Trump Supports Israel to “Get Rid of” Hamas as Gaza Talks Collapse Amid Starvation

In Doha’s diplomatic deadlock, Trump backs war, not peace, and famine spreads in Gaza.

U.S. President Donald Trump declared on July 25, 2025, that Hamas isn’t serious about securing a ceasefire or returning the hostage, asserting, “they want to die.” As he accepted the collapse of negotiations, Trump aligned with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, saying Israel must now “finish the job” and remove Hamas from power. ([The Times of Israel])(The Times of Israel)

📌 What Just Happened

❌ Ceasefire Talks Crumble

Weeks of mediation in Doha ended as both the U.S. and Israeli negotiating teams withdrew, citing Hamas’s unwillingness to engage constructively. U.S. envoy Steve Witkoff characterized the group’s stance as “selfish” and “in bad faith”(ft.com)

🧨 Trump Signals War, Not Truce

Trump publicly endorsed Israel’s military escalation, urging it to dismantle Hamas entirely. His remarks followed Netanyahu’s own vow to eliminate Hamas’ control, rather than negotiate a power-sharing or ceasefire arrangement. (New York Post)

🌐 Humanitarian Crisis & Global Fallout

• Starvation Intensifies: Gazans continue facing famine and malnutrition. At least nine more deaths were reported from hunger that day, while aid remains blocked. (The Times of Israel)

• Aid Delivery Still Failing: Despite Israel approving limited airdrops by Jordan and the UAE, experts warn it’s insufficient and dangerous; ramping up aid remains urgent.(The Times)

🔍 SMH Takeaway: Diplomacy Fades, Obliteration Becomes Policy

When Trump said Hamas “didn’t embrace a deal,” he also embraced the conclusion of talks—and endorsed a military path forward authored by Netanyahu. The shift from negotiation to obliteration aligns both leaders, even as Gaza slips toward collapse.

This escalation highlights a brutal truth: when diplomacy fails, war becomes the default, especially when global power backs the strongest actor. Yet the people left starving are the ones paying the real price.

😐🇺🇸 #SMHAmerica #CeasefireDead

📰 Related Coverage

• AP News
• The Times of India
• Politico

Trump Administration Unfreezes Over $5B in School Grant Funds After Nearly a Monthlong Block.

After a funding freeze that triggered lawsuits and bipartisan outrage, the money locked up for schools is finally flowing again.

On July 25, 2025, the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) confirmed the release of more than $5 billion in K–12 grant funding that had been frozen since July 1. The aid covers programs for English learners, teacher training, migrant education, and academic enrichment, long stalled due to a so-called “programmatic review” to align spending with administration priorities ([K12Dive](K-12 Dive); [Reuters](Reuters)).

📌 What Changed

⚖️ Funding Holds Trigger Backlash

Originally, roughly $6.8 billion in grants were withheld, creating chaos for school districts that depended on them for staffing, curriculum, and programs. Earlier in July, 24 states plus D.C. and multiple school systems sued the administration over what they called an unlawful impoundment of legally approved funds ([Washington Post](The Washington Post)).

🔓 Funds Will Flow Starting Week of July 28

After completing its review, OMB mandated that funds begin dispersing the week of July 28, including $1.3 billion previously unblocked and the rest of the allocation for the 2025 school year. The programs include Title I‑C (migrant education), Title II‑A (professional development), Title III‑A (English learners), and Title IV‑A (academic enrichment), as well as adult literacy and civics education grants ([Education Week](Education Week); [K12Dive](K-12 Dive)).

🛑 “Guardrails” Now Attached

The administration stated the funds will be released with new “guardrails” to ensure compliance with Trump’s executive orders—implicitly targeting what it terms radical or woke agendas. Details remain vague, but critics worry schools will face new ideological strings attached to spending ([Education Week](Education Week; [Reuters](Reuters).

⚖️ Political & Legal Fallout

• Bipartisan Pressure Paid Off: Fifteen Republican senators—many from rural states—joined Democrats in demanding the release. Rep. Don Bacon even touted success publicly on X. Superintendents warned of staff cuts and program disruptions if the freeze continued ([Education Week](Education Week).

• Legal Defeat Loomed: Courts had already blocked the broader OMB pause on thousands of federal grants, including these education programs, citing executive overreach and violation of the Impoundment Control Act ([Wikipedia grant pause](en.wikipedia.org)). The funding freeze could have triggered a constitutional showdown over Congress's power of the purse.

🔍 SMH Takeaway: Control vs. Chaos in Education Funding

What began as a political maneuver to reshape federal spending became a national education crisis until lawyers, legislators, and school leaders forced a reversal. The administration’s delay reveals how executive power can weaponize appropriated funds—but also how institutional resistance can hold it in check.

The question now: will these new “guardrails” stifle programming or simply enforce accountability? And will future funding cycles see the same brinkmanship—or be smoother once the system retools for ideological conformity?

Parents, educators, and students can finally breathe again—but the real story is how far the executive branch can—or should—go in redirecting public money.

😐🇺🇸 #SMHAmerica #SchoolFundingFreeze

• Reuters
• The Washington Post

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

US Withdraws from Gaza Ceasefire Talks as Envoy Warns Hamas Lacks Good-Faith Commitment

Trump-aligned negotiator Steve Witkoff signals shift in U.S. strategy amid humanitarian collapse.

On July 24, 2025, U.S. Special Envoy Steve Witkoff, appointed by President Trump, announced that the U.S. has formally pulled its negotiating team from ceasefire talks in Doha, accusing Hamas of acting in “bad faith.” President Netanyahu similarly withdrew Israeli representatives. Both countries cited stalled progress despite proposals for a 60-day truce with pledged hostage exchanges and increased humanitarian aid ([turn0news14])(AP News).

📌 Negotiations & Breakdown

🕊️ Proposed Deal Collapsed

The deal on the table included a 60‑day ceasefire, phased hostages-for-prisoners exchange, and improved aid corridors. But stalemate over Israeli troop presence and Hamas’s refusal to surrender arms stalled progress. Hamas also rejected Israel’s more expansive “Witkoff Plan,” which called for releases in exchange for an extended ceasefire—a deviation from the original January agreement. ($\textit{Witkoff plan}$ was first outlined in Marcy/to renegotiate prior terms.)(Wikipedia)

🌐 Witkoff’s Reaction & Next Steps

Witkoff sharply criticized Hamas’s failure to engage constructively, and declared the U.S. would now explore alternative options to secure hostage releases and stabilize Gaza, even as he plans to head back to the region imminently to recalibrate efforts.(AP News)

🌍 Humanitarian & Diplomatic Fallout

• Humanitarian Crisis Deepens: More than 115 aid groups warn of imminent famine, with severe malnutrition and aid access cut off by blockades. At least 85 people died during food distribution delays.(AP News)

• Global Backlash Builds: France recognized Palestine at the UN, prompting heated responses from Israel and widespread international criticism. Global protests and diplomatic upheaval are escalating.(The Guardian)

• Hostage Release Pressure: Trump claimed that Israeli authorities agreed to new truce terms including hostage release, and praised Witkoff’s negotiation role. However, uncertainties remain about the number of surviving hostages and Israel’s agreement on conditions.(The Guardian)

🔍 SMH Takeaway: Diplomacy on Pause, Despair Not

Witkoff’s exit signals more than a walkout—it marks a shift from mediation to messaging. The U.S. leverage now comes in threats of alternative tactics, not diplomacy. Meanwhile, Gaza’s civilians continue drowning in shortages, conflict, and collapse.

The strategy is clear: negotiations have stalled. But the morality question remains—when humanitarian suffering is weaponized, diplomatic silence becomes complicity.

😐🇺🇸 #SMHAmerica #CeasefireFail

• AP News
• The Guardian
• AP News

Trump’s New Homelessness Executive Order Spurs Crackdown, Civil Commitment Push

Unhoused people may face forced institutionalization as policy shifts from housing to enforcement

On July 24, 2025, President Trump signed an executive order titled “Ending Vagrancy and Restoring Order,” directing cities and states to aggressively clear homeless encampments and facilitate involuntary civil commitment for individuals suffering from mental illness or addiction disorders (Guardian live feed (The Guardian)).

📌 Policy Details

🏙️ Forced Removal & Funding Mandate

Under the order, Attorney General Pam Bondi is instructed to challenge federal consent decrees and precedents that restrict local authority to relocate unhoused individuals. The administration will prioritize federal grants to cities enforcing bans on public camping, drug use, loitering, and squatting (White House fact sheet (whitehouse.gov)).

🏥 Involuntary Commitment Focus

The order encourages transferring homeless individuals with severe mental health or addiction issues to institutional or outpatient treatment centers, bypassing Housing First models. It directs agencies to defund harm-reduction programs like safe injection sites and to reinforce civil commitment frameworks ([Daily Beast, Guardian, Washington Post] (thedailybeast.com)).

🌐 Context & Criticism

📊 Homelessness at Historic Levels

Federal data shows homelessness rose by 18% in 2024, reaching 771,480 people, with 36% unsheltered. The policy arrives amid worsening housing shortages and weakened aid infrastructure ([Reuters] (Reuters). The order claims over 274,000 were sleeping outside nightly under the previous administration—a record high ([White House fact sheet] (whitehouse.gov)).

⚖️ Rights Groups Sound Alarm

Advocacy organizations like the National Homelessness Law Center and the National Coalition for the Homeless denounce the policy as regressive, discriminatory, and likely to harm vulnerable individuals. Critics warn it criminalizes poverty and shifts focus away from affordable housing solutions ([Daily Beast, Washington Post] (thedailybeast.com)).

Experts underline that without sufficient funding or expanded treatment capacity, the order risks institutionalizing people without any meaningful path out of homelessness or improving public safety ([Washington Post] (washingtonpost.com)).

🔍 SMH Takeaway: Order Restores “Order”—At What Cost?

This executive order marks a sharp pivot from Housing First to a law-and-order approach that prioritizes visibility over sustainability. By redirecting resources toward enforcement and institutionalization—and defunding harm-reduction—it embraces the optics of control at the expense of human dignity and systemic solutions.

The central questions loom large: Is forcing people off the streets a fix? Or is it a policy that further marginalizes the already vulnerable?

Real change won’t come by removing tents—it comes by building homes.

😐🇺🇸 #SMHAmerica #OrderNotCare

• New York Post
• The Guardian
• Reuters

Congress Splits Over Epstein File Release—Trump’s Base Grows Restless, Democrats Push Hard

As Trump denies wrongdoing, Capitol Hill faces fractures and pressure for transparency.

Across Capitol Hill, the fallout from the Jeffrey Epstein controversy has escalated into a partisan flashpoint. Reports confirmed that President Trump was quietly briefed in May 2025 that his name appears in sealed DOJ files, though officials say the mentions are unverified hearsay (Wikipedia). As lawmakers debate how to respond, divisions are emerging—not just between parties, but within them as well.

📌 What’s Brewing in Washington

🔍 Mounting GOP Line Frays

Despite Trump’s denials and a DOJ declaration of no “client list,” many Republican lawmakers—feeling the heat from both MAGA activists and independent voters—have publicly supported releasing Epstein-related records. Senator Thom Tillis, breaking ranks, now echoes demands for transparency. House Republicans even backed a non-binding resolution to attempt release, despite party leadership resisting the effort (Axios, The Guardian).

🧑‍⚖️ Democrats Push Full Disclosure

House Democrats, led by Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries, are pressing into the August recess with subpoenas and public pressure tactics. Known Trump adversaries, such as Ron Wyden and Marc Veasey, are leading legislative efforts. Even conservative stalwarts, such as Mike Pence and Sen. Mike Johnson, have called for the release of the documents, spurred by rising public frustration and a handful of GOP defections (Axios).

🧭 Political Impact & Fallout

🔍 SMH Takeaway: Is This Trump’s Tipping Point?

When Donald Trump pledged to release Epstein records, he positioned himself as a champion of truth. Yet once briefed that his own name made the list, that promise turned into a political hot potato.

Now, embarrassed allies and restless voters alike are demanding answers. What happens next matters—not just for party optics, but for the question at the heart of modern U.S. politics: who holds power over the narrative?

Trump's silence may have saved him short-term, but in the long run, secrecy is rarely sustainable.

😐🇺🇸 #SMHAmerica #ReleaseTheFiles

• TIME
• Axios
• El País

Deputy AG Blanche Meets with Ghislaine Maxwell in DOJ Effort to Unlock Epstein Network

DOJ explores Maxwell’s potential leverage amid mounting pressure for Epstein transparency

On Thursday, July 24, 2025, Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche—former defense attorney for Donald Trump—sat down for a six-hour interview with Ghislaine Maxwell at the U.S. Attorney’s Office in Tallahassee, Florida. Maxwell, serving a 20-year sentence for sex trafficking minors tied to Jeffrey Epstein, reportedly initiated the meeting as she enters talks about cooperating with federal prosecutors (reuters.com) (Reuters).

🧾 What Took Place

Maxwell Starts the Conversation

According to ABC News, Maxwell’s legal team reached out to DOJ officials to propose the meeting. The session was attended by Acting Associate Deputy AG Diego Pestana and lasted nearly six hours in the Tallahassee courthouse. Blanche confirmed he would continue the discussion on Friday and pledged to share findings "at the appropriate time" (ABC News) (ABC News).

No Fifth Amendment Used

Maxwell’s attorney, David Markus, said she answered every question posed without invoking her right to remain silent. He called the interview "truthful" and "productive," though specifics on the content remain undisclosed. Analysts say this marks the DOJ's most direct effort yet to revisit Epstein’s network (The Daily Beast) (The Daily Beast).

🏛️ Wider Pressure Points

• Demands for Transparency Intensify: Trump-aligned conservatives and congressional leaders have criticized Attorney General Pam Bondi for reversing earlier promises to release an Epstein “client list.” Now, House Republicans are demanding documents and Maxwell’s deposition, escalating oversight battles. Blanche’s personal role—previously Trump’s lawyer—is drawing scrutiny and implies political stakes in the outcome (Politico) (Politico).

• Legal Elite in Focus: Epstein-related docs have named Trump and other high-profile figures. But investigators have said there is no verified evidence of wrongdoing or blackmail; yet doubts linger, as a federal judge denied a grand jury transcript release, citing secrecy rules (Reuters) (Reuters).

🔍 SMH Takeaway: Smoke or Signal?

This isn't just a meeting—it’s a statement. With Maxwell’s cooperation on the table, DOJ is pushing back on accusations of obfuscation and control. But Blanche’s personal ties to Trump and the opaque nature of the interview raise questions: is this about justice, political expediency, or silencing pressure from the right?

If Maxwell’s testimony brings new names to light—or dovetails with subpoena-driven testimony in August—it could upend the narrative: from strategic withholding to potential reckoning for powerful people.

😐🇺🇸 #SMHAmerica #EpsteinFilesTalk

📰 Related Coverage

• Reuters
• The Daily Beast
• Politico

Epstein Files Exposed America’s Political Divide: Democrats Push Disclosure, Republicans Fracture

The Epstein controversy erupts into a full-blown partisan crisis

A new Wall Street Journal exposé revealed that on July 24, 2025, Justice Department officials informed President Trump in May that his name appeared multiple times among sealed investigative files on Jeffrey Epstein. Though officials assert the mentions were unverified hearsay, the disclosure has fractured GOP messaging and ignited sustained backlash from Democrats and Trump’s own base (Reuters).

📌 What Just Happened

🧾 Trump Briefed on Epstein Mentions

Attorney General Pam Bondi personally told Trump that his name—and those of other high-profile figures—were included in DOJ files related to Epstein. Neither prosecutors nor investigators found evidence warranting further inquiry (Reuters).

⚖️ Legal Roadblocks & Congressional Action

A Florida federal court rejected the Trump administration’s bid to unseal grand jury transcripts, emphasizing strict legal protections. Meanwhile, House Democrats forced a vote and won bipartisan support (8‑2) for a subpoena compelling the Justice Department to release Epstein-related files, spurning GOP leadership’s attempts to bury the issue (Reuters).

🏛️ Political Quake: Divide at Every Level

• Democrats Demand Full Transparency

Senators like Ron Wyden cite nearly $1.5 billion in suspicious Epstein-related transactions involving foreign banks. Rep. Marc Veasey introduced resolutions to force the release of files, gaining momentum from both parties. Even top Republicans—like former VP Mike Pence and GOP luminaries Marjorie Taylor Greene and Mike Johnson—called fothe r release of the documents, arguing public scrutiny is overdue. Subpoenas are also in motion for Ghislaine Maxwell, intensifying the oversight push (The Times, Vanity Fair, People.com, The Daily Beast, The Guardian).

• GOP in Crisis: MAGA Defections and Internal Scrutiny

Trump loyalists—including QAnon supporters like Jake Chansley—have turned on the former president, denouncing him for breaking transparency promises. Conservative commentators like Laura Loomer accuse his team of bait-and-switch tactics. Even polling shows alarm: only 17% of Americans—and a mere 35% of Republicans—approve of how Trump is handling the Epstein files ranting. Over 60% of Americans believe something is being hidden (Politico).

🔎 SMH Takeaway: Secrecy, Scandal & Self‑Inflicted Wounds

Trump wagered political capital on revealing Epstein secrets—but learned his own name was inside. Now he’s scrambling to spin it as "democrat hoax" while his base fractures, Congress subpoenas, and his political allies break ranks.

This issue has transcended Epstein. It’s about the limits of power, the hypocrisy of promises made, and whether today's leaders still believe in accountability—or simply control of the narrative.

💥 The bigger question: Does hiding the files only deepen suspicion? Or is this fight now about something else entirely—public trust, political betrayal, and accountability for elites?

😐🇺🇸 #SMHAmerica #ReleaseTheFiles

• TIME
• AP News
• TIME
• Reuters