Sitting beside Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, Trump said that "the U.S. will take over the Gaza Strip," which would be emptied of Palestinians.
By Brett Wilkins
U.S. President Donald Trump said Tuesday that the United States will "take over" Gaza after emptying the embattled enclave of nearly all its native Palestinians, sparking a firestorm of criticism that included allegations of intent to commit ethnic cleansing.
Speaking during a press conference with fugitive Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu on Tuesday, Trump told reporters, "The U.S. will take over the Gaza Strip, and we will do a job with it too."
"We'll own it and be responsible for dismantling all of the dangerous unexploded bombs and other weapons on the site, level the site, and get rid of the destroyed buildings—level it out and create an economic development that will supply unlimited numbers of jobs and housing for the people of the area," Trump continued.
"We're going to develop it, create thousands and thousands of jobs, and it will be something that the entire Middle East could be very proud of," he said, evoking the proposals of varying seriousness to build Jewish-only beachfront communities over the ruins of Gaza.
Doubling down on his January call for the removal of most of Gaza's population to Egypt and Jordan—both of which vehemently rejected the proposal—Trump said that "it would be my hope that we could do something really nice, really good, where [Palestinians] wouldn't want to return."
"Why would they want to return?" asked Trump. "The place has been hell."
Asked how many Palestinians should leave Gaza, Trump replied, "all of them," citing a figure of 1.7-1.8 million Palestinians out of an estimated population of approximately 2.3 million people.
The forced transfer of a population by an occupying power is a war crime, according to Article 49 of the Fourth Geneva Convention—under which Israel's settler colonies in the occupied West Bank are also illegal.
"I don't think people should be going back to Gaza," Trump continued. "Gaza is not a place for people to be living, and the only reason they want to go back, and I believe this strongly, is because they have no alternative. If they had an alternative, they'd much rather not go back to Gaza and live in a beautiful alternative that's safe."
Asked if he would deploy U.S. troops to Gaza, Trump said that "we'll do what's necessary. If it's necessary, we'll do that."
Palestinian Ambassador to the U.N. Riyad Mansour responded by affirming that "our country and our home is the Gaza Strip."
"It's part of Palestine," he stressed. "Our homeland is our homeland."
Responding to Trump's remarks, Netanyahu praised his ally's "willingness to puncture conventional thinking" and stand behind Israel.
"[Trump] sees a different future for that piece of land that has been the focus of so much terrorism, so many attacks against us, so many trials and so many tribulations," Netanyahu told reporters as he stood beside the U.S. leader. "He has a different idea, and I think it's worth paying attention to this. We're talking about it. He's exploring it with his people, with his staff."
"I think it's something that could change history," Netanyahu added, "and it's worthwhile really pursuing this avenue."
There is currently a fragile cease-fire between Israel and Hamas in Gaza, where more than 15 months of Israeli bombardment, invasion, and siege have left more than 170,000 Palestinians dead, maimed, or missing and more than 2 million others forcibly displaced, starved, or sickened, according to local and international officials and agencies.
Numerous Israeli leaders have advocated the ethnic cleansing of Palestinians from Gaza and the Jewish recolonization of the coastal enclave, most of whose inhabitants are the descendants of Palestinians forcibly expelled from other parts of Palestine during the establishment of the modern state of Israel in the late 1940s. Palestinians ethnically cleansed during what they call the Nakba, or catastrophe, have since been denied their U.N.-guaranteed right of return to their homeland.
Last November, former Israeli Defense Minister Moshe Ya'alon acknowledged that the ethnic cleansing of northern Gaza was underway. Other Israeli political and military leaders have said that the so-called "Generals' Plan"—a strategy to starve and ethnically cleanse Palestinians from northern Gaza—was effectively in progress.
Palestinian-American journalist Ramzy Baroud responded to Trump's remarks in a video posted on social media Tuesday.
"Now, you would say, 'Wait a minute, Trump seems to be really, really determined, his heart is set on ethnically cleansing Palestinians, and this subject is back on the table,'" Baroud said. "The question is, whose table? It's not on the table of the Palestinian people."
Earlier Tuesday, Trump signed an executive order withdrawing the United States from the U.N. Human Rights Council (UNHRC) and continuing the freeze on funding for the U.N. Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East (UNRWA), which Israel has baselessly accused of being a terrorist organization.
In a fact sheet viewed by multiple media outlets, the White House asserted that UNHRC "has not fulfilled its purpose and continues to be used as a protective body for countries committing horrific human rights violations."
"The UNHRC has demonstrated consistent bias against Israel, focusing on it unfairly and disproportionately in council proceedings," the White House continued. "In 2018, the year President Trump withdrew from the UNHRC in his first administration, the organization passed more resolutions condemning Israel than Syria, Iran, and North Korea combined."
UNHRC spokesperson Pascal Sim noted Tuesday that the U.S. has been an observer state, not a UNHRC member, since January 1, and according to U.N. rules, it cannot "technically withdraw from an intergovernmental body that is no longer part of."
The UNRWA funding pause is based on Israeli claims—reportedly extracted from Palestinian prisoners in an interrogation regime rife with torture and abuse—that a dozen of the agency's more than 13,000 workers in Gaza were involved in the Hamas-led October 7, 2023 attack. These claims prompted numerous nations including the United States to cut off funding for UNRWA last year. The U.S. had been UNRWA's biggest benefactor, providing $300-400 million annually to the lifesaving organization.
UNRWA fired nine employees in response to Israel's claim, even as the agency admitted there was no evidence linking the staffers to October 7. Faced with this lack of evidence, the European Union and countries including Japan, Germany, Canada, and Australia reinstated funding for UNRWA. Last March, then-U.S. President Joe Biden signed a bill prohibiting American funding for the agency.
Israeli lawmakers have also banned UNRWA from operating in Israel, severely hampering the agency's ability to carry out its mission throughout Palestine, including in Gaza and the illegally occupied West Bank and East Jerusalem.
According to the most recent UNRWA situation report, at least 272 of the agency's workers have been killed by Israeli forces, which since October 2023 have bombed numerous schools, shelters, and other facilities used by the agency.
William Deere, the director of UNRWA's Washington, D.C. office, toldPBS earlier this week that "there is no alternative to UNRWA."
"UNRWA performs a unique function in the U.N. system," Deere explained. "We are a direct service provider. We run... a healthcare network, we run an education system, we provide relief and social services."
As U.N. Secretary-General António Guterres said last month, "UNRWA has been carrying out activities in the occupied Palestinian territory for more than 70 years... and has thus accumulated unparalleled experience in providing assistance that is tailored to the specific needs of Palestine refugees."
Trump's executive order preceded his meeting with Netanyahu, who is wanted by the International Criminal Court after it issued arrest warrants for him and Yoav Gallant, his former defense minister, last November for alleged war crimes and crimes against humanity in Gaza. The tribunal also issued a warrant for Hamas leader Mohammed Diab Ibrahim Al-Masri.
The U.S. president's directives also followed his January freeze on foreign aid to countries except for Israel and Egypt, and his plan to shut down the United States Agency for International Development.
This article and its headline have been updated to include Trump's call for U.S. ownership of Gaza.
One think tank urged Congress to "create a more equitable federal tax system that raises revenue sufficient to meet the nation's needs and requires wealthy households and corporations to pay their fair share."
By Jessica Corbett
As U.S. President Donald Trump and congressional Republicans plot more tax cuts for the rich at the expense of working people, a progressive think tank on Tuesday put out a policy brief detailing how those cuts and price-hiking tariffs would deeply harm working families.
The Center on Budget and Policy Priorities brief is part of CBPP's "2025 Budget Stakes" series, which also includes documents on potential "painful cuts" for "vulnerable people" and the possible loss of health coverage, food aid, and rental assistance.
"High-income households and profitable corporations would grow even wealthier under Republican proposals for trillions of dollars in new or extended tax cuts," the new report states, "even as Republican proposals for trillions of dollars of cuts to health assistance, food assistance, and other programs would leave more children in poverty, more families without stable housing, and more people without health coverage."
"As a first step, Congress should let the 2017 tax cuts for households with high incomes expire on schedule."
"The major tax law that President Trump and a Republican-controlled Congress enacted in 2017 was heavily skewed to households with high incomes," the brief continues. "It was also expensive, costing $1.9 trillion over 10 years, according to the Congressional Budget Office's 2018 estimate. And it failed to deliver the economic gains its backers promised; studies found the benefits didn't 'trickle down' to most workers."
The current debate over taxes in Washington, D.C. is happening not only because Republicans now control the White House and both chambers of Congress, but also because key parts of the GOP's Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of 2017 expire at the end of this year.
The CBPP brief warns that extending the expiring provisions from what critics called the "GOP Tax Scam" would:
Do relatively little for households with low or middle incomes;
Add trillions in debt, much of it to benefit the wealthy;
Worsen racial inequities; and
Weaken the nation's ability to fulfill our commitments to seniors and meet national needs and challenges.
The document features a section on the Internal Revenue Service, which explains that "during the 2010s, steep budget cuts imperiled the IRS' ability to serve taxpayers and enforce the nation's tax laws. But funding from the 2022 Inflation Reduction Act is helping the IRS dramatically improve its customer service, operate the direct file mechanism so people can file their taxes directly with the IRS for free, and modernize and improve its tax enforcement efforts."
"Those efforts are already paying off in cracking down on tax cheats and ensuring that wealthy people pay more of the taxes they owe," the brief notes. "But Congress has already canceled some of the new enforcement funding, and Republican budget proposals call for repealing the rest."
Although Trump on Monday struck deals with the Canadian and Mexican governments to delay 25% tariffs on goods from the United States' neighboring nations, CBPP also sounded the alarm about Trump's campaign promises regarding the taxes.
"Research shows that the extra costs imposed by these tariffs are passed on to consumers; the tariffs announced February 1 would cost a typical middle-income household around $1,200 per year, according to one estimate," the brief states. "Tariffs can also provoke trade wars, which can harm domestic businesses."
The document argues that "instead of extending and expanding costly tax breaks for those who least need help, Congress should create a more equitable federal tax system that raises revenue sufficient to meet the nation's needs and requires wealthy households and corporations to pay their fair share."
"As a first step, Congress should let the 2017 tax cuts for households with high incomes expire on schedule," the brief says. "Congress also should expand the child tax credit, especially for the roughly 17 million children who don't receive the full credit today because their families' incomes are too low, and expand the earned income tax credit for workers not raising children in their home, who now receive little or nothing from the credit."
"In addition, Congress should scale back corporate tax breaks and reduce the special tax breaks enjoyed by very wealthy households that shield their considerable income from taxation," the report concludes. "And Congress should provide the IRS with the funding it needs to enforce the nation's tax laws and better ensure that wealthy people and corporations pay the taxes they legally owe."
"The administration's claim that there is a migrant 'invasion' is unfounded, and its mislabeling immigrants as 'terrorists' is diversionary—and neither makes offshore detention lawful," said one rights advocate.
The head of Consumer Watchdog argued the company is "detouring the rules that protect state consumers from insurance price gouging."
By Eloise Goldsmith
The insurance giant State Farm on Monday asked California state insurance regulators to approve an emergency interim rate hike of 22%, drawing pushback from the nonprofit Consumer Watchdog, which accused the company of not providing the financial data necessary to justify the increase.
"State Farm wants to fill its bank accounts on the backs of California homeowners, some of whose homes are in ashes," said Carmen Balber, Consumer Watchdog's executive director. "Insurance Commissioner [Ricardo] Lara must require State Farm to prove it needs this staggering increase."
Devastating wildfires ravaged the Los Angeles area starting in early January, compounding an already escalating insurance crisis in the state and causing between $35 to $45 billion in insured property losses, according to one estimate. The fires, which are now either out or fully contained, generated over 8,700 claims for State Farm General, the California homeowners insurance affiliate of the firm State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company. The compnay said it has paid over a billion to customers due to the blazes.
State Farm General is the largest insurance group in the state. The firm stopped writing any new policies in May 2023, and last spring the company announced it would not renew plans for tens of thousands of homeowners—though it has said it will renew policies for those impacted by the recent fires in Los Angeles County.
In a letter to the California Department of Insurance, leaders at State Farms General requested that the department take "emergency action to help protect California's fragile insurance market," by allowing interim rate increases of 22% for homeowners, 15% for renters, 15% for condo owners, and 38% for rental dwellings.
"State Farm General's rate filings raise serious questions about its financial condition," department spokesman Gabriel Sanchez said, according to the outlet Insurance Business.
Proposition 103, a measure passed in 1988 which sought to protect consumers from arbitrary insurance rate hikes, requires insurance companies to back up their rate applications with "comprehensive data," according to the California's insurance commissioner.
Consumer Watchdog said that State Farm General is asking for an increase on an interim basis, meaning "without having to prove that it needs that increase, or the impact higher premiums will have on the ability of consumers to afford coverage."
The letter from State Farm General to the department includes an "illustration of State Farm General financial deterioration" as an attachment.
According to Consumer Watchdog, the requested 22% hike on home insurance rates amounts to $740 million a year for the company. The group has called the request a "bailout."
The request comes after State Farm General last summer asked for a 30% rate increase for its homeowners, a 52% rate increase for renters, and a 36% rate increase for condominium owners. In December 2023 it was approved for a 20% increase for homeowners and condominium owners.
The insurance company is "trying to cash in on a terrible tragedy by detouring the rules that protect state consumers from insurance price gouging—at a time when those safeguards are more important than ever," said Balber.
"There has to be a political price to pay" for Elon Musk's takeover of federal agencies, said the congresswoman.
By Julia Conley
Hours after Democratic lawmakers warned that billionaire Elon Musk's takeover of federal agencies is "what the beginning of dictatorship looks like," expressed outrage at being barred from entering the U.S. Agency for International Development, and vowed to take legislative action and launch legal challenges to stop Musk's "outrageous" maneuver, Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez spoke out against Democrats who are proceeding as though a constitutional crisis isn't taking place.
"No Democrat should be voting to advance [President Donald] Trump's nominees while all of this stuff is going on," said the New York Democrat in a 90-minute Instagram Live video Monday evening. "There has to be a political price to pay and we have a responsibility as a party to block everything that is happening while they're setting a literal mash to the federal government."
Ocasio-Cortez aired her live video—an overview of Musk's takeover of Treasury Department payment systems, USAID, and his push to cut billions in federal spending for social services to secure an extension of Trump's 2017 tax cuts for the rich—as the Senate was voting to confirm fracking company CEO Chris Wright to be the country's next energy secretary.
Seven Democratic senators—Sens. Michael Bennet (D-Colo.), Ruben Gallego (D-Ariz.), Maggie Hassan (D-N.H.), Martin Heinrich (D-N.M.), John Hickenlooper (D-Colo.), Ben Ray Luján (D-N.M.), and Jeanne Shaheen (D-N.H.)—joined Republicans in supporting Wright, as did Sen. Angus King (I-Maine), who caucuses with the Democrats.
In addition to overlooking Musk's seizure of USAID and payment systems that contain personal data of millions of people who receive Social Security checks, Medicare, and other payments and benefits from the government, the Democrats approved a nominee who has accused the party of pushing for Soviet-style communism through efforts to combat the climate emergency and has said, "There is no climate crisis."
"There is no reason for business as usual while Elon Musk is fueling a constitutional crisis."
Ocasio-Cortez said Democrats must make the Trump administration and the GOP "fight for every single step. The slower they go, the less they can break."
"We have to stop playing nice in the Senate and block every damn thing that we can," said Ocasio-Cortez, who did not speak directly about Wright's confirmation vote. "Do not give votes to the nominees."
Ocasio-Cortez urged voters to call their senators and demand that they vote against Trump's nominees who still have to be confirmed, including Robert F. Kennedy Jr. for health and human services secretary, Pam Bondi for attorney general, and Rep. Elise Stefanik (R-N.Y.) for United Nations ambassador.
The Democrats, who hold 47 Senate seats compared to Republicans' 53, don't have the numbers to block the president's nominees through a vote—but they could push for nominations to be withdrawn, as former Rep. Matt Gaetz's was for attorney general amid sexual abuse allegations against him—and at least display "a gesture of resistance," as historian Keith Orejel said Tuesday.
Organizers applauded Sen. Brian Schatz (D-Hawaii), who spoke at a rally outside USAID on Monday, for announcing a plan to place a blanket hold on all of Trump's nominees for State Department positions until Musk and the administration end their effort to shut down USAID.
"Until and unless this brazenly authoritarian action is reversed and USAID is functional again, I will be placing a blanket hold on all of the Trump administration's State Department nominees," said Schatz. "This is self-inflicted chaos of epic proportions that will have dangerous consequences all around the world."
Sen. Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.) said he would support Schatz's holds, telling a reporter, "We're all in this together."
A blanket hold communicates to the Senate majority leader that lawmakers would object to a nomination by unanimous consent, slowing down the confirmation process and other legislative business Republicans want to address.
Stefanik's nomination for U.N. ambassador could be directly impacted by the blanket hold.
Schatz's announcement displayed "crucial leadership," said Leah Greenberg, co-founder of the grassroots advocacy group Indivisible.
"There is no reason for business as usual," she said, "while Elon Musk is fueling a constitutional crisis."
"When large financial institutions charge over 25% interest on credit cards, they are not engaged in the business of making credit available," said Sen. Bernie Sanders. "They are engaged in extortion and loan sharking."
By Jake Johnson
JOIN THE MOVEMENT
As a people-powered nonprofit news outlet, we cover the issues the corporate media never will.
Your contribution supports this bold media model—free, independent, and dedicated to reporting the facts every day. Stand with us in the fight for economic equality, social justice, human rights, and a more sustainable future.
U.S. President Donald Trump does not have the authority to abolish the U.S. Agency for International Development, according to a Congressional Research Service report published Monday, which noted that congressional authorization is needed to "abolish, move, or consolidate" the humanitarian assistance agency.
The report was release the same day that billionaire Elon Musk, who has been tapped by Trump to help lead his administration's efforts to cut spending and bureaucracy through the so-called Department of Government Efficiency( DOGE), said he was seeking to shut down the agency, which is known as USAID. Musk, who said he had received Trump's blessing to do so, made the remarks during a live discussion on X.
Also Monday, the State Department announced that Secretary of State Marco Rubio had taken over as acting director of the agency.
"Secretary Rubio has also now notified Congress that a review of USAID's foreign assistance activities is underway with an eye towards potential reorganization," according to statement from the State Department.
The Trump administration implemented a 90-day freeze on nearly all foreign aid during its first week, and days later placed dozens of senior USAID staffers on leave. Two top security officials at USAID were removed by the administration over the weekend after they refused representatives with DOGE access to restricted spaces at the agency.
According to the congressional report, the White House can make make structural changes to USAID and to the State Department, such as shifting functions from one agency to the other. However, the administration is supposed to notify and consult "appropriate congressional committees" prior to making changes, and "in the past, administrations have implemented such changes only after this notification."
The report states that some members of Congress had raised concerns over Trump's halting of foreign aid and the administration's removal of USAID officials, and that news of the "administration's actions to subsume USAID into the State Department may deepen such concerns and raise new questions" about the administration's adherence to consultation requirements and use of funds appropriated for USAID.
"Members on the House and Senate Appropriations Committees and House Foreign Affairs and Senate Foreign Relations Committees, in particular, might elect to seek more information about these actions from the administration through congressional hearings, letters, and informal communications," wrote the author of the report.
The email sent to federal employees urging them to resign in exchange for uncertain benefits is clearly aimed at purging critical government employees and replacing them with loyalists and ideologues.
From LA’s wildfires to Asheville’s floods, disasters are intensifying and demand resilience. Public banking offers a blueprint for recovery: leverage public dollars to cut long-term costs, create jobs, and rebuild smarter.
By Trinity Tran
On the night of January 7th, as the Palisades Fire surged to 2,000 acres to the west and the Eaton Fire exploded to 1,000 to the east, I joined thousands fleeing hurricane-force winds that hurled embers for miles. But while I evacuated out of precaution, across Los Angeles, many Angelenos were not as fortunate. Like so many here, I spent those first sleepless nights glued to wall-to-wall news coverage, tracking the fires’ paths. But while flames dominated headlines, a slower crisis burns, one that Los Angeles has yet to confront.
Caught in a cycle of destruction and recovery that grows more urgent every year, fire season is no longer a season—it’s a year-round threat. Entire neighborhoods in Altadena have lost more than homes—they’ve watched their generational wealth turn to rubble. In Pacific Palisades, emergency teams scrambled to stabilize hillsides before landslides erased what remained. With wildfire losses now climbing past $250 billion, one question echoes through the city: Who pays to rebuild? And how can we do it faster, smarter, without sinking deeper into debt?
Los Angeles isn’t the first to face this reckoning. Back in 1997, Grand Forks, North Dakota, suffered a catastrophic flood. Their city was left in ruins, but they had something most cities don’t: the Bank of North Dakota (BND), America’s only state-owned public bank. Within two weeks, the BND funneled around $70 million in credit for emergency operations and rebuilding. While FEMA took months to distribute aid, the BND’s local presence and public mandate allowed it to act with precision. ND mortgage holders got six-month payment pauses. Show me one Wall Street bank that’s offered that kind of breathing room.
Caught in a cycle of destruction and recovery that grows more urgent every year, fire season is no longer a season—it’s a year-round threat.
This is the power of public banking: swift, people-focused, and designed for crisis response. Unlike profit-driven institutions, a public bank—owned by a city or state—would reinvest public deposits into local resilience rather than shareholder dividends. Imagine transforming tax dollars into a renewable resource: funding fire-resistant infrastructure, upgrading aging power grids, and keeping families housed during disasters.
Look around Los Angeles today. Insurers flee high-risk areas, leaving families stranded. Meanwhile, we’re sending more than $1.4 billion a year in debt service fees to Wall Street—this staggering sum, outlined in the City’s 2024/25 Adopted Budget (Page R-71), is money that could fortify hillsides or retrofit homes. Governor Newsom’s $2.5 billion wildfire package helps clear debris, but it doesn’t address the bigger question: How do we fund tomorrow’s disasters without predatory loans that bleed the city dry?
A public bank is the answer. Picture the Bank of North Dakota model scaled for a metropolis. Need emergency credit after the next natural disaster? Done. Low-interest loans for small businesses distributing supplies mid-crisis? No delays. By partnering with local lenders, a public bank could bridge the gap for families waiting months or years for insurance payouts.
This is the power of public banking: swift, people-focused, and designed for crisis response.
This isn’t fantasy. A national public banking movement is rising. In 2019, California passed the Public Banking Act, clearing the legal path for cities like Los Angeles to establish their own public banks. New York City plans a public bank to fund affordable housing and support minority communities. Florida eyes the model for local control of state resources. From San Francisco to New Jersey, cities and states recognize that megabanks can’t meet the scale of today’s economic and environmental challenges. Public institutions keep dollars local, funding fire-resilient housing, green energy projects, and businesses that anchor communities during crises.
During COVID-19, the Bank of North Dakota proved this again. While Wall Street prioritized corporations, the BND partnered with community banks to quickly deliver relief to small businesses and frontline workers. Los Angeles deserves that same agility. A public bank could centralize disaster funds, slash bureaucratic delays, and ensure every dollar stays local—rebuilding neighborhoods instead of enriching distant shareholders.
Housing offers another critical test. Today, financing affordable projects takes years as developers navigate a maze of private lenders. A public bank could create a housing fast-track fund, offering below-market loans for shovel-ready developments. Interest payments would recycle into future projects, not Wall Street bonuses. Streamlined funding means lower costs, faster construction, and more Angelenos housed before the next disaster strikes.
The fight isn’t about resources—it’s about control. A public bank keeps investments local, ensuring funds flow to priorities like firebreaks and microgrids rather than stock buybacks.
Critics argue public banks risk politicization. But the BND’s 105-year track record in a solidly red state disproves this: it's rated A+ by S&P with an 18.2% return on equity in 2023. It’s safer than most big banks and exceptionally stable as a public institution. By law, California’s public banks won’t compete with local community banks, instead, they will partner with them, expanding access to credit in underserved communities.
The money to capitalize a public bank exists. We’ve already raised billions for disaster recovery. The fight isn’t about resources—it’s about control. A public bank keeps investments local, ensuring funds flow to priorities like firebreaks and microgrids rather than stock buybacks.
From LA’s wildfires to Asheville’s floods, disasters are intensifying and demand resilience. Public banking offers a blueprint for recovery: leverage public dollars to cut long-term costs, create jobs, and rebuild smarter.
Los Angeles can lead this revolution. By creating the nation’s first major urban public bank, we’ll pioneer a model for cities nationwide. When the next disaster strikes, we won’t be at the mercy of for-profit banks, we’ll have the tools to rebuild ourselves—faster, fairer, and permanently stronger. The alternative is unthinkable: another decade of rubble, debt, and avoidable loss.
The Trump real estate fortune was built by hundreds of millions of dollars in government subsidies and huge tax breaks, none of which are available to the working people Trump is hurting with his current attacks.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.