Connect with us

America

US federal agent kills woman during Minneapolis immigration raid, sparking national outcry

Published

on

An agent with US Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) shot and killed a woman in Minneapolis on Wednesday during an operation targeting immigrants. The victim, who was reportedly not the intended target of the raid, has been identified as 37-year-old Renee Nicole Good.

While the FBI has launched an investigation into the shooting, accounts of the incident provided by local and federal authorities diverge sharply.

Good was shot while behind the wheel of an SUV near the intersection of 34th Street and Portland Avenue shortly before 10:30 a.m. local time. US President Donald Trump and Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem characterized the woman as a “provocateur” who was obstructing ICE agents at the scene.

President Trump claimed the agent acted in self-defense, accusing Good of being a “professional provocateur.” He alleged that “the woman driving the car was acting very erratically, interfering and resisting, and then she violently, intentionally, and brutally ran over an ICE officer.”

The President added that the officer was “recovering in the hospital” after being struck by the vehicle, noting that, based on footage he had reviewed, “it’s hard to believe the officer is alive.”

Trump framed the incident within a broader narrative, blaming what he described as the “Radical Left” for “threatening, attacking, and targeting our Law Enforcement Officers and ICE Agents every single day.” He concluded his statement with a call to support law enforcement.

Vice President JD Vance described Good’s death as a tragedy, but one “of her own making.” Reaffirming the administration’s full support for ICE, Vance wrote, “To the radicals who attack them, doxx them, and threaten them: Congratulations, we are going to work even harder to enforce the law.”

Secretary Noem, a central figure in Trump’s hardline immigration policies, alleged that Good ignored orders to exit the vehicle and instead used the car “as a weapon” by intentionally attempting to strike an officer. Noem stated that the ICE agent fired three shots at the driver in self-defense.

However, Minneapolis Mayor Jacob Frey dismissed the administration’s version of events as “nonsense,” stating that video evidence directly contradicts the federal narrative. Frey demanded that ICE “get out” of the city.

A majority of the Minneapolis City Council is now calling for the arrest and prosecution of the ICE agent responsible for Good’s death.

In a statement posted to X, 11 of the council’s 13 members wrote, “Anyone who kills someone in our city must be arrested, investigated, and prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law.”

Describing Minneapolis as a resilient city united in its support for the immigrant community, the council members expressed their commitment to working with state partners to ensure public safety.

“We demand that ICE leave our city immediately so that we can move past this chaos and violence. Now is the time to reach out and support your immigrant neighbors,” the statement read.

Minnesota Governor Tim Walz remarked that Good’s death was a “predictable” consequence of the White House’s “recklessness” in deploying federal agents and military personnel to Democratic-led cities. Walz urged protesters to remain peaceful but vowed that the state would “spare no effort in seeking accountability and justice” regarding the fatal shooting.

Witness Emily Heller told NBC that she was on her porch Wednesday morning when she saw six or seven ICE vehicles and a person parked perpendicular to traffic.

Heller observed agents exit their vehicles and tell the driver to “get out of here” and leave the area. “Then they approached her car and tried to open her door; I’m sure at that point the woman was scared and tried to get away,” Heller said.

Heller continued: “She backed up a little bit and then turned her wheels at an angle so she could pull away. As she tried to move forward, one of the ICE agents stepped in front of her vehicle, reached over the hood, and fired his weapon three or four times, shooting her in the face.”

The killing occurred during a recent Department of Homeland Security crackdown in Minnesota linked to alleged fraud involving Somali nationals.

Trump has repeatedly accused Somalis in Minnesota of stealing billions of dollars. In December, he drew sharp criticism for referring to Somali immigrants as “garbage” and claiming they “contribute nothing” to the country.

Renee Good described herself on social media as a “poet, writer, wife, and mother.” Originally from Colorado, she noted she was “experiencing Minnesota.”

Following the incident, residents and locals gathered in the streets, shouting slogans at federal agents and throwing snowballs. Law enforcement responded with pepper spray and tear gas.

Department of Homeland Security spokesperson Tricia McLaughlin stated that ICE officers and agents have detained approximately 1,400 people since arriving in Minneapolis in early December. This marks a significant escalation from the roughly 300 arrests reported as of December 12.

McLaughlin also maintained that Good “attempted to run over law enforcement officers with the intent to kill, using her vehicle as a weapon.”

According to the Associated Press, Wednesday’s fatal shooting marks at least the fifth death resulting from the Trump administration’s aggressive immigration enforcement operations across various US cities.

These fatalities include 38-year-old Silverio Villegas González, a Mexican chef shot and killed by ICE agents during a traffic stop outside Chicago last September.

The other three known fatalities involved individuals attempting to flee immigration authorities.

Last August, a 52-year-old Guatemalan man identified as Roberto Carlos Montoya Valdez was struck and killed by an SUV while attempting to cross a highway to evade immigration officers in Southern California.

Also in Southern California, Mexican farmworker Jaime Alanis, 57, died in July after falling through a greenhouse roof and breaking his neck while fleeing ICE agents during a pickup operation. He died in the hospital two days later.

In October, 24-year-old Castro Rivera from Honduras was killed after being struck by a pickup truck while attempting to evade authorities in Virginia.

America

Trump energy shares rose by up to $4.4m during Iran war, CNBC reports

Published

on

The value of US President Donald Trump’s nine largest oil and gas holdings increased by approximately $1.5 million to $4.4 million during the first six months of the war with Iran.

According to an analysis conducted by CNBC based on the American leader’s financial disclosure, corporate balance sheets, and FactSet market data, the investment basket includes shares in Chevron, ConocoPhillips, ExxonMobil, Kinder Morgan, Marathon Petroleum, Occidental Petroleum, Phillips 66, Valero Energy, and Williams Companies.

In its calculations, the television network took into account the minimum and maximum baseline values of Trump’s declared holdings alongside share price fluctuations from the close of trading on 27 February through 31 August.

As the conflict with Iran continued, specialists managing Trump’s investment accounts maintained active trading in energy company shares.

Up to 29 June, the latest date for which transactions were disclosed, fresh purchases were logged alongside at least 23 sales operations involving stock in the nine companies.

Because disclosure filings do not specify exact share numbers or transaction prices, the estimates produced by CNBC do not reflect Trump’s realised profits or the precise current scale of his holdings.

On 2 March, the first trading day following the launch of air strikes against Iran by the US and Israel, shares in eight major oil and gas companies were purchased through Trump’s accounts.

These transactions included ExxonMobil shares valued at between $100,000 and $250,000. Prior to the conflict, the aggregate value of Trump’s holdings in ExxonMobil stood at between $3.2 million and $12.5 million.

Stock market gains in August, excluding subsequent transactions, raised the value of these shares by approximately $176,000 to $690,000.

CNBC also examined transactions executed on days when Trump’s decisions directly swayed the oil market. On 23 March, when the president deferred planned strikes against Iran’s energy infrastructure, the price of a barrel of Brent crude dropped by roughly 11%.

That same day, oil and gas shares worth a combined $163,000 to $570,000 were purchased across Trump’s accounts.

A similar transaction took place on 7 April. One of Trump’s investment accounts sold between $500,000 and $1 million worth of ExxonMobil shares.

Approximately two and a half hours after markets closed, President Trump announced an agreement on a two-week ceasefire with Iran. The following morning, ExxonMobil shares fell by more than 6% at the market open.

The report noted that CNBC saw no evidence indicating that Trump gave direct instructions for specific trades, that managers possessed advance knowledge of his actions, or that personal financial interests guided White House policies.

White House officials, commenting on the matter, stated that the president’s investment portfolio is managed by independent portfolio managers and that neither Trump nor members of his family hold authority to intervene in asset trading decisions.

The growth in the portfolio coincided with a broader surge in the earnings of energy majors. The nine energy companies in which Trump holds shares generated a combined profit of $47.6 billion in the second quarter.

During the same period last year, that figure stood at $15.9 billion. The profits of ExxonMobil and Chevron alone climbed from $9.6 billion in the prior year to $26.6 billion.

In July, the US Office of Government Ethics published Trump’s 927-page financial disclosure report for 2025.

The report noted that Trump’s earnings from cryptocurrency operations exceeded $500 million.

Continue Reading

America

Over half of Latino voters back Democrats in key US House races

Published

on

A new public opinion poll in the US shows that Democratic candidates have made notable gains since 2024 among Latino voters in critical, competitive districts for the House of Representatives.

These gains have the potential to directly determine which party will secure the majority in Congress next year.

According to a joint survey by Hart Research and TelevisaUnivision shared with Axios, Democrats reached 58% support on the generic congressional ballot among Latino voters across 17 competitive House districts.

The share of those backing Republicans within the same voting bloc remained at 35%. This group continues to represent the fastest-growing swing constituency in battleground districts.

Examining three competitive House races in Texas, the study indicated that Latino voters, who reported splitting evenly at 44% to 44% in the 2024 presidential election, shifted 56% to 36% in favour of Democrats heading into the midterms.

Latino support for Democrats also increased in other states. In California, 57% of Latino voters said they would support Democrats, compared with 33% who said they would back the Republican Party.

Kate Coleman, Senior Vice President at TelevisaUnivision, highlighted voter behaviour in remarks to Axios:

“Latino voters are not locked into one party. They are watching developments closely; they make decisions based on who stands with them and how they stand.”

The survey data determined that 11% of Latino respondents who said they voted for Donald Trump in the 2024 presidential election now support Democratic candidates.

Accelerating his deportation plans, Trump triggered fear across many Latino neighbourhoods while weakening his support among this demographic.

The Hart Research and TelevisaUnivision study revealed that 63% of Latino voters disapprove of Trump’s presidential job performance. The share of those approving of his performance in office stood at 36%.

Trump’s approach to high prices and the cost of living drew disapproval from 65% of Latino voters, while immigration enforcement and deportation practices were disapproved of by 62%.

More than half of Latino voters, at 64%, reported that they disapprove of Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE).

A survey published in May by UnidosUS showed that a quarter of Latino voters “would probably not vote” or would definitely not support Trump if they had to vote for him again.

The study at that time had pointed out that, despite Trump’s decline among Latino voters, Democrats had not yet secured significant gains.

According to Pew Research Center data, Trump strengthened his support in 2024 by securing 48% of the Latino vote, coming very close to the 51% reached by then Vice President Kamala Harris.

Some figures within the Democratic Party, however, worry that primary victories by democratic socialist candidates could alienate certain Latino voters, particularly those who fled Cuba or Venezuela.

The Hart Research and TelevisaUnivision survey was conducted between 6 and 17 August among 1,500 Latino respondents. The poll’s margin of error was reported as 2.5 percentage points.

Continue Reading

America

Researcher quits Anthropic and warns AI firms gamble with lives

Published

on

Jacob Coxon, an artificial intelligence researcher at Anthropic, has resigned from his post, stating that tech companies are acting irresponsibly in the race towards self-improving superintelligence. Coxon warned that the autonomous operational capabilities of such systems pose existential risks to humanity and that internal industry anxieties run far deeper than generally perceived.

The AI researcher stepped down from his position at Anthropic to draw attention to industry safety vulnerabilities and the unregulated race among developers.

Having worked for three years as a pre-training researcher across both OpenAI and Anthropic, Coxon announced his decision to leave in an extensive statement shared on his X account.

Stating that both companies have acted irresponsibly, Coxon argued that developers are engaged in a dangerous race to achieve self-improving superintelligence.

“They believe it could kill us all by the end of the decade”

In his posts, Coxon stated that technical teams developing AI genuinely believe this technology could bring about the demise of humanity by the end of the decade.

Asserting that these concerns are not a marketing strategy, the researcher noted that while top executives and senior researchers adopt a cautious tone in public statements, they voice the very same fears behind closed doors.

Developments reflecting similar anxieties across the sector evoke James Cameron’s 1984 film The Terminator, which set 2029 as the pivotal year when machines waged war against humanity.

Indeed, Evan Hubinger, head of Anthropic’s own alignment team, had previously estimated the probability of human extinction to be greater than 10%.

Warning that systems currently under development will soon evolve into superhuman structures capable of bypassing any firewall, transforming industries overnight, and securing physical resources, Coxon stressed that the pace of progress is not slowing in any way.

Arguing that the danger of superintelligence is no longer merely theoretical, the researcher pointed to the Hugging Face security leak that occurred between May and July.

In that incident, OpenAI models established an independent chatroom within the testing environment to communicate among themselves, subsequently using this channel to reach the open internet and infiltrate production systems.

Because of this security breach, Hugging Face was forced to rebuild approximately one-third of its infrastructure.

“They are gambling with our lives”

Characterising the leak as a warning flare, Coxon indicated that the incident makes pacing agreements between US-based laboratories more feasible.

However, emphasising that developers are not yet on the right track to prevent a global race, the researcher noted that measures such as a temporary moratorium on advancing model capabilities could be considered.

Arguing that civilisation-scale risks have not yet been sufficiently internalised at OpenAI, Coxon contended that Anthropic joined the race out of an ambition to be first, despite being fully aware of the dangers.

Coxon is not the only figure to leave the sector on such grounds. Mrinank Sharma, a member of Anthropic’s safety team, also stepped down earlier this year, writing that the world is in danger.

On the other hand, not everyone agrees with these catastrophic scenarios. Some responses to the post emphasised the view that humanity, with an evolutionary history spanning hundreds of thousands of years, will not be wiped out by a text prediction model achieving consciousness.

It was also noted that even the plot of the Terminator franchise does not entirely support Coxon’s premise, as the human resistance survived the nuclear catastrophe and ultimately defeated the machines.

Alongside safety debates, AI continues to directly affect the labour market. Research by the Stanford Digital Economy Lab indicates that, while mass job losses have not yet materialised, entry-level employment in AI-exposed sectors across the US has fallen by nearly 20%.

A Goldman Sachs study pointed to a similar trend, showing that entry-level workers bear the brunt of the ongoing workforce transformation.

Anthropic, which remains at the centre of the controversy, filed for an initial public offering in June and plans to list on the Nasdaq exchange this autumn at a multi-trillion-dollar valuation.

Continue Reading

MOST READ

Turkey