Archaeologists Accidentally Found the Incredible Lost Remnants of America's First Soldiers

Tim Newcomb
Sun, June 22, 2025

POP MECH

Lost Revolutionary War Barracks Found in Virginia ArjanL - Getty Images


Here’s what you’ll learn when you read this story:

Barracks believed built by the Continental Army during the Revolutionary War between 1776 and 1777 were recently discovered in Colonial Williamsburg.


Experts believe the barracks were burned by British troops under the direction of General Charles Cornwallis in 1781.


An archaeology team has started unearthing artifacts that show the life of soldiers in the late 1770s.

British General Charles Cornwallis ordered the burning of a Continental Army barracks in Colonial Williamsburg in 1781. What he hoped to destroy forever was recently found by archaeologists, giving experts a fresh perspective on the life of Continental soldiers during the Revolutionary War.

As crews made way for the construction of a new sports center on Colonial Williamsburg Foundation property, archaeologists first took to the area to see if 18th century maps and period documents referencing the construction of barracks in 1776 through 1777 produced any archaeological fruit.

They have plenty to pick from, as the nearly four-acre site has artifacts showing both the barracks and everyday life of soldiers.

“Archaeological evidence of continental barracks in Virginia is rare,” the foundation says in a blog post. “This site, which was occupied from 1777-1781, is particularly valuable since it was built and used only for one purpose. In addition, a significant portion of the site has been largely undisturbed since the barracks were destroyed.”

Archaeologists have excavated only a small section of the area—the sports center was shifted on the site to ensure future exploration of the barracks—but the team has already found bricks and an intact chimney base, gun hardware, lead musket shot with toothmarks, high-end ceramics, and personal items likely owned by officers.

“What we know about the barracks from historical documentation is that, in August 1776, just a month after the signing of the Declaration of Independence, the Commonwealth of Virginia ordered the construction of those barracks, Jack Gary, executive director of archaeology for the foundation, tells Fox News Digital.

The barracks were said to house up to 2,000 soldiers and 100 horses, even if they were originally anticipated to accommodate 1,000 soldiers.

Those barracks didn’t last long, though, with Gary saying a report from a soldier describes the burning of the barracks by British troops while they moved toward Yorktown in 1781.

“Later on, after the Cornwallis troops moved through, they could see the barracks on fire in the distance … For us as archaeologists, this is a burning event, which is a catastrophic event,” Gary tells Fox News. “But it can also lend itself to really good preservation.”

One of the more intriguing items discovered is the bounty of lead shot with toothmarks. The foundation’s blog post says the shot was chewed on by bored soldiers to help pass the time, but also because the lead had a sweet taste.

Experts hope that as they excavate additional sections of the barracks, they discover more about the way of life for Continental Army soldiers in the late 1770s.

Takeaways from AP report on Wagner allegedly committing war crimes by promoting atrocities

MONIKA PRONCZUK and SAM MEDNICK
Sat, June 21, 2025 at 10:47 PM MDT



In this image from video posted on a Wagner Group-affiliated Telegram channel in July 2024, men in Burkina Faso military uniforms stand around a dead body lying on the ground as it was cut into pieces. (AP Photo)ASSOCIATED PRESS

In this image from video posted on a Wagner Group-affiliated Telegram channel in July 2024, a man wearing a Mali armed forces uniform reaches for what appears to be a human heart in a bowl of liquid. (AP Photo)ASSOCIATED PRESS

In this image from video posted on a Wagner Group-affiliated Telegram channel in July 2024, a man in a Burkina Faso armed forces uniform uses a machete to cut up a dead body lying on the ground. (AP Photo)ASSOCIATED PRESS

DAKAR, Senegal (AP) — Editor’s Note: This story contains graphic images and descriptions of atrocities.

The International Criminal Court has been asked to review a confidential legal brief arguing that the Russia-linked Wagner Group has committed war crimes by spreading images of apparent atrocities in West Africa on social media, including ones alluding to cannibalism. The brief was seen exclusively by The Associated Press.

Violence in the Sahel, an arid belt of land south of the Sahara Desert, has reached record levels as military governments battle extremist groups linked to al-Qaida and the Islamic State group. Last year, it became the deadliest place on earth for extremism, with half of the world’s nearly 8,000 victims killed across the territory, according to yearly data compiled by the Institute for Economics and Peace.

While the United States and other Western powers withdraw from the region, Russia has taken advantage, expanding military cooperation with several African nations via Wagner, the private security company closely linked to Russia’s intelligence and military.

Observers say the new approach has led to the kind of atrocities and dehumanization not seen in the region for decades. Social media offers a window into the alleged horrors that often occur in remote areas with little or no oversight from governments or outside observers.

Experts say the images, while difficult to verify, could serve as evidence of war crimes. The confidential brief to the ICC goes further, arguing that the act of circulating the images on social media could constitute a war crime, too. It is the first such argument made to the international court.

Here are some takeaways from AP’s report on the issue


Videos that humiliate and dehumanize

The brief, along with AP reporting, shows that a network of social media channels, likely administered by current or former Wagner members, has reposted content that the channels say is from Wagner fighters. They promote videos and photos appearing to show abuses by armed, uniformed men, often accompanied by mocking or dehumanizing language.

In the videos, men in military uniform are shown butchering corpses of what appear to be civilians with machetes, hacking out organs and posing with severed limbs. One fighter says he is about to eat someone’s liver. Another says he is trying to remove their heart.

While administrators of the channels are anonymous, open source analysts believe they are current or former Wagner fighters based on the content as well as graphics used, including in some cases Wagner’s logo.

AP analysis of the videos confirms the body parts shown are genuine, as well as the military uniforms.

The videos and photos, in a mix of French and local languages, aim to humiliate and threaten those considered the enemies of Wagner and its local military allies, along with civilian populations whose youth face pressure to join extremist groups. But experts say it often has the opposite effect, prompting reprisal attacks and recruitment into the ranks of jihadis.

The governments of Mali and Burkina Faso earlier condemned the graphic videos and said they would look into them, but it is not clear whether anyone in them has been identified.

Russia's presence continues

The U.S. State Department has described Wagner, a network of mercenaries and businesses, as “a transnational criminal organization.” Wagner did not respond to AP questions about the videos.

Since Wagner leader Yevgeny Prigozhin was killed in a plane crash in 2023, Moscow has been developing a new organization, the Africa Corps, as a rival force under direct command of Russian authorities.

Earlier this month, Wagner announced its withdrawal from Mali, declaring “mission accomplished” in a Telegram post. In a separate Telegram post, Africa Corps said it is staying.

In Mali, about 2,000 Russian mercenaries are fighting alongside the country’s armed forces, according to U.S. officials. It is unclear how many have been with Wagner or are with the Africa Corps.


Outrages on personal dignity

Under the Rome Statute that created the ICC, the violation of personal dignity, mainly through humiliating and degrading treatment, constitutes a war crime. Legal experts from UC Berkeley, who submitted the brief to the ICC last year, argue that such treatment could include Wagner’s alleged weaponization of social media.

The brief was submitted to the ICC before the U.S. sanctioned the court earlier this year. It asks the ICC to investigate individuals with Wagner and the governments of Mali and Russia for alleged abuses in northern and central Mali between December 2021 and July 2024, including extrajudicial killings, torture, mutilation and cannibalism.

It also asks the court to investigate crimes “committed through the internet, which are inextricably linked to the physical crimes and add a new dimension of harm to an extended group of victims.”

The ICC told the AP it could not comment on the brief but said it was aware of “various reports of alleged massive human rights violations in other parts of Mali,” adding that it “follows closely the situation.”

Its Office of the Prosecutor said investigations have focused on alleged war crimes committed since January 2012, when insurgents seized communities in Mali’s northern regions of Gao, Kidal and Timbuktu.

Lack of accountability

Human Rights Watch has documented atrocities committed in Mali by Wagner and other armed groups. It says accountability for alleged abuses has been minimal, with the military government reluctant to investigate its armed forces and Russian mercenaries.


It has become difficult to obtain detailed information on alleged abuses because of the Malian government’s “relentless assault against the political opposition, civil society groups, the media and peaceful dissent,” said Ilaria Allegrozzi, the group’s Sahel researcher. That has worsened after a U.N. peacekeeping mission withdrew from Mali in December 2023 at the government’s request.

Las Vegas casino dealers quietly being laid off amid decline in tourism — what’s behind the slump in Sin City

advance summer bookings for flights between Canada and the U.S. have plunged by more than 70 percent compared to the summer of 2024.

Monique Danao
Sat, June 21, 2025 

Poker dealer in Las Vegas
Yahoo is using AI to generate takeaways from this article. This means the info may not always match what's in the article. Reporting mistakes helps us improve the experience.Generate Key Takeaways

Las Vegas’s famed casino floors are getting quieter as table game dealers find themselves among the first to feel the squeeze of technological change and a downturn in tourism.

Major resorts on the famous Las Vegas Strip, including Fontainebleau and Resorts World, have started laying off workers — many of which are dealers — as foot traffic dwindles on the gaming floor.
Don't miss

Thanks to Jeff Bezos, you can now become a landlord for as little as $100 — and no, you don't have to deal with tenants or fix freezers. Here's how


I'm 49 years old and have nothing saved for retirement — what should I do? Don't panic. Here are 6 of the easiest ways you can catch up (and fast)


Nervous about the stock market in 2025? Find out how you can access this $1B private real estate fund (with as little as $10)

“We want those casinos to be successful, active and robust because that gives our break-in dealers an opportunity to transition, that’s the goal,” CEG Dealer School Managing Director David Knoll shared with KLAS.
Declining foot traffic leads to job cuts

New data from the Las Vegas Convention and Visitors Authority shows the city’s visitor volume dipped 7.8% year-over-year in March 2025, marking the third straight month that tourism dropped in Sin City. With fewer guests coming into town, gaming revenue on the Strip fell 4.8% over that same period, while hotel occupancy slid to 82.9%, down from 85.3% in March 2024.

Despite the city’s drop in overall visitors, convention attendance in Vegas is actually up 10%, but analysts warn that event-driven boosts are unlikely to offset the broader declines.

Tourism throughout the country appears to be in steep decline, as International arrivals are down sharply amid evolving U.S. travel and tariff policies. According to Travel Weekly, advance summer bookings for flights between Canada and the U.S. have plunged by more than 70 percent compared to the summer of 2024.

“Less tourism means less shifts at the job, less small businesses that support our tourist industry,” Senator Jacky Rosen (D-Nevada) told The Washington Post. “It’s going to cause businesses to go under. It has a trickle-down effect. It’s going to be devastating to Nevada.”

Travel industry analysts also link the decline in Sin City visitors to broader economic uncertainty at home. A recent Bankrate survey found that only 46% of U.S. adults plan to travel this summer due to affordability concerns.

Read more: Want an extra $1,300,000 when you retire? Dave Ramsey says this 7-step plan ‘works every single time’ to kill debt, get rich in America — and that ‘anyone’ can do it
Automation accelerates job losses

As casinos begin to tighten belts, automation is reshaping the role of the typical Vegas table game dealer.

According to Travel and Tour World, casinos have introduced electronic table games that handle bets and payouts without human intervention, another factor that has encouraged casinos to cut labour costs. Enrollment in dealer training programs has also fallen as fewer people view Las Vegas as a stable option for employment.

“We’ve seen our enrollment drop, and people interested in becoming a dealer,” said Knoll. “We used to have a lot more people transition from out of state and come to Las Vegas for the opportunities here.”

On the broader labor market, Vegas’s unemployment rate climbed to 5.2% in April 2025 — one of the highest among large U.S. metro areas — primarily driven by cuts in leisure and hospitality. This sector has shed thousands of jobs over the past year, even as the average hourly wage for Vegas dealers hovered around $19.96 — slightly above the national average of $19.25
What lies ahead

There are many factors that are likely doing damage to tourism numbers in Las Vegas.

Beyond what was mentioned above, Trump’s tariff policies, his threatening rhetoric around annexing countries like Canada and Greenland, and the increased scrutiny that international visitors can face at the borders are all additional factors that are likely scaring tourists away from the U.S. And with Trump’s economic policies forcing many Americans to tighten their belts, domestic tourism throughout the country is also in decline.

Upcoming projects in Vegas, such as Universal Studios’s Horror Unleashed attraction and a $1.75 billion stadium for the Athletics — an MLB team that will be moving to Vegas in the near future — could potentially draw fresh crowds.

But in the meantime, Sin City’s tourism — as well as its ability to generate revenue — could continue to struggle in the years to come. And if this trend of dwindling tourism continues, casinos could be forced into making more cuts, which will likely keep Vegas’s unemployment rate well above the national average of 4.2%.
What to read next

Rich, young Americans are ditching the stormy stock market — here are the alternative assets they're banking on instead


Robert Kiyosaki warns of a 'Greater Depression' coming to the US — with millions of Americans going poor. But he says these 2 'easy-money' assets will bring in ‘great wealth’. How to get in now


This tiny hot Costco item has skyrocketed 74% in price in under 2 years — but now the retail giant is restricting purchases. Here’s how to buy the coveted asset in bulk


Here are 5 ‘must have’ items that Americans (almost) always overpay for — and very quickly regret. How many are hurting you?


Like what you read? Join 200,000+ readers and get the best of Moneywise straight to your inbox every week. Subscribe for free.

This article provides information only and should not be construed as advice. It is provided without warranty of any kind.

Louisiana's Ten Commandments law struck down by US appeals court

Fri, June 20, 2025
By Jonathan Stempel

(Reuters) -A federal appeals court on Friday blocked Louisiana from enforcing a law requiring the display of the Ten Commandments in all classrooms of the state's public schools and universities.

Calling the law "plainly unconstitutional," a three-judge panel of the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in New Orleans unanimously upheld a November 2024 ruling by a lower court judge who enjoined the law's enforcement.

It is a victory for parents and students who accused Louisiana of trampling on their religious rights, and a defeat for Republicans and conservative groups trying to make expressions of faith more prominent in society.

The appeals court is widely considered among the country's most conservative, though two judges on Friday's panel were appointed by Democratic presidents.

According to published reports, Louisiana's Republican attorney general, Liz Murrill, will ask the full appeals court and perhaps eventually the U.S. Supreme Court, which has a 6-3 conservative majority, to review the case.

Murrill's office did not immediately respond to requests for comment.



Nine families, including several clergy, with children in public schools sued to block the law, saying it violated the First Amendment prohibition against state establishment of religion.

"We are grateful for this decision, which honors the religious diversity and religious-freedom rights of public school families across Louisiana," said Darcy Roake, a Unitarian Universalist minister who with her Jewish husband Adrian Van Young is among the plaintiffs.

Louisiana's law requires the display of posters or framed versions of the Ten Commandments that are at least 11 inches by 14 inches, with the Commandments being the "central focus" and printed in a large, easy-to-read font.

The law, signed by Republican Governor Jeff Landry, covers K-12 schools and state-funded colleges, and was scheduled to take effect on January 1.

In Friday's decision, Circuit Judge Irma Carrillo Ramirez cited a 1980 Supreme Court decision, Stone v. Graham, that struck down a Kentucky law requiring similar displays of the Ten Commandments because it had no "secular legislative purpose."

Louisiana said the Stone decision no longer applied because it relied on a precedent that the Supreme Court has disavowed.

It also said that even if Stone applied, Louisiana's case differed because schools could display the Ten Commandments with documents such as the Declaration of Independence, reflecting a secular "historical and educational" purpose.



Ramirez, an appointee of Democratic President Joe Biden, nonetheless cited several legislators who expressed religion-based justifications for Louisiana's law. These included that the Ten Commandments were "God's law," and that opponents were waging an "attack" on Christianity.

"If the posted copies of the Ten Commandments are to have any effect at all, it will be to induce the schoolchildren to read, meditate upon, perhaps to venerate and obey, the Commandments," Ramirez wrote, quoting the Stone decision. "This is not a permissible state objective."

Ramirez also rejected Louisiana's argument that the Supreme Court's 2022 decision favoring a Washington state high school football coach who prayed with players at the 50-yard line after games required upholding the Ten Commandments law.

She said this was in part because the Washington case primarily concerned First Amendment provisions governing free speech and the free exercise of religion.

Louisiana was the first U.S. state requiring displays of the Ten Commandments since the Kentucky law was struck down.

The case is Roake et al v Brumley et al, 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, No. 24-30706.

(Reporting by Jonathan Stempel in New York; Editing by Leslie Adler

India says it will never restore Indus water treaty with Pakistan

Reuters
Sat, June 21, 2025 


FILE PHOTO: View of a cultivated land on the dry riverbed of the Indus River in Hyderabad


NEW DELHI (Reuters) -India will never restore the Indus Waters Treaty with Islamabad, and the water flowing to Pakistan will be diverted for internal use, Home Minister Amit Shah said in an interview with Times of India on Saturday.

India put into "abeyance" its participation in the 1960 treaty, which governs the usage of the Indus river system, after 26 civilians in Indian Kashmir were killed in what Delhi described as an act of terror. The treaty had guaranteed water access for 80% of Pakistan's farms through three rivers originating in India.

Pakistan has denied involvement in the incident, but the accord remains dormant despite a ceasefire agreed upon by the two nuclear-armed neighbours last month following their worst fighting in decades

"No, it will never be restored," Shah told the daily.

"We will take water that was flowing to Pakistan to Rajasthan by constructing a canal. Pakistan will be starved of water that it has been getting unjustifiably," Shah said, referring to the northwestern Indian state.

The latest comments from Shah, the most powerful cabinet minister in Prime Minister Narendra Modi's cabinet, have dimmed Islamabad's hopes for negotiations on the treaty in the near term.

Last month, Reuters reported that India plans to dramatically increase the water it draws from a major river that feeds Pakistani farms downstream, as part of retaliatory action.

Pakistan's foreign ministry did not immediately respond to Reuters' request for comments.

But it has said in the past that the treaty has no provision for one side to unilaterally pull back and that any blocking of river water flowing to Pakistan will be considered "an act of war".

Islamabad is also exploring a legal challenge to India's decision to hold the treaty in abeyance under international law.

($1 = 86.5600 Indian rupees)

(Reporting by Aftab Ahmed; Editing by Jacqueline Wong)

GOP's food stamp plan is found to violate Senate rules. It's the latest setback for Trump's big bill

LISA MASCARO
Sat, June 21, 2025 

Activists with the Poor People's Campaign protest against spending reductions across Medicaid, food stamps and federal aid in President Donald Trump's spending and tax bill being worked on by Senate Republicans this week, outside the Supreme Court in Washington, Monday, June 2, 2025. (AP Photo/J. Scott Applewhite)More


WASHINGTON (AP) — In another blow to the Republicans’ tax and spending cut bill, the Senate parliamentarian has advised that a proposal to shift some food stamps costs from the federal government to states — a centerpiece of GOP savings efforts — would violate the chamber’s rules.

While the parliamentarian's rulings are advisory, they are rarely, if ever, ignored. The Republican leadership was scrambling on Saturday, days before voting is expected to begin on President Donald Trump's package that he wants to be passed into law by the Fourth of July.

The loss is expected to be costly to Republicans. They have been counting on some tens of billions of potential savings from the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, known as SNAP, to help offset the costs of the $4.5 trillion tax breaks plan. The parliamentarian let stand for now a provision that would impose new work requirements for older Americans, up to age 65, to receive food stamp aid.

“We will keep fighting to protect families in need,” said Sen. Amy Klobuchar of Minnesota, the top Democrat on the Senate Agriculture, Nutrition and Forestry Committee, which handles the SNAP program.

“The Parliamentarian has made clear that Senate Republicans cannot use their partisan budget to shift major nutrition assistance costs to the states that would have inevitably led to major cuts,” she said.

The committee chairman, Sen. John Boozman, R-Ark., said in a statement that his team is examining options that would comply with Senate rules to achieve savings and "to ensure SNAP serves those who truly need it while being responsible stewards of taxpayer dollars.”

What's at stake in the big bill

The parliamentarian's ruling is the latest in a series of setbacks as staff works through the weekend, often toward midnight, to assess the 1,000-page proposal. It all points to serious trouble ahead for the bill, which was approved by the House on a party-line vote last month over unified opposition from Democrats and is now undergoing revisions in the Senate.

At its core, the goal of the multitrillion-dollar package is to extend tax cuts from Trump's first term that would otherwise expire if Congress fails to act. It also adds new ones, including no taxes on tips or overtime pay. To help offset the costs of lost tax revenue, the Republicans are proposing cutbacks to federal Medicaid, health care and food programs — some $1 trillion. Additionally, the package boosts national security spending by about $350 billion, including to pay for Trump's mass deportations, which are running into protests nationwide.

Trump has implored Republicans, who have the majority in Congress, to deliver on his top domestic priority, but the details of the package, with its hodgepodge of priorities, is drawing deeper scrutiny.

All told, the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office estimates the package, as approved by the House, would add at least $2.4 trillion to the nation's red ink over the decade and leave 10.9 million more people without health care coverage. Additionally, it would reduce or eliminate food stamps for more than 3 million people.

The parliamentarian's office is tasked with scrutinizing the bill to ensure it complies with the so-called Byrd Rule, which is named after the late Sen. Robert C. Byrd, D-W.Va., and bars many policy matters in the budget reconciliation process now being used.

Late Friday, the parliamentarian issued its latest findings. It determined that Senate Agriculture, Nutrition and Forestry Committee’s proposal to have the states pick up more of the tab for covering food stamps — what Republicans call a new cost-sharing arrangement — would be in violation of the Byrd Rule.

Many lawmakers said the states would not be able to absorb the new requirement on food aid, which has long been provided by the federal government. They warned many would lose access to SNAP benefits used by more than 40 million people.

Initially, the CBO had estimated about $128 billion in savings under the House’s proposal to shift SNAP food aid costs to the states. Cost estimates for the Senate’s version, which made changes to the House approach, have not yet been made publicly available.

Senate Democratic Leader Chuck Schumer called the latest development a “small but important win,” but warned the overall package with other SNAP changes “still includes the most brutal assault to food assistance in American history.”

Schumer held a private conference call with Democratic senators Saturday and said they will continue lobbing objections to the package. “Senate Republicans are hell bent on paying for tax cuts for billionaires by ripping food out of the mouths of kids, seniors, veterans and families,” the New York senator said.

More questions and decisions ahead

The parliamentarian's office rulings leave GOP leaders with several options. They can revise the proposals to try to comply with Senate rules or strip them from the package altogether. They can also risk a challenge during floor voting, which would require the 60-vote threshold to overcome. That would be unlikely in the split chamber with Democrats opposing the overall package.

The latest findings from the parliamentarian also said the committee's provision to make certain immigrants ineligible for food stamps would violate the rule. It found several provisions from the Senate Commerce, Science and Transportation Committee, which is led by Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, to be in violation. They include one to provide $250 million to Coast Guard stations damaged by fire in 2025, namely one on South Padre Island in Texas.

Still to come are some of the most important rulings from the parliamentarian. One will assess the GOP's approach that relies on “current policy” rather than “current law” as the baseline for determining whether the bill will add to the nation's deficits.

Already, the parliamentarian delivered a serious setback Thursday, finding that the GOP plan to gut the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, which was a core proposal coming from the Senate Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs Committee, would be in violation of the Byrd Rule.

The parliamentarian has also advised of violations over provisions from the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee that would rollback Environmental Protection Agency emissions standards on certain vehicles and from the Senate Armed Services Committee to require the defense secretary to provide a plan on how the Pentagon intends to spend the tens of billions of new funds.

The new work requirements in the package would require many of those receiving SNAP or Medicaid benefits to work 80 hours a month or engage in other community or educational services.

___

Associated Press writer Mary Clare Jalonick contributed to this report.

Senate parliamentarian strikes key SNAP spending cuts from GOP megabill

Alexander Bolton
Sat, June 21, 2025


Senate parliamentarian strikes key SNAP spending cuts from GOP megabill

The Senate parliamentarian on Friday ruled against several more Republican provisions in President Trump’s megabill, including language to bar immigrants who are not citizens or lawful permanent residents from receiving food assistance under the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP).

The parliamentarian, Elizabeth MacDonough, also ruled against a key Republican pay-for in the bill, a proposal requiring states to pay for a certain percentage of food assistance under SNAP depending on those states’ error rates in delivering aid.

The proposal to shift SNAP costs onto the states was a sticking point with Republican Sens. Lisa Murkowski (Alaska) and Susan Collins (Maine).

The parliamentarian’s ruling could make it easier for Senate Majority Leader John Thune (R-S.D.) to pick up Murkowski’s and Collins’s support as the SNAP-related pay-for will now need to be stripped from the legislation.

The Senate bill as drafted would have required states to pay between 5 and 15 percent of food benefits in 2028 on their rate of error in paying out food benefits.

Almost every state in the country has had error rates of 6 percent or higher, which would have shifted a significant percentage of the cost for delivering food assistance onto the states.

The Center for Budget and Policy Priorities estimated that the Senate language would have cost North Carolina, for example, to pay up to $438 million for food aid in 2028.

MacDonough struck another blow against the GOP leadership’s agenda by ruling against a section to extend the suspension of permanent price support authority, something that traditionally has been part of the farm bill.

Congress passed a one-year extension of the farm bill in December after Democrats and Republicans failed to reach a deal on a multi-year extension of the law due to disagreements over SNAP funding.

Sen. Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.), the ranking member on the Senate Budget Committee, applauded the parliamentarian’s decision on Friday.

“The Senate parliamentarian has begun providing guidance that certain provisions in the Republicans’ One Big, Beautiful Betrayal will be subject to the Byrd Rule — ultimately meaning they will need to be stripped from the bill or altered to comply with the rules of reconciliation,” Merkley said in a statement.

“As much as Senate Republicans would prefer to throw out the rule book at advance their conservative families lose and billionaires win agenda, this process has rules and Democrats are making sure those rules are enforced,” he added. “We will be fighting this bill every single day until Republicans bring it to the floor.”

Provisions of the reconciliation package that the parliamentarian decides violate the Senate’s Byrd Rule are not eligible to pass with a simple-majority vote.

If Thune and Senate Budget Committee Chairman Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) don’t remove provisions found to be in violation of the Byrd Rule, the Republican package would need to muster 60 votes to advance.

The parliamentarian ruled against several provisions of the bill under the Commerce Committee’s jurisdiction, including a section that appropriated $250 million to Coast Guard stations on South Padre Island, Texas, damaged by fire in 2025.

She also ruled that language allocating $85 million to transfer the space shuttle on display at the Smithsonian Air & Space Museum to a non-profit group in Texas would not be eligible for the budget reconciliation fast track.

Provisions found not to comply with the Byrd Rule would need at least 60 votes to overcome a point-of-order objection.

Senate GOP’s plan to push food aid costs onto states axed from megabill

Grace Yarrow
Sat, June 21, 2025 

Senate Republicans' plan to force states to share the cost of the country’s largest nutrition program to pay for their policy megabill has been halted by the chamber’s rules.

The Senate parliamentarian determined that the cost-sharing plan would violate the so-called Byrd Rule, which limits what can be included in the reconciliation process, and would be subject to a 60-vote filibuster threshold, according to an advisory sent out Friday night by Senate Budget Committee Democrats.

That means Republicans will need to head back to the drawing board after months of heated debate about how to slash spending on the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program.

The advisory comes after Senate Agriculture Committee staff met with Parliamentarian Elizabeth MacDonough on Thursday to discuss their piece of the reconciliation bill text.

The cost-sharing plan, which was first put forward by House Republicans, sparked backlash from state officials and concerns within the caucus. The bill would make states pay for SNAP benefits for the first time using a sliding scale based on their payment error rates.

The Senate Agriculture Committee introduced a scaled-back version of the House GOP’s cost-sharing plan earlier this month. Without it, Senate Republicans will struggle to find enough cuts to pay for their policy priorities and the $67 billion farm bill package they included — all with an ambitious timeline of delivering the megabill to President Donald Trump’s desk by July 4.

Although the committee’s bill hadn’t received a final cost saving estimate from the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office, committee staff predicted it would save around $211 billion in agriculture spending, with the cost-share plan making up a large portion of those trims.

MacDonough also struck measures that would remove SNAP eligibility for immigrants who are not lawful permanent residents and extend a farm bill provision that allows federal officials to update farm payment programs.

GOP Provision That Makes Trump A King Breaks Senate Rules, Says Parliamentarian

Jennifer Bendery
Sun, June 22, 2025




WASHINGTON ― A provision in the GOP’s tax-and-spending bill that would make it nearly impossible for anyone to sue the Trump administration for breaking laws is on track to be stripped from the bill after the Senate parliamentarian said it violates the chamber’s rules.

This provision, which is in Senate Republicans’ version of the One Big Beautiful Act, would require anyone seeking an emergency court order ― that is, a temporary restraining order or a preliminary injunction ― against the federal government to first post a bond that covers all the costs and damages that would be sustained to the federal government.

Judges grant emergency orders to temporarily halt actions like deportations, bans or drilling, while a case is being decided. They typically waive bonds in public interest cases, but under the Senate GOP’s bill, public interest groups, or even individual plaintiffs, would have to cough up millions if not billions of dollars in order to seek an emergency court order against the Trump administration ― money they definitely don’t have.

In short, this provision would allow Trump to serve as a king, free to ignore the courts amid his lawlessness.

The Senate parliamentarian, the chamber’s nonpartisan adviser on Senate rules, determined Saturday that this provision is not related to budget matters. Republicans are using a process called budget reconciliation to expedite passage of their tax bill, which allows them to advance it with 51 votes instead of 60. But this process is only for budget-related bills, so any language in the bill that the parliamentarian flags as unrelated to budgets is subject to 60 votes.

With Democrats united against this provision and Republicans only holding 53 votes, it’s almost certainly coming out of the bill. Democrats are already signaling their plans to invoke the so-called Byrd Rule to strip this and other language out when the Senate begins debate on this bill in the coming days.

“We continue to see Republicans’ blatant disregard for the rules of reconciliation when drafting this bill,” Sen. Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.) said in a Saturday statement. “Today, we were advised by the Senate Parliamentarian that several more provisions in this Big Beautiful Betrayal of a bill will be subject to the Byrd Rule – and Democrats plan to challenge every part of this bill that hurts working families and violates this process.”

Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) and other Republicans on the Senate Judiciary Committee put language into the GOP's tax-and-spending bill to make it too expensive for public interest groups to sue the Trump administration. Kevin Dietsch via Getty ImagesLess

On Tuesday, HuffPost asked Senate Judiciary Committee chairman Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) why he and other Republicans on the panel put this provision into the bill at all.

“Yeah, it’s pretty simple,” Grassley said. “There’s no constitutional authority. There’s no statutory authority for national [injunctions].”

HuffPost reiterated that the effect of this language is that it prices out public interest groups from being able to sue the Trump administration, something they’ve been very, very successfully doing for months. Grassley, visibly irritated, offered a confusing defense of this provision. He insisted judges don’t have the authority to issue injunctions, which they do.

“You’re talking about the authority of judges to put national emergency,” he said, his voice rising. “Forget about who can enter the courtroom for anything, because judges can only see cases and controversy. They don’t have any authority to issue a national injunction, but if you do do an injunction, you’re supposed to put a bond up, and they haven’t put bonds up.”

Asked again about this provision making it too expensive for public interest groups to be able to sue the Trump administration at all, Grassley said, “Well, it seems to me, if you don’t even have authority in the Constitution or in the laws, to have national injunctions, you shouldn’t even be asking that question!”

He walked off in a huff.

Senate parliamentarian deals blow to GOP plan to gut consumer bureau in tax bill

LISA MASCARO
Fri, June 20, 2025 

Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., is joined by Sen. Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass., left, ranking member of the Senate Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs Committee, and Sen. Ron Wyden, D-Ore., the ranking member of the Senate Finance Committee, as he talks to reporters about Senate Republicans' efforts to pass President Donald Trump's tax cut and spending agenda with deeper Medicaid cuts, at the Capitol in Washington, Wednesday, June 18, 2025. (AP Photo/J. Scott Applewhite)ASSOCIATED PRESS

WASHINGTON (AP) — Republicans suffered a sizable setback Friday on one key aspect of President Donald Trump's big bill after their plans to gut the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau and other provisions from the Senate Banking Committee ran into procedural violations with the Senate parliamentarian.

Republicans in the Senate proposed zeroing-out funding for the CFPB, the landmark agency set up in the aftermath of the 2008 financial crisis, to save $6.4 billion. The bureau had been designed as a way to better protect Americans from financial fraud, but has been opposed by many GOP lawmakers since its inception. The Trump administration has targeted the CFPB as an example of government over-regulation and overreach.

The findings by the Senate parliamentarian’s office, which is working overtime scrubbing Trump’s overall bill to ensure it aligns with the chamber’s strict “Byrd Rule” processes, signal a tough road ahead. The most daunting questions are still to come, as GOP leadership rushes to muscle Trump's signature package to floor for votes by his Fourth of July deadline.

Sen. Tim Scott, R-S.C., the chairman of the Banking Committee that drafted the provisions in question, said in a statement, “My colleagues and I remain committed to cutting wasteful spending at the CFPB and will continue working with the Senate parliamentarian on the Committee’s provisions.”

For Democrats, who have been fighting Trump's 1,000-page package at every step, the parliamentarian's advisory amounted to a significant win.

“Democrats fought back, and we will keep fighting back against this ugly bill,” said Sen. Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts, the top Democrat on the Banking Committee, who engineered the creation of the CFPB before she was elected to Congress.

Warren said that GOP proposals “are a reckless, dangerous attack on consumers and would lead to more Americans being tricked and trapped by giant financial institutions and put the stability of our entire financial system at risk–all to hand out tax breaks to billionaires.”

The parliamentarian’s rulings, while advisory, are rarely, if ever ignored.

With the majority in Congress, Republicans have been drafting a sweeping package that extends some $4.5 trillion tax cuts Trump approved during his first term, in 2017, that otherwise expire at the end of the year. It adds $350 billion to national security, including billions for Trump's mass deportation agenda. And it slashes some $1 trillion from Medicaid, food stamps and other government programs.

All told, the package is estimated to add at least $2.4 trillion to the nation's deficits over the decade, and leave 10.9 million more people without health care coverage, according to the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office's review of the House-passed package, which is now undergoing revisions in the Senate.

The parliamentarian's office is responsible for determining if the package adheres to the Byrd Rule, named after the late Sen. Robert Byrd of West Virginia, who was considered one of the masters of Senate procedure. The rule essentially bars policy matters from being addressed in the budget reconciliation process.

Senate GOP leaders are using the budget reconciliation process, which is increasingly how big bills move through the Congress, because it allows passage on a simple majority vote, rather than face a filibuster with the higher 60-vote threshold.

But if any of the bill's provisions violate the Byrd Rule, that means they can be challenged at the tougher 60-vote threshold, which is a tall order in the 53-47 Senate. Leaders are often forced to strip those proposals from the package, even though doing so risks losing support from lawmakers who championed those provisions.

One of the biggest questions ahead for the parliamentarian will be over the Senate GOP’s proposal to use “current policy” as opposed to “current law” to determine the baseline budget and whether the overall package adds significantly to deficits.

Already the Senate parliamentarian’s office has waded through several proposals in Trump’s big bill, including those from the Senate Armed Services Committee and Senate Environment and Public Works Committee

The Banking panel offered a modest bill, just eight pages, and much of it was deemed out of compliance.

The parliamentarian found that in addition to gutting the CFPB, other provisions aimed at rolling back entities put in place after the 2008 financial crisis would violate the Byrd Rule. Those include a GOP provision to limit the Financial Research Fund, which was set up to conduct analysis, saving nearly $300 million; and another to shift the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board, which conducts oversight of accounting firms, to the Securities and Exchange Commission and terminate positions, saving $773 million.

The GOP plan to change the pay schedule for employees at the Federal Reserve, saving $1.4 billion, was also determined to be in violation of the Byrd Rule.

The parliamentarian’s office also raised Byrd Rule violations over GOP proposals to repeal certain aspects of the Inflation Reduction Act, and one from the Environment and Public Works Committee to repeal emission standards for some model year 2027 light-duty and medium-duty vehicles.

A provision from the Senate Armed Services Committee that would have required the Defense Secretary to provide a plan detailing how the boost of new funds in the bill would be spent, with quarterly updates, or risk reductions of $100,000 a day, was also deemed by the parliamentarian to be in violation of the rule.

__

Associated Press writer Mary Clare Jalonick contributed to this report.

Japan scraps US meeting after Washington demands more defense spending, FT reports

HOW TO WIN FRIENDS AND INFLUENCE PEOPLE

Reuters
Fri, June 20, 2025


FILE PHOTO: US Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth meets Japanese PM Ishiba at the Prime Minister’s office in Tokyo


WASHINGTON (Reuters) -Japan has canceled an annual high-level meeting with key ally the United States after the Trump administration demanded it spend more on defense, the Financial Times reported on Friday.

Secretary of State Marco Rubio and Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth had been expected to meet Foreign Minister Takeshi Iwaya and Defense Minister Gen Nakatani in Washington on July 1 for the yearly 2+2 security talks.

But Tokyo scrapped the meeting after the U.S. asked Japan to boost defense spending to 3.5% of gross domestic product, higher than an earlier request of 3%, the newspaper said, citing unnamed sources familiar with the matter.

Japan's Nikkei newspaper reported on Saturday that President Donald Trump's administration was demanding that its Asian allies, including Japan, spend 5% of GDP on defense.

A Japanese foreign ministry official, who asked not to be named, told Reuters on Saturday that Japan and the U.S. have never discussed 3.5% or 5% targets for defense spending. The official also said he had no information about the FT report.

It is generally difficult to coordinate such four-way meetings, especially as Hegseth is busy with the crisis in the Middle East, he said.

A U.S. official who asked not to be identified told Reuters that Japan had "postponed" the talks in a decision made several weeks ago. The official did not cite a reason. A non-government source familiar with the issue said he had also heard Japan had pulled out of the meeting but not the reason for it doing so.

State Department spokesperson Tammy Bruce said she had no comment on the FT report when asked about it at a regular briefing. The Pentagon also had no immediate comment.

Japan's embassy in Washington did not respond to a request for comment. The nation's defense ministry and the Prime Minister's Office did not answer phone calls seeking comment outside business hours on Saturday.

The FT said the higher spending demand was made in recent weeks by Elbridge Colby, the third-most senior Pentagon official, who has also recently upset another key U.S. ally in the Indo-Pacific by launching a review of a project to provide Australia with nuclear-powered submarines.

In March, Prime Minister Shigeru Ishiba said that other nations do not decide Japan's defense budget, after Colby called for Tokyo to spend more to counter China in his nomination hearing to be under secretary of defense for policy.

Japan and other U.S. allies have been engaged in difficult trade talks with the United States over President Trump's worldwide tariff offensive.


The FT said the decision to cancel the July 1 meeting was also related to Japan's July 20 upper house elections, expected to be a major test for Ishiba's minority coalition government.

Japan's move on the 2+2 comes ahead of a meeting of the U.S.-led NATO alliance in Europe next week, at which Trump is expected to press his demand that European allies boost their defense spending to 5% of GDP.

(Reporting by David Brunnstrom, Idrees Ali, Urvi Dugar and Tim Kelly; Additional reporting by Junko Fujita and Nobuhiro Kubo in Tokyo; Editing by Don Durfee, Sandra Maler, William Mallard and Tom Hogue)

Trump’s Strange God Talk Has People Concerned

Catherine Bouris
Sat, June 21, 2025 

DAILY BEAST


The people are worried about the president.

In a Saturday evening address, where he confirmed the U.S. had struck three Iranian nuclear facilities, it was President Donald Trump’s repeated mention of “God” that stood out to several of his critics.

At the end of his four-minute address, Trump said, “I want to just thank everybody, in particular, God. I want to just say we love you God, and we love our great military, protect them. God bless the Middle East, God bless Israel, and God bless America.“


Many on the left were quick to point out how insincere Trump sounded, particularly given Trump’s own relationship with religion. During his first term, a Pew Research Center survey found that most Americans didn’t see Trump as particularly religious, with only 7 percent of American adults viewing him as “very religious.”




Critics included Democrat Gen Z streamer Dean Withers, who tweeted, “No Trump, God Doesn’t Want Another War in the Middle East you Delusional F--k. Resign.” Another user highlighted the fact that Trump mentioned Israel before he mentioned the U.S., tweeting, “Trump ended his press conference saying God bless Israel before he even said God bless America. That should tell you everything you need to know.”


Others posted reaction images to Trump’s message from God’s perspective, including a GIF of Denzel Washington slamming a door in someone’s face and an image of a woman throwing her hands up in defeat.

Several users compared Trump to the anti-Christ, while others argued that his comments sounded as dry and devoid of meaning as a generic yearbook signature. One X user wrote, “This must be the most forced and uncomfortable ‘Thank you, God’ ever spoken in world history.”

One user felt Trump’s mention of God was significantly more sinister, tweeting, “This man started a new war and is already invoking religion to manipulate his base into it. This man is a insane sociopath.”




Trump could be looking to the early 2000s for inspiration, when President George W. Bush claimed that he was on a mission from God when he invaded Afghanistan and Iraq.

In 2003, Bush reportedly told a Palestinian delegation at an Israeli-Palestinian summit held in Egypt, “I am driven with a mission from God. God would tell me, ‘George go and fight these terrorists in Afghanistan.’ And I did. And then God would tell me ‘George, go and end the tyranny in Iraq.’ And I did.”

He continued, “And now, again, I feel God’s words coming to me, ‘Go get the Palestinians their state and get the Israelis their security, and get peace in the Middle East.’ And, by God, I’m gonna do it.”

India's watchdog warns Air India for breaching pilots' flight duty timings


Updated Sat, June 21, 2025
By Aditya Kalra

NEW DELHI (Reuters) -India's aviation watchdog has issued a warning to Air India for "repeated and serious violations" related to pilot duty scheduling and oversight, according to government directives reviewed by Reuters on Saturday.

The Directorate General of Civil Aviation (DGCA) directed Air India to remove three company executives from crew scheduling roles - a divisional vice president, a chief manager of crew scheduling and one planning executive - for lapses linked to flights from Bengaluru to London on May 16 and May 17 that exceeded the stipulated pilot flight time limit of 10 hours.

The June 20 order cited "systemic failures in scheduling protocol and oversights" and criticised the lack of strict disciplinary measures against responsible officials.

The latest action by the aviation authority against the airline is unrelated to this month's crash of an Air India Boeing 787-8 plane that killed all but one of the 242 people onboard but signal heightened scrutiny of the airline.

On Thursday, Reuters reported the authorities had also warned Air India for breaching safety rules after three of its Airbus planes flew despite being overdue for checks on emergency equipment of escape slides.

The latest order by assistant director of operations at the DGCA, Himanshu Srivastava, said: "Of particular concern is the absence of strict disciplinary measures against key officials directly responsible."

In a statement to Reuters, Air India said it has implemented the DGCA order and in the interim, the company's chief operations officer will provide direct oversight to the Integrated Operations Control Centre.

"Air India is committed to ensuring that there is total adherence to safety protocols and standard practices," it added.

The DGCA stated in its order that Air India had voluntarily disclosed the violations.

Air India was taken over by the Tata Group in 2022 and faces many challenges in its attempts to rebuild its image, after years of criticism from travelers for poor service.

The Indian regulator, like many abroad, often fines airlines for compliance lapses. India's government in February told parliament that authorities had warned or fined airlines in 23 instances for safety violations last year.

Around half of them - 12 - involved Air India and Air India Express. The biggest fine was $127,000 on Air India for "insufficient oxygen on board" during some international flights.

(Reporting by Aditya Kalra; Editing by Jacqueline Wong)

Zuckerberg’s political shift didn’t shock Meta staff: ‘The whole time this was all one inch underneath’

Ariana Baio
Fri, June 20, 2025 

THE INDEPENDENT

Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg‘s recent public support for President Donald Trump did not come as a shock to those who know or have closely worked with him, with dozens of people saying some changes at the company are part of the tech billionaire’s long-held beliefs.

Dozens of people who have either worked with or known Zuckerberg told the Financial Times that the CEO’s more public shift toward Trump is just Zuckerberg displaying the more “authentic” version of himself to the world, even though he was once known to support liberal ideology and voiced opposition to Trump’s policies during the first administration.

“Mark was trying to keep his real feelings tight inside and put on a suit and cut his hair and be a good boy. But the whole time this was all one inch underneath,” an unnamed Meta insider told the outlet. “Then he said, ‘F*** it. I might as well be the person I really am.’”

Since Trump was elected in November, the Meta CEO has met with Trump at Mar-a-Lago, donated $1 million to Trump’s inaugural fund, attended the inauguration, co-hosted a reception, and changed company policy to align more closely with the administration.

Insiders told the newspaper that the tech billionaire’s unapologetic pro-“masculine energy”, free speech-loving shift is only a shift to the public.

Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg has reportedly become a more authentic version of himself by rejecting norms and supporting President Donald Trump (POOL/AFP via Getty Images)

“The public is seeing him more how we have, internally, since the beginning.” Andrew Bosworth, Meta’s CTO, told FT.

Bosworth suggested that Zuckerberg’s former suit-wearing, government-obeying self was just the Meta CEO doing what he thought he was supposed to be doing.

The Independent has asked the White House for comment.

Meta declined to comment for this story.

Zuckerberg’s private shift toward more conservative figures, such as Trump, was reportedly a slow movement that was seemingly triggered by constant pushback against Facebook – Meta’s former name – from both the public and lawmakers, especially those seeking to regulate the tech industry.

One major shift came in 2020, when Biden administration officials pressured Zuckerberg to censor misinformation about Covid on his social media platform, which he did and later regretted.

Zuckerberg and other CEOs attended Trump’s inauguration in January (POOL/AFP via Getty Images)

But under the Trump administration, Zuckerberg appears less concerned with appeasing the public. Appearing on Joe Rogan’s podcast recently, the Meta CEO said he believes “masculine energy is good.” Even when executives challenged Zuckerberg’s comments, he refused to apologize.

Those familiar with Zuckerberg told FT that his decision to lean into hobbies such as Brazilian jiu-jitsu or wear more streetwear or cozy up to the administration is all part of Zuckerberg’s efforts to get people to like him.

“He saw that Elon Musk was popular among the tech bros,” a former insider said. “There was a push to make him cool. The core of the Social Network movie is true — he just wants people to like him.”




Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg horrified staffers with Joe Rogan chat, transformation into ‘MAGA Mark’: report

Ariel Zilber
Fri, June 20, 2025 

Yahoo is using AI to generate takeaways from this article. This means the info may not always match what's in the article. Reporting mistakes helps us improve the experience.Generate Key Takeaways


Meta boss Mark Zuckerberg’s public embrace of President Trump and his apparent transformation into “MAGA Mark” has horrified staffers and executives at the social media giant, according to a report.

Zuckerberg triggered a wave of internal backlash at the Facebook and Instagram parent company following a controversial appearance on the “Joe Rogan Experience” podcast in January — in which the burgeoning MMA competitor said Corporate America had been “culturally neutered” and workplaces needed more “masculine energy,” according to the Financial Times.

Just days after the controversial comments, a handful of executives worked up the courage to speak out at a leadership meeting at the company’s Menlo Park, Calif., headquarters, the FT reported.

Mark Zuckerberg’s public embrace of masculinity reportedly triggered a wave of internal backlash at Meta, according to a report. PowerfulJRE/YouTube

Zuckerberg made the comments during a January 2025 appearance on the “Joe Rogan Experience” podcast. PowerfulJRE/YouTube

Zuckerberg’s conversation with Rogan reportedly left Meta staffers in “horror” and “grieving.” PowerfulJRE/YouTube

“He basically said: ‘If you don’t like it, tough sh-t’,” one person with knowledge of the conversation told FT.

Zuckerberg, who as of Friday had the world’s second highest net worth with a fortune valued by Bloomberg Billionaires Index at $245 billion, had also praised mixed-martial arts as a means of male bonding and asserted that aggression in men can be a force for good.

“There’s this crazy thing about wrestling,” he told Rogan, a former MMA commentator.

“It’s like, if you get into a fight with someone at work, you’re probably going to get fired. But if you train in MMA, you can roll hard with someone and you’re both better friends afterward.”

“In a lot of the corporate world, I think there’s this bias where you think that aggression or intensity is inherently bad,” Zuckerberg went on. “But it’s not. I actually think it’s useful. You want to be able to channel that energy.”

Zuckerberg’s transformation from Silicon Valley liberal to a Trump-friendly public figure has become a defining narrative of his leadership.

Once viewed as a quiet, hoodie-wearing technocrat, he began to appear shirtless in MMA training videos, sported gold chains, flaunted expensive watches and made regular appearances on podcasts with predominantly male, anti-woke audiences.

The Rogan interview added to a growing list of moves that critics view as aligning Zuckerberg — and the company — with right-wing politics. His public praise for Trump and the rollback of content moderation teams have only fueled those concerns, according to the report.

Zuckerberg has transformed his public image from tech nerd to an MMA-loving alpha male. Mark Zuckerberg/Instagram

But those who know Zuckerberg intimately told FT that the Meta boss is simply showing the public a side of him that they have long been familiar with only in private.

“When he was 19 years old, I think he had an idea in his head of what a CEO was supposed to be like and he was trying to be that, especially in public,” Meta’s chief technology officer Andrew Bosworth, told FT, adding that people are now seeing the “authentic” Zuckerberg.

“The public is seeing him more how we have, internally, since the beginning,” Bosworth said.

A Meta spokesperson declined to comment.

Zuckerberg’s newly revealed persona is gaining attention at a time when he has set his company on a war footing in the ultra-competitive race to gain market share in artificial intelligence.

Last week, Meta acquired the start-up Scale AI for $14.3 billion — a deal that gives Zuckerberg’s company a 49% non-voting stake as part of its push to close the gap with OpenAI and Google in the AI arms race.

Zuckerberg and other Silicon Valley bigwigs including Jeff Bezos (third from left), Google CEO Sundar Pichai (second from left) and Tesla CEO Elon Musk (far left) have sought to curry favor with President Trump. APMore

The deal secures Meta access to Scale’s infrastructure and talent, including its founder Alexandr Wang, who now leads Meta’s new “superintelligence” unit.

This move has triggered backlash from rivals, with OpenAI and Google cutting ties with Scale over conflict-of-interest concerns.