Trump Administration Warns About “Civilizational Erasure” in Europe

The Trump administration is invoking racist tropes in a policy document, claiming that Europe is facing “civilizational erasure.” 

The White House’s new National Security Strategy, posted Thursday night, called the European Union antidemocratic and seemed to make an openly bigoted jab at the demographics of European NATO states, saying, “Over the long term, it is more than plausible that within a few decades at the latest, certain NATO members will become majority non-European.” 

“As such, it is an open question whether they will view their place in the world, or their alliance with the United States, in the same way as those who signed the NATO charter,” the document states. 

The paper went on to say the U.S. should “help Europe correct its current trajectory,” including by supporting “patriotic” parties. “We want Europe to remain European, to regain its civilizational self-confidence and to abandon its failed focus on regulatory suffocation,” the document reads.

The administration also accused governments of “the subversion of democratic processes” to thwart public opinion to end the war in Ukraine. The document praises Europe’s far-right political parties, saying that “the growing influence of patriotic European parties” gives “cause for great optimism.” 

While sitting European leaders haven’t commented, former leaders have reacted with alarm, comparing the document to rhetoric from Russian President Vladimir Putin and the Russian government. 

“It’s language that one otherwise only finds coming out of some bizarre minds of the Kremlin,” said Carl Bildt, former prime minister of Sweden, on X. He pointed out the only part of the world where the document saw a threat to democracy was Europe. Bildt also described the document as “to the right of the extreme right in Europe” and “JD Vance on steroids.” 

An anonymous European diplomat also mentioned the vice president, saying the document’s “tone was not promising. Even worse than Vance’s speech in February,” referring to Vance’s speech at the Munich Security Conference where he extolled nativism and far-right politics while downplaying the threat from Russia. 

Latvia’s former Prime Minister Krisjanis Karins told Reuters that “the happiest country reading this is Russia,” adding that “Moscow has been trying to break the transatlantic bond for years, and now it seems the greatest disruptor of this bond is the U.S. itself, which is unfortunate.”

Much of the document seems to echo the racist rhetoric coming from other parts of the Trump administration, whether it’s the dog whistles coming out of the Department of Homeland Security or the underpinnings of the administration’s immigration policies. It appears that the White House is more concerned about racial and cultural homogeneity than the real external threats.   

The Trump administration removed free national park access on Martin Luther King Jr. Day and Juneteenth, while adding it for President Trump’s birthday. 

Now two federal holidays that celebrate Black American history will be ticketed—from around $3 to $30—while Trump’s birthday on June 14 is free entry. 

This change, first reported by SFGATE, is emblematic of the small-scale, antagonistic ways in which Trump wages his MAGA culture war on any federal mention of Black history in America, or any minority group, for that matter. 

The NPS has been a battleground for much of that war. Since taking office for the second time, Trump has ordered the removal of signs and exhibits documenting American slavery, including an iconic 1863 portrait of an ex-slave, often referred to as either Peter or Gordon, and the brutal whipping scars on his “scourged back.” 

He signed an executive order directing the Interior Department to erase any information that could be misconstrued as a “corrosive ideology,” which of course included anything relating to race relations, LGBTQ rights, and sexism. He also removed a picture of Harriet Tubman from the National Park Service page on the Underground Railroad, and changed the words “enslaved African Americans” to “enslaved workers” while removing a section that discussed Benjamin Franklin being a slave owner.

This move is spiteful and self-centered, and a perfect opportunity for the president to center himself while punching down on MLK Day and Juneteenth in the name of MAGA.  

The U.S. president on Friday became the inaugural recipient of FIFA’s newly minted peace prize.

The prize was the invention of Gianni Infantino, the boss of the international soccer league, who shocked his own top officials by cooking up the concept after Donald Trump begged, pleaded, and failed to win the Nobel Peace Prize in October.

“This is truly one of the great honors of my life, and beyond awards, Gianni and I were discussing this, we’ve saved millions and millions of lives,” Trump said after the medal—a sculpture of hands holding a soccer ball—had been draped around his neck. “So many different wars that we were able to end.”

But whether a soccer prize will scratch Trump’s itch for global recognition remains to be seen. Trump has coveted the Nobel Peace Prize for years, going so far as to lie about solving nonexistent international conflicts and phoning Norwegian officials this past summer in lame efforts to snag the title (Norway’s government has no influence on decisions made by the committee).

Part of the president’s obsession could stem from the fact that four other U.S. presidents have received the award, perhaps most notably Trump’s political nemesis, former President Barack Obama.

Infantino had publicly lobbied for Trump to win the award. But his failure to launch that process offered Infantino a new opening to flatter the president: inventing an entirely new award to satisfy Trump’s ego.

Trump was announced as the winner during the 2026 FIFA World Cup final draw.

This story has been updated.

A federal vaccine advisory panel handpicked by Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. voted Friday to recommend delaying the hepatitis B vaccine for most newborns.

The 8–3 vote by the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices reverses the government’s longtime stance that all babies be vaccinated at birth against the liver infection. Now the panel is recommending the vaccine—which has been credited with preventing thousands of illnesses—be given only to those infants whose mothers test positive or haven’t been tested.

If parents or guardians decide not to get the vaccination at the time of birth, the committee’s vote recommends that the baby should get the dose at two months. One committee member, Dr. Cody Meissner, expressed misgivings, saying, “We are doing harm by changing this wording, and I vote no.”

When asked Thursday by the Associated Press why the committee chose to reexamine this vaccine, committee member Vicky Pebsworth said it was because of “pressure from stakeholder groups wanting the policy to be revisited,” but did not elaborate. A spokesperson for Kennedy did not respond to a question on the subject. Senator Bill Cassidy, a doctor and liver specialist, called the committee “totally discredited” on Thursday.

In 2022, longtime vaccine skeptic Kennedy said the hepatitis B vaccine “was made for prostitutes and for promiscuous gay men.” The virus isn’t just spread through sexual contact, though: Even contact with small amounts of infected blood can put someone at risk.

Now the decision on whether to accept the recommendation goes to the acting head of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Jim O’Neill. But the American Academy of Pediatrics plans to keep promoting the existing CDC guidance for babies to get the first dose of the vaccine at birth, followed by a second at one or two months with the third dose coming between six and 18 months.

At least one state will also continue recommending the hepatitis B vaccine at birth: Governor Maura Healey of Massachusetts said on CNN Thursday that “D.C., the Trump administration, RFK, that panel, they are not doing their jobs. And in the face of that, as governor, I’m going to do mine.”

An appeals court judge tore into her colleagues’ decision Friday to “pave the way for autocracy” by allowing President Donald Trump to summarily fire the Democratic members of independent federal agencies.

In a 2–1 ruling, Trump-appointed D.C. Circuit Court Judges Gregory Katsas and Justin Walker greenlit the president’s efforts to remove Democratic members of the National Labor Relations Board and Merit Systems Protection Board.

“Congress may not restrict the President’s ability to remove principal officers who wield substantial executive power,” Katsas wrote in the majority opinion. “As explained below, the NLRB and MSPB wield substantial powers that are both executive in nature and different from the powers that Humphrey’s Executor deemed to be merely quasi-legislative or quasi-judicial. So, Congress cannot restrict the President’s ability to remove NLRB or MSPB members.”

Humphrey’s Executor v. United States is a 1935 Supreme Court case that established Congress can pass laws limiting the president’s ability to fire executive officials of independent federal agencies.

In a scathing dissenting opinion, Judge Florence Pan warned that the decision was a disastrous consolidation of executive power behind the president. “Adoption of the government’s maximalist theory of executive power (implicitly or explicitly) threatens to fundamentally change the character of our government,” she wrote.

“Taken to its logical end, the government’s theory will eliminate removal protections for all employees of the Executive Branch and place every hiring decision and agency action under the political direction of the President. But such a radical upending of the constitutional order is not supported by the text or structure of the Constitution and is inconsistent with the intent of the Framers. And while the government claims to uphold the separation of powers, its theory instead concentrates excessive power in the President and thus paves the way to autocracy.”

The Supreme Court previously allowed Trump to oust Gwynne Wilcox at the National Labor Relations Board and Cathy Harris at the Merit Systems Protection Board—whose terms weren’t due to expire until 2029—as well as three Democratic appointees on the Consumer Product Safety Commission and Rebecca Slaughter, a Democratic commissioner on the Federal Trade Commission.

Republicans are slowly but steadily peeling away from House Speaker Mike Johnson.

The Louisiana lawmaker is facing mounting scrutiny from his caucus, who are reportedly concerned about his leadership ahead of the 2026 midterm elections.

Democrats’ surprise performance in the Tennessee special election earlier this week put Johnson’s capabilities into laser focus, stressing already fraught tensions between House Republicans and their leader.

“The confluence is weakened political power by Trump, the result from the elections in New Jersey, New York, and Virginia, and people getting anxious about the election,” a senior House GOP lawmaker told NBC News Thursday. “There’s a lot of anxiety and stress about the election, and people looking at their own districts, saying, ‘I thought things were going to be different.’”

The government shutdown only exacerbated the effect, leaving Republicans in vulnerable districts without the support that they thought they could rely on.

“I just think being off for 50 days, there was no continuity. Nobody was here. There was nobody like, ‘Hey, you’re doing great. Keep it up,’” the lawmaker continued. “Everyone being back in their district, there was a loneliness. A lot of members may have felt like we’re on our own.”

Johnson shocked the halls of Congress when he catapulted into the House leadership position in late 2023, replacing former Speaker Kevin McCarthy amid a historically divided caucus. That was possible, in part, because Johnson was a relative unknown with practically zero enemies. But that’s no longer the case.

In recent weeks, Johnson has made enemies out of Representatives Elise Stefanik, Anna Paulina Luna, and Marjorie Taylor Greene on issues ranging from his reluctant release of the Epstein files to his resistance to bipartisan legislation on insider trading.

Speaking with reporters Thursday, Johnson claimed that “friction” and “vigorous debate” were “all part of the process.”

“They’re going to get upset about things. That’s part of the process. It doesn’t deter me in any way. It doesn’t bother me,” he said.

Just nine representatives of the majority party are needed to trigger a vote of no confidence against a House speaker. But for all the malcontent, exactly who could unite the conference to replace Johnson is still not clear.

“I support Mike Johnson and what he’s been doing. I think he’s in line with the president. I think he has the ear of the president,” Representative Troy Nehls, who is retiring when his term ends in January 2027, told NBC. “If it’s not Mike Johnson, well, then who?… Who could get enough votes to even replace him? And quite honestly, it’s probably nobody.”

The man who planted pipe bombs at the Republican and Democratic National Committee headquarters the day before January 6 seems to have been motivated by MAGA election denialism.  

Virginia resident Brian Cole, 30, was taken into custody on Thursday after being charged with placing the bombs on January 5, 2021, the day before Congress was to certify the 2020 presidential election. 

Cole reportedly told FBI investigators that he believed unsubstantiated theories about the 2020 presidential election being stolen from Donald Trump. Sources told CNN he made multiple statements as he spent hours with the FBI.

While the FBI has yet to declare a motive or publicly comment on the report, it’s clear that Trump’s biggest lie played a role in the incident of political violence.

California Governor Gavin Newsom has reason to be optimistic about congressional redistricting in his state after a Supreme Court ruling.

On Thursday, the court ruled 6-3 that Texas can use a new legislative map that was redrawn to benefit Republicans, with conservative Justice Samuel Alito saying in his concurring opinion that rather than racial gerrymandering, which would be illegal, “the impetus for the adoption of the Texas map (like the map subsequently adopted in California) was partisan advantage pure and simple.”

This seems to suggest that the conservative majority on the high court that approved Texas’s map will also approve California’s, which is being redrawn to give Democrats possibly five more congressional seats. When Attorney General Pam Bondi celebrated the Supreme Court ruling on X Thursday, Newsom’s press office eagerly chimed in, asking if the Justice Department would drop its lawsuit against Newsom and the Golden State.

The DOJ’s official account didn’t seem to think the ruling applied to Democrats, posting in response, “Not a chance, Gavin—we will stop your DEI districts for 2026.” But that statement may not be how the Supreme Court sees it.

President Trump began the partisan gerrymandering wars earlier this year when he urged Texas to redraw its maps, hoping to avert Republican losses in the 2026 midterms. His efforts to get other Republican-led states on board has not gone as well. Meanwhile, California isn’t the only Democratic-led state replying to Trump: Virginia is now beginning plans to redraw its maps.

FBI Deputy Director Dan Bongino offered up a baffling excuse Thursday for fueling conspiracy theories about the pipe bombs planted at the Democratic and Republican national headquarters five years ago.

Following the arrest earlier Thursday of a suspect in the attempted bombing, Fox News’s Sean Hannity asked Bongino about his past claims that the government had engaged in a “massive cover-up,” and that the pipe bombs were likely an “inside job.”

“You know, listen, I was paid in the past, Sean, for my opinions. That’s clear,” Bongino said. “And one day I will be back in that space. That’s not what I’m paid for now. I’m paid to be your deputy director, and we base investigations on facts.”

The former talk radio host then launched into yet more conspiracy winding about the so-called “collusion hoax.” So, it seems Bongino’s opinion days aren’t so far behind him after all.

Hannity was referring to comments Bongino initially made on X shortly after the riot on January 6, 2021, but also as recently as this past January—just one month before being tapped to help lead the FBI. Bongino suggested that the agency had identified a suspect but “just doesn’t want to tell us, because it was an inside job.”

One of Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth’s main arguments for bombing two helpless men in the Caribbean Sea was that they possessed radios that they could have used to call back their alleged cartels. But lawmakers who saw the video said that wasn’t the case.

“There was no radio. There were two individuals clinging to flotsam, that’s what there was,” Democratic Representative Jim Himes told MS NOW. “There wasn’t weaponry of any kind. There wasn’t a radio.... There was no means for them to communicate, other than the fact that the fire and the smoke was fairly well visible for a long distance around. But there was no radio.”

CNN also reported that Admiral Frank M. Bradley—whom Hegseth has named as responsible for the strike—told lawmakers that the men had their boat completely destroyed with no way to even reach a radio. In reality, for nearly an hour, defense officials watched the two men try to overturn the remains of their boat before bombing them a second time.

This directly contradicts what defense officials told The New York Times on Wednesday, adding only more speculation to the legitimacy of this lopsided and unsubstantiated “war” on alleged drug boats.

Only time will tell if Hegseth and the Defense Department actually face any repercussions for their killing in the Caribbean Sea. As of right now, they seem content to keep on bombing.