MAGA freaks out at Hollywood star Natalie Portman over teary-eyed comments on Trump's ICE

Robert Davis
January 27, 2026 
RAW STORY


Natalie Portman. (Photo credit: lev radin / Shutterstock)

Fans of President Donald Trump's MAGA movement freaked out at a Hollywood film star on Tuesday after she made a teary-eyed statement about Trump's immigration forces.

Natalie Portman, who has starred in films like "Garden State" and "Star Wars: Episode III – Revenge of the Sith," discussed the actions of Trump's Immigration and Customs Enforcement on the red carpet of the premiere of her new film "The Gallerist" at the Sundance Film Festival in Utah on Saturday. That was the same day immigration agents swarmed and killed Alex Pretti, a 37-year-old ICU nurse in Minneapolis, during a protest against Trump's immigration regime.

"It's such a horrible day, it's been a horrible week. What is happening in our country is just obscene," Portman said through tears, according to reporting from The Daily Mail.

Trump's immigration forces have faced growing scrutiny since Pretti's death, with a bipartisan coalition of lawmakers calling on Department of Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem to either resign or be fired. Trump privately fumed at coverage of Noem in the aftermath of Pretti's killing, telling people inside the White House that she "made the administration look bad."

Fans of Trump's MAGA movement shared their reactions to Portman's comments on social media.

"Where were her tears for Laken Riley?" MAGA radio personality Megyn Kelly told her listeners. "Tell it to Jocelyn Nungaray's mother as you cry while these guys are trying to deport molesters of children, you f---ing idiot know-nothing."

"They're doing their jobs Natalie," right-wing journalist Tommy Robinson posted on X. "Maybe stick to yours, because those crocodile tears are fooling nobody."

"Natalie Portman cries about the deportation of criminal illegal migrants," MAGA commentator David Vance posted on X. "She is a moral void.'

"It's classic celebrity hypocrisy: virtue-signal against law enforcement protecting our sovereignty, all while enjoying the privileges that strong borders help preserve. Real Americans see through the tears," the America First Facebook group wrote in a statement.

'Bloodthirsty': MAGA media calls for violence after nurse's killing leaves analysts aghast

Robert Davis
January 27, 2026 

RAW STORY

Two analysts were stunned on Tuesday after a flood of "bloodthirsty" MAGA media personalities called for President Donald Trump to inflict more violence against protesters in Minneapolis following the killing of ICU nurse Alex Pretti.

Sam Stein, managing editor of The Bulwark, and Will Sommer, the publication's senior reporter, discussed how the MAGA media sphere reacted to Pretti's death during a new episode of "Bulwark Takes" on Tuesday. They highlighted examples from commentators like Megyn Kelly, who claimed she felt no sympathy for Pretti after he was killed, and Greg Kelly, who said immigration officers were right to mistake Pretti's phone for a gun.

"Look, to openly say you don't feel sorry that someone was shot to death, you gotta have a little absence of something in your core to say something like that, but that seems to be a particular strain of reaction on the right," Stein said.

Sommer noted that Kelly's argument that Pretti's death was justified because he was shouting at officers was an "innovation in Constitutional law."

"At that point, if you're shouting, safety's off and they can kill you if they want," he noted.

The MAGA reactions happened at a time when the Trump administration is switching out its immigration leadership. Border czar Tom Homan was deployed to Minneapolis to take over command from Customs and Border Patrol commander Greg Bovino, who is reportedly being forced into retirement after a disastrous response to Pretti's death.

GOP Senate Judiciary chair plays dumb on legality of no-warrant ICE raids: 'I'm a farmer!'

Matthew Chapman
January 27, 2026 
RAW STORY

U.S. Senator Chuck Grassley (R-IA) speaks as Kash Patel, U.S. President Donald Trump's nominee to be director of the FBI, testifies before a Senate Judiciary Committee confirmation hearing on Capitol Hill in Washington, U.S., January 30, 2025. REUTERS/Evelyn Hockstein


Senate Judiciary Committee chair Chuck Grassley (R-IA) pleaded ignorance when questioned by reporters on Tuesday about whether Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents had legal authority to break into people's homes without a warrant from a judge.

According to Igor Bobic of HuffPost, when Grassley was posed the question, the answer he gave was, “Ask a constitutional lawyer. I'm a farmer.”

Grassley, age 92, has served multiple terms heading up the Judiciary Committee, where he has been responsible for, among other things, vetting and shepherding through the confirmation of President Donald Trump's judicial nominees.

Ironically, in 2014, the Iowa Senate race that went on to elect Grassley's junior colleague Joni Ernst was shaken up when her Democratic opponent, then-Rep. Bruce Braley, was raked over the coals by Republicans and the Iowa press for telling a room full of attorneys in Texas that Grassley's background as a farmer made him unqualified to chair the Judiciary Committee.

"If you help me win this race you may have someone with your background, your experience, your voice, someone who’s been literally fighting tort reform for 30 years, in a visible or public way, on the Senate Judiciary Committee. Or, you might have a farmer from Iowa who never went to law school, never practiced law, serving as the next chair of the Senate Judiciary Committee," said Braley at the time. He gave a lengthy apology when the remarks were leaked.

While Grassley deflected the question, other GOP senators are increasingly raising alarms about ICE tactics and Homeland Security leadership in general. Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY) told Bobic he objects to “the idea that you can write your own warrant,” while Sens. Thom Tillis (R-NC) and Lisa Murkowski (R-AK) have outright called for DHS Secretary Kristi Noem's resignation.

Top Republican sparks outrage after playing dumb about Trump's ICE: 'Coward'

Robert Davis
January 27, 2026 
RAW STORY


U.S. Senator Chuck Grassley (R-IA) speaks during a Senate Judiciary Committee hearing on oversight of the Federal Bureau of Investigation, on Capitol Hill in Washington, D.C., U.S., September 16, 2025. REUTERS/Jonathan Ernst


Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-IA), sparked outrage on Tuesday after he seemed to play dumb about whether some of the actions of President Donald Trump's immigration forces are legal.

Igor Bobíc, senior politics reporter at HuffPost, posted on X that he tried asking Grassley whether it is appropriate for Immigration and Customs Enforcement officers to enter an American citizen's home without a judicial warrant. Last week, the Associated Press reported that ICE officers have been told they have the legal authority to enter people's homes without a warrant, sparking outrage from legal experts.

“Ask a constitutional lawyer,” said Grassley, who chairs the Senate Judiciary Committee. “I'm a farmer.”

Grassley's comments happened at a time when Trump's immigration forces are facing increased scrutiny over their actions in Minneapolis. Over the last several weeks, immigration agents have shot multiple people while conducting immigration raids. Two shootings have led to high-profile deaths that caused calls for the Trump administration to reform its operations.

Political analysts shared their reactions on social media.


"This f------ chickens--- coward," writer Charlotte Clymer posted on X.


"Disgraceful," The Tennessee Holler posted on X.

"I see Chuck Grassley’s going with the 'I'm just a smol bean' defense here," progressive YouTuber Brian Tyler Cohen posted on X.

"To be fair, Chuck's 92, he started bending the knee to Trump back 10 years ago and just couldn't get back up," the anti-Trump group The Lincoln Project posted on X.

This brutal invasion would horrify our nation's founders

Jeff Kolnick,

 Minnesota Reformer
January 26, 2026 


ICE agents confront protesters in Minneapolis. REUTERS/Tyrone Siu

The Twin Cities metropolitan area is under occupation by armed federal agents. According to the Census Reporter, there are roughly 3.7 million people living in the metro area and there may already be 3,000 militarized federal agents occupying our city. An additional 1,500 active duty troops from the army’s 11th Airborne Division are on standby, ready for deployment to Minnesota.

Let’s put that in perspective. During the last year of his first term, President Donald Trump negotiated a full withdrawal from Afghanistan, which at the time was a nation of 39 million people, to be completed in early 2021. In 2019, there were between 12,000 and 13,000 U.S. troops in Afghanistan. At the start of the Biden administration, there were only 2,500 U.S. soldiers remaining there.

I say this because the Trump administration has decided to send more armed federal agents to the Twin Cities than Joe Biden inherited in Afghanistan. That’s too many armed federal agents under any circumstances.

Two U.S. citizens have already been killed who would be alive today absent the occupation. Many U.S. citizens have been detained and physically abused, and many more such instances have been endured by legally authorized immigrants.

We are about to celebrate the 250th anniversary of the Declaration of Independence. The Founders of the United States were intensely suspicious of standing armies in peace time. If they were British citizens, the colonists asked, why were the Red Coats stationed in Boston? They included, among their reasons for dissolving their ties to King George, the following:

“He has kept among us, in times of peace, Standing Armies without the Consent of our legislatures.”

In 1787, at the Constitutional Convention, future President James Madison made the following observation:

“A standing military force, with an overgrown executive will not long be safe companions to liberty. The means of defense against foreign danger, have been always the instruments of tyranny at home. Among the Romans it was a standing maxim to excite a war, whenever a revolt was apprehended. Throughout all Europe, the armies kept up under the pretext of defending, have enslaved the people.”

It was clear to the nation’s Founders that federal forces were meant to fight foreign enemies and defend the United States from other nations. Among their first actions after the end of the Revolutionary War was to disband the Continental Army. Federal forces were never meant to occupy American cities and rural areas.

Some might suggest that the millions of undocumented immigrants in the United States constitute a foreign invasion. Hogwash. The undocumented here come from many nations and arrived for as many reasons. It was not and is not an organized foreign invasion.

U.S. federal forces are meant to protect us from foreign threats, not to occupy the streets and farms of America in unmarked cars and wearing masks and picking up people without judicial warrants based on how they look, or speak, or what neighborhood they live in, or how they get to work, or where they work.

What is happening in Minnesota is un-American. It would make the Founders wonder what has become of their project. After 250 years, we now resemble the British more than we do the Patriots, except the Red Coats had the courage to show their faces.

Jeff Kolnick is a retired professor of history. He is a founder of the Fannie Lou Hamer National Institute on Citizenship and Democracy and he served his faculty union as a negotiator and local president.

The Videos of Alex Pretti’s Murder vs Outright Lies by Bovino and Noem

Top officials—despite what anyone with two good eyes could see for themselves—immediately activated Donald Trump’s authoritarian playbook: lie, smear, double-down, and cover-up.

Footage shows Border Patrol agent drawing his weapon moments before shooting 

Alex Pretti dead.
(Photo: Screengrab via CNN)

Steven Harper
Jan 27, 2026

Common Dreams

I was born and raised in Minnesota. One of my childhood homes in south Minneapolis is less than a mile from the scene of Saturday’s brutal Border Patrol killing. The victim was 37-year-old Alex Pretti, a US citizen born in Illinois and a registered ICU nurse at the Minneapolis Veterans Affairs hospital.

Pretti’s crime: He was “Minnesota nice.”


Before proceeding further, please watch this New York Times video.

But be warned, the footage is violent, graphic, and disturbing:

Footage and analyis of Alex Pretti killing

Similarly, a detailed CNN compilation of bystander videos confirms that Border Patrol officers took Pretti’s gun before shooting him an estimated 10 times:



And USA Today also offered a second-by-second analysis:



Now contrast what you just observed with the Trump administration’s four-step playbook for avoiding accountability: Lie, double-down, deflect, and cover-up.

Step #1: Lie

Almost immediately, the Department of Homeland Security issued a false statement exonerating Border Patrol officers and blaming Pretti for his death:“At 9:05 AM CT,… an individual approached US Border Patrol officers with a 9mm semi-automatic handgun….”

No. Pretti approached the officers with a cellphone as he filmed their encounter with two protesters. Then he tried to aid a protester whom officers had shoved to the ground.“The officers attempted to disarm the suspect, but the armed suspect violently resisted.”

No. The officers didn’t even know that Pretti had a gun until seven of them had already swarmed, pepper-sprayed, and wrestled him to the ground. Then one of the officers exclaimed with surprise, “He has a gun!”

At that point, several officers were on top of Pretti. A gun matching the description of the one that DHS said Pretti owned (and for which he had a permit in the open-carry state of Minnesota) emerged from the group. After Pretti had been disarmed, an officer shot him in the back at close range. As the officer continued firing, another officer shot Pretti as he lay on the ground.

The agents fired a total of at least 10 shots.

Step #2: Double Down

During a six-minute press appearance, Border Patrol Commander Greg Bovino doubled-down on the lies. He said that an “individual approached Border Patrol agents with a nine-millimeter semi-automatic handgun.”

No. It was a cellphone.

“The agents attempted to disarm this individual, but he violently resisted.”

No. Pretti was on the ground when officers noticed his gun and took it.

“Fearing for his life and lives and safety of fellow officers, a Border Patrol agent fired defensive shots.”

No. Two agents fired a total of 10 shots as Pretti lay on the street with his hands over his head.

“The suspect also had two loaded magazines and no accessible ID.”

I don’t know what an “accessible ID” is, but Minnesota is an open-carry state and Pretti had a permit to own the gun.

“This looked like a situation where an individual wanted to do maximum damage and massacre law enforcement.”

There is no evidence supporting that claim.

“The officer was highly trained and had been serving as a Border Patrol agent for eight years. The officer has extensive training as a range safety officer and less lethal officer…”

Two officers fired a total of 10 shots at a man who had been disarmed. What about the second shooter? And what training recommends firing 10 shots at a defenseless US citizen lying on the ground?

Bovino then took questions but refused to answer them:

Q: “When did agents learn that he had a gun, and did he ever brandish that weapon at them?

Bovino: “This situation again is evolving. This situation is under investigation. Those facts will come to light. This particular incident is being investigated, just like we investigate other similar incidents like we’ve done over the past several years. It’s in the hands of professionals as facts will come to light.”

The videos show that Pretti never brandished a weapon at anyone. As for an investigation, the federal government had refused to allow Minnesota officials to participate after an officer killed Renee Nicole Good two weeks earlier. But this time, Minnesota officials took two extraordinary steps: the state obtained a warrant to search the public street where the officers had killed Pretti; and a federal judge issued a temporary restraining order barring federal officials from altering or destroying evidence.

Q: “Did he have an additional gun, or was the gun removed from the scene?... From the video, it doesn’t seem like he pulled a gun on anyone…. When did the gun come out?”

Bovino: “Again, this situation is evolving. This is under investigation. Those facts will come to light…”

The gun never “came out” until Border Patrol officers discovered and removed it after forcing Pretti to the ground.

Step #3: Deflect – Blame the Victim…and Anyone Else

Trump’s deputy chief of staff and the architect of Trump’s immigration policy, Stephen Miller, tripled down on the lies. Others quickly followed.Miller said Pretti was a “domestic terrorist” and “would-be assassin.”Trump blamed Minnesota Governor Tim Walz (D) and Minneapolis Mayor Jacob Frey (D) for “inciting insurrection.” He posted that they were leading a “subversive effort” against law enforcement “the likes of which we have not seen, probably, since the Civil War.”Attorney General Pam Bondi offered Walz a deal. One of her demands revealed the true motive behind Trump’s aggressive immigration surge in Minnesota: leverage. Trump is looking ahead at the November midterm elections, doesn’t like what he sees, and is preparing to upend them. That’s why Bondi told Walz to turn over the state’s voter rolls and maybe it “will help bring back law and order to Minnesota.” (A few days earlier, Trump’s Justice Department had already subpoenaed numerous Minnesota officials, including Walz, Minnesota Attorney General Keith Ellison, and the mayors of Minneapolis and St. Paul.)Homeland Security Secretary Kristia Noem parroted Bovino’s lies that Pretti “arrived at the scene to inflict maximum damage on individuals and to kill law enforcement.” She said that her assertion of “domestic terrorism” was just “the facts.”Vice President JD Vance posted that the events in Minneapolis were “engineered chaos” caused by “far left agitators, working with local authorities.”On Fox News, FBI Director Kash Patel characterized Pretti as a violent actor.

Step #4: Repeat – and Cover-Up as Needed

Trump’s minions had falsely smeared Renee Nicole Good as a “domestic terrorist” too. Then the Justice Department announced that the civil rights division would not even investigate whether her killer had used excessive force—as it typically has done in such situations. Instead, the Department would investigate the victim and her partner. Days later, six senior career federal prosecutors in Minnesota resigned over the issue.

Noem announced that DHS would lead the Pretti investigation—with assistance from the FBI.

Bovino’s “Choices”

In a press conference on Sunday, January 25, Bovino lectured Minnesotans on “choices,” suggesting that Pretti’s choices led to his death. But Pretti chose only to exercise his First and Second Amendment rights. For that, Trump’s newly expanded paramilitary organization chose to execute him in broad daylight. Bovino, Trump, and Trump’s sycophants chose to lie about it.

In the aftermath of Pretti’s killing, thousands of Minnesotans also made a choice: In sub-zero temperatures, they protested the federal government’s aggressive occupation of Minneapolis that had led to yet another death. They know that the whole world is watching. And if I know anything about Minnesotans, they will prevail.


Our work is licensed under Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0). Feel free to republish and share widely.

Steven Harper
Steven J. Harper is an attorney, adjunct professor at Northwestern University Law School, and author of several books, including Crossing Hoffa -- A Teamster's Story and The Lawyer Bubble -- A Profession in Crisis. He has been a regular columnist for Moyers on Democracy, Dan Rather's News and Guts, and The American Lawyer. Follow him at https://thelawyerbubble.com.
Full Bio >

Trump Admin Opposes Order Banning Destruction of Evidence in Pretti Killing

“It seems we may be looking at a bona fide cover-up,” said one reporter.


Agents from the Minnesota Bureau of Criminal Apprehension investigate the location where Alex Pretti was shot and killed on January 27, 2026, in Minneapolis, Minnesota.
(Photo by Scott Olson/Getty Images)


Stephen Prager
Jan 27, 2026
COMMON DREAMS


As it attempts to shield immigration agents from responsibility for killing Alex Pretti, the Trump administration is asking a court to dismiss an order preventing the destruction of evidence in the case.

Shortly after a gang of agents shot and killed the 37-year-old intensive care unit nurse in Minneapolis on Saturday, agents reportedly rounded up witnesses to the killing and transported them to the nearby Whipple Building, where they were detained for several hours, according to a review of court affidavits by CBS News.

Agents also ordered local police to leave the scene of the shooting, but the order was ignored by Minneapolis Police Chief Brian O’Hara, who instructed local officers to preserve the crime scene.

US District Judge Eric Tostrud swiftly issued an order barring federal agents from “destroying or altering evidence” related to the shooting, including evidence “removed from the scene” or “taken into [the federal government’s] exclusive custody.”

It came following a request from Drew Evans, the superintendent of the Minnesota Bureau of Criminal Apprehension (BCA), who said his officers had been turned away by agents with the US Department of Homeland Security (DHS).

The Trump administration has already preemptively declared that agents’ shooting of Pretti was justifiable, as it has done in at least 16 DHS shooting cases, according to an investigation published Tuesday by the Washington Post.

Members of the administration have stated that Pretti was a “domestic terrorist” and an “assassin” who intended to “massacre law enforcement,” despite ample video evidence of the encounter leading to his death showing nothing of the sort.

On Monday, lawyers for the Department of Justice filed a legal motion, first reported on by the New York Times, opposing Tostrud’s order preventing federal agencies from destroying evidence. The agencies, the DOJ argued, “are already obligated by agency policy to preserve the evidence at issue.”

“While it’s not uncommon for the Trump administration to oppose judges’ orders against it, this case seems particularly unnecessary—and suspicious,” wrote Edith Olmsted in the New Republic.

Radley Balko, a journalist who covers criminal justice, pondered why the administration would need to oppose the motion at all if it was making no effort to destroy evidence.

“In a sane country, the DOJ response to a motion asking a judge to stop the government from destroying evidence after federal officers shot and killed a man in broad daylight would be, ‘Of course, we wouldn’t destroy evidence. We agree with this motion,’” he wrote on social media. “That is not what happened.”

The motion comes as the administration is shielding many other pieces of information from the public, leaving the series of events to be pieced together through video footage shot by bystanders.

DHS spokesperson Tricia McLaughlin has said multiple agents were recording body camera footage during the shooting, but has announced no plans to release it.

Meanwhile, the administration has refused to publicly name the agents involved in the shooting, with the recently sacked Border Patrol commander Gregory Bovino asserting that publicizing their names was tantamount to “doxing.”

“Clearly, DHS is taking unprecedented actions to control the investigation into the second broad daylight killing of a civilian by its agents in just the past month,” Olmsted wrote. “When coupled with Customs and Border Patrol’s efforts to shield its officers from accountability, and Trump officials’ desperation to change the subject, it seems we may be looking at a bona fide cover-up.”

'Politically toxic' Trump has become a liability for far-right European fascists: report

Tom Boggioni
January 27, 2026 
RAW STORY


Activists in Germany protest at vigil for Hitler (Photo by Christian Mang for Reuters)

The alliance between Donald Trump and far-right nationalist groups in Europe has become frayed to the point of snapping due to his designs on occupying Greenland and the kidnapping of Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro Moros.

According to the New York Times, European far-right parties have historically grounded their political platforms on national sovereignty, particularly opposing immigration. However, Trump's contempt for European nations has exceeded their tolerance.

While the Trump-nationalist relationship has always been characterized as "awkward," European nationalist leaders have recently adopted a more confrontational stance toward the president. His lengthy speech at Davos intensified existing tensions.

Jordan Bardella, president of France's far-right National Rally party, characterized Trump's Greenland remarks as "unacceptable" and labeled tariff threats as "blackmail."

Nigel Farage, leader of Britain's far-right Reform UK party and longtime Trump ally, described the Greenland threats as a "very hostile act." Giorgia Meloni, Italy's right-wing prime minister, typically viewed as Trump-friendly, rejected his claims about European military contributions in Afghanistan.

Justin Logan of the libertarian Cato Institute explained the backlash: "Whatever the AfD or Rassemblement National believe about civilizational erasure and migration, they're not for the American annexation of a big chunk of Europe."

Trump faces additional challenges among far-right Europeans who already harbored suspicions toward America. Polling data shows substantial shares of far-right-aligned voters in Britain, France, and Germany viewed Trump negatively before the recent developments.

Trump's unpopularity is particularly acute in France, where association with the president carries political risk and he is described as "politically toxic." Alice Weidel, a leader of Germany's extremist AfD party, directly accused Trump of violating a fundamental campaign promise by interfering in other countries through the Venezuelan invasion.

You can read more here.

FRENEMIES

Not allies, not enemies: Britain’s ties with China


By AFP
January 26, 2026


Britain's Keir Starmer is in China this week, marking the first visit by a UK prime minister in eight years - Copyright POOL/AFP Jordan Pettitt

Britain’s Keir Starmer is in China this week, marking the first visit by a UK prime minister in eight years.

It is the latest in a string of Western leaders seeking a rapprochement with Beijing, as US President Donald Trump turns on traditional allies.

Starmer hopes to boost trade after years of strained relations, but must balance this with security concerns raised in the UK over a potential threat posed by China.

Here are the three key questions surrounding the visit:



– Where do relations stand? –



London and Beijing enjoyed what they describe as the “Golden Era” a decade ago — a time when then-prime minister David Cameron and Chinese President Xi Jinping famously enjoyed beers together at a British pub.

But relations soured since 2020, when Beijing imposed a national security law on Hong Kong and cracked down on pro-democracy activists in the former British colony.

Human rights abuses, alleged spying and cyber attacks, and China’s perceived support for Russia’s war in Ukraine also strained ties.

Nevertheless, China remains Britain’s third-largest trading partner, though UK exports to the East Asian country plummeted 52.6 percent year-on-year in 2025, according to British government statistics.

And in December, Starmer said that it would be a “dereliction of duty” not to engage with Beijing.



– Why is Starmer visiting now? –



Relations began to thaw soon after Starmer took the helm in 2024 following a closed-door meeting with Xi in Brazil in which the UK prime minister said Britain would look to cooperate with China on issues such as climate change.

But a protracted row over Chinese plans to build a vast new embassy in London complicated plans for Starmer to visit.

Beijing purchased the building, on the site of the former Royal Mint, in 2018, but opponents argued that the “mega embassy” will be used for espionage and pressure rights activists in Britain.

The plan was finally approved on Tuesday and made way for China’s invitation to Starmer with a UK government spokesperson saying intelligence agencies have plans to “manage any risks”.

Starmer’s trip also comes as Britain faces a rift with its closest ally, the United States, following Trump’s bid to seize Greenland and his brief threat of tariffs against Britain and other NATO allies.

With Trump increasingly tearing apart the global order, “China might not be an ally, but it is also not an enemy”, Kerry Brown, director of the Lau China Institute at King’s College London told AFP.

Facing a lacklustre British economy, Starmer will also be looking to seal trade deals to boost growth at home.



– What’s on the table? –



Starmer will arrive with an entourage of industry executives hoping to promote British business through a UK-China CEO Council, a body that has lain dormant for years.

Created in 2018, the council once brought business and industry executives from both countries together when relations were in their “golden era”.

Starmer is also expected to raise the case of Hong Kong media mogul and democracy supporter Jimmy Lai, a British citizen and founder of the now-shuttered Apple Daily tabloid.

The 78-year-old is facing years in prison after being found guilty of collusion charges in December under the new national security law.

Xi and Starmer are also likely to discuss Ukraine, where Beijing is accused of enabling Russia’s invasion through its close economic ties to Moscow.

The visit will represent a “shift toward managed re-engagement rather than renewed strategic trust”, according to Jinghan Zeng, an international relations scholar at City University of Hong Kong.

While progress could be made on climate change, trade, and people-to-people exchanges, “concrete outcomes will probably be modest”, he said.

Canada’s Marineland gets ‘conditional approval’ to sell whales to US

By AFP
January 26, 2026


An aerial view of belugas at Canada's now-shuttered Marineland theme park - Copyright AFP/File Angelos TZORTZINIS

Canada’s federal government on Monday gave Marineland conditional approval to sell its 30 imperilled beluga whales to parks in the United States, after rejecting an export request to China.

Marineland, a once lucrative tourist attraction near Niagara Falls, has said it is in deep financial trouble, cannot afford to care for the whales, and will be forced to euthanize them if it can’t find them a new home.

The park has been mired in controversy for years. Twenty animals, including 19 belugas, have died there since 2019, according to a tally by The Canadian Press.

Marineland, which is closed to visitors, thought it had a solution last year when it forged a plan to sell the whales to the Chimelong Ocean Kingdom, a lavish theme park in China.

Fisheries Minister Joanne Thompson rejected that plan, saying it would perpetuate the whales’ exploitation.

Marineland presented Ottawa with a new plan last week to sell the 30 whales to a series of parks in the United States.

“Today, I met with Marineland regarding their proposal to export the remaining whales to US facilities,” Thompson said in a statement.

“I provided conditional approval,” Thompson said, adding that final permits would be granted once Marineland provides additional information.

Marineland has said all the beluga deaths at the park resulted from natural causes, but animal welfare officials from the province of Ontario have been investigating the park for several years.

Clickbait and ‘AI slop’ distort memory of Holocaust


ByAFP
January 26, 2026


The Auschwitz concentration camp -- seen here in a genuine AFP photo -- was liberated in January 1945

 - Copyright POOL/AFP Dominique JACOVIDES

Johanna Lehn and Pierrick Yvon

An emaciated and apparently blind man stands in the snow at the Nazi concentration camp of Flossenbuerg: the image seems real at first but is part of a wave of AI-generated content about the Holocaust.

As the world marks International Holocaust Remembrance Day on Tuesday, experts warn that such content — whether produced as clickbait for commercial gain, or for political motives — threatens efforts to preserve the memory of Nazi crimes.

AFP’s Fact Check team has noted a surge of such imagery on social networks, distorting the history of Nazi Germany’s murder of six million European Jews during World War II.

Among the AI-generated images that have gone viral is one of a little girl with curly hair on a tricycle.

She is presented as Hannelore Kaufmann, a 13-year-old Berliner who purportedly died at the Auschwitz extermination camp, of which the 1945 liberation by Soviet troops is commemorated on Tuesday.

However, there is no record of her ever having existed.

Another example is a fake image created to illustrate the invented story of a Czech violinist called “Hank” at Auschwitz, which was called out as false by the camp museum.

After early examples emerged in the spring of 2025, by the end of the year “AI slop” on the subject “was being shown very frequently”, historian Iris Groschek told AFP.

On some sites such content was posted once a minute, said Groschek, who works at memorial sites in Hamburg, including the Neuengamme concentration camp.

With the exponential advances in AI, “the phenomenon is growing,” said Jens-Christian Wagner, director of the foundation that manages the Buchenwald and Mittelbau-Dora memorials.



– Exploiting ’emotional impact’ –



Several Holocaust memorials and commemorative associations this month issued an open letter warning about the rising number of these “entirely fabricated” pieces of content.

Some of them are churned out by content farms which exploit “the emotional impact of the Holocaust to achieve maximum reach with minimal effort”.

The picture supposedly from Flossenbuerg camp falls into this category, as it was shown on a page claiming to share “true, human stories from the darkest chapters of the past”.

The memorials warned that fake content was also being created “specifically to dilute historical facts, shift victim and perpetrator roles, or spread revisionist narratives”.

Wagner points for example to images of “well-fed prisoners, meant to suggest that conditions in concentration camps weren’t really that bad”.

The Frankfurt-based Anne Frank Educational Centre warned of a “flood” of AI-generated content and propaganda “in which the Holocaust is denied or trivialised, with its victims ridiculed”.

By distorting history, AI-generated images have “very concrete consequences for how people perceive the Nazi era”, says Groschek.

The results of trivialising or denying the Holocaust are in evidence in the attitudes of some younger visitors to the camps, particularly from “rural parts of eastern Germany… in which far-right thinking has become dominant”, said Wagner.



– ‘Confident, loud, aggressive’ –



Staff have observed Hitler salutes as well as other provocative and disrespectful actions and comments.

Such behaviour is only “by a minority, but a minority that is increasingly confident, loud and aggressive”, he told AFP.

In their open letter, the memorials called on social media platforms to “proactively combat AI content that distorts history” and to “exclude accounts that disseminate such content from all monetisation programmes”.

“The challenge for society as a whole is to develop ethical and historically responsible standards for this technology,” they said, adding: “Platform operators have a particular responsibility in this regard.”

German Culture Minister Wolfram Weimer said in a statement to AFP: “I support the memorials’ call to clearly label AI-generated images and remove them when necessary.”

He said that making money from such imagery should be prevented.

“This is a matter of respect for the millions of people who were killed and persecuted under the Nazis’ reign of terror,” he said, reminding the platforms that they had “obligations” under the EU’s Digital Services Act.

Groschek said that none of the American social media giants responded to the memorials’ letter, including Meta, the owner of Facebook and Instagram.

TikTok responded by saying it wanted to exclude the accounts in question from monetisation and implement “automated verification”, according to Groschek.

Some of the fake Facebook posts about Hannelore and Hank were still online on the eve of Holocaust Remembrance Day.

Greece probes factory fire as fifth victim found


By AFP
January 27, 2026


The explosion early on Monday gutted an entire section of the Violanta factory

 - Copyright Eurokinissi/AFP Thanasis Kalliaras

Investigators in Greece on Tuesday were looking into the causes of a fire that killed five workers at a biscuit factory in the country’s worst industrial accident in years.

The explosion early on Monday, caught on nearby security cameras, gutted an entire section of the Violanta factory outside the city of Trikala, 245 kilometres (150 miles) northwest of Athens.

“The case will be investigated to the end… possibly, even today, we may have an initial picture of what caused the fire,” Civil Protection Minister Giannis Kefalogiannis told state TV ERT.

Five women died and company staff told local media the toll would probably have been higher had other staff not been taking a break at the time.

Four of the victims were found soon after the blast but the fifth was only recovered on Tuesday morning as pockets of fire made the operation difficult, the fire department said.

The deaths have shocked local communities around Trikala, which provide much of the company’s workforce.

Colleagues and relatives said the women who died had chosen to work the night shift so they could be with their children during the day.

The Violanta company in a statement insisted it “strictly applies protocols and procedures, adhering to all measures for the safety of our staff and facilities”.

“We are mourning five of our own,” the company said, adding that it was “fully” cooperating with the investigating authorities.

The blaze is one of the deadliest industrial accidents in Greece for many years.

A local trade union on Monday said it had never been allowed to inspect the facility that burnt down.

Over 200 people died in work-related accidents in 2025, according to the federation of technical company employees.

In 1992, 15 people died in a refinery explosion in the industrial zone of Elefsina, near the port of Piraeus.

Three people had died in a dynamite factory explosion in Itea, central Greece, in 2022.

The Violanta plant in Trikala, the company’s first and biggest, produced 12,500 tonnes of biscuits, cookies and wafers per year, according to the company website.

The brand is among the fastest growing in Greece, with a major presence in shops, and exports to around 40 countries.

GLOBALIZATION REDUX

China’s Anta Sports to become top Puma shareholder


By AFP
January 27, 2026


Puma has been struggling with weak demand in recent months and saw sales decrease more than 15 percent in the third quarter of last year - Copyright AFP/File Christof STACHE

Chinese athletic goods giant Anta Sports will buy a controlling stake in historic German sportswear brand Puma for $1.79 billion, a stock exchange filing showed Tuesday, as it expands its international presence.

Anta will buy 43 million shares for 35 euros apiece from the French billionaire Pinault family’s Artemis group, the statement to the Hong Kong exchange said, giving it a 29 percent stake.

The price is a more than 60 percent premium to Puma’s last close, according to Bloomberg data, and values the deal at 1.51 billion euros.

Anta said in the statement that the stake would “further enhance its presence and brand recognition in the global sporting goods market”, including China.

“We believe Puma’s share price over the past few months does not fully reflect the long-term potential of the brand,” Anta chairman Ding Shizhong said.

While the statement said Anta had no plans to launch a full takeover of Puma, it will “carefully assess the possibility of further deepening the partnership between the two parties in the future”.

Artemis said the sale would allow it to “redeploy its resources to new value-creating sectors”.

The deal is expected to close by the end of the year, though it is subject to regulatory approvals, and the company will buy shares with cash.

Anta declined to comment on the deal when contacted by AFP.

The firm, based in China’s southeastern Fujian province, is one of the world’s largest sportswear companies.

Founded in 1991, it is the parent company of many global brands through its subsidiary Amer Sports, including Wilson, Arc’teryx and Salomon.

Anta closed its acquisition of Finland-based Amer in 2019, leading a consortium in a deal worth about $5.2 billion.

It also controls rights in the vast Chinese market for foreign sportswear firms including Fila and Descente.

Anta has become the world’s third-largest sportswear brand following Nike and Adidas, according to data analytics firm Euromonitor International.

Puma, however, has been struggling with weak demand in recent months and saw sales decrease more than 15 percent in the third quarter of last year.

CEO Arthur Hoeld, who was appointed last year, has said the brand had become “too commercial” and was undergoing a “reset” last year to improve on brand heat, distribution quality and product offering.

Hoeld told investors in October that the company’s goal was to “become a top three sports brand in the future again”.

He deemed 2026 a “year of transition”, vowing a return to growth in 2027.

Puma is set to release its 2025 full-year financial results on February 26.