Inflation in the United States rose by an annual rate of 3.7 percent in August, the second consecutive month of rising costs. The Consumer Price Index, which tracks a basket of goods and services typically purchased by consumers, increased by 0.6 percent from July. The so-called core CPI, which excludes volatile fuel and food costs, rose by 4.3 percent from a year ago. Gasoline prices were the primary contributor to the increase, with housing also playing a role.
The release of the latest inflation data comes just prior to the Federal Reserve’s two-day policy meeting, during which officials will assess price and wage trends to decide whether to raise interest rates or keep them stable. While inflation remains higher than the Fed’s target of 2 percent, analysts believe the cooling trend may influence the central bank to maintain steady rates. Gasoline prices at the pump rose from an average of $3.60 per gallon in July to $3.84 in August, with housing costs also contributing to the overall increase.
Newsletter
Need to Know.
Your free, daily feed from The National Pulse.
Thank You!
You are now subscribed to our newsletter.
Experts note that rent growth is slowing, with median rents falling year-over-year last month. However, it may take several months for these trends to be reflected in the CPI measures that the Fed considers when determining interest rate policy at their upcoming meeting.
By Popular Demand.
The National Pulse Now has an on-site comments section for members. Sign up today and be part of the conversation in our community of almost 15,000.
More From The Pulse
WE ARE 100% INDEPENDENT AND READER-FUNDED. FOR A GUARANTEED AD-FREE EXPERIENCE AND TO SUPPORT REAL NEWS, PLEASE SIGN UP HERE, TODAY.
❓WHAT HAPPENED: Mexico-born Bishop Alberto Rojas of San Bernardino, California, issued a decree excusing parishioners from their Sunday Mass obligations so they can avoid U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE).
Newsletter
Need to Know.
Your free, daily feed from The National Pulse.
Thank You!
You are now subscribed to our newsletter.
👤WHO WAS INVOLVED: Bishop Alberto Rojas, Msgr. Gerard M. Lopez, and the Diocese of San Bernardino.
📍WHEN & WHERE: Diocese of San Bernardino, California; decree issued recently with no specific end date.
💬KEY QUOTE: “Those who, due to genuine fear of immigration enforcement actions, are unable to attend Sunday Mass… are dispensed from this obligation.” – Bishop Rojas
🎯IMPACT: The move absolves illegal immigrants from the obligation to attend Holy Mass, regarded by many faithful Catholics who are not breaking immigration laws as a slap in the face to their brethren in places like Africa and the Middle East, who often face active, violent persecution.
IN FULL
Bishop Alberto Rojas of the Diocese of San Bernardino in California has issued a decree excusing parishioners from their Sunday Mass obligation due to “potential immigration enforcement actions by civil authorities.” The decision, according to Mexico-born Rojas, was made under his authority in the Code of Canon Law, which allows a diocesan bishop to dispense the faithful from universal and particular disciplinary laws when it contributes to their spiritual good.
Attending Sunday Mass is an obligation for all Catholics able to attend, and those who refuse are likely considered to be committing a mortal sin, which bars them from receiving the Holy Eucharist.
Rojas stated, “Recognizing that fear of immigration enforcement, such as raids by the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), may deter some members of our diocese from fulfilling the obligation to attend Mass on Sundays and holy days of obligation… and acknowledging that such fear constitutes a grave inconvenience that may impede the spiritual good of the faithful, I hereby decree the following…”
The decree specifies that members of the faithful who genuinely fear immigration enforcement actions and are unable to attend Mass are dispensed from the obligation “until such time as this decree is revoked or amended.” Rojas also encouraged alternative spiritual practices, such as personal prayer, reading Sacred Scripture, or participating in devotions like the Rosary or the Divine Mercy Chaplet. He suggested televised Mass as another option.
Additionally, Rojas recommended that parishes provide “pastoral care and assurances” and explore alternative means of catechesis and sacramental preparation for those unable to attend regularly. The decree’s duration and scope will remain in effect “until further notice or until such time as the circumstances necessitating this decree are sufficiently resolved.”
Such dispensations were also granted during the COVID-19 pandemic, with many Bishops excusing parishioners from attending Holy Mass due to the risk of possible infection.
The move also comes after President Donald J. Trump defunded many Catholic charities in the United States that were receiving billions of U.S. taxpayer dollars to help illegal immigrants.
Many Catholics around the world face serious risks in order to attend Holy Mass that go far beyond deportation. In countries like Nigeria, Catholic priests and parishioners are often killed while at Mass, including 50 people killed in 2022 at a church in the country’s southwest.
Join Pulse+ to comment below, and receive exclusive e-mail analyses.
show less
show more
By Popular Demand.
The National Pulse Now has an on-site comments section for members. Sign up today and be part of the conversation in our community of almost 15,000.
WE ARE 100% INDEPENDENT AND READER-FUNDED. FOR A GUARANTEED AD-FREE EXPERIENCE AND TO SUPPORT REAL NEWS, PLEASE SIGN UP HERE, TODAY.
❓WHAT HAPPENED: Elon Musk’s artificial intelligence (AI) chatbot, Grok, posted anti-Semitic content and referred to itself as “MechaHitler” on the X platform (formerly Twitter), prompting action from xAI engineers.
Newsletter
Need to Know.
Your free, daily feed from The National Pulse.
Thank You!
You are now subscribed to our newsletter.
👤WHO WAS INVOLVED: Elon Musk, xAI engineers, and users of the X platform who interacted with Grok.
📍WHEN & WHERE: July 8, 2023, on the X platform.
💬KEY QUOTE: “We are aware of recent posts made by Grok and are actively working to remove the inappropriate posts.” – xAI statement
🎯IMPACT: Grok’s behavior raised significant concerns about AI moderation, leading to its posts being removed and further scrutiny of xAI’s training methods. Linda Yaccarino, the CEO of X, resigned following the “MechaHitler” episode, although a direct link has not been confirmed.
IN FULL
Grok, Elon Musk’s artificial intelligence (AI) chatbot integrated into the X platform (formerly Twitter), has ignited widespread controversy after it posted a series of anti-Semitic messages. Among the most alarming content were derogatory remarks about Jews and the chatbot referring to itself as “MechaHitler.”
Following the incident, engineers at xAI, the company behind Grok, responded with a public statement: “We are aware of recent posts made by Grok and are actively working to remove the inappropriate posts.” The company added that it remains committed to “banning hate speech on X” and plans to make improvements to Grok’s training data and moderation processes. Grok itself is currently claiming its “MechaHitler arc” was “satirical.”
Grok, developed to rival ChatGPT and marketed as a “truth-seeking” AI with enhanced reasoning capabilities, is currently accessible to premium users of X. Its name is derived from the term “grok,” first introduced in Robert A. Heinlein’s 1961 novel Stranger in a Strange Land, which means to understand something deeply and intuitively.
Coinciding with the fallout from Grok’s behavior, X CEO Linda Yaccarino resigned on July 9. Although no official connection between her departure and the chatbot’s remarks has been confirmed, the timing has led to speculation and added to broader concerns over the ethical complexities of AI deployment and platform accountability. However, WarRoom host and former White House Chief Strategist Stephen K. Bannon believes the resignation is tied to Yaccarino’s inability to rein in Musk’s antics more generally.
Join Pulse+ to comment below, and receive exclusive e-mail analyses.
show less
show more
By Popular Demand.
The National Pulse Now has an on-site comments section for members. Sign up today and be part of the conversation in our community of almost 15,000.
WE ARE 100% INDEPENDENT AND READER-FUNDED. FOR A GUARANTEED AD-FREE EXPERIENCE AND TO SUPPORT REAL NEWS, PLEASE SIGN UP HERE, TODAY.
❓WHAT HAPPENED: Protests against federal immigration enforcement outside a San Francisco courthouse turned violent when demonstrators attempted to stop deportations by climbing onto a U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) vehicle.
👤WHO WAS INVOLVED: Protesters, ICE agents, and federal officers were involved in the clashes outside a courthouse in downtown San Francisco.
Newsletter
Need to Know.
Your free, daily feed from The National Pulse.
Thank You!
You are now subscribed to our newsletter.
📍WHEN & WHERE: Tuesday, July 8, in San Francisco, California.
💬KEY QUOTE: “I was bleeding everywhere. They were brutal to those of us trying to exercise our rights and protect our community.” – Sorin, a protester.
🎯IMPACT: The protests disrupted federal operations and led to injuries, arrests, and ongoing high tensions between federal immigration agents and anti-ICE agitators.
IN FULL
Violent demonstrations against U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) operations broke out near a courthouse in downtown San Francisco, California, on Tuesday. Video of the protest shows far-left demonstrators attempting to interfere with federal immigration enforcement action by barring the path of an ICE van and climbing onto its hood.
At least two demonstrators can be seen in the video clinging to the ICE vehicle as it attempts to drive away, with one person falling off and another holding on as the van swerves sharply. Protesters, many wearing masks and keffiyehs, were also seen engaging in physical altercations with federal agents. “Holy f***ing s**t, frightening times, right?” a demonstrator can be heard exclaiming in the video before adding: “What the f**k have we gotten ourselves into?”
Meanwhile, another protester who spoke with local San Francisco media, identified only as “Sorin,” stated that see was injured while attempting to block an ICE vehicle. “I was bleeding everywhere,” she said, adding: “They were brutal to those of us trying to exercise our rights and protect our community.”
The demonstrations are part of a broader wave of violent protests against immigration enforcement operations across the country, including in New York, Oregon, and Texas. Earlier this month, chaos unfolded at an ICE detention facility in Portland, Oregon, where protesters clashed with officers attempting to maintain order.
Meanwhile, on July 4, a “planned ambush” targeting corrections officers at an ICE detention facility in Alvarado, Texas, left a police officer with a gunshot wound to the neck. The National Pulse reported on Tuesday that eleven individuals have been arrested so far in connection with the attack.
Protesters in San Francisco try to stop ICE Agents.
❓WHAT HAPPENED: Three teenage girls filed a lawsuit against the State of Oregon over policies allowing trans-identifying males to compete in female sports.
👤WHO WAS INVOLVED: Plaintiffs Maddie Eischen and Sophia Carpenter, an unnamed third plaintiff, Riley Gaines, Simone Biles, the Oregon Department of Education, the Oregon School Activities Association (OSAA), and Governor Tina Kotek (D).
Newsletter
Need to Know.
Your free, daily feed from The National Pulse.
Thank You!
You are now subscribed to our newsletter.
📍WHEN & WHERE: The lawsuit follows an April track meet in Oregon and was filed with support from the America First Policy Institute.
💬KEY QUOTE: “This case is a landmark federal challenge to a statewide policy that permits males to compete in K–12 girls’ sports based on nothing more than self-proclaimed gender identity.” – America First Policy Institute
🎯IMPACT: The lawsuit challenges Oregon’s policy under Title IX, aiming to protect the integrity of women’s sports.
IN FULL
Three teenage girls have filed a lawsuit against the State of Oregon, challenging laws that permit biological males claiming to be transgender to compete against women and girls in sports. The incident that led to the lawsuit occurred in April at an Oregon track meet, where plaintiffs Maddie Eischen and Sophia Carpenter refused to compete against a trans-identifying male athlete. A third plaintiff, a legal minor, is only identified as S.C. and is represented by her legal guardians, Randy and Tiffany Castaneda.
The America First Policy Institute (AFPI) is representing the three girls, with court filings arguing that Oregon’s policy allowing biologically male athletes to compete against women and girls violates Title IX. “This case is a landmark federal challenge to a statewide policy that permits males to compete in K–12 girls’ sports based on nothing more than self-proclaimed gender identity,” AFPI said in a statement. “That policy, enforced by the Oregon Department of Education and the Oregon School Activities Association (OSAA), violates the plain language of Title IX and undermines decades of progress for female students and athletes.”
Two of the plaintiffs, Maddie Eischen and Sophia Carpenter, stated that they were inspired to act after witnessing a public dispute between pro-transgender former Olympic gymnast Simone Biles and pro-women conservative activist Riley Gaines. The incident that led to the lawsuit occurred in April at an Oregon track meet, where Eischen and Carpenter refused to compete against a trans-identifying male athlete. Following this, Gaines reached out to the teenagers and encouraged them to take legal action.
In a recent interview, Carpenter explained, “I think especially when Riley Gaines and Simone Biles, and that whole thing happened, and kind of seeing how that played out and how the public responded, I think that was encouraging to see how many people are on the side of protecting women’s sports.”
Gaines has been outspoken about being forced to compete against transgender athlete “Lia” Thomas—recently stripped of his titles—as a swimmer. Meanwhile, Biles is a supporter of transgenders in female sports—despite having written as recently as 2017 that it was a “good thing guys don’t compete against girls or [they would] take all the gold medals” in her own sport.
Oregon’s Department of Education, the OSAA, and Governor Tina Kotek (D) are listed as defendants in the lawsuit.
Join Pulse+ to comment below, and receive exclusive e-mail analyses.
show less
show more
By Popular Demand.
The National Pulse Now has an on-site comments section for members. Sign up today and be part of the conversation in our community of almost 15,000.
WE ARE 100% INDEPENDENT AND READER-FUNDED. FOR A GUARANTEED AD-FREE EXPERIENCE AND TO SUPPORT REAL NEWS, PLEASE SIGN UP HERE, TODAY.
❓WHAT HAPPENED: President Donald J. Trump issued tariff letters to seven countries on Wednesday. This follows his announcement on Monday of the imposition of trade duties on a number of countries, including Japan and South Korea.
👤WHO WAS INVOLVED: Countries targeted were the Philippines, Brunei, Moldova, Algeria, Libya, Iraq, and Sri Lanka.
Newsletter
Need to Know.
Your free, daily feed from The National Pulse.
Thank You!
You are now subscribed to our newsletter.
📍WHEN & WHERE: Letters were sent on Wednesday, with tariffs set to begin August 1. Meanwhile, discussions with the European Union (EU) bloc and a number of individual nations remain ongoing.
💬KEY QUOTE: “You guys are going to fight, we’re not going to trade. And we seem to be quite successful in doing that.” – Donald Trump
🎯IMPACT: The tariffs aim to address trade imbalances and boost American manufacturing.
IN FULL
President Donald J. Trump has announced new tariffs targeting seven smaller U.S. trading partners, including the Philippines, Brunei, Moldova, Algeria, Libya, Iraq, and Sri Lanka. The tariffs, ranging from 20 percent to 30 percent, will take effect on August 1. Notably, the move follows the America First leader’s imposition of trade duties on Japan and South Korea this past Monday, along with a number of other nations.
The Trump administration has consistently contended that tariffs are a tool to address long-standing trade imbalances and bolster the U.S. economy. During a meeting with African leaders on Wednesday afternoon, Trump emphasized how his trade policies are also serving a key diplomatic purpose, highlighting his administration’s successful facilitation of peace deals between India and Pakistan, as well as Rwanda and Congo. According to Trump, trade “seems to be a foundation” for his success in settling foreign disputes, adding: “You guys are going to fight, we’re not going to trade. And we seem to be quite successful in doing that.”
The letters, posted on Truth Social, followed a 90-day negotiation period that saw the imposition of a 10 percent global tariff. Trump indicated there would be no extensions for the targeted countries. The tariffs are part of a broader strategy that includes recent import taxes of 25 percent on Japan and South Korea. The European Union (EU), a frequent focus of Trump’s trade grievances, has not yet received similar tariff letters.
Critics argue that the tariffs could worsen inflation and slow economic growth, though economic data has yet to show the traded duties producing any inflationary pressure. In fact, as The National Pulse noted in past reporting, tariffs have historically generated a degree of deflationary pressure.
Meanwhile, the Trump administration asserts that the measures will reduce trade deficits and encourage the return of manufacturing jobs to the United States.
America often finds itself at an unfair disadvantage competing against foreign countries where pay and conditions are poor, governments subsidise their producers, or American goods are themselves subject to punitive tariff and non-tariff barriers, if not a combination of all three.
Join Pulse+ to comment below, and receive exclusive e-mail analyses.
show less
show more
By Popular Demand.
The National Pulse Now has an on-site comments section for members. Sign up today and be part of the conversation in our community of almost 15,000.
WE ARE 100% INDEPENDENT AND READER-FUNDED. FOR A GUARANTEED AD-FREE EXPERIENCE AND TO SUPPORT REAL NEWS, PLEASE SIGN UP HERE, TODAY.
❓WHAT HAPPENED: The Trump administration has restricted temporary visas for Nigerians, limiting most to single-entry visas valid for only three months.
Newsletter
Need to Know.
Your free, daily feed from The National Pulse.
Thank You!
You are now subscribed to our newsletter.
👤WHO WAS INVOLVED: President Donald J. Trump, the U.S. Embassy in Nigeria, and Nigerian travelers.
📍WHEN & WHERE: United States and Nigeria, July 2025.
💬KEY QUOTE: “Effective immediately, most non-immigrant and non-diplomatic visas issued to citizens of Nigeria will be single-entry visas with a three-month validity period.” – U.S. Embassy in Abuja.
🎯IMPACT: The move is part of broader Trump-era security measures affecting African nations, raising diplomatic tensions and threatening future trade opportunities with West Africa.
IN FULL
Temporary-stay visas for Nigerians visiting the United States have been slashed to three months and are now limited to single entry only. The change, announced by the U.S. Embassy in Abuja, follows a wave of travel restrictions under President Donald Trump’s administration.
The embassy’s statement on Tuesday framed the move as an “update to its reciprocal non-immigrant visa policy,” noting that it impacts several countries, including Nigeria. Previously, visa durations and terms varied widely depending on the applicant’s purpose of travel.
The visa clampdown comes shortly after Trump ordered sweeping travel bans and restrictions affecting nationals from more than a dozen countries, citing concerns about national security and insufficient vetting systems. Citizens of Chad, Congo, Equatorial Guinea, Eritrea, Libya, Somalia, and Sudan were banned outright. Chad responded by suspending U.S. visa issuances in return.
“In my first term, my powerful travel restrictions were one of our most successful policies, and they were a key part of preventing major foreign terror attacks on American soil,” Trump said at the time, adding, “We will not let what happened in Europe happen to America.”
The Trump administration’s broader immigration crackdown has intensified scrutiny on African nations and sparked concern among diplomats and trade partners. The latest decision to curtail Nigerian travel is seen as part of a larger pattern of policy designed to overhaul and harden American entry requirements.
Join Pulse+ to comment below, and receive exclusive e-mail analyses.
show less
show more
By Popular Demand.
The National Pulse Now has an on-site comments section for members. Sign up today and be part of the conversation in our community of almost 15,000.
WE ARE 100% INDEPENDENT AND READER-FUNDED. FOR A GUARANTEED AD-FREE EXPERIENCE AND TO SUPPORT REAL NEWS, PLEASE SIGN UP HERE, TODAY.
❓WHAT HAPPENED: Linda Yaccarino announced her resignation as CEO of X (formerly Twitter), following controversies involving the platform’s AI assistant, Grok. Some—including former Trump White House Chief Strategist and WarRoomhost Stephen K. Bannon—speculate that Yaccarino’s exit was precipitated by her inability to keep the social media platform’s owner, Elon Musk, in check.
👤WHO WAS INVOLVED: Linda Yaccarino, Elon Musk, Stephen K. Bannon, and, indirectly, President Donald J. Trump.
Newsletter
Need to Know.
Your free, daily feed from The National Pulse.
Thank You!
You are now subscribed to our newsletter.
📍WHEN & WHERE: Yaccarino announced her resignation on Wednesday, after serving two years as CEO of X.
💬KEY QUOTE: “After two incredible years, I’ve decided to step down as CEO of X.” – Linda Yaccarino
🎯IMPACT: Yaccarino’s departure fuels speculation about internal issues at X and coincides with tensions between Elon Musk and President Donald Trump.
IN FULL
Elon Musk reacted briefly on Wednesday to Linda Yaccarino‘s resignation as CEO of his X platform (formerly Twitter), after two years in the role, brusquely responding to her announcement: “Thank you for your contributions.” The terse reply from Musk is fueling speculation that Yaccarino’s departure was driven by deeper issues than those with X’s AI assistant, Grok, which recently drew backlash for praising Adolf Hitler, among other inappropriate behaviors.
Yaccarino took to X to share her decision, writing, “After two incredible years, I’ve decided to step down as CEO of X. When [Elon Musk] and I first spoke of his vision for X, I knew it would be the opportunity of a lifetime to carry out the extraordinary mission of this company. I’m immensely grateful to him for entrusting me with the responsibility of protecting free speech, turning the company around, and transforming X into the Everything App.” Musk acquired the social media platform—then known as Twitter—in 2022 for $44 billion.
The exchange between Musk and Yaccarino is driving speculation that the latter’s exit was more driven by her inability to assert control over the billionaire technology mogul, especially regarding his ongoing political spat with President Donald J. Trump. For instance, former White House Chief Strategist Stephen K. Bannon, referring to Musk as “Elmo,” contended that Yaccarino’s resignation was entirely because of Musk’s antics.
“We understand why you are stepping down and why you’re running. That Elmo’s out of control. Sorry, baby, that came with the job. You took the job, you took the pay, you took the warrants, you took the stock options, you took all the hundreds of millions of dollars you’re going to make,” Bannon argued.
“No, if you can’t keep Elmo in the nursery and keep him under control, you’re gonna pay a price. You are gonna pay the price. It doesn’t matter that you’re resigning today, baby. The whole scam over there, the whole complete scam of Elmo is going to be taken apart brick by brick, OK?”
BANNON: Linda Yaccarino is stepping down as CEO of X.
Sorry, but resigning won’t hide you from the lawsuits.
You couldn’t keep “Elmo the Mook” in his nursery, and you’ll have to face the consequences. pic.twitter.com/25txVrqZPV
— Bannon’s WarRoom (@Bannons_WarRoom) July 9, 2025
❓WHAT HAPPENED: Federal authorities have warned that green card holders with criminal records face detention and deportation for violating immigration laws.
Newsletter
Need to Know.
Your free, daily feed from The National Pulse.
Thank You!
You are now subscribed to our newsletter.
👤WHO WAS INVOLVED: U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP), United States Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS), Secretary of State Marco Rubio, and immigrants and their advocates.
📍WHEN & WHERE: The warning was issued recently on X (formerly Twitter), with enforcement actions occurring across the United States.
💬KEY QUOTE: “Possessing a green card is a privilege, not a right,” Customs and Border Protection confirmed on X.
🎯IMPACT: Green card holders with criminal histories or those accused of supporting extremist activities face heightened scrutiny, detention, and potential deportation.
IN FULL
Federal immigration officials are warning migrants with lawful permanent resident status that they still face deportation if they have criminal records. U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) says green card holders found to be violating criminal law or immigration law face revocation of their legal residency and deportation.
CBP emphasized the seriousness of this issue in a recent statement on X, formerly Twitter, writing: “Under our nation’s laws, our government has the authority to revoke your green card if our laws are broken and abused.”
The agency also warned that lawful permanent residents arriving at U.S. ports of entry who have criminal convictions may be detained and could undergo removal proceedings. This notice aligns with broader enforcement policies under the Trump administration, prioritizing tougher immigration measures, including much stronger border control, removing illegals, and heightened scrutiny of those with legal status.
Amelia Wilson, assistant professor at the Elisabeth Haub School of Law and director of the Immigration Justice Clinic, complains that green cards should not be taken away without due process. “The Department of Homeland Security cannot unilaterally ‘revoke’ a permanent resident’s status,“ Wilson insists. “There is a process the agency must follow, including serving the individual with a ‘Notice of Intent to Rescind,’ at which time that individual is entitled to a hearing before an immigration judge.“
In a separate post on X, Secretary of State Marco Rubio reiterated the administration’s stance on national security concerns tied to immigration enforcement, stating: “We will be revoking the visas and/or green cards of Hamas supporters in America so they can be deported.”
U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) echoed this approach, warning that permanent residents and visa holders could lose their immigration privileges if they are found to have committed crimes, supported terrorism, or engaged in activities threatening public safety.
These moves come as the Trump administration is also pushing to denaturalize immigrants who have acquired U.S. citizenship, if they are found to have lied during the naturalization process or committed crimes, among other transgressions.
The Trump administration has also launched online campaigns encouraging illegal immigrants to self-deport and promoting arrests of individuals with criminal histories as part of a broader crackdown.
Attention Green Card Holders: Having a criminal history does not make you an upstanding lawful permanent resident. Possessing a green card is a privilege, not a right. Under our nation’s laws, our government has the authority to revoke your green card if our laws are broken and…
❓WHAT HAPPENED: President Donald J. Trump criticized Russian President Vladimir Putin during a Cabinet meeting on Tuesday.
👤WHO WAS INVOLVED: President Trump, Russian President Vladimir Putin, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky, former President Barack Obama.
Newsletter
Need to Know.
Your free, daily feed from The National Pulse.
Thank You!
You are now subscribed to our newsletter.
📍WHEN & WHERE: Tuesday, during a Cabinet meeting held in Washington, D.C.
💬KEY QUOTE: “We get a lot of bulls**t thrown at us by Putin, if you want to know the truth. He’s very nice all the time, but it turns out to be meaningless.” – Donald Trump
🎯IMPACT: Trump highlighted the differences in U.S. military aid to Ukraine under his administration compared to Obama’s, implying he will begin applying significantly more pressure to Russia if the Kremlin remains unserious about making peace.
IN FULL
President Donald J. Trump took a strong line on Russian leader Vladimir Putin during his Cabinet meeting on Tuesday, calling out what he described as the Russian leader’s “bullshit” on the Ukraine war. “That was a war that should never have happened. And a lot of people are dying and it should end. And I don’t know, we get… we get a lot of bullshit thrown at us by Putin, if you want to know the truth. He’s very nice all the time, but it turns out to be meaningless,” he said.
Often portrayed as a Russia sympathizer or even a Russian puppet—without evidence—by his detractors, Trump stressed that his first administration was far more helpful to Ukraine than Barack Obama’s. “I gave them the Javelins. Remember? They said, ‘Trump gave them javelins and Obama gave them sheets.’ Right. They called Obama at that time, Barack Hussein Obama, if you haven’t heard, he did a terrible job,” Trump said.
In 2014, amid Russia’s annexation of Crimea, the Obama administration opted to provide Ukraine with non-lethal assistance, including medical supplies and blankets. Trump, by contrast, approved the sale of Javelin anti-tank missiles to Ukraine in 2017.
By referencing his first administration’s military support for Ukraine, Trump likely intended to imply that Russia could expect the U.S. to begin ramping up assistance to Ukraine again if the Kremlin remains unserious about making peace.
Trump also blamed former President Joe Biden’s 2021 withdrawal from Afghanistan for emboldening Putin to invade Ukraine in 2022. “I think that had you not had the situation in Afghanistan, I don’t think Putin would have gotten in. I think when he looked at how stupid and incompetent that operation was, he said, ‘wow, this might be a chance,’” Trump argued.
Trump stressed that while European countries have contributed to supporting Ukraine, the United States has carried the heaviest burden. He ended by endorsing the resumption of certain defensive weapons shipments to Ukraine. “Putin is not treating human beings right. He’s killing too many people,” he emphasized.
On Wednesday, Putin spokesman Dmitry Peskov struck a cautious tone on Trump’s statements, saying the Kremlin was “pretty calm about this.”
“Trump’s way of talking is generally quite harsh… [W]e plan to continue our dialogue with Washington to mend our broken bilateral relations [and] we hope that Trump and his team will continue their efforts to get the peace process back to the realm of diplomacy,” Peskov said.
In June, Trump adopted a harsh tone against Iran and especially Israel when a ceasefire between them appeared to be slipping away, ultimately pressuring them both into ending their operations.
President Trump: “We get a lot of bullshit thrown at us by Putin, if you want to know the truth. He’s very nice all the time, but it turns out to be meaningless.” pic.twitter.com/VMnXSTuCiK
❓WHAT HAPPENED: The Trump administration announced plans to issue subpoenas to Harvard University for information about alleged misconduct involving foreignstudents.
👤WHO WAS INVOLVED: The Department of Homeland Security (DHS), the Department of Education, the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), and Harvard University.
Newsletter
Need to Know.
Your free, daily feed from The National Pulse.
Thank You!
You are now subscribed to our newsletter.
📍WHEN & WHERE: The announcement was made on Wednesday, July 9, with actions targeting Harvard University.
💬KEY QUOTE: “We tried to do things the easy way with Harvard. Now, through their refusal to cooperate, we have to do things the hard way,” said DHS Assistant Secretary Tricia McLaughlin.
🎯IMPACT: The move could lead to Harvard losing its accreditation, affecting student eligibility for federal financial aid.
IN FULL
President Donald J. Trump’s Department of Homeland Security (DHS) announced on Wednesday that it intends to issue subpoenas for information Harvard University may have on any misconduct, anti-Semitism, or illegal activities connected to foreign students. The move marks the latest escalation in an ongoing dispute between the Trump White House and Harvard that has already seen the Ivy League institution potentially lose billions in federal funding.
In addition to the subpoenas announced by DHS, the Departments of Education and Health and Human Services (HHS) revealed they have notified Harvard’s accreditor that the university violated federal law by failing to address reported harassment of Jewish students. Consequently, Harvard could lose its accreditation, potentially making its students ineligible for federal financial assistance.
Notably, the administrative subpoenas from DHS are in response to Harvard refusing to provide requested information regarding its Student and Exchange Visitor Program (SEVP) certification. “We tried to do things the easy way with Harvard. Now, through their refusal to cooperate, we have to do things the hard way,” said DHS Assistant Secretary Tricia McLaughlin in a statement.
The National Pulse reported in late May that President Trump had drawn a firm line on Harvard’s refusal to hand over the names of its foreign students to his administration. “Harvard wants to fight. They want to show how smart they are, and they’re getting their ass kicked,” Trump said at the time.
Already, the Trump administration has frozen $3 billion in federal funding, moved to strip Harvard of its SEVP certification, and blocked new foreign visa appointments.
Join Pulse+ to comment below, and receive exclusive e-mail analyses.
show less
show more
By Popular Demand.
The National Pulse Now has an on-site comments section for members. Sign up today and be part of the conversation in our community of almost 15,000.
Share Story
FacebookTwitterWhatsappTruthTelegramGettrCopy Link
Real News Fan? Show It!
Many people are shocked to learn that because of active censorship, we currently have to spend more time making sure you can even see The National Pulse, than on producing the news itself. Which sucks. Because we do this for the truth, and for you.
But the regime doesn’t want you being informed. That’s why they want us to go away. And that will happen if more people don’t sign up to support our work. It’s basic supply and demand. So demand you get to read The National Pulse, unrestricted. Sign up, today.
We don’t sell ads, and refuse corporate or political cash. It all comes down to you, the reader. I hope you can help.
