“Hands Off!” rallies sweep U.S. as protesters condemn Trump-Musk alliance and federal cutbacks.

Massive “Hands Off!” protests across America challenge President Trump’s policies and Elon Musk’s influence, demanding protection for healthcare, education, and veterans.

Trump Faces Nationwide Revolt: America Says “Hands Off!”

America erupted into mass demonstrations this weekend, as anger against President Donald Trump and billionaire advisor Elon Musk’s sweeping federal cuts reached fever pitch. Over 1,300 rallies spread across cities large and small under a unified banner: “Hands Off!” Protestors denounced what many call an unprecedented billionaire power grab and a calculated assault on public welfare and freedoms.

People take part in the nationwide anti-Trump “Hands Off” protest in Atlanta, Georgia U.S., April 5, 2025. REUTERS/ Megan Varner

From coast to coast, these protests mark the most coordinated pushback yet against Trump’s radical second-term agenda. In Washington, D.C., thousands gathered near the Washington Monument, waving signs demanding the preservation of healthcare, veterans’ benefits, reproductive rights, and Social Security—all threatened by Trump’s slash-and-burn policies. The presence of veterans like Colleen Boland and Sonia Lundy was especially poignant, as they declared they were fulfilling their oath “to protect America against all enemies, foreign and domestic,” signaling the gravity of domestic divisions sparked by Trump’s controversial actions.

A particular target of public fury was Elon Musk, whose shadow loomed large after recent electoral embarrassments and unpopular federal downsizing decisions spearheaded by his informal “DOGE” task force. In Boston, demonstrators rallied against the arrest of Tufts doctoral student Rümeysa Öztürk, highlighting growing fears of arbitrary federal action targeting academics and critics. Meanwhile, protesters in Portland explicitly described Musk’s advisory role as an “illegal billionaire power grab,” underscoring the widening public distrust of the wealthy elite’s outsized influence on governance.

Archer Moran, from Port St. Lucie, Fla., protests President Donald Trump, who was a few miles away at his Trump National Golf Club, during a “Hands Off!” demonstration Saturday, April 5, 2025, in Palm Beach Gardens, Fla. (AP Photo/Alex Brandon)

But perhaps most significant were protests in smaller communities—Sylva, North Carolina, Charlottesville, Virginia, and elsewhere—underscoring the depth of frustration outside traditional Democratic strongholds. From elderly activists like Al and Bev Mirmelstein, making their political voices heard later in life, to young citizens forming digital coalitions like the “Sisters of the Resistance,” these protests reveal that opposition to Trump is diverse, determined, and deeply rooted.

Trump’s hardline approach has triggered a backlash far beyond partisan politics. These protests are about survival, reflecting genuine fears over vanishing social safety nets, shrinking healthcare access, threats to veterans’ livelihoods, and an erosion of democratic values. Despite repeated assurances from the administration, widespread layoffs, office closures, and drastic federal downsizing have citizens deeply unsettled, skeptical of Trump’s promises to protect essential programs.

This weekend’s message was crystal clear: Americans won’t quietly accept a billionaire-backed demolition of their society. Trump’s vision for America now faces fierce resistance—one that shows no signs of fading quietly into the night. The pressure is building, and the question is whether Trump and Musk, insulated by power and wealth, will heed the alarm—or whether America is on the brink of even deeper conflict.

A Sudden 25% Tariff on Aluminum Sends Shockwaves Through Global Beer Markets.

Trump’s surprise aluminum tariff hits beer drinkers hard. European brewers panic, drinkers furious, and confusion reigns—here’s why your beer just got expensive.

President Donald Trump has once again ignited controversy by imposing an unexpected 25 percent tariff affecting beer imports into the United States, ostensibly targeting aluminum but inadvertently hitting beer drinkers directly. While Trump’s intent might have been to curb reliance on foreign aluminum, the collateral damage is clear: consumers are facing higher beer prices, and brewers across the globe are left scrambling.

Trump’s abrupt tariff decision has blindsided European breweries, including global giants like Guinness and Heineken, who now find themselves in an uncertain limbo. The confusion stems from ambiguous language in customs documentation, initially suggesting a blanket tariff on all beer imports. Although the U.S. Commerce Department later clarified that tariffs apply strictly to the aluminum content in beer cans rather than the beer itself, this clarification arrived late, intensifying the chaos and deepening market uncertainty.

The economic ripple effect is profound. European beer exports to the U.S. totaled €1.1 billion last year alone, with a significant portion packaged in aluminum cans. Mexican breweries, responsible for 60 percent of U.S. beer imports, face equally devastating financial impacts. These tariffs, ironically meant to protect American industry, threaten domestic businesses dependent on imported aluminum, primarily sourced from Canada, further illustrating the shortsightedness of this measure.

But beyond economics, Trump’s tariff gamble has stirred intense backlash among American beer drinkers. Social media platforms erupted with outrage and disbelief, epitomized by one succinct Reddit comment: “A massive sales tax on beer? What a fucking asshole.” This public resentment highlights the stark disconnect between Trump’s protectionist rhetoric and the immediate pain felt by ordinary citizens.

European trade bodies have voiced diplomatic yet pointed criticisms. Julia Leferman of The Brewers of Europe captured industry frustrations succinctly, questioning why beer—deeply embedded in Western culture—was suddenly classified merely as “a derivative product of aluminum.”

Trump’s unpredictable tariff regime not only undermines consumer trust but risks significant long-term economic repercussions. European and Mexican brewers may reconsider American markets altogether, potentially depriving U.S. consumers of beloved international brands. Meanwhile, the brewing industry must navigate costly disruptions, jeopardizing jobs and businesses already strained by prior tariff battles.

Trump’s latest tariff maneuver is more than just a trade policy—it’s a direct attack on everyday consumer pleasures, leaving the world questioning his true economic priorities.

New insider account reveals Obama’s damaging legacy on the Democratic Party, Harris-Obama tension, and the Clintons’ power plays after Biden’s exit.

A new political bombshell book, Fight, reveals Barack Obama’s fraught relationship with the Democratic Party, his reluctance to support Kamala Harris, and internal chaos following Trump’s 2024 re-election.

Inside the Democratic Implosion: How Obama’s Post-Presidency May Have Helped Trump Win Again

A bombshell political tell-all is ripping open the deep wounds inside the Democratic Party, exposing Barack Obama not as the party’s savior, but as one of the architects of its fragmentation. In Fight: Inside the Wildest Battle for the White House, journalists Jonathan Allen and Amie Parnes paint a stark portrait of a once-united coalition now crumbling under the weight of internal divisions, elite gatekeeping, and a rising tide of populist right-wing backlash.

One quote from a Black Democratic operative delivers the thesis bluntly: “Obama destroyed that s—.”

While the Clintons, Joe Biden, and others scrambled to “rebuild” party infrastructure post-2016 and keep the far-left at bay, Obama was focused on Organizing for Action, a parallel political machine that siphoned power and money away from the traditional Democratic establishment. Far from being the unifier many hoped for, the book describes Obama as disconnected, disinterested in internal party mechanics, and wary of a new Democratic vanguard rising from the grassroots.

Nowhere is this clearer than in his hesitant, almost reluctant backing of Kamala Harris in 2024. Despite Michelle Obama’s glowing support at the DNC, the book claims Obama delayed his endorsement until five days after Biden bowed out of the race — a slight that stung Harris and required behind-the-scenes “mending.” His reason? He didn’t think Harris could beat Trump.

That gamble proved catastrophic. Trump, fueled by economic backlash, populist messaging, and continued Democratic miscalculations, stormed back into office. And according to Fight, Obama still doesn’t grasp why.

The implications are enormous. As Democratic strategists scramble to find a post-Obama vision, the Clintons’ old-school machine politics are quietly reasserting control, leaving progressives sidelined and the party’s future increasingly uncertain.

Fight isn’t just a book. It’s a post-mortem for a political movement that once promised hope and change — and now finds itself rudderless, fractured, and outmaneuvered by Trump’s populist juggernaut.

As global backlash escalates, Trump retreats to Florida golf course, sends mixed signals on economic strategy while Wall Street and allies panic.

President Trump remains defiant amid global markets crash over his sweeping tariff plan, insisting on short-term pain for long-term gains—even as investors, allies, and the Fed sound alarms.

Defiant on the Green: Trump Shrugs as Tariff Turmoil Rattles Markets and Allies

As the Dow spiraled into correction and global retaliation ramped up, President Donald Trump spent Friday not in a strategy room, but teeing off in Florida, unmoved by Wall Street’s panic or the rising cries from corporate America. His vision of an economic “Liberation Day” has so far delivered carnage: a $2 trillion market sell-off, a wave of reciprocal tariffs, and a barrage of criticism from allies, CEOs, and Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell.

But none of it is swaying Trump. In fact, it seems to be energizing him.

Posting from his Mar-a-Lago base, the president doubled down: “This is a great time to get rich, richer than ever before!” With that, he rolled into his golf course while markets bled red and world leaders lined up to retaliate.

Trump’s latest gambit—tariffs of up to 54% on Chinese imports and baseline 10% duties on all foreign goods—has triggered a geopolitical firestorm. Beijing hit back with a punishing 34% tax on U.S. products. France’s Macron called for halting European investment in the U.S. Canada, already fuming, received its own targeted swipe after some GOP senators dared to vote against Trump’s emergency declarations.

Even Trump’s own economic advisers are split. Peter Navarro and Scott Lutnick are fueling the fire, insisting this is a necessary reset of global trade norms. Others, like Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent and National Economic Council Director Kevin Hassett, reportedly warned against the timing and scope. Their advice was ignored.

Business titans are fuming. CEOs from across sectors privately threaten lawsuits while fearing open retaliation. “There’s no endgame,” one CEO fumed, noting companies that relocated factories from China to Vietnam during Trump’s first term are now being punished again—with Vietnam slapped with a 46% tariff.

At the Fed, Powell issued a rare public rebuke: tariffs could lead to both inflation and job losses. Trump fired back, demanding a rate cut and accusing Powell of “playing politics.”

Insiders say Trump is sticking to instinct over analysis, motivated more by legacy and leverage than economic modeling. “I wouldn’t want to be the last country to negotiate with Trump,” his son Eric warned. Meanwhile, advisers scramble to refocus public attention on tax cuts for tips and overtime pay—a simpler sell than economic brinkmanship.

But for now, Trump seems unbothered by the chaos he’s unleashed. To critics, it’s reckless. To his base, it’s war-time leadership against a global system long seen as rigged. The only certainty? Trump isn’t backing down—and the markets know it.

For now, America’s trade war is being fought with tweets, tariffs, and titanium resolve—from the 18th hole.

Consul Anna Högberg forced to leave Mogadishu after allegations of undermining Somali government image—aid future uncertain.

Somalia expels Sweden’s Consul Anna Högberg over alleged image damage to the government, escalating tensions and placing humanitarian cooperation in question.

Mogadishu Ousts Swedish Consul Anna Högberg in Rare Diplomatic Fallout

The Somali government has expelled Swedish Consul and head of development cooperation Anna Saleem Högberg, according to Global Bar Magazine. Though officials in Mogadishu have yet to issue a formal explanation, sources confirm that her expulsion in March was the culmination of months-long friction with Prime Minister Hamza Abdi Barre’s office.

Högberg, who had been based in Somalia since 2022, managed Sweden’s humanitarian and institutional development programs—key components of Sweden’s long-term commitment to stabilizing Somalia. Her sudden removal has raised concerns about the future of aid operations in the country, especially at a time when Somalia is grappling with escalating security threats, food insecurity, and governance challenges.

Insiders say the Somali government accused Högberg of “damaging the government’s image,” a vague but politically loaded charge that appears to reflect growing sensitivity within Mogadishu’s leadership toward foreign involvement in domestic affairs.

Diplomatic observers suggest the expulsion is emblematic of a deeper shift: the Somali government’s desire to reassert control over foreign development narratives while navigating a volatile geopolitical environment. With the administration of President Hassan Sheikh Mohamud increasingly wary of criticism, even from long-time allies like Sweden, the room for foreign diplomats to maneuver is tightening.

Stockholm has remained officially silent, with both Sweden’s Foreign Ministry and its development agency Sida declining to comment. But the diplomatic fallout could have real-world implications. Sweden has played a major role in Somalia’s post-conflict reconstruction, investing in education, governance, and gender equity initiatives. The expulsion of its lead representative could hamper coordination and delay critical support.

As Somalia continues to fend off regional instability and internal political rivalries, this move could mark the beginning of a chill in its engagement with Western development partners. Whether other donor nations will reassess their footprint in the country remains to be seen—but the message from Mogadishu is clear: criticism, even if unspoken, may come at a cost.

While Trump retreats, China plants its flag in Africa’s skies—building satellites, telescopes, and alliances to dominate space and surveillance.

As Trump guts foreign aid, China ramps up space partnerships across Africa, embedding surveillance tech and satellites that could shift the balance in the global space race—and military power.

Space for Sale: How China Is Colonizing Africa’s Skies as America Pulls Back

While the United States under President Trump slashes development aid and scales down soft power, China is quietly launching a space takeover in Africa—one satellite, telescope, and military-grade surveillance system at a time.

From a space lab outside Cairo to high-powered telescopes tracking orbital objects from Egyptian hilltops, China is embedding itself deep into Africa’s burgeoning space infrastructure. Beneath the banner of cooperation and development, Beijing is not just gifting technology—it’s harvesting data, expanding its global surveillance network, and establishing a strategic military and political footprint across the continent.

This is no secret to Washington. Intelligence veterans like Nicholas Eftimiades warn that China is “democratizing space to enhance its authoritarian capabilities”—a global dragnet cloaked in diplomacy. And it’s working. More than 23 African nations now partner with China on space ventures, from satellite launches and ground stations to a proposed joint moon base that openly rivals NASA’s Artemis program.

The Space City outside Cairo, where Chinese engineers outnumber locals, is emblematic. The “African-built” satellites launched there? Mostly assembled in China. Data ownership? Officially Egyptian—but insiders say Beijing still taps into the stream. It’s not just soft power—it’s hardware dominance with military consequences, including anti-satellite warfare readiness and real-time surveillance of joint U.S.-Egyptian exercises.

As China builds eyes in the sky, Trump’s America is going dark—cutting U.S. Agency for International Development funds and retreating from space diplomacy. Meanwhile, SpaceX’s Elon Musk races ahead in military-grade satellite networks, but there’s little sign of the U.S. competing with China’s ground-level infiltration across Africa.

The result? A Cold War-style showdown in orbit, with Africa as the battlefield—and Trump’s retreat from development aid and soft power may have handed Beijing the launch codes for a new global order in space.

China isn’t just investing in Africa—it’s outsourcing its space program onto the continent, collecting data, projecting power, and rewriting the rules of 21st-century dominance. The moon may be next, but the race is already raging here on Earth. And right now, Beijing is winning.

Top Trump officials reportedly used unsecured Gmail accounts and Signal to coordinate US military strikes, sparking national security outcry.

In a scandal that could dwarf Hillary Clinton’s infamous email saga, members of Donald Trump’s national security team—including his top adviser Mike Waltz—have reportedly used personal Gmail accounts to discuss sensitive military operations and national security matters, according to the Washington Post.

The revelation comes hot on the heels of the so-called “Signal-Gate”, when a journalist was accidentally added to a Signal group chat where senior White House officials—including Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth and Vice President J.D. Vance—were actively discussing real-time plans for US airstrikes in Yemen.

Now it gets worse.

The Post alleges that a senior aide to Waltz engaged in “highly technical conversations” via Gmail, including information on weapons systems and battlefield movements—content that experts warn could be “potentially exploitable” if intercepted.

This isn’t a minor protocol breach. It’s a massive operational security risk, and it flies in the face of government regulations that strictly require secure, government-issued communication platforms for such matters.

Waltz, now under fire, claims that he “didn’t and wouldn’t send classified information” through these accounts—but evidence suggests otherwise. His team allegedly coordinated meetings and posted fragments of his classified schedule into Signal messages, raising serious concerns among cybersecurity experts and Democrats alike.

The NSC attempted to downplay the leak, stating that Waltz copied messages to his government email “to ensure compliance,” while refusing to acknowledge whether sensitive intel was shared outside secure systems.

But that’s not washing with critics.

“The hypocrisy is staggering,” one Hill staffer told the media. “They spent years attacking Hillary over emails—and now Trump’s war council is texting about drone strikes like it’s a football group chat.”

Despite growing pressure, Trump is standing by his embattled team. “I don’t fire people because of fake news and because of witch hunts,” he said defiantly to NBC News.

But make no mistake: this is not just about emails. It’s about the chain of command being compromised, unauthorized communication during active military campaigns, and the alarming normalization of recklessness in U.S. national security.

And in an era of rising global tensions and cyber espionage, that’s not just dangerous—it’s damning.