in Milan, the controversy has deepened suspicion about the broader intent behind Washington’s move, with critics arguing that the justifications offered by the Trump administration do little to ease concerns. Officials have maintained that the ICE unit, operating under the Department of Homeland Security, will help «monitor for criminal activity» and conduct «no immigration operations», but detractors in Italy and abroad view this as largely semantic given the agency’s recent lethal encounters in Minneapolis.

Many observers have interpreted the deployment as an extension of federal enforcement tools into an international setting at a moment when the agency’s actions have already sparked nationwide protest movements and civil rights inquiries in the United States, including a federal civil rights investigation into the Pretti shooting. The presence of a highly politicised and controversial security force on foreign soil — especially under the spotlight of the Olympic Games — has amplified unease among Italian officials, human rights organisations, and everyday citizens who question whether the decision aligns with the spirit of international cooperation that the Olympics are meant to represent.

«This is a militia that kills, a militia that enters into the homes of people, signing their own permission slips. It is clear they are not welcome in Milan, without a doubt.»

-Milan’s mayor, Giuseppe Sala

Many protesters in Milan and on social media have sought to send a clear message to the United States that ICE is not welcome in Italy, a sentiment echoed by several public officials ahead of the Winter Olympics opening Friday. Local residents waving banners and chanting at rallies in central squares made opposition to the planned deployment of U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents a central theme of their demonstrations, reflecting broader unease over the agency’s reputation and recent controversial actions abroad. Milan’s mayor, Giuseppe Sala, expressed his city’s stance directly to the Associated Press, emphasising local official resistance as the city prepared to host the opening ceremony on February 6, which will be attended by the U.S. Vice President, JD Vance. Sala said of ICE: «This is a militia that kills, a militia that enters into the homes of people, signing their own permission slips. It is clear they are not welcome in Milan, without a doubt.» His remarks crystallised the intersection of local political sentiment and international scrutiny surrounding the decision to involve ICE personnel in aspects of Olympic security and risk mitigation, even as U.S. officials maintain that their role will be limited and non-enforcement in nature.

The Canadian federal government has announced a change to the Interim Federal Health Program that will result in vulnerable citizens paying more for their health services.

The Canadian Federal government announced that IFHP beneficiaries will have to start paying copay for prescription medications and a third of all other healthcare costs. The change has many citizens who benefit from the IFHP concerned about the change in their monthly costs. The changes include a $4 copay for medications and 30% of the cost of all other eligible supplemental health products and services, including dental care, vision care, counselling, and assistive devices.

What is the IFHP

The Interim Federal Health Program (IFHP) is a program that benefits resettled refugees, refugee claimants, protected persons, and victims of human trafficking or family violence in Canada who are not yet eligible for provincial/territorial health insurance. The IFHP was created by the Canadian government in 1957 and has helped tens of thousands of refugees in its history. In 2012, a Conservative Canadian government slashed the program until the Liberal Party was elected into power in 2016 and reinstated the program’s funding.

The cuts from 2012 resulted in refugees and vulnerable citizens being left without healthcare, access to prescriptions, and difficulty getting access to healthcare services. This is the first time that the IFHP has been changed since its funding was reinstated in 2016. While the cuts announced are nowhere near as drastic or harmful as those from 2012, the change marks a concerning turn away from the IFHP’s values and leads Canadians to wonder whether more changes are to come. More than 600,000 individuals rely on the Interim Federal Health Program.

Details of the cuts

The two changes implemented are designed to use the strain of the IFHP on the Federal budget. The IFHP costs the Canadian government nearly $1 CAD every year, and the cost has been steadily rising. Approximately half of the budget is spent on supplemental health products and services, which is also the area that will experience the most change from the new directive. With IFHP beneficiaries now paying 30% of the cost of their supplemental health products and services, the Federal government will see an income boost of at least $100m CAD. The new copay rate will not secure a large financial payout for the Federal government.

How will the cuts impact Canadians?

Over two-thirds of Canadians require a daily prescription. With more than 600,000 vulnerable citizens benefiting from IFHP, there should be more than 300,000 people now required to pay a $4 copay for their medications. Dental coverage is also included as a ‘supplemental health product and service,’ meaning refugees will no longer have complete dental coverage. Basic dental checkups can cost up to $300, and expensive surgeries can cost thousands of dollars. One of the most common dental surgeries, a wisdom tooth removal, can cost up to $2,000 CAD, and with an estimated 85% of people needing wisdom tooth surgery, the changes to the IFHP will financially affect thousands of refugees and vulnerable citizens.

Vulnerable population

Refugees and victims of human trafficking/family violence are some of the most financially vulnerable citizens in Canada. The average yearly income for a new refugee is just $24,000 CAD, and after ten years in the country, the average income only goes up to $30,000 CAD. Survivors of domestic violence and human trafficking average even less yearly, often relying on financial assistance programs while they experience a serious life change. Victims of domestic violence and human trafficking also often experience higher medical bills. Victims of violence often require therapy and other ancillary health services, along with prescriptions.

It’s not clear why the Federal chose the IFHP as the program to be defunded. Prime Minister Mark Carney has not commented on the changes to the program, but human rights groups in Canada have begun lobbying in favour of the IFHP.