China’s 373MPH Maglev Train Debuts, Slashing Travel Time Between Cities
A Chinese-built maglev train, set to become the country’s fastest ground transport vehicle, was publicly unveiled this week at the 17th Modern Railways exhibition in Beijing, according to South China Morning Post.
Developed by China Railway Rolling Stock Corporation (CRRC), the train can reach speeds of 600km/h (373mph) and is designed to drastically cut travel times and strengthen China’s global lead in high-speed rail.
The train features a sleek, aerodynamic nose to reduce drag, and a futuristic interior with a large digital display.
The train is intended to function as a “point-to-point transport tool” between major cities, complementing existing high-speed rail. At full speed, it could cut the Beijing–Shanghai trip from 5.5 hours to about 2.5.
“This model is equipped with a fully automated driving function … [which] requires integrating a variety of technologies such as 5G communication, AI video capture, acoustic sensing, and the deployment of various types of sensors along the line,” CRRC engineer Shao Nan said.
He also noted the train aims to “fill the speed gap between high-speed rail and aviation within 2,000km,” blending the efficiency of rail with the speed of flight.
The maglev uses superconducting magnets to levitate above the track after reaching 150km/h, eliminating friction and enabling lower noise, no emissions, and reduced maintenance. Before that speed, the train runs on rubber wheels. The project is still undergoing route tests and safety evaluations before commercial launch.
Though China opened its first low-speed maglev line in 2003 with German technology, and domestic versions in Changsha (2016) and Beijing (2017), these earlier systems were limited to 120km/h. The new maglev marks a significant leap forward.
South China Morning Post writes that China’s broader high-speed rail network has rapidly expanded to 48,000km by the end of 2024, the largest in the world, with plans to surpass 50,000km this year.
CRRC’s maglev is just one of several cutting-edge transport projects underway. In 2024, China tested its maglev hyperloop project, aiming to eventually reach 1,000km/h, and researchers developed AI-based suspension systems to counter high-speed vibrations and improve ride comfort.
Despite these advances, experts cited by SCMP caution that the sector still faces steep technical and financial hurdles, including the high cost of building dedicated maglev and hyperloop infrastructure and the need for advanced technologies like superconducting magnets.
NATO Turning Moldova Into ‘Cannon Fodder’ To Confront Russia: Kremlin
Russia’s Foreign Intelligence Service (SVR) on Monday issued a rare statement accusing the West, under US leadership, of turning Moldova into a military outpost aimed at confronting Russia, akin to what has happened over several years with Ukraine.
The SVR’s provocative statement said Washington wants to use the country as “cannon fodder” in future hostilities, which is allegedly being fast-tracked by Western foreign policy decision-makers.
The statement further alleged that NATO wants to turn tiny Moldova into a “military testing ground” by modernizing its railways to European specifications and constructing major logistics hubs for future Western military deployments. This also includes serious upgrades to airfields, to host military planes, according to Russian state media.
Russian intelligence also accused Moldovan President Maia Sandu of surrendering national interests to Western powers, dubbing her administration a “comprador regime” – and that her pro-European Party of Action and Solidarity is being propped up and strengthened by the West.
These charged can’t exactly be dismissed as paranoia or propaganda, given for example that just last year the United Kingdom inked a new defense pact with Moldova, precisely to counter ‘Russian aggression’ – as we previously detailed.
The tiny Eastern European nation bordering Ukraine has experienced the same kind of internal political pro-EU vs. pro-Russia tug of war historically on display in other countries such as Ukraine or Georgia.
The UK foreign ministry described the defense agreement as about “building on extensive cooperation between the two countries and strengthening Moldovan resilience against external threats.”
One thing which has long alarmed the West is the presence of Russian ‘peacekeeping’ troops in Moldova’s breakaway Transnistria region.
As for Transnistria, although it has diverse ethnic demographics almost equally apportioned between Russians, Moldovans, Romanians and Ukrainians, the Russian demographic slightly ekes out its counterparts with a plurality of 29% of Transnistrians belonging to the group.
The pro-Russian cultural sentiment of the region is exemplified by its flag, which has remained the same as it was when Transnistria was a part of the Soviet Union. That representative Russian demographic, coupled with broader dissatisfaction of the Moldovan government, has fostered support for assimilation into the Russian Federation for quite some time.
Europe’s political landscape continues to defy expectations, leaving analysts and policymakers scrambling to explain outcomes that, in hindsight, seem foreseeable. From the UK’s Brexit vote to Giorgia Meloni’s rise in Italy, the Alternative für Deutschland (AfD) surge in Germany, Dutch farmers’ revolts, and Marine Le Pen’s ascent in France, each development triggers a chorus of shocked “No one saw this coming.” Yet millions of Europeans did.
The persistent surprise may stem from a flawed lens—dominated by English-language media filters, historical overcorrections, and shrinking on-the-ground reporting—that distorts our understanding. As these shifts ripple globally, misreading Europe poses strategic risks we can no longer afford to ignore.
The pattern is unmistakable. Europe has been portrayed as a stable, liberal bastion—centrist coalitions driving climate action and European Union unity, embodying a progressive ideal. Yet reality diverges: The UK exited the EU in 2016, Meloni became Italy’s prime minister in 2022, Germany’s AfD polled second nationally in 2025, Dutch farmers blocked roads over nitrogen policies, and France’s center collapsed in 2024, elevating Le Pen. Each time, English-language coverage reacts with shock, missing signals visible to local populations.
The Media’s Blind Spot
This disconnect begins with a critical media filter. English-language European outlets, such as state-funded France 24, Deutsche Welle, Politico Europe, and center-left publications like Le Monde, cater to an urban, university-educated, globally minded audience. These sources are mostly credible and professional but reflect a narrow slice of society, underrepresenting conservative and rural perspectives.
A key disparity amplifies this bias: While mainstream liberal media regularly publish English editions, conservative and right-wing outlets across Europe—such as Germany’s Junge Freiheit or Italy’s Il Giornale—rarely do. This choice stems from several factors: a lack of perceived demand in English-speaking markets, suspicion of hostile Anglo-American coverage, and a strategic focus on local bases.
As a result, English-speaking audiences relying on European media’s English editions get an incomplete picture, skewed toward liberal narratives and missing the conservative currents driving political shifts.
Europe’s Hidden Currents
Country-specific examples reveal the depth of this gap. In Italy, Meloni’s 2022 victory, often labeled “neo-fascist” because of her party’s post-fascist roots, was misread by English outlets. Yet her platform—lower taxes, stronger borders, and national pride—reflected frustration with unelected technocrats and Brussels’ fiscal rules. She formed a coalition with Matteo Salvini’s League and Forza Italia, securing a parliamentary majority with 44 percent of the vote, appealing to millions disillusioned by years of instability, not extremism. Her government’s three-year record (2022 to 2025) has focused on economic recovery.
In Germany, AfD’s rise to more than 20 percent in state elections and a mayoral win in 2025 reflect discontent with soaring energy prices post-nuclear shutdown and immigration strains. Yet it’s framed as a dangerous anomaly, ignoring its roots in rural and eastern voter bases.
In the Netherlands, the government’s 2019 nitrogen reduction plan, mandating farm buyouts, sparked tractor blockades by farmers facing existential threats to generational livelihoods. The Farmer-Citizen Movement, formed in response, became the largest party in the Dutch Senate by 2023, a democratic revolt misread as a sideshow.
In France, President Emmanuel Macron’s 2024 dissolution of the National Assembly followed his party’s European election defeat, paving the way for Le Pen’s National Rally. Her movement, drawing working-class and youth voters from disaffected leftist unions, has softened its rhetoric—shifting from anti-immigrant hardline to economic populism—normalizing her appeal amid the center’s collapse.
Postwar Shadows
This blind spot is structural, rooted in postwar Europe’s “firewall” logic. After World War II, institutions like Germany’s Basic Law and France’s laïcité were designed to prevent fascism and nationalism, embedding a cultural consensus against these ideologies. The EU, as a moral project to dissolve rivalries, reinforced this stance.
Over time, this overcorrection stigmatized moderate conservatism—national flags or religious appeals were red flags, dissent from EU norms labeled “anti-democratic.” Repressing these voices buried resentment, fueling unexpected populism. The UK grooming gang scandals illustrate a similar pattern: institutional real fear of fomenting racism delayed action on abuse, worsening the crisis. In Europe, suppressing feedback has similarly driven political surprises.
Anglosphere’s Distance
The Anglosphere’s media compounds this. Decades ago, outlets like The New York Times or CBS maintained lively European bureaus, offering nuance and real understanding of reality on the ground. Budget cuts and shifting priorities have shuttered many, replacing correspondents with wire services and freelancers. Walter Duranty’s downplaying of Joseph Stalin’s Holodomor, despite his Moscow base, shows proximity isn’t a cure-all, but its absence distorts coverage, even by the mere addition of intermediaries.
Today’s reports—relying on embassy briefings, nongovernmental organization releases, the European media’s English language editions, or echo-chamber articles—many times lack critical context. For example, there was the framing of Dutch tractor protests as climate backlash rather than a livelihood crisis. For policymakers and investors, this distance misjudges risks, from policy legitimacy to market stability.
Global Stakes at Risk
The stakes are high. Misreading Europe leads to ill-fated policies, regulatory backlash, and eroding trust in journalism, fueling polarization. Each “shock result” signals analytical failure with global repercussions—markets shift, alliances waver, and migration patterns change. The postwar consensus, while essential, has ossified into dogma, blinding elites to new threats.
A Call for Clarity
To see Europe clearly, we ought to think and act like historians. We stop waiting for “The Truth” to arrive in a statement and start building our own mosaic. This means reading across ideological spectra, using artificial intelligence to translate non-English conservative sources like Junge Freiheit (even if one vehemently disagrees with its editorial line), tracking polling trends, and listening beyond capitals.
This is not about endorsing right-wing or conservative parties over liberal and progressive ideologies; rather, it underscores that navigating with a flawed map—lacking the full true picture—hurts everyone’s performance. Understanding Europe’s diverse political currents, progressive gains and conservative surges alike, reduces the risk of costly surprises.
Views expressed in this article are opinions of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of The Epoch Times.
The Unlikely, Tiny EU State Holding Up Europe’s 18th Package Of Russia Sanctions
The West has come to expect this from Hungary or even Slovakia, but tiny Malta as a key holdout preventing European action against Russia?
European Union (EU) ambassadors have not yet reached an agreement on the bloc’s 18th sanctions package against Moscow, largely due to Malta’s stance on maintaining the current price cap on Russian oil, according to a senior EU official cited in several European reports.
Earlier reports indicated that Greece, Cyprus, and Malta had initially resisted lowering the cap from $60 to $45 per barrel.
While Greece and Cyprus did not oppose revisiting the oil price ceiling in a Sunday meeting, Malta remained firm in its position, arguing that its shipping industry, a vitally important sector to its national economy, would be deeply and negatively impacted by any changes.
As of now, Malta is the only country still holding out, with its permanent representative to the EU saying in a statement:
“We were unable to express political support during yesterday’s Committee of Permanent Representatives. However, discussions are ongoing, and Malta is constructively engaged with this goal in mind.”
Russia’s RT has also picked up on Malta’s holdout position, noting that “Malta’s specific concerns have not been detailed, but a large number of ships fly the flag of the island nation.”
It continues, “Its maritime insurance sector has previously expressed unease over measures that could drive shipowners to reflag outside the EU, causing economic harm to the bloc’s shipping registries and related industries.”
The new sanctions package, which was first set before EU members in June, also impacts Russian gas, as it proposes a ban on the future use of the Nord Stream pipeline.
* * *
One European source provides the following overview of the stalled 18th anti-Moscow sanctions proposal by the EU:
Energy sector:
Ban on all transactions related to Nord Stream 1 and 2: no EU operator will be able to conduct deals through these pipelines.
Price cap on oil products lowered from $60 to $45 per barrel to make it harder for Russia to generate revenue.
Expansion of the “shadow fleet”: 77 more tankers that transported oil outside the law have been added to the sanctions list.
Ban on importing oil products made from Russian oil to prevent sanctions evasion through third countries.
Financial sector:
Transformation of SWIFT restrictions into a full ban on transactions: this applies to 22 Russian banks and third-country operators that help circumvent sanctions.
Imposition of sanctions on the Russian Direct Investment Fund (RDIF) along with its subsidiaries.
* * *
Malta has long been accused of emerging as a new hotspot for Russia-linked ship-to-ship oil transfers amid the Ukraine war and resulting US-EU led sanctions…
🚨 The crude oil tanker SEAPRINCESS (IMO 9373668), sailing under Maltese flag, has recently been operating from Russian ports. Given the ongoing use of “shadow fleet” tactics to bypass sanctions, this vessel should be monitored closely. It may be at risk of damage. pic.twitter.com/vtwk9kv4V9
Meanwhile, Malta’s veto translates to EU leaders probably being forced to move forward with approving the package against Russia without including a revised oil price cap, while negotiations continue over energy supply assurances for Slovakia and Hungary.
The Christian Democratic Union (CDU) has long been known to sell out every last so-called value the party is supposed to represent, but it appears that backing controversial far-left candidate Frauke Brosius-Gersdorf is now a bridge too far.
The CDU/CSU has now decided that a special session on the election of Brosius-Gersdorf should now be removed from the Bundestag agenda. The reason? Civil war in the CDU/CSU is causing serious chaos in the party over her candidacy.
However, the party is stating that the reason is not her stance on abortion, which she backs until the last moment of pregnancy, but instead allegations of plagiarism.
During an ongoing meeting, sources within parliament revealed that the parliamentary group executive and Chancellor Friedrich Merz (CDU) informed the SPD that plagiarism allegations against the candidate compromised her professional expertise. This was allegedly problematic because her expertise was the primary justification for her election as a constitutional judge, a role that demands individuals be beyond reproach.
However, the real reason might have to do with Merz’s historic answer in the Bundestag less than 48 hours ago. Responding to a question from AfD MP Beatrix von Storch, he said he has no moral qualms about backing a candidate that supports abortion up until a minute before birth.
BREAKING: 🇩🇪🔴A historic moment unfolded in German parliament.
Chancellor Friedrich Merz blew up what his CDU party has represented for decades with a single word — all in support of late-term abortion.
“Can you reconcile it with your conscience to vote for Mrs. Brosius Gersdorff, for whom the dignity of a human being does not apply if he is not yet born? Mrs. Brosius Gersdorff has said that a child that is 9 months old — 2 minutes before birth — has no human dignity. Can you reconcile it with your conscience to vote for this woman, knowing that presumably this lady will shortly be voting on the abolition of Article 218 (of the criminal code)?” asked von Storch in parliament.
“The scope and extent of Article 1, sentence 1 of our Basic Law, Mrs. von Storch, is something I would like to discuss with you on another occasion. But my very simple answer to your question is: yes,” replied Merz.
His answer was like a stick of dynamite being thrown into his parliamentary group. The CDU has historically been opposed to abortion due to its Christian roots. Not only did the AfD go on the attack following Merz’s answer, but CDU MPs came out against Merz, which has shaken the party’s foundations.
“Friedrich Merz offered me yesterday to discuss Article 1 of the Basic Law with him: “The dignity of man is inviolable.” I gladly accept this offer, Mr. Merz. I will therefore gladly await your proposed date. Deporting rejected asylum seekers and warning against Islamization does not violate human dignity. Frauke Brosius Gersdorff, on the other hand, wants to suspend Article 1 of the Basic Law for an entire category of people, namely all unborn humans. If someone like that becomes a constitutional judge, it threatens the core of the value system of the Basic Law, and you bear the responsibility for that.”
Friedrich Merz hat mir gestern angeboten, mit ihm über Artikel 1 Grundgesetz: „Die Würde des Menschen ist unantastbar“ zu diskutieren. Das Angebot nehme ich sehr gerne an, Herr Merz. Ich warte also gerne auf Ihren Terminvorschlag. Abgelehnte Asylbewerber abzuschieben und vor der…
— Beatrix von Storch (@Beatrix_vStorch) July 10, 2025
According to former Karlsruhe court judge Peter M. Huber, Brosius-Gersdorf’s election could damage the institution’s reputation.
“Such a polarizing personnel proposal poses a risk to the court’s reputation,” Huber told Focus magazine. “The positions that Ms. Brosius-Gersdorf has raised and are hotly debated do not command majority support, either in society or among constitutional lawyers.”
“Karlsruhe has always stood for balance and reliability – including in the selection of constitutional judges,” he said. Unlike in the United States, judicial appointments in Germany “have never been so personalized, so that the Federal Constitutional Court is generally perceived as a single entity.” He said that the debate around the candidate could radically transform Germany’s views on the courts.
The influential editor of NIUS and the former top editor of Bild newspaper, Juilan Riechelt, predicted on X that Merz’s answer would have historic implications for the CDU.
“Prognosis: This thoughtless, unequivocally revealing answer is a turning point in the history of the CDU. No CDU member should ever answer such a question so decisively with ‘Yes!’ Merz could have talked his way out, he could have said he understood or interpreted the left-wing activist Brosius-Gersdorf differently. But he goes All-In AGAINST the core brand of his party,” he wrote.
BREAKING NIUS: Der historische Moment im Video! Bundeskanzler Friedrich Merz stellt mit einem einzigen Wort das komplette Selbstverständnis der CDU infrage. Auf die Frage, ob er es mit seinem Gewissen vereinbaren kann, eine Frau zu wählen, die einem Baby im neunten Monat der… https://t.co/KnBXnauoPepic.twitter.com/2mIpz1W7ou
As Remix News previously reported, the election of Brosius-Gersdorf represents a serious threat to democracy in Germany, as the activist lawyer has called for a ban on the AfD.
🇩🇪🔴Is she the German Right’s worst nightmare?
Germany’s next likely top court justice for the Constitutional Court has pushed for a ban on the AfD.
Lawyer Frauke Brosius-Gersdorf had also speculated that it was a “constitutional duty” for mandatory vaccination during the… pic.twitter.com/SUiKwRMLpZ
As I reported on X on Sunday, it appears Attorney General Pamela Bondi and FBI Deputy Director Dan Bongino have agreed to a truce. Bongino was prepared to imminently resign over Bondi’s botched handling of the Jeffrey Epstein matter; President Trump told reporters on Sunday he had spoken with Bongino and indicated his longtime friend was “in good shape” without any plans to depart soon.
If true, the development represents good news since the clash of wills pitted the White House against some of the president’s most loyal influencers, prompting one of the biggest political crises in the administration to date. Trump appears to have successfully calmed the waters both behind the scenes and online.
Unfortunately, not only did the Epstein matter create deep division in MAGAland, fixation on the topic sucked the oxygen out of the media sphere related to significant achievements within the Department of Justice. Bondi and her team continue to clean house at the systemically corrupt department as longtime employees are either fired or leave voluntarily amid “differences” with the president’s policies. The most recent purge includes members of Special Counsel Jack Smith’s team, J6 prosecutors, and the spokeswoman at the most powerful U.S. Attorney’s office in the country.
But rather than take their well-deserved firings on the chin like grown ups, self-proclaimed “victims” of the personnel wrecking ball emote on social media or to slavish reporters proving that DOJ employees are a partisan, sanctimonious, and downright annoying bunch of humans.
Poor Poor Pitiful Me, Part 1,306
For example, Bondi last week fired Joseph Tirrell, head of the DOJ’s ethics office. (LOL).
Tirrell, according to Bloomberg News, is “a career attorney who’d spent nearly 20 years at the department,” meaning Bondi was stuck with him until the DOJ could find a reason to terminate. No details are available as to why Tirrell finally got the boot but he reportedly did, among other things, oversee Special Counsel Jack Smith’s operation.
Last February, Tirrell reviewed Smith’s last disclosure report, which revealed the special counsel had received $140,000 in pro bono legal advice after the 2024 election. (The president promised to investigate Smith, who handed down two criminal federal indictments against Trump in 2023.)
It’s unclear whether Tirrell approved that free legal work, flagged any excessive expenditures—the special counsel’s office spent roughly $50 million in a little over a year—or identified any conflict of interests within the office. But instead of simply updating his resume, Tirrell followed in the light-in-the-loafers footsteps of his former colleagues by penning a tale of woe on social media.
Patricia Hartman, the longtime spokeswoman at the D.C. U.S. Attorney’s office, went straight to CBS News last week to bitch about her invitation to the unemployment line.
Hartman, no doubt at the direction of Biden appointee Matthew Graves, spent four years churning out daily press releases to boast about the Biden DOJ’s success in the politically-motivated January 6 investigation. Hartman even issued press releases on the misdemeanor cases against Trump confidants Steve Bannon and Peter Navarro; U.S attorney’s offices rarely pursue federal misdemeanors and certainly never brag about it in press releases if they do.
Nonetheless, Hartman portrayed herself as the victim of a political operation rather than the devoted mouthpiece of one:
Hartman is the only J6 propagandist to hit the streets. Following an immediate expulsion of J6 and Jack Smith prosecutors back in late January, the DOJ is back to the chopping block in both matters. Bondi just fired at least 20 lawyers and staffers assigned to Smith’s team bringing the total number of scalps to 37. (Smith resigned on January 10.) At least three prosecutors who handled high-profile J6 cases also got the ax this month with more to come, according to my own sources.
Voluntary Self Deportation
Many DOJ employees are leaving voluntarily rather than anxiously refresh their email inbox for a message with the subject line, “Notice of Removal From Federal Service.” Dozens of employees working at the DOJ unit responsible for defending the administration against a nonstop deluge of lawsuits have resigned, according to a Reuters analysis this month. Prosecutors complained of a heavy workload–boo hoo!–and ideological differences with the new boss.
“Many of these people came to work at Federal Programs to defend aspects of our constitutional system. How could they participate in the project of tearing it down?” one lawyer who recently quit told Reuters.
A similar exodus is underway at the DOJ’s civil rights division where nearly 70 percent of the division’s attorneys have headed for the exits rather than work for Harmeet Dhillon, the president’s pick to run the office. Apparently the totally nonpolitical lawyers object to doing things like keeping boys out of girls’ sports, protecting children from surgical mutilation, and combating religious bias—just a few of Dhillon’s stated objectives.
All of this comes on top of months of success in identifying and firing known partisans at both the DOJ and FBI, an historic purge with no signs of stopping. The moves are “creating rampant speculation and fear within the workforce over who might be terminated next,” former staffers told the Washington Post.
Which should be sweet music to the collective ears of Trump supporters. Unfortunately, this good news is being silenced by a cacophony of discord and demands in the Epstein case—something the enemies of MAGA are enjoying all too much.
Orange Juice Futures Squeeze On Trump’s Brazil Tariff Threat
President Trump fired off a flurry of trade warning letters last week to countries including South Korea, Brazil, Europe, Mexico, and Canada. In one letter to Brazilian President Luiz Inácio “Lula” da Silva, Trump announced the potential for a new 50% tariff on imports from Brazil. The move has since sparked fears of supply disruptions and sent orange juice futures in New York soaring to a four-month high.
The most active contract jumped 8.655% to $3.1385 a pound on Monday, the highest since early March. Orange juice futures have been rallying since Trump’s trade warning letter to the South American country last week, stoking fears of renewed supply disruptions. Prices previously surged as high as $5 a pound in late 2024, as U.S. orange juice production fell to decade lows. Prices then crashed earlier this year.
OJ is on track for the largest monthly gain since January 1981.
The threat of disrupted OJ supplies comes as the U.S. has ramped up imports from Brazil in recent years, with Florida production in disarray due to greening disease and hurricanes that have devastated large swaths of groves, according to Craig Elliott, a market analyst at Expana, as cited by Bloomberg. He noted that while the full impact of the proposed tariff remains uncertain, the volume of trade at risk is substantial and could further undermine Brazil’s competitiveness.
Tariffs risk upending Brazil–U.S. ag trade across a wide range of goods (much more than just OJ) — from coffee and red meat to poultry, pork, and more.
A poll by the Berkeley Institute of Governmental Studies published on July 10 found that a majority of Californians believe special interest groups wield too much influence over policymaking in Sacramento.
More than 6,000 respondents were asked whether or not “special interest money has too much influence in Sacramento politics and decisionmaking.”
Fifty-five percent of respondents strongly agreed, and 20 percent somewhat agreed. Only 2 percent disagreed.
Republicans and Democrats were largely united on the issue.
The poll found that 73 percent of Democrats and 81 percent of Republicans agreed with the statement. Among those with no party preference, 75 percent agreed.
The sentiment was shared across regional, gender, age, education, income, and racial groups, with at least 59 percent of respondents in each group agreeing with the statement. The poll also found that 87 percent of regular voters strongly or somewhat agreed with the statement.
“The numbers don’t lie. Californians overwhelmingly recognize that big money wields far too much power over our elected officials,” said Russia Chavis Cardenas, deputy director of nonprofit organization California Common Cause.
“People from every political party, every race, and every walk of life are united behind one urgent demand. They want Sacramento to break the grip of big money on our democracy.”
When asked whether they trust various representatives to “act in the best interests of the California public,” 14 percent of voters said they have “a lot” of trust in Gov. Gavin Newsom. Another 28 percent said they trust him “somewhat.”
Voters trust the state Legislature about as much: 11 percent said they trust it a lot, and 33 percent said they trust it somewhat.
Voters have even less trust in “tech companies and their leaders,” with just 4 percent saying they have a lot of trust that those leaders will act in the best interests of California residents. The poll found 58 percent have no trust “at all” in tech leaders. Trust in business leaders in general was only slightly higher: 4 percent said they trust them, while 46 percent said they do not trust them “at all.”
“It’s no surprise that Californians have little trust in tech companies and their leadership,” said Leora Gershenzon, policy director of the California Initiative for Technology and Democracy.
“All too often, they have made decisions that further screentime addiction, mental health challenges in children and teens, and political deepfakes that undermine elections, all to maximize profit.”
Voters trust labor unions more, with 19 percent saying they trust them a lot and 32 percent saying they trust them somewhat.
Community-based nonprofit organizations score higher: 27 percent trust them a lot, and another 35 percent trust them somewhat.
“With so much special interest money in California elections, everyday Californians question the motives of our elected leaders. But they know community-based organizations will always have their back,” said Camila Chavez, executive director of nonprofit organization Dolores Huerta Foundation.
Regarding the justice system, 20 percent of California voters said they have a lot of trust in the courts, and 37 percent said they trust them somewhat.
Eleven percent of voters said they trust public officials a lot, and 39 percent said they trust them somewhat.
‘Democracy Under Attack’
A majority of Californians, 64 percent, across gender, age, education, regional, income, and racial groups, view American democracy as “under attack.”
Fewer than 15 percent of respondents from each group said American democracy is in “no danger.”
Seventy percent of respondents aged 65 and older believe American democracy is under attack, along with 69 percent of white people, and 74 percent of black respondents. Only 1 percent of black respondents view American democracy as being in no danger.
Democrats and Republicans are split on the issue, with 81 percent of Democrats seeing American democracy as under attack, while only 38 percent of Republicans agree. A total of 39 percent of Republicans view American democracy as being tested, and 24 percent of Republicans view American democracy as in no danger.
Sixty-one percent of those with “No Party Preference” believe that American democracy is under attack. An estimated 32 percent view it as being tested. Just 8 percent of those with no party preference, and 3 percent of Democrats, see American democracy as being in no danger.
“It is hard to imagine that a majority of voters would have seen U.S. democracy as under severe threat,” said Eric Schickler, co-director of the Institute of Governmental Studies. “It is now something of a new ‘normal,’ itself a worrisome sign about how things have shifted.”
Trump Wants Gaza Deal ‘Straightened Out’ Within The Next Week
President Trump on Sunday said he hopes a ceasefire deal in Gaza can be finalized within this week, in comments made to reporters before boarding a flight to attend yesterday’s FIFA Club World Cup Final.
When asked about the ongoing crisis in Gaza, he responded, “We’re talking, and hopefully we’ll get that straightened out over the next week. Let’s see what happens.”
While there had been anticipation in Israel for a deal announcement during Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s recent visit to Washington DC last week, recent days have seen the typical non-committal, ambiguous statements out of both Washington and Tel Aviv. The war looks to have no solutions, given the stated goals of Israel and the United States.
Middle East envoy Steve Witkoff expressed optimism Sunday, saying he was “hopeful” an agreement could be reached.
But as it stands the Netanyahu government is still insisting on the full disarming of Hamas, while Hamas for its part wants full withdrawal of the Israeli military.
Neither is expected to happen, and at this point it looks to be a fight to the death – with Israeli hostages still in limbo (and many feared dead) – and thousands of Palestinian civilians getting slaughtered each week.
Currently, a plan floated by some Israeli officials for a designated ‘humanitarian city’ inside a sector of Gaza has continued to be met with immense pushback. Critics call it in effect a “concentration camp” – while many within Israel say it is logistically impossible.
The plan was announced by Israel’s Defense Minister Israel Katz last week:
Israeli affairs analyst, Dan Perry, says the plan to build a “humanitarian city” would involve “by all indications a very long process” to build and maintain, while the country does not have the “funds or the energy or the desire” to do so.
“I think this has to be viewed in the context of the current negotiations where the very reporting of such a plan might be an effort to put pressure on Hamas to show more flexibility,” Perry told Al Jazeera.
“I agree with [opposition leader Yair] Lapid that it is a security, political and logistical nightmare. I would add that it’s ethically inadmissible,” he added.
And so it is unlikely to get off the ground. In the meantime aid delivery continues to also be mired in controversy and scandal, as American military contractors have reportedly fired on hungry Palestinians.
Reports say the IDF troops have shot dead scores of Palestinians seeking the aid, and UN and international rights groups have slammed the unsafe aid station set-ups.
‘At least 798 killed’ at Gaza aid points – as medical charity warns acute malnutrition at all-time high | World News | Sky News https://t.co/PmBpgdMd0V
Al Jazeera provides some Monday updates on the situation as follows:
At least 47 people killed across Gaza today, including Palestinians gathered near aid centre.
Israeli forces continue bombarding Gaza a day after killing 95 Palestinians across the Strip.
Criticisms of Israel’s plan to set up an internment camp in Gaza are growing, with Israeli opposition leader Yair Lapid saying it would amount to a “concentration camp” if Palestinians there are not allowed to leave.
Israel’s war on Gaza has killed at least 58,026 people and wounded 138,520, according to Gaza’s Health Ministry. An estimated 1,139 people were killed in Israel during the October 7, 2023, attacks, and more than 200 were taken captive.
And below are more regional and global headlines via Newsquawk.
* * *
Geopolitics: Middle East
Iran Foreign Ministry spokesperson says Tehran will respond to the return of UN sanctions after snapback mechanism. No date or location for US/Iran nuclear talks. Will not restart US talks unless we are certain they will work.
Israeli official said talks in Doha are ongoing with Hamas for a ceasefire and hostage deal but noted Hamas is sticking to positions that do not allow mediators to advance an agreement.
US envoy to the Middle East Witkoff said he is hopeful on Gaza ceasefire negotiations and was said to meet senior Qataris in New Jersey on Sunday.
Iranian Foreign Minister Araghchi said they are carefully assessing options for talks with the US.
Ukraine
US President Trump is considering greenlighting new funding for Ukraine to send a message to Russia, according to CBS. It was separately reported that President Trump is to announce an “aggressive” Ukraine weapons plan on Monday to arm Ukraine which is expected to include offensive weapons, according to Axios.
EU envoys are nearing an agreement on lower Russian oil price cap, according to Reuters.
Ukraine’s SBU intelligence agency accused Russia’s FSB of being behind the murder of an SBU Colonel in Kyiv last week and said agents responsible for the murder were killed during an operation to apprehend them.
IAEA team at Ukraine’s Zaporizhzhia nuclear plant reported hearing hundreds of rounds of small arms fire on Saturday night.
Russia’s Defence Ministry said Russian forces took control of Myrne and Mykolaivka in eastern Ukraine.
North Korean leader Kim reaffirmed unconditional support for Moscow’s actions in the Ukraine war during a meeting with Russian Foreign Minister Lavrov, while North Korea and Russia pledged cooperation to safeguard each other’s territorial integrity. Furthermore, Russia expressed firm opposition to any attempt to undermine North Korea’s national security and sovereignty, while it was also stated that Moscow wants to further strengthen the strategic partnership.
Ukrainian President Zelensky’s Chief of staff says US Special Envoy Kellogg has arrived in Kyiv to discuss security and sanctions against Russia.
Russian President Putin’s envoy Dmitriyev says Russia-US dialogue will continue.
Russia’s Kremlin says it is obvious Ukraine is not in a hurry on peace negotiations, “we await timing of third round of talks”.
Other
North Korea warned it stands ready to take military action against threats from the US, Japan and South Korea following recent joint air drills involving a strategic US bomber, according to KCNA.
Administration officials on July 13 defended President Donald Trump’s immigration enforcement operations, including one on a California marijuana farm last week that a worker advocacy group alleges led to a man’s death.
Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Secretary Kristi Noem told NBC News’s “Meet the Press” on July 13 that Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents detained 361 illegal immigrants and encountered 14 unaccompanied minors during a July 10 operation on two marijuana farms in Southern California.
“At the California marijuana facilities, ICE and CBP law enforcement rescued at least 14 migrant children from what looks like exploitation, forced child labor, and potentially human trafficking or smuggling while facing assault and even gunfire,” DHS Assistant Secretary for Public Affairs Tricia McLaughlin said in a statement.
Among those arrested were “criminals with convictions for rape, serial burglary, hit and run and DUIs,” she added.
Both marijuana sites are operated by and licensed to Glass House Farms, which confirmed the operation and said it was fully complying with the search warrants.
United Farm Workers, a worker advocacy group, alleges that several workers were injured during the operation and reported prematurely Friday that one man died a day after he fell off a 30-foot building that he climbed. The family of Jaime Alanis, 57, later confirmed that he died Saturday.
The worker’s family created a GoFundMe page to raise funds for his family and a burial in Mexico, identifying him as Jaime Alanís.
Elizabeth Strater, national vice president of the United Farm Workers, claimed that there were U.S. citizens arrested during the operations. DHS said Monday that four U.S. citizens “are being criminally processed for assaulting or resisting officers.”
The Department of Homeland Security said its agents weren’t responsible for Alanís’s death. “Although he was not being pursued by law enforcement, this individual climbed up to the roof of a green house and fell 30 feet,” the agency stated.
Agents immediately ordered a medical evacuation, according to the department.
When asked about the death during an interview with CNN’s “State of the Union” on July 13, border czar Tom Homan said: “It’s sad. It’s unfortunate.
“He wasn’t in ICE custody, and ICE did not have hands on this person.
“But it’s always unfortunate when there’s deaths. No one wants to see people die.”
Homan said the agents were doing their job serving criminal search warrants.
“I see the media saying it was an ICE raid,” he said. “No, they were serving criminal search warrants as part of a criminal investigation involved with child trafficking, child labor. I think it was a total of 11 children that were found on that farm, and now they’re being interviewed.”
Response to Judge Ruling
On July 11, a federal judge temporarily blocked the Trump administration from carrying out immigration enforcement operations and arrests in the Central District of California without probable cause.
The judge ordered the Department of Homeland Security to stop detaining people based on their race, spoken language or accent, occupation, or presence in specific locations such as bus stops.
Noem told NBC Sunday that the administration would “absolutely” comply with the court order, but denied that the Trump administration is using racial profiling when carrying out immigration enforcement search warrants.
“What we have always done is built a case and done investigative work, and who we go after and who we target. And so this judge is ridiculous in the fact that he put forward a decision like this,” Noem said.
She said the administration will appeal the ruling and that “we will win it.”
“Because over and over again, when our ICE officers are out there getting the worst of the worst off of our streets, they’re using the investigative backgrounds and information that they have from either criminal records or what they have for charges or individuals who are breaking our federal laws that need to be brought to justice,” Noem said.
On July 13, Homan told CNN that physical characteristics are one of many factors that agents could use to establish reasonable suspicion that a potential target lacks legal immigration status, and thus give probable cause to stop and detain them.
He emphasized that it can’t be the sole reason, and suggested that features such as having a visible MS-13 tattoo would be one example.
“I want to be clear about that again, because my words are taken out of context. Physical description cannot be the sole reason to detain and question somebody. That can’t be the sole reason to raise reasonable suspicion,” Homan said.
“It’s a myriad of factors, and I could stay here for the next half hour and give you all the factors.”
Aldgra Fredly, T.J. Muscaro, and Reuters contributed to this report.
