Trump Signs AI Executive Orders Targeting “Woke” Models While Pushing U.S. Exports to Challenge China

America’s AI posture shifts from fairness to nationalism—ideology and infrastructure at odds in tech policy.

On July 24, 2025, President Trump unveiled a trio of sweeping executive orders under the banner of “Winning the AI Race”, mandating that federal agencies only contract with AI systems deemed free of ideological bias, while simultaneously accelerating data center expansion and AI exports to counter China’s growing influence (The Guardian).

🧾 The Executive Orders in Focus

📦 Preventing “Woke” AI in Government

One order bans federal use of AI models that embed ideological frameworks, targeting themes like DEI (diversity, equity, inclusion), CRT, or transgender care. Vendors must now certify their systems as ideologically neutral to qualify for government contracts, effectively shaping the “political neutrality” of AI tools (AP News).

🚀 Promoting American AI Export

Another order creates the American AI Exports Program, directing Commerce and OSTP to support domestic companies in exporting full-stack AI solutions to allied nations. That includes hardware, cloud platforms, and application layer tools across sectors like healthcare, agriculture, and education (The White House).

🏗️ Accelerating Data Center Permitting

The third directive streamlines federal permitting for AI and data infrastructure projects, promising to fast-track approvals and dismantle regulatory barriers hampering tech expansion and competitiveness (K&L Gates, Reuters, The Times of India).

🏛️ Reaction & Fallout

• Big Tech Gains, Critics Worry
  Silicon Valley leaders celebrated the order's deregulation and export push, while conservative analysts saw it as strategic alignment against China's AI ambition. Still, critics warned of ideological censorship and First Amendment implications for AI-driven discourse (The Washington Post, Financial Times).

• State Authority Clash & GOP Split
  Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene condemned the executive order, citing environmental strain from massive data centers and encroachments on state-level regulation. Even within Trump’s base, concern grows over water usage and over-centralized power (thedailybeast.com).

• Civil Rights & AI Experts Alarmed
  Advocacy and civil liberty groups argue the policy could erase diversity considerations from AI fairness tools. Some experts liken the federal mandates to state-led censorship seen in authoritarian regimes, noting the impossibility of truly neutral AI given data bias constraints (AP News, The Washington Post, The Guardian).

🔍 SMH Takeaway: Ideology or Innovation?

Trump’s AI orders make it clear: ideological loyalty now trumps inclusive design, and America-first tech exports will come with strings attached.

The crackdown on “woke” AI forces companies to pre-sanitize procurement models, while deregulation and infrastructure incentives aim for Silicon Valley and project dominance, not ethical accountability.

As developers and civil liberties advocates warn, setting ideological terms on “truth” erases plurality in AI output. The bigger question: will the U.S. trading fairness for dominance create AI we can trust, or simply tools that perform on command?

😐🇺🇸 #SMHAmerica #UnbiasedOrUnAmerican

• The Washington Post
• Financial Times
• thedailybeast.com

Google Reports Iranian Hack Attempts on Trump and Biden-Harris Campaigns

Google revealed in a report on Wednesday that it identified efforts by Iranian hackers to target both the Trump and Biden-Harris campaigns in May and June, as part of a broader ongoing phishing operation.

This announcement by Google supports the Trump campaign’s recent claim that it was targeted by an Iranian hacking campaign aiming to interfere with the U.S. election.

According to Google’s Threat Analysis Group, which monitors government-backed cyberattacks, it disrupted a “small but persistent” phishing operation carried out by a hacking unit linked to the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps.

During May and June, “targets included the personal email accounts of approximately a dozen individuals associated with President Biden and former President Trump, including current and former U.S. government officials and individuals connected to both campaigns,” the report stated. Google blocked numerous attempts to access the targets’ personal email accounts.

The report also noted that in July, Iranian hackers managed to breach the Gmail account of a prominent political consultant. Google secured the account and referred the case to law enforcement but did not disclose the consultant’s identity or whether they were involved with either campaign.

The hacking group tied to the Revolutionary Guard is known for its relentless persistence. Google reported that it continues to observe unsuccessful attempts to compromise accounts linked to Biden, Vice President Kamala Harris, and Trump.

These attempted hacks are part of a larger campaign targeting U.S. and Israeli entities, using Google products like Sites, Drive, and Gmail.

Last week, concerns about credible hacking threats to U.S. presidential campaigns escalated when Microsoft reported that Revolutionary Guard-affiliated hackers had breached the email account of a former senior adviser to a presidential campaign. However, Microsoft did not provide further details on who was targeted.

A spokesperson for Iran’s Mission to the United Nations did not respond to requests for comment. Previously, Iranian state news reported that a representative for the mission denied any involvement in hacking Trump’s campaign.

Over the weekend, three U.S. news outlets — Politico, The Washington Post, and The New York Times — reported receiving emails that appeared to contain Trump campaign files, suggesting a possible “hack-and-leak” operation intended to embarrass Trump. On Monday, the FBI announced it was investigating efforts to hack both the Trump and Biden-Harris campaigns but did not provide additional information.

So far, only the Trump campaign has claimed to have been hacked. The phishing attempts occurred before Biden exited the race and Harris became the Democratic nominee. A Harris campaign official told NBC News they were unaware of any security breach.

To date, no major cybersecurity firm or government agency has confirmed that Iran successfully hacked the Trump campaign. Microsoft has declined to elaborate on its report, with a spokesperson stating that the company’s policy is not to disclose details about hacking victims unless requested by the victim.

These developments follow a warning from a U.S. intelligence official from the Foreign Malign Influence Center, indicating that Iran was likely to continue efforts to undermine Trump.

 2.9 Billion Records, Including Social Security Numbers, Compromised in Massive Data Hack: Key Details

A staggering number of Social Security numbers and other sensitive information belonging to millions of people may now be in the hands of a hacking group following a significant data breach. The Los Angeles Times reported this week that the compromised data might have been sold on an online marketplace.

The hacking group, known as USDoD, allegedly stole personal records of 2.9 billion individuals from National Public Data, according to a class-action lawsuit filed in the U.S. District Court in Fort Lauderdale, Florida, as reported by Bloomberg Law. The breach is believed to have occurred around April 2024, according to the lawsuit.

Here’s what you need to know about the alleged data breach:

What Information Was Compromised?

The law firm Schubert, Jonckheer & Kolbe, which filed the class-action suit, stated in a press release that the stolen data file is 277.1 gigabytes in size and contains names, address histories, family connections, and Social Security numbers dating back at least three decades.

According to a cybersecurity expert’s post on X (formerly known as Twitter), the group USDoD claims to be selling the 2.9 billion records of U.S., U.K., and Canadian citizens on the dark web for $3.5 million.

Since the data was put up for sale in April, other versions of the data have surfaced, according to the cybersecurity and technology website Bleeping Computer.

In August, a hacker known as "Fenice" reportedly released the most comprehensive version of the data for free on an online forum, Bleeping Computer reported.

What is National Public Data?

National Public Data is a background check company based in Florida and operated by Jerico Pictures, Inc.

While National Public Data has not publicly confirmed the breach, The Los Angeles Times reported that the company has been responding to inquiries via email, stating, "We are aware of certain third-party claims about consumer data and are investigating these issues."

Trump's Chaotic Musk Interview: A Public Relations Nightmare

For a billionaire with a fascination for flirting with far-right ideologies, Elon Musk has an uncanny talent for making conservative figures look foolish.

Former President Donald Trump eagerly promoted his upcoming Monday night interview with Musk, which was set to stream on X (formerly Twitter). However, much like the rocky launch of Florida Governor Ron DeSantis’ presidential campaign on the same platform, the Trump-Musk interview turned into a social media debacle, inviting widespread mockery over the glaring technical glitches and lack of preparedness.

Since Kamala Harris secured the top spot on the Democratic ticket last month, Trump’s campaign has been struggling. His immature attacks on Harris have fallen flat, and his racist remarks about her mixed-race background have alienated all but his staunchest supporters. His choice of JD Vance as his running mate has also backfired, with Vance becoming increasingly unappealing with each public appearance.

In an odd and likely misguided attempt to regain his footing, Trump decided to sit down with Musk for a chat with an audience that skews heavily online and does not reflect the broader electorate. Even if the interview had gone smoothly, it would have been a strange and ineffective move in Trump’s efforts to counter Harris’ growing momentum.

But the interview did not go smoothly. It went off the rails almost immediately. As the scheduled start time came and went, X users were left in the dark, either laughing or fuming as the broadcast failed to begin. It took over 40 minutes before the interview finally started, adding another layer of embarrassment to a campaign already struggling to maintain a veneer of competence.

Trump, who had previously ridiculed DeSantis for his Twitter interview disaster in May 2023, writing, “Wow! The DeSanctus TWITTER launch is a DISASTER! His whole campaign will be a disaster. WATCH!”, found himself in a similar, if not worse, predicament.

Once the interview finally got underway, things didn’t improve for Trump. His speech was disjointed, jumping from topics like crowd sizes and immigration to President Joe Biden and other random thoughts. Worse still, his slurred speech raised further concerns about his health and did nothing to dispel growing worries about his age and fitness for office.

Musk, who lacks the ability to steer a conversation or challenge his guest, merely echoed Trump’s bizarre statements, occasionally veering off on his own right-wing tangents, much like a man too wealthy to be told he’s wrong.

Quoting anything from the interview would be pointless, as Trump’s remarks were either too incoherent to transcribe or recycled from his usual rally rhetoric.

Trump's message has become tiresomely predictable: build a wall, drill for oil, bash Marxists and socialists, and make racially insensitive remarks about Harris. His latest attempt to revitalize his campaign by teaming up with a tech mogul known for social media missteps resulted in what Trump himself might call a "DISASTER!"

Musk, with his clumsy handling of social media and inflated sense of self-importance, first made DeSantis look inept. Now, he’s done the same to Trump.

At this rate, Musk’s continued blunders might even win him some unlikely fans.

 Trump Campaign Confirms Hack After Anonymous Emails Surface

The campaign for former President Donald Trump confirmed on Saturday that some of its internal communications had been compromised by a hacker. This announcement followed the receipt of emails by POLITICO from an anonymous sender who shared documents purportedly from within Trump’s campaign.

The Trump campaign attributed the breach to “foreign sources hostile to the United States,” referencing a Microsoft report released on Friday. The report highlighted a spear phishing attempt in June by Iranian hackers targeting a senior official in a U.S. presidential campaign, though Microsoft did not specify which campaign was targeted. When asked for details, a Trump campaign spokesperson, Steven Cheung, declined to provide further information supporting the claim that Iran was responsible for the breach.

“These documents were obtained illegally from foreign sources hostile to the United States, intended to interfere with the 2024 election and sow chaos throughout our Democratic process,” Cheung stated. He also mentioned Microsoft’s report, noting that the timing of the cyberattack coincided with Trump’s selection of a vice-presidential nominee.

Cheung did not disclose whether the campaign had engaged with Microsoft or law enforcement regarding the breach, citing the sensitivity of such discussions.

The anonymous emails began arriving at POLITICO on July 22, sent from an AOL account by someone identifying themselves only as “Robert.” Over the past few weeks, “Robert” shared what appeared to be internal communications from a senior Trump campaign official, including a research dossier on Trump’s running mate, Ohio Sen. JD Vance, dated Feb. 23. According to two individuals familiar with the documents, who spoke on the condition of anonymity, the documents are authentic. One source described the dossier as an early draft of Vance’s vetting file.

The 271-page dossier compiled publicly available information about Vance’s record and statements, highlighting some, like his past criticisms of Trump, as “POTENTIAL VULNERABILITIES.” Another document provided by “Robert” included a portion of a research file on Florida Sen. Marco Rubio, who was also considered for the vice-presidential nomination.

When asked how they obtained the documents, “Robert” cryptically replied, “I suggest you don’t be curious about where I got them from. Any answer to this question will compromise me and legally restrict you from publishing them.”

The full extent of the breach remains unclear, but it represents a significant security lapse for the Trump campaign.

In recent weeks, reports have surfaced indicating that the U.S. intelligence community is increasingly concerned that Iran is plotting retaliation against Trump for ordering the 2020 assassination of Iranian military officer Qassem Soleimani. Although no evidence links the hacker to these plots, the situation has raised alarms.

Cheung alluded to these reports in his statement on Saturday, asserting, “The Iranians know that President Trump will stop their reign of terror just like he did in his first four years in the White House.”

Iranian officials were not immediately available for comment.

This breach recalls the 2016 hacking of top Democratic Party officials ahead of the presidential election. That cyberattack, later attributed to Russia, resulted in the leak of damaging emails that exposed the inner workings of Hillary Clinton’s campaign. The Justice Department’s subsequent investigation into Russian interference in the election did not find sufficient evidence to charge Trump or his campaign with collusion, though Special Counsel Robert Mueller did document the campaign’s enthusiasm for exploiting the hacked materials.

 Is It Feasible for Donald Trump to Establish an Iron Dome for America?

In a word, no. The former president and current candidate is still peddling the same old missile defense fallacy.

“We will replenish our military and build an Iron Dome missile defense system to ensure that no enemy can strike our homeland,” Donald Trump promised at the recent Republican Party convention. “Israel has an Iron Dome. They have a missile defense system,” he said. “Why should other countries have this, and we don’t?”

Firstly, it is technically impossible to build a system that can protect the United States from ballistic missile attacks.

It's not for lack of trying. Since President Ronald Reagan announced his ambitious Strategic Defense Initiative in 1983, the country has allocated more than $415 billion to top military contractors, employing tens of thousands of workers and the best scientists for this effort. However, nothing has worked.

All we have to show for the effort is a basic system of 44 ground-based interceptors deployed in Alaska and California. Under ideal test conditions, they have been able to hit a target only half of the time. The program is essentially on hold while a new interceptor is designed.

Trump might suggest that we can simply deploy a U.S.-built version of Israel’s Iron Dome. Since that system works fairly well, why not build an American version?

Because the Iron Dome is designed to intercept short-range rockets, not intercontinental ballistic missiles. Each Iron Dome system can defend an area of roughly 150 square miles. To cover the 3.7 million square miles of the continental United States, we would need to deploy more than 24,700 Iron Dome batteries. At $100 million per battery, this would cost approximately $2.47 trillion.

Even if it costs $2.5 trillion, it might be worth it if the system could truly defend the country. But it can’t. The Iron Dome is designed to intercept relatively primitive rockets and mortars that travel under 44 miles. It is suitable for defending San Diego from rockets launched from Tijuana, 35 miles away. But the system couldn’t even protect Mar-a-Lago from missiles fired from the Bahamas, 80 miles away.

Long-range missiles pose a fundamentally different, more complex threat than short-range missiles.

After decades of effort, we now have systems that can reliably intercept short- and medium-range missiles that travel tens or even hundreds of miles. These missiles are relatively slow, large, and hot targets. They travel mostly through the atmosphere, preventing them from deploying any kind of decoys against the interceptors.

Reliably intercepting long-range missiles that travel thousands of miles and are fast, small, and cold as they speed through outer space has proved impossible, particularly if the adversary deploys countermeasures like decoys, chaff, and jammers. The interceptors can’t see the target, and even when the warhead enters the atmosphere, stripping away the decoys deployed in space, it is traveling so fast (around 4 miles per second) and is so small that it is an extraordinarily difficult target. Adding to the difficulty, adversaries can overwhelm defensive systems with more warheads than there are interceptors, presenting insurmountable problems.

Ronald Reagan sought to solve this dilemma by deploying laser weapons in space. These, theoretically, could overcome the built-in advantage the offense enjoys. It was a fantasy. The American Physical Society—the country’s premier association of physicists—concluded in 1987 that it would take decades to determine whether such technologies were even feasible.

This sent the program away from “Star Wars” laser weapons back to kinetic-kill weapons. After several years of pursuing impractical “Brilliant Pebbles” schemes that would house thousands of interceptor rockets in huge space “garages,” the program was forced to go back to ground-based systems, even with their inherent limitations.

Has the technology improved? Trump thinks so. “Ronald Reagan wanted this many years ago, but we really didn’t have the technology many years ago. Remember, they called it starship, spaceship, anything to mock him,” he said at the convention. “But now we have unbelievable technology. And why should other countries have this, and we don’t? No, no, we’re going to build an Iron Dome over our country, and we’re going to be sure that nothing can come and harm our people.”

While short-range directed energy weapons are now feasible, scientists are nowhere close to achieving the kinds of power, beam control, and precision tracking required for space weapons. Nor have engineers overcome the substantial cost, maintenance, and operational difficulties of putting dozens or hundreds of weapons in space. House Armed Services Committee Chairman Adam Smith, D-Washington, warned in a comment on Trump’s 2019 Missile Defense Review, “A space-based interceptor layer…has been studied repeatedly and found to be technologically challenging and prohibitively expensive.”

Even with the science and technology against him, Trump believes so strongly in this vision that he has made it the one defense plank in the new Republican Party platform other than “strengthen our military.” There are 20 points in the official GOP agenda. Number eight is: “PREVENT WORLD WAR THREE, RESTORE PEACE IN EUROPE AND IN THE MIDDLE EAST, AND BUILD A GREAT IRON DOME MISSILE DEFENSE SHIELD OVER OUR ENTIRE COUNTRY — ALL MADE IN AMERICA.” (All caps in the original.)

Similarly, Project 2025 calls for making missile defense “a top priority.” It treats the problem as if it were just a lack of political will, arguing that we must “abandon the existing policy of not defending the homeland against Russian and Chinese ballistic missiles.” It returns to the “Star Wars” vision: “Invest in future advanced missile defense technologies like directed energy or space-based missile defense that could defend against more numerous missile threats.”

In 1994, Rep. Newt Gingrich had a similar defense plank in his 10-point “Contract for America”: to deploy a national missile defense system. Then, too, Republican leaders arrived at their strategy by listening to conservative activists. The Heritage Foundation—the group behind today’s Project 2025—assembled a report that called for ending “the Clinton Administration's policy of intentionally leaving American cities and territory open to missile attack.” The report argued that for a few billion dollars, America could develop and deploy “affordable, effective ballistic missile defenses.” All that was lacking, the report stated, was “a proper understanding of missile defenses and the political will to build them.”

It was complete nonsense. A Republican White House and a Republican Congress spent billions but got nowhere with the scheme. Thirty years later, Donald Trump is trying to pull the same fast one, relying on the same group to sell the snake oil. It may be rhetorically appealing—Gingrich did capture the House—but it is utterly without scientific merit or strategic sense.

Let’s hope the American people have learned from the follies of the past.

Florida House Approves Bill Restricting Social Media Access for Individuals Under 16 

The Florida House of Representatives has approved a bill that aims to prevent individuals under the age of 16 from holding accounts on certain social media platforms. The legislation, known as House Bill 1 or Online Protections for Minors, received a vote of 108-7 and will now be sent to Governor Ron DeSantis, a Republican, for potential approval.

If signed into law, HB1 will mandate certain social media platforms to verify the age of account holders. Additionally, it will prohibit individuals under 16 from creating new accounts and require the termination of accounts suspected to belong to underage users. The Senate had already passed the bill with a vote of 23-14 earlier on the same day.

Governor DeSantis, known for his stance on parental involvement, expressed his views on the matter during a press conference. He acknowledged the potential harm of excessive social media use but emphasized the importance of parental supervision. DeSantis is actively working to incorporate a role for parents in deciding whether their children should have access to social media, suggesting that parents should have the option to opt in if they want their kids on these platforms.

The bill broadly defines the social media platforms subject to its provisions. It encompasses companies where at least 10% of daily active users under 16 spend a minimum of two hours per day on the platform, and those utilizing algorithms, push alerts, continuous scrolling, or auto-play videos.

The legislation, introduced on January 5, faces an uncertain future, echoing the challenges seen in other states. A federal judge recently temporarily blocked a similar Ohio law, deeming it likely unconstitutional. The Ohio law aimed to regulate children's access to social media platforms, requiring parental consent for accounts created for those under 16. This legal setback underscores the complex landscape surrounding attempts to regulate social media for young individuals amid concerns about its impact on mental health.

In Other SMH America News

"Amazon's Alexa Records and Sends Private Conversation to Random Contact"

Despite Amazon's assurances that its Echo devices only record conversations when triggered by the wake word "Alexa," a Portland resident, Danielle, discovered otherwise. She requested an investigation after an Alexa device recorded a private conversation between her and her husband, sending it to a random contact in their address book without permission. Danielle received a call from her husband's colleague, warning them that they were being hacked and to unplug their Alexa devices immediately.

Amazon's Alexa recorded private conversations and sent them to random contact

Initially skeptical, Danielle realized the severity of the situation when the colleague mentioned details from their conversation about hardwood floors. Feeling invaded and questioning her trust in the device, Danielle decided never to use it again. Amazon confirmed the incident, apologized and termed it an "extremely rare occurrence."

In an updated statement, Amazon explained that the Echo device mistakenly woke up due to a word resembling "Alexa" in the background conversation. The subsequent conversation was misconstrued as a "send message" request, leading Alexa to ask aloud, "To whom?" The background conversation was then interpreted as a name in the user's contact list, and Alexa asked, "[contact name], right?" Amazon acknowledged the improbability of this sequence of events and stated they were exploring options to minimize such incidents.

Despite Amazon's insistence that this was a malfunction rather than evidence of constant listening, the company has filed patent applications for features involving continuous listening, such as an algorithm to analyze when users say they "love" or "bought" something. The patent included a scenario where individuals having a phone conversation received separate targeted advertisements afterward.

In Other SMH America News